States

Tim Cook has been a wonderful CEO for Apple investors. For the United States, not so much

by

Filling the void left by a myth like Steve Jobs seemed like an impossible mission, and although Tim Cook has been a radically different CEO than his predecessor, his career has been equally prodigious. At least in financial terms, because with it Apple has become a four trillion dollar titan. That’s one way to look at it. There is another. Financially impeccable. Over the past fifteen years, this logistics genius has refined operational efficiency and managed to turn every iPhone into a ticket printing machine. An amazing fact: With Tim Cook, Apple’s value has grown by 682 million dollars on average per day for every day of the last three decades. The business runs like clockwork, but behind that economically impeccable facade there is an uncomfortable paradox. The factories do not matter, but the processes. Cook’s management has shown that to achieve maximum profit margins it is not enough to create iconic products: you must master the supply chain. And to achieve this, Apple preferred to own processes rather than factories. She delegated all production risk to external suppliers while she developed new hardware products and especially services that expanded the ecosystem and maximized profit. China as a great ally. The pillar of this entire strategy was unusual. Since arriving at Apple as vice president of operations in 1998, Cook opted for the massive scale and cheap labor of mainland China. This allowed Apple to manufacture in massive volumes and at a very low cost, but in doing so signed a blood pact with Beijing. Educating your rival. By fully focusing the manufacturing process on China, Apple invested billions of dollars in training millions of workers. The transfer and transfer of technical knowledge has been of such magnitude that it has elevated China’s economic and technological status compared to the West. Flexible principles. This relationship with China has also been controversial due to how the company has been folded to the demands of the Chinese government in the geopolitical sphere. The App Store removed thousands of applications following direct orders from Beijing, but even more revealing has been the iCloud data transfer of Chinese users to servers operated by a Chinese state-owned company. There is a moral duality that inevitably raises suspicions. Remembering Jack Welch. In The New York Times they remembered to Jack Welch, a manager who was described as “manager of the century” after his management at the General Electric (GE) company. Like Cook, Welch was a manager with a spectacular financial record. He achieved staggering annual returns, but over time he was shown to have turned GE into an overleveraged company that was about to collapse in the 2008 crisis. Hero or villain. Cook has systematically ignored a great existential risk: if the tension of the trade war between the US and China ends up exploding, the impact could be terrible for the North American economy. The threat that China ends up attacking Taiwan could come true and in that case Cook would be remembered as the CEO who handed over the technological sovereignty of his company to his country’s biggest geopolitical rival. It is true that Cook takes time reducing Chinese dependence in the manufacturing processes at Apple, but it is also true that “the damage has been done” and the transfer of knowledge has been enormous. Ternus and a very heavy legacy. Cook’s successor will be John Ternusbut your room for maneuver will be very limited at the moment. Tim Cook in fact is not retiring completely and will become CEO and supervise the management of his successor. That makes it difficult to chart a new course for Apple if that is what Ternus is proposing, which also seems unlikely. The iPhone has changed all of China. The truth is that every step that Cook took to reinforce his commitment to China It made undeniable financial sense. and generated huge sums of money for all of the company’s investors. That does not reflect the other reality, because the iPhone has contributed definitively for China to become the giant it is today. In Xataka | Apple has been giving in to China for years, but this time the price to pay is much higher. Your AI is at stake

China has almost closed the AI ​​gap with the United States. And he has done it with all the sticks in the wheels

by

It is difficult to go into detail about the number of dances in which the United States and China are immersed at the moment. The technological war is the umbrella under which the trade warthe attempt of military conflict in the South China Seathe robot racethat of the energy and that of artificial intelligence. Everything is related to each other and, although the United States has exercised an aggressive technological blockadeStanford University is clear that it has not been of much use. And they are clear that the AI ​​gap between the powers is “practically closed.” The report. When a new model or version of AI is presented, those responsible show graphs and tables in which they comment on how good their product is. It is something that always has to be taken with a grain of salt because the idea is to make your product look good – it would be necessary to do more – and, for this reason, an external analysis is needed to show us the complete photo. In this sense, the annual report from Stanford University (in its ninth edition) is one of the best thermometers for taking temperature in the state of AI. One of the conclusions of study is that the Chinese models are very close to the American ones. If at the beginning of the AI ​​boom those from the US set the tone with an abysmal difference, at the beginning of 2025 the distance was greatly reduced to the point that DeepSeek-R1 equaled the best American models on several occasions. Since then, the absolute top model is that of Anthropic, but currently only with a 2.7% advantage over the best Chinese model. Different approaches. In fact, in the graph with this specific analysis you can see how the distance between the two is closed as the performance of the Chinese models increases exponentially in a very short time. And something that the study highlights is that, although the United States continues to lead the battle because it is the one that produces the most top-level AI models and with the most important patents, China leads in volume of both models and production of those patents. Also in other sectors, such as AI in robotics, for example. sticks in the wheels. And the most notable thing is that China has achieved this evolution without having the best tools. As a result of the technological and trade war, it is known that the United States has done everything in its power to prevent cutting-edge technology will reach the hands of the Chinese industry. For years they prohibited American companies (which are the ones that control the AI leader like NVIDIA or AMD) sold their higher-end platforms to Chinese companies, but also They shorted the European ASML and the South Korean Samsung and SK Hynix. Because the US has the aforementioned NVIDIA and Intel, but ASML is the one that manufactures the most advanced machines for making chips, Samsung is one of the world’s leading foundries and leader in high bandwidth memory along with SK Hynix and then there is the Taiwanese TSMC as the largest foundry on the market. Although the US has more recently shaken hands with China in this regard, there are still restrictions on Chinese companies accessing the latest technology. Counterproductive. However, through innovation, government support and a little bit of smuggling, gray market and reverse engineering, companies like SMIC -the Chinese foundry- or Huawei They have managed to develop their advanced equipment and chips. The US has tried to put all the pieces in the wheels of the Chinese industry, but as some reputable voices in the chip sector have pointed out, this has only served for China to directly and advances its technological sovereignty program. That is to say, the vetoes that had such a hard impact at the beginning have served to light the flame of technological development. Huawei is the best example of this, since was ostracized five years ago and recently showed that not only has he recovered, but he has returned in better shape than ever, even becoming one of the main drivers of AI for Chinese industry. Approach. Something that the Stanford AI study also highlights is how the two countries are approaching this segment of AI. And we talk about money, of course. While private investment in AI in the United States reached almost $286 billion, in Europe The investment was almost 21,000 million and in China it was only 12,400 million. This is tricky, since it involves private financing (and this year among just a handful of American companies 650,000 million dollars will be melted) and the state support from the Chinese government should not be underestimated, but beyond investment, American companies have focused on creating the most powerful models regardless of the price while the Chinese approach is to make a Cheap AI to be almost transparent to the user. The goal in both cases is mass adoption, but here the cheaper the product and better integrated into everyday platformsbetter. Taiwan. There are other adjacent topics. For example, China has the energy for the AI ​​erabut The US has the data centers. According to the report, there are more than 5,400 data centers in the American country, which is more than ten times the amount that any other country has, but all this with a curious counterpoint: it is a Taiwanese company that manufactures almost all of its artificial intelligence chips: TSMC. The company is expanding with foundries in the US, but although a conflict that will break those relationships is not in sight, it is evident that depending on a foreign country is not the best strategy for technological independence. That is why they are injecting a lot of money so that Intel be the great foundry, but the reality is that it is still very far from TSMC and, although the US is making attempts with native companies such as Applied Materials, the main partners continue to … Read more

Europe cannot be a “technological vassal of the United States”, and the CEO of Mistral is clear about the path

by

Mistral is emerging as the pillar of European artificial intelligence. A few weeks ago we said that the French startup had raised another 830 million dollars to create AI data centers in Europe. Arthur Mensch is the CEO of the company and, for some time now, he is establishing himself as one of the powerful voices within the initiative of European technological sovereignty. His new warning is that Europe cannot be a “vassal state” of the United States and he has published a roadmap so that Europe leads AI. It won’t be easy. European swerve. There are those who complain that everything cannot be politics, but really politics is something that permeates many layers and the European turn in search of technological sovereignty has a lot to do with this. It is something that has coincided with the return of Donald Trump because Europe has realized that, between threats and the “I invaded Greenland”, can’t trust his ally. With American technology companies very involved in the ideology set by their Government, there is a demand for sovereign European alternatives that do not depend on American Big Tech nor how they may process your sensitive data. What happens with rockets, satellites, chips and even with Microsoft Office. And AI is no exception. Measures. That’s right where it comes into play. Mistral. As the greatest exponent of European AI (within the Generative AIsince we also have the suite from the Spanish Freepik as one of the most important companies in this field), Mistral and its CEO are voices with a certain weight when it comes to talking about what seems to be the only topic of conversation in recent months. And Mensch has clear that Europe cannot be a “vassal” of US technology companies. For this reason, they have published “European AI: a roadmap to lead it”, a long document in which it urges the institutions of the European Union to speed up procedures and permits to take advantage of its single market position of more than 450 million people and combine the talent of different countries at the service of AI. From European AI, of course. The premises are clear: Attract and retain talent. Unlock the full potential of the single market. Embrace European AI on all economic fronts. Empower Europe with critical infrastructure for AI. 80%. Each of the measures has a series of points that detail what the optimal way to proceed would be (according to Mistral) to achieve European leadership and stop depending on foreign technology. And one of the points to keep in mind is that Europe has the possibility of commanding, but it faces a devastating fact: 80% of the digital infrastructure continues to depend on non-EU providers. To put it down: if a ministry needs an office suite, turn to Google or Microsoft. If a hospital needs an AI, goes to ChatGPT or Huawei. If we limit ourselves to AI, Mistral estimates that only 20% of EU companies have adopted AI and that only 11% of SMEs take advantage of its potential. slap on the wrist to regulatory Europe. What they point out is that this situation makes us vulnerable to extraterritorial controls that put the strategic autonomy of the member countries in check. They defend that this roadmap is not a theoretical exercise, but rather something practical that is based on three key principles: Action over theory. Unity against the fragmentation of each of the governments. And the most important: the speed is questionable. We must find quick ways to attract talent and capital so that the most innovative in Europe are not left behind, trapped in regulations that take time. Ambition. They warn that it is something with potential not only for Mistral, but for the entire ecosystem, an ecosystem in which Mistral is already very, very well positioned. Part of the 830 million they have raised will go to their facilities near Paris where there will be 13,800 NVIDIA GB3000 chips (You can’t become independent from NVIDIA…), but it won’t be the only one. By 2027 they hope to have a €1.2 billion facility in Sweden with 23 MW of computing capacity. In total, they hope to achieve 200 MW of capacity by the end of next year. It is very, very far from China and, above all, from the United States, but although the distance is enormous, it is an important step. The B side of the matter. Now, everything has a twist, and the twist of this enormous amount of money is that this round is not venture capital, but debt financing. The main French banks have lent this money to create data centers and, while the risk capital is not returned, the debt is, and with interest. It doesn’t matter if Mistral’s move turns out well or not, even if the AI ​​bubble bursts: the banks that have lent the money expect to receive it with the aforementioned interest regardless of how business goes. It is an added pressure for the company, but also a sign that they trust in what they are building. In Xataka | ChatGPT’s milestone is not being a good AI: it is having become one of the biggest attention grabbers in history

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

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.