war

The next Mercedes-Benz model aims like a missile to fully enter the war

by

In the middle of World War II, while Allied bombing destroyed German factories and consumed resources at an impossible rate, many plants that until then manufactured cars, engines or civil machinery began to transform hurriedly to produce military vehicles, aviation parts and weapons. Some of the most recognizable brands in the European automotive industry they then discovered something that decades later resonates strongly again: in times of geopolitical tension, an assembly line can change purpose much faster than it seems. The unexpected twist, or almost. For decades, the future of the European automobile seemed to come down to a single discussion: electric, hybrid or gasoline. However, the German industrial crisis and the accelerated rearmament of Europe are opening a possibility completely different. Mercedes-Benz, like before Volkswagenhas just made it clear that it is willing to enter the defense industry if the business makes economic sense. This has been confirmed through an interview in the Wall Street Journal of its CEO, Ola Källenius, and it is much more important than it seems because it reflects a profound change within the German automobile industry: the big brands are no longer only looking at the car of the future, they are also beginning to look at war as a new industrial opportunity. In a Europe increasingly obsessed with drones, missiles, air defense and military production, car factories are beginning to be seen not only as car plants, but as possible centers strategic manufacturing. The perfect storm. The context explains why this idea is beginning to seem reasonable even for companies historically far from the military business. The German automobile industry is going through one of its most delicate moments in decades: falling profits, pressure from Chinese manufacturers, high energy costs, lower European demand and tariff threats from the United States. Mercedes-Benz, for example, suffered a strong profit drop in 2025, while practically all major German manufacturers have announced cuts or adjustments labor. At the same time, the defense industry is experiencing exactly the opposite situation. European rearmament after the war in Ukraine has fired orders, investments and military contracts to historic levels. For many German industrial companies, the military sector is beginning to represent something very different from a marginal business: stability, growth and guaranteed public financing for years. From cars to artillery. The case of Mercedes is not isolated and we have been counting. Volkswagen is also exploring possible military collaborations as defense companies such as Rheinmetall study reuse factories of automobiles or absorb part of its industrial infrastructure. The message is clear: Europe is beginning to discover that many capabilities necessary to produce modern cars (advanced metallurgy, electronics, robotics, complex logistics chains or highly skilled workers) are also extremely useful to manufacture systems military. The border between both industries begins to fade little by little. It is no longer just about producing tanks or ammunition, we are talking about radars, drones, autonomous vehicles, electronic systems and air defense platforms that require technologies very similar to those of the modern automobile. The new European war economy. As we said, the ukrainian war It has caused an enormous psychological change within Europe. For years, much of continental industry assumed that globalization and stability made a large military capacity of its own unnecessary. Now the opposite happens: European governments are increasing defense budgets at speeds not seen since the Cold War. This transformation is pushing traditionally civil companies to reconsider their role within the new geopolitical context. The CEO of Mercedes himself insist that any military activity would remain dwarfed by its core business, but at the same time recognizes something revealing: can become a growing and profitable niche. That is to say, the German automobile industry is beginning to assume that part of future European growth could come directly from rearmament. The car of the future may not be a car. If you like, the most striking thing of all is the symbolism of change. For a long time, the automotive debate revolved around batteries, autonomous driving and sustainability. Now, some of Europe’s most iconic companies are beginning to speak openly on anti-drone defensemilitary production or collaboration with weapons manufacturers. The idea that the next big European industrial business could be closer to war than sustainable mobility would have seemed absurd just a few years ago. However, the combination of economic crisis, Chinese competition and continental rearmament is slowly pushing giants like Mercedes-Benz itself into completely new and unexpected terrain. And that reveals the extent to which Europe is entering a stage where the economy, industry and security are beginning to mix more and more. Image | Nara, RawPixel, Julian Herzog In Xataka | Europe wants to make more weapons and faster. Your biggest obstacle is not money: it is finding qualified welders and technicians In Xataka | In the midst of rearmament, Spain has just surprised Europe: 5,000 million for 34 warships and four submarines

secret training for war in Ukraine

by

The scene took place a few months ago. Ukrainian soldiers surprised British instructors when they discovered that many NATO armies still They did not use anti-drone networks on a regular basis. After several years of war, Ukraine was beginning to teach the West how to survive on a front dominated by drones. Much more than drones. For much of the Ukraine war, the relationship between China and Russia has been interpreted primarily in terms economic and technological. Beijing bought Russian oil and gas while Chinese companies appeared linked to the supply of electronic components, drones and machinery useful for the Russian military industry. However, the revelations he has had access Reuters on the secret training of Russian military in Chinese facilities point to something much deeper: China would not be limiting itself to indirectly supporting the Russian war economy, but rather participating in the tactical and doctrinal training of soldiers who then return directly to the Ukrainian front. This enormously changes the dimension of the relationship between both countries. War as a military classroom. According to the documents and sources European intelligence agencies, some 200 Russian soldiers were trained discreetly in China at the end of 2025 under an agreement signed between senior commanders of both countries. He program included training in FPV drones, electronic warfare, army aviation, mechanized infantry and demining. Some sessions took place in military centers in Beijing, Nanjing, Zhengzhou or Shijiazhuang. What is important is not only the relatively small number of soldiers, but the profile of many of them: instructors and commanders capable of relaying that knowledge to whole units once back in Ukraine. In other words, China would not simply be sending technology, but helping to perfect the way Russia fights modern war. China learns while Russia fights. It just so happens that the relationship also greatly benefits Beijing. The People’s Liberation Army has not fought a major war in decades and the Russian invasion of Ukraine has become the largest military laboratory real of the planet. Russia brings direct combat experience in drones, trenches, electronic warfare and mass attrition. China provides industrial capacity, advanced simulators, technological production and training methods increasingly sophisticated. The exchange is extremely valuable for both. Moscow gains access to technology and training difficult to obtain under Western sanctions, while Beijing can observe how modern weapons, tactics and doctrines really work without being officially involved in the conflict. Silent revolution. The heart of all this cooperation revolves around drones. Ukraine has completely transformed the way it fights using cheap FPV capable of destroying armored vehicles, fortified positions and even helicopters. Russia had to quickly adapt to that reality and now appears to be turning to China to further professionalize part of that ecosystem. The documents describe simulator training flight, coordinated use of drones with mortars, electronic warfare against enemy drones and physical interception systems through networks. All of this reflects the extent to which modern warfare is ceasing to depend exclusively on large traditional platforms to increasingly focus on cheap, massive and very difficult to neutralize systems. Europe’s concern. For the European agencies, what is truly disturbing is that part of those soldiers trained in China already they would have participated later in combat operations in occupied Crimea and Zaporizhzhia. This means that the knowledge acquired in Chinese facilities ends up being applied directly on the European battlefield. Beijing, for its part, continues to publicly defend a neutral position and continues to present itself as a possible peace mediator, but this type of cooperation seriously erodes that image. In the eyes of many Western governments, China would be entering a much more sensitive gray area: not officially sending its own troops or weapons, but contributing to improving Russian operational capacity in an active war against Ukraine. Increasingly military alliance. The revelation It also confirms the extent to which the “limitless” partnership announced by Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin before the 2022 invasion has evolved far beyond simple joint exercises or diplomatic statements. China and Russia no longer seem to limit themselves to coordinating political positions vis-à-vis the West, they are beginning to share knowledge combat practices, training and doctrine. The most significant detail may be precisely the secrecy of the agreements: prohibition of media coverage, restrictions on information to third parties and programs developed discreetly away from the international spotlight. All this suggests that both countries perfectly understand the political sensitivity of a cooperation that, although still indirect, gets closer and closer to China to the real workings of the war in Ukraine. Image | Vitaly V. Kuzmin In Xataka | The closure of the Strait of Hormuz chokes the Chinese economy. Its only energy solution is a historic pact with Putin In Xataka | While everyone was looking at Hormuz, Russia has found a much more important route to supply drones to Iran

In the era of drones and smart missiles, the US has recovered a relic of the First World War: the bayonet

by

In the middle of the Iraq war, a group of British soldiers launched a bayonet charge against Iraqi militiamen near Al Amara. The scene seemed like something out of another century, but the British Army considered it a tactical success in the middle of a modern combat already marked by night vision, digital communications and advanced weaponry. The unexpected return of the bayonet. More than 20 years have passed since the scene described, but they counted in a report in Insider that, in an era dominated by FPV drones, electronic warfare, artificial intelligence and guided missiles, the United States Army has decided to bring back something that seems straight out of the trenches of World War I: indeed, the bayonet. The US Army Ranger School, one of the toughest training programs on the planet, has incorporated new hand-to-hand assaults with this war tool within its extreme combat circuits. As? Apparently, soldiers must advance through smoke, tunnels, trenches and physical obstacles while attacking humanoid targets with knives mounted on the end of the rifle. At first glance it seems like an absurd military anachronism in the digital age. However, for the Pentagon the decision responds precisely to the type of war What do you think can happen? in the future. The Pentagon obsession. The war in Ukraine and other recent conflicts have shown something which is of great concern to Western military strategists: modern battlefields depend on extremely vulnerable networks, communications, GPS, drones and electronic sensors. Jamming, electronic warfare attacks, and combat chaos can isolate entire units in a matter of minutes. In this scenario, the US Army fears that soldiers accustomed to operating surrounded by technology lose capacity to continue fighting when screens, communications or air support disappear. That’s why Ranger School now insists on training something a lot. most basic and brutal: move forward, endure fear, maintain physical cohesion with teammates and continue attacking even in extreme situations of exhaustion and disorientation. A relic that never disappeared. The truth is that, although the bayonet is associated above all to suicidal charges of the First World War, never completely disappeared of modern armies. American troops still used it in Korea and Vietnamand British soldiers and US Marines set it again during particularly violent urban combat in Iraq in 2004. Its current value is not so much in the weapon itself as in what it represents psychologically. Military historians have been pointing out for years that the bayonet works especially like a tool to train aggression, discipline and the ability to continue fighting under extreme fear. It forces the soldier to accept something that modern technological warfare sometimes hides: that many combats still end at very short distances and in deeply chaotic conditions. Recovering very old ideas. The movement is especially striking because it arrives just when the war seems more futuristic than ever. Ukraine and Russia have filled the front autonomous droneselectronic interference and constant surveillance from the air. But precisely that same technological saturation is producing an unexpected effect: combat once again becomes extremely disorderly when communications fail or units become isolated. In many sectors of the Ukrainian front, soldiers survive entire days under drones and artillery hardly any contact of course with higher commands. The Pentagon appears to have drawn an uncomfortable conclusion from that experience: The more technological war becomes, the more important it becomes for a soldier to be able to keep fighting even when all that technology disappears. The fear of blackout. Plus: America’s new military obsession is not just about developing better drones or missiles, but about preparing troops capable of operating when the entire digital ecosystem collapsesif it does. The bayonet symbolizes precisely that idea. Not because the Army expects massive loads like those of 1916but because it represents the ultimate survival level military: keep moving forward when there is nothing else left. Ultimately, the decision reflects a very current paradox. The more sophisticated modern wars become, the more armies fear the moment when they will once again resemble something much more ancient, physical and primitive. Image | Joey Rhodes/US Army In Xataka | The United States has 54 billion euros for its army and a very precise place to invest it: in drones In Xataka | A soldier can and should disobey an illegal order. The problem that Anthropic faces is that an AI does not

turning smart glasses into instruments of war

by

Anduril and Meta join forces. What began as a race to conquer the “metaverse” with devices like the Quest has transformed into something very different. Specifically, in a contract of 159 million dollars that Anduril and Meta have jointly signed to develop smart glasses that enhance the operational capacity of soldiers on the battlefield. This joint project is being developed in parallel with the Anduril helmet with assisted vision system, called EagleEye. War made video game. These augmented reality glasses provide the soldier with an integrated system that theoretically displays a map, identifies enemy vehicle profiles, calculates shooting distance, processes threats in real time and overlays tactical data on the wearer’s physical environment. The future vision of these companies is to add special functions, such as being able to order a drone attack thanks to eye tracking and voice commands. War made video game. From consumers to soldiers. It is ironic that a technology that was originally used for entertainment applications ends up having a military purpose. Anduril provides its software platform, called Lattice, which acts as the “brain” of the system, fusing the data captured by the glasses with that received from the rest of the battlefield network. The ethical challenge. If an AI decides what a target is and displays it prominently on the soldier’s glasses, is the room for human error reduced or are we simply automating violence? This gamification of war is increasing and the danger is evident: treating a combat environment almost as if it were a video game can make it difficult to distinguish between civilians and combatants, for example. If the metaverse doesn’t work… Meta has an opportunity here to recover part of the gigantic investment it has made in the field of virtual and augmented reality. After losing tens of billions of dollars with the metaverse, Mark Zuckerberg has decided leave these solutions in the background in the end-user market. And he has also seen clearly that his advances could have a very juicy military application. The geopolitical factor. There is no doubt that both in Silicon Valley and in the rest of the world there is one huge demand of new technological solutions applied to the battlefield. The conflicts that have occurred in recent years have caused skyrocket defense budgetsand here both Anduril and Meta wanted to take advantage of their opportunity. Microsoft missed its chance. In Redmond they had a fantastic product with Hololensbut its role in the end-user segment was never clear, and the company refocused it on first- and then to the military sector. Here the failure was enormous despite the investment of 22 billion dollars that the US Army carried out in this area. Meta and Anduril have wanted to take the baton, but they will not be alone: ​​companies like Rivet either Elbit They have projects that compete to become the new “weapons” of the soldier of the future. In Xataka | In its obsession with bringing technology to every corner of the country, China has equipped its army with augmented reality

How the Panama Canal is being lined thanks to the war in Iran

by

When an international conflict breaks out, there is always someone who manages to take advantage. As the world watches with concern the Third Gulf War, thousands of kilometers from missiles and drones, the Panama Canal has been crowned the unexpected winner of this global chaos. What began as an energy crisis in the Persian Gulf has become, for the small Central American nation, a gold mine of historic dimensions. Since the attacks triggered the virtual closure of the Strait of Hormuz – the world’s main artery for fuel transportation, through which approximately one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas trade transits – maritime trade has entered a phase of genuine desperation. The urgency to move goods has reached such a point that, as confirmed by Ricaurte Vásquez Moralesadministrator of the Panama Canal, a shipping company paid 4 million dollars in an auction just to skip the line and cross the interoceanic waterway as soon as possible. The mechanism of urgency After the Hormuz blockade, traffic through the Panamanian canal has experienced a general increase of close to 11%, registering peaks of up to an additional 20% on the days of greatest demand, as reported by the Panama Canal Authority itself BBC. During the first half of fiscal year 2026 – from October 2025 to March 2026 – the channel registered 6,288 transits, 224 more than in the same period of the previous year, according to data presented by the channel authority to Bank of America Merrill Lynch. In order to absorb this flow, nature has also been complicit. The deputy administrator of the channel, Ilya Espino de Marotta, explained to cnn that unusually intense rains during the dry season have kept Gatún and Alhajuela lakes at maximum levels, which has made it possible to manage between 40 and 41 daily transits compared to the usual average of 36. A notable recovery if one remembers that during the El Niño drought between 2023 and 2024, daily transits fell to 24. “The Panama Canal is open and fully operational,” assured Vásquez Morales. “Amid all the geopolitical complexities of today’s world, the Panama Canal remains open and reliable.” But the true profitability is not only in the volume, but in the price of urgency. The companies they pay a fixed rate between 300,000 and 400,000 dollars to transit with prior reservation. Those who do not have it must compete in a relentless auction system where the highest bidder takes the coveted spot. Víctor Vial, vice president of finance of the channel, detailed in the same presentation to investors that the average auction price before the crisis ranged between 135,000 and 140,000 additional dollars. After the start of the conflict, “that average increased to approximately $385,000 between March and April.” Desperation has pushed some oil companies to pay more than 3 million additional dollars to avoid waits, according to Bloomberg. The absolute record of 4 million is explained by Vásquez himself: “It was a ship that transported fuel to Europe, but they diverted it to Singapore, and it had to get there because Singapore is running out of fuel,” declared. With this extraordinary injection, Vial estimated that the growth of the channel’s income will be between 10% and 15% this year, although he warned that “we are still not doing the math or modifying our projections.” A logistical lifesaver, not a replacement The profitability of the channel is explained by the geography of the panic. More than 80% of the oil that usually transited through Hormuz was destined for the Asian continent, according to Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). When that route was blocked, buyers from Japan, South Korea, India and China turned to the United States Gulf Coast. According to data from the maritime intelligence company Kpler cited by BloombergUS crude oil exports through the Panama Canal have exceeded 200,000 barrels per day, approaching their maximum since July 2022. The logic is implacable. A trip from the US Gulf Coast to Japan via the canal takes almost a month, while going around Africa around the Cape of Good Hope would take almost twice as long. “With all the bombings, missiles, drones, companies say it is safer and less expensive to cross through the Panama Canal,” explained Rodrigo Noriegalawyer and analyst in Panama City. “All of this is affecting global supply chains.” Despite the boom, experts are categorical when comparing both routes. The EIA data, updated as of March 2026illustrate it crudely: in the first half of 2025, 20.9 million barrels of oil per day transited the Strait of Hormuz, compared to the 2.3 million that crossed the Panama Canal in its entire fiscal year 2025. A ratio of almost one to nine. Furthermore, VLCC-type supertankers—capable of transporting up to two million barrels in a single trip—are simply too big for the Panamanian locks, as both France 24 and OilPrice point out. Panama is a golden shortcut, but it does not have the muscles to replace the massive flow of the Persian Gulf. Marc Gilbert, global leader of the Geopolitics Center at Boston Consulting Group, summed it up: “What is really happening is that energy from the United States is replacing the volumes that cargoes from the Gulf previously sent to Asia.” And he added that what this crisis shows is that “when a sea lane fails, the entire system must adapt.” From economic bonanza to diplomatic minefield Panama’s sudden strategic prominence has not gone unnoticed by the great powers. As reported by Al JazeeraWashington and its allies accused China at the end of April of applying “selective economic pressure”, retaining dozens of Panamanian-flagged ships in Chinese ports in retaliation for the annulment, by the Panamanian Supreme Court, of a port concession that a company linked to Hong Kong maintained over the ports of Balboa and Cristóbal. Beijing categorically denied the accusations. The spokesperson for the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Lin Jian, described them as statements that “lack foundation and distort reality”, and in turn accused the United … Read more

The war in Ukraine has entered such a crazy phase that soldiers are shooting at their own drones

by

In 1943, during a night mission over Europe, several British pilots returned convinced that they had been pursued by strange luminous objects that appeared and disappeared around their planes. Some thought it was a secret German weapon, others thought it was nervous breakdowns caused by the stress of combat. Decades later, that aerial confusion He continues to remember a disturbing idea: there are moments in wars where the problem is no longer just the enemy. A schizophrenic heaven. They counted on Insider that the war in Ukraine has entered such a phaseDrone Aturation that, in many sectors of the front, soldiers no longer know what aircraft flies over their heads or who controls it. The consequence is an almost absurd situation even by military standards: Ukrainian troops shooting against their own drones for pure survival, operators cutting with scissors fiber optic cables without knowing if they belong to the enemy or a friendly unit and electronic warfare systems blocking any signal that appears in the air even if that means disabling their own equipment. The battlefield has become so crowded with small flying devices, jammers and data links that distinguishing between ally and enemy takes mere seconds. If something approaches too quickly, the automatic reaction is to destroy it first and ask later. Disposable drones due to excess. Part of the problem stems from how both sides have transformed the drone into a mass consumption weapon. These are no longer expensive and scarce platforms like those used by Western powers a decade ago, but rather relatively cheap systems manufactured at enormous speed and designed to be constantly lost. Russia and Ukraine consume drones in such gigantic amounts that losses due to friendly fire have been integrated almost as another operational cost. Units expect to lose devices due to interference, coordination errors, enemy jamming or simply because a nervous soldier open fire against any object that buzzes near your position. The result is a combat environment where technological saturation has begun to generate chaos even within one’s own side. The new logic: destroy them before they exist. This uncontrolled explosion in the use of drones is also pushing the war towards a new strategic stage: attack the factories before the devices in flight. Russia and Ukraine have understood that intercepting drones one by one is no longer enough when both produce thousands of systems continuously. That’s why the long range attacks attacks against industrial plants, logistics centers and component manufacturers have multiplied in recent months. Ukraine is hitting Russian facilities linked to Shahed drones, sensors, navigation modules and jam-resistant electronic systems, as Russia seeks destroy Ukrainian workshops where FPV drones or long-range attack devices capable of penetrating hundreds of kilometers into Russian territory are assembled. The logic begins to look less like a conventional war and more like a permanent industrial hunt. Electronics don’t keep up. The problem for both sides is that technological adaptation it moves too fast. Each defensive upgrade generates an immediate modification to enemy drones. Interference systems stop working when faced with fiber optic links. GPS locks lose effectiveness against new navigation modules. Drones incorporate more autonomy, greater processing capacity and increasing resistance to electronic countermeasures. In parallel, Ukraine and Russia they use satellite intelligencepattern analysis and constant recognition to locate production centers, antennas, warehouses and logistics chains. The front already It doesn’t end in the trenches.: continues hundreds or thousands of kilometers behind, inside factories, industrial parks and supply networks that have become priority military targets. A machine out of control. The most disturbing thing is that this dynamic gives the sensation of having partially independent of the soldiers themselves. There is drones attacking dronesautomatic systems jamming any available signal, operators trying coordinate safe corridors so that their own devices are not demolished and entire factories turned into objectives daily to sustain a rate of losses that seems impossible to absorb. If you like, the war in Ukraine is still a war of artillery and attrition, but it is also transforming into something much stranger: an aerial ecosystem saturated with cheap and disposable machines where survival depends on react before identifying. And when an army ends up shooting at its own drones because there are too many devices in the sky to distinguish them, it means that the conflict has crossed a whole new frontier. And crazy. Image | mod-gov-ua In Xataka | Ukraine has found a new way to assault buildings occupied by Russia: sending a robot with a 300-kilogram surprise In Xataka | The war in Ukraine is being filled with “Mad Max” ships: metal screens and nets against FPV drones in the Black Sea

Renfe makes its position in the workshop war clear to Iryo and the CNMC

by

The Iryo-Renfe soap opera continues. Every day that passes we have a new chapter, a new exchange of statements, new figures on the table. And with each passing day, Iryo continues to find the door to the workshops closed. Although the CNMC obliges them, Renfe is clear: “they have no obligation.” The (pen)last chapter. It is the one that brings us the response from Renfe. And it is that, to questions from Xatakathe company tells us that the obligation imposed by the CNMC to open its workshops to Iryo has a “disproportionate impact” and there is a “technical impossibility.” The company assures that “adapting the workshops to the regime that the CNMC wants to impose” would take them a year. For now, the company has kept the Italian company’s workshops closed. And although Renfe clearly feels harmed, the company assures us that “we are studying how to do it (open the workshops) to carry out the CNMC’s decision, as it could not be otherwise.” Heavy or light. That’s the question. And since the liberalization of Spanish roads began, Renfe already knew that it would have to leave its workshops to Ouigo and Iryo to carry out light maintenance work. That is, routine checks of little significance. The problem is that these “light maintenance” operations are not clearly specified even in the Directive 2012/34/EU nor in the standard EN 15380-4:2021. This friction is what has led Renfe to deny passage to Iryo since it considers that in the proposed operations part of the train must be dismantled and that falls into the category of heavy maintenance. It must be remembered that Renfe already encountered this problem a few months ago. The Spanish company reported that Ouigo was carrying out heavy maintenance work at its facilities and that it had not previously reported this. Something that was proven, according to the company itself, by documents provided by the French company. The CNMC, on that occasion, also sided with Ouigo, forcing Renfe to lend its facilities for unforeseen interventions. Is it that big of a deal? Well, obviously, the versions differ here. No, it’s not that big a deal: Iryo is clear that the operations to be carried out in the Renfe workshops would not involve many problems. They assure that they would only occupy 7% of the infrastructure and that, since maintenance is scheduled weeks in advance, it is all a matter of organization. Yes, of course it is a big deal: Renfe, on the contrary, assures that these maintenance tasks seriously affect its schedule. They say that space is already operating at almost full capacity, that the impact of Iryo would be 10% of the infrastructure and that it would force them to withdraw 1.2 million seats from the offer because there would be no room to maintain their own trains. More than one million of these seats correspond to the lines in which it is handled as a Public Service Obligation (OSP) and this would result in a drop of 60 million euros in income. The CNMC is clear. The problem for Renfe is that the CNMC is clear about it and is on Iryo’s side. The regulator has already received a complaint that Renfe did not allow the Italian company to enter its workshops and issued a resolution forcing Renfe. This resolution was appealed before the National Court, which has decided to force Renfe to make way for Iryo in their workshops as a precautionary measure but with the notice that it will study the case in particular. The sticking point is that Iryo would need to send its trains to Rome for scheduled maintenance. That would force them, they say, to stop providing service with the trains involved for two months, a compelling reason for the CNMC despite the fact that In France Iryo was forced to take its trains to Italy despite the cessation of activity and despite the fact that the company announced that I would set up some workshops in Spain for these cases but nothing is known about them. Those are the cards that, for the moment, are on the table. Photo | Sergioorozco96 and Renfe In Xataka | There is a fight between the railway operators to get the best drivers and Renfe is winning it

In the “war of the workshops”, Iryo defends himself. And he has already made it clear to Renfe why he will use its facilities

by

The battle for the use of Renfe workshops continues to give us new chapters. From the closed door and the complaint to the CNMC we have moved on to appeals to the latter’s decision and a crossroads of statements in which numbers are beginning to be put on the table. The last to speak was Iryo. What is happening? Iryo and Renfe have an open battle over the use of the latter company’s workshops. To understand all the keys: What does Renfe say? What Renfe says is that the regulations only require them to hand over part of their facilities to their rivals to carry out light maintenance, but that is not the case when the work involves heavy maintenance. Iryo’s actions fall under this last definition and Renfe already reported in October that Ouigo was performing heavy maintenance on their facilities without their permission. In addition, they point out that giving space to these trains from the Italian company will have a direct impact on their offer. If Iryo is occupying a space that Renfe had planned to use, the Spanish company estimates that they will have to withdraw from their offer around 1.2 million seatsof which more than one million fall within its Public Service Obligation (OSP). They estimate 60 million losses in income. What does the CNMC say? The CNMC considers that Renfe would obtain a substantial competitive advantage if Iryo has to send its trains to Italy to carry out heavy maintenance. They consider that, if this happens, it would stop providing service with the affected trains for weeks. (as has happened in France) and that maintaining them without performing said maintenance is a danger to the safety of passengers. For this reason, it forces Renfe to open its facilities and allow the Italian company to carry out these jobs with the employees it considers. In exchange, the Spanish company receives compensation as if it were a rental of the facilities. What does Iryo say? Until now we have known the version and calculations of Renfe but not of Iryo. The Italian company assures that moving its trains to its country would mean a extra cost of 17 million euros and defends that they would only be occupying 7% of all Renfe facilities. To estimate this extra cost, they calculate that if Iryo has to take the trains to Rome, they would stop being operational for about two months each, although, they point out in The Economistwhich on other occasions the company reduced this time horizon to one month. This operational stoppage, Iryo points out, would be key in the market because they compete with 19 trains available in our country, while Renfe has 270 high-speed trains at its disposal. And they culminate their complaints by pointing out that these actions are scheduled based on mileage and that Renfe was aware that they would have to carry out these operations for months. A music that sounds familiar to us. The truth is that railway liberalization in Europe has created a constant fight between operators that, as we are seeing, sometimes goes far beyond the tracks. Renfe has pressed everything it can to prevent Iryo from carrying out these maintenance tasks at its facilities but has also recalled that the company has to work on all high speed lines and not only in the most profitable since, unlike Ouigo and Iryo, they work as a public service operator. Furthermore, remember that upon arrival Iryo committed to building his own workshops but no steps have been taken in that direction. At the same time, it is logical that Iryo tries by all means to carry out its maintenance work in Spain to minimize its impact on the offer. And, as we said before, in France they have already forced the company to take your trains back to Italy to perform this type of maintenance. Country where Renfe has also encountered countless obstacles to deploy your servicesespecially in everything related to his arrival in Pariswhere the most profitable lines start. Photo |Smiley.toerist and Renfe In Xataka | If the question is when Ouigo was going to be profitable, the answer is: now. And that makes Renfe suspicious

China is neither nor does it want to be in the 2nm war between TSMC, Intel and Samsung. Your plan to win is different

by

“Many people believe that competition in the semiconductor industry comes down to the advanced nodes and that we will only achieve success when we reach 2 or 3 nm. This is a misunderstanding“. This statement was made by Richard Chang Rujing, the founder of SMIC (Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp), the largest Chinese semiconductor manufacturer with a global market share of about 5%. Rujing has spoken these words with a very clear intention: he wants China to strengthen its supply chain and its position in the global integrated circuit market by developing its manufacturing capacity for mature chips. Currently the most advanced integration technology that SMIC has in production is 7nm photolithography due to their inability to access equipment extreme ultraviolet lithography (VVE) of ASML. And there is no doubt that it and other Chinese chip manufacturers would benefit greatly from having the capacity to produce 5, 3 and 2 nm semiconductors. In this way they could compete on equal terms with TSMC, Intel and Samsung. However, there is something very important that we should not overlook: advanced nodes represent less than 20% of the world market of integrated circuits by product volume, while more than 80% of demand It comes from the segments of mature nodes and specialized processes. Rujing wants SMIC and the other Chinese chipmakers to invest more in their mature nodes, and it makes sense. After all, this is the strategy that is allowing China resist US pressure. Mature chips are the medicine the Chinese industry needs During the first two months of 2026, China exported integrated circuits worth $43.3 billionwhich represents an increase of 72.6% compared to the same period in 2025. This information comes directly from Chinese customs records, so it is presumably reliable. However, the most astonishing thing is that this country’s exports as a whole have grown by 21.8% during January and February, so it is evident that the semiconductor industry has been stimulated with much more intensity than other sectors. More than 80% of demand comes from the mature nodes and specialized processes segments Domestic demand has stimulated the growth of the Chinese chip industry in recent years, but the figures I have collected in the previous paragraph show that external demand is also very strong. In this context it is reasonable for us to ask what type are integrated circuits that Chinese manufacturers are mass producing. And the answer is very revealing: these are chips derived from mature integration technologiesusually 28 nm or less advanced. After all, the semiconductors that we mostly find in electronic devices, household appliances or cars, among other products, have been produced using them. Many Chinese chip manufacturers, such as Hua Hong Semiconductor, China Resources Microelectronics or Guangzhou ZenSemi, are manufacturing 28 nm integrated circuits or with even more mature technologies. And the Beijing Yandong Microelectronics (YDME) company is going to build a 4.6 billion dollar plant expressly to produce 28nm semiconductors on 300mm wafers. It is evident that these companies would not focus on the manufacturing of mature chips in this way if it were not a profitable strategy, and, above all, necessary to sustain the Chinese integrated circuit industry at a time as critical as the current one. Image | TSMC More information | SCMP In Xataka | China is preparing for the worst scenario: it fears that the US will prevent TSMC from delivering chips for cars and smartphones

In the war of humanoid robots, those from the United States dance and those from China work by the piece. It is not a technological issue

by

The United States and China are fighting a technological battle with two very clear strategies: one visible and the other invisible. The invisible is that of the artificial intelligence, the fight between models and the basic technological development. The visible one is the creation of data centersthe development of next generation networks and robotics. Because it is the robots that are at the center of that technological race between the two powersbut while one country shows them jumping, the other is making them work. The difference is not technology or money: it is state support. However, as with so many things, there is a trick to it. Priority. China has put robotics at the center of its technological development program for the coming years. The new Five-Year Plan, the roadmap in which the country points out the objectives that it will try to achieve over the next five years, robotics is in a privileged place next to the development of the chip ecosystem or the 6G networks. This is a state issue, a national priority that marks a deliberate shift from assembly line robotics, the ‘simple robots’ of traditional automation, to one with built-in artificial intelligence and a greater range of functions they can perform. Humanoid robotics is not new and, in fact, Boston Dynamics is the company that has been demonstrating its products for years. But while the demonstrations by American companies consisted of making their vehicles dance or do somersaults, humanoid robotsChina has been showing them at sporting events and in impressive showsbut it is also putting them in front of stores. to work. There are already stores in Beijing that are operated by humanoid robots. They are independent, serve users and do not need human supervision (unless they are like this japanese robot). They are also turning them into guides in museums and stores, but beyond that public-facing work, there are important groups that are incorporating humanoid robotics into their workforce. An example is CATL. The electric vehicle battery giant began deploy humanoid robots at its Zhengzhou plant. Their task is one considered high risk for human workers: connecting high-voltage battery plugs on an assembly line. The robots are made by a startup called Spirit AI and feature a vision-language-action AI model. According to the company, they are having 99% success in connections, they triple the work that a human can do and, obviously, they do not need breaks. But it is not only private companies that are deploying this technology. The State Electricity Grid Corporation has intended 6.8 billion yuan, about 1 billion euros, to acquire 8,500 robots with AI. The intention is to deploy them in 26 regions to inspect and maintain power lines. It has a trick. Returning to the comparison with the United States, there is something that stands out: the valuation of the companies. While Chinese powers like Linkerbot are valued at 6,000 million dollars, the American Figure is valued in 39,000 million. The key is that Figure has shipped far fewer units to the market, something largely dominated by Chinese companies. Analysts expect both countries to develop markets of similar size, but China currently leads by far in the early commercialization of humanoid robots. Now, not all the mountain is oregano and, in the last report of the International Federation of Robotics highlights that, although China is dominating the deployment of robots globally (humanoids and non-humanoids), the mass market will still take several years to arrive. According to that document, there are more than 150 humanoid robot developers currently operating in the Chinese market, a market that will represent in 2025 more than 85% of the 15,000 humanoid robot installations worldwide. USA represents 13%. However, what the IFR also says is that much of that deployment remains limited to demonstrations or pilot projects, not a replacement as such for the human workforce. That is to say, there are companies that are already using robots on a large scale (the examples of CATL and the State itself), but within the figures that are used to talk about this Chinese dominance also include those pilot programs or robots that are dedicated to playing sports and dancing, as in the United States. Need. In any case, there is something undeniable: China is betting very hard and very quickly on robotics, be it humanoid or that of the ‘robodogs’ that are already using in military forces or in divisions of firefighters. And the reason is that the country is facing a precipice: that of the demographic pyramid. The accelerated aging of its workforce, together with new generations that are not willing to work for a decent wage, are accelerating the implementation of robots to improve productivity and efficiency in various sectors. China is not the only one. Japan is also experiencing with robotics in day-to-day jobs because it faces the same problem of population aging. And Samsung, part of a South Korea that is also experiencing a demographic crisis, has already indicated that it has a great plan underway to automate its factories with humanoid robots controlled by a central AI. In Xataka | In China they are not satisfied with creating advanced robots: a company has developed a head that gestures like a human

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.