US lawmakers raise 'China-Russia Alert'; send letter to Google, Facebook, Microsoft and Amazon: Tell us by August 8 ...
What the letter from Republican lawmakers to Google, Facebook, Microsoft and Amazon says
In a letter sent Monday (July 21), Representatives John Moolenaar (Chair of the House panel on China), Carlos Gimenez (Chair of a relevant subcommittee), and Keith Self (Chair of another relevant subcommittee) voiced particular apprehension regarding the continued involvement of "China-affiliated entities such as SBSS,
Huawei
Marine, China Telecom, and China Unicom" in the maintenance and servicing of cable systems in which the tech giants hold direct or indirect operational involvement or ownership.
The lawmakers stated their committees are "examining the extent to which foreign adversarial actors are positioning themselves, both overtly and covertly, to compromise subsea cable systems at key points of vulnerability." They have given the companies until August 8 to disclose any instances of suspected hardware tampering, optical signal tapping, unexpected signal distortion, or other operational irregularities observed during cable repair or maintenance.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
A genetic disorder that is damaging his organs. Help my son
Donate For Health
Donate Now
Undo
"A growing body of evidence points to a pattern of coordinated malign activity linked to the People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation targeting subsea infrastructure in the Baltic Sea, Indo-Pacific, and other strategic regions," the letter asserted.
Letter follows attack on subsea infrastructure
This congressional inquiry follows recent actions and incidents highlighting the vulnerability of subsea infrastructure. Recently, Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chair Brendan Carr announced the agency's plan to implement rules prohibiting companies from connecting undersea submarine communication cables to the United States if they incorporate Chinese technology or equipment.
Since 2020, U.S. regulators have been instrumental in blocking four proposed cable projects intended to link the United States with Hong Kong. More recently, in November 2024, two fiber-optic undersea telecommunication cables in the Baltic Sea were severed, prompting sabotage investigations. In 2023, Taiwan accused two Chinese vessels of cutting the only two cables providing internet access to the Matsu Islands. Additionally, Houthi attacks in the Red Sea have been implicated in the severing of three cables vital for internet service to Europe and Asia.
AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
9 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump deals bring some clarity for world's manufacturing base
Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads After months of uncertainty, President Donald Trump 's latest tariff deals are providing clarity on the broad contours of a new trade landscape for the world's biggest manufacturing on Tuesday announced a deal with Japan that sets tariffs on the nation's imports at 15%, including for autos — by far the biggest component of the trade deficit between the countries.A separate agreement with the Philippines set a 19% rate, the same level as Indonesia agreed and a percentage point below Vietnam's 20% baseline level, signaling that the bulk of Southeast Asia is likely to get a similar rate.'We live in a new normal where 10% is the new zero and so 15% and 20% doesn't seem so bad if everyone else got it,' said Trinh Nguyen, senior economist for emerging Asia at Natixis. At a 15%-20% tariff level, it's still profitable for US companies to import from abroad rather than produce similar goods at home, she US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said he'll meet his Chinese counterparts in Stockholm next week for their third round of talks aimed at extending a tariff truce and widening the discussions. That suggests a continuing stabilization in ties between the world's two largest economies after the US recently eased chip curbs and China resumed rare earths exports.'We're getting along with China very well,' Trump told reporters on Tuesday. 'We have a very good relationship.'Throw it all together and a level of predictability is finally emerging after six months of tariff threats that had at one point jacked up tariff levels to 145% on China and near 50% on some smaller Asian exporters. Investors cheered the moves, with Asian shares rising the most in a month and contracts for the S&P 500 up 0.2%. The Nikkei-225 index in Japan jumped 3.2%, with Toyota Motor Corp. and other carmakers leading the gains.'What's been interesting to me is that equity markets still have been fairly rosy about the changes,' Albert Park, chief economist at the Asian Development Bank, said in a Bloomberg Television interview. 'I'm not sure they've priced in fully all of the effects that are likely to occur from the disruption of higher tariff rates.'Back in April, Trump hit the pause button on the steepest levies after a rare combination of weakening US stocks, bonds and the dollar showed investors were unnerved by his protectionist salvos. That bought time for policymakers from Tokyo, Manila and across the globe to negotiate more palatable the latest deals bring some relief, key questions remain. The Trump administration is still considering a range of sectoral tariffs on goods like semiconductors and pharmaceuticals that will be critical for Asian economies including Taiwan and India — both of which have yet to announce tariff agreements with the Korea is also more exposed to sectoral tariffs, even though the Japan deal provides a potential template for new President Lee Jae Trump moves quickly on talks with countries accounting for the bulk of the US trade deficit, he has said he may hit around 150 smaller countries with a blanket rate of between 10% and 15%.With some certainty on tariff levels now emerging, businesses with complex supply chains across Asia and still reliant of the US consumer can start to game out how they'll shift operations to minimize the hit to like the first trade war in 2018, the latest tariff announcements are likely to spur companies to increasingly shift production outside of China. The average tariff rate on the world's second-largest economy remains the highest in the region, and continued White House pressure on the nation's technology and trade ambitions means companies may find more stability and industry groups have been flagging for months that uncertainty is worse than tariffs for investment. The manufacturing sector across the ASEAN region saw the most notable weakening since August 2021, according to S&P PMI, led by a sharper decrease in new orders, major job cuts and weaker purchasing front-loading of shipments from Asia to the US to get ahead of the incoming levies will likely slow once the new rates kick in. While there's relief that tariff rates for Southeast Asian economies and 15% for Japan are lower than some of Trump's earlier threats, the reality is that they're far higher than they were before he took latest deals 'continue the trend of tariff rates gravitating towards the 15-20% range that President Trump recently indicated to be his preferred level for the blanket rate instead of 10% currently,' Barclays Plc analysts including Brian Tan wrote in a note. That skews risks to GDP growth forecasts for Asia 'to the downside,' they US consumers who have so far been spared the tariff ticket shock, economists warn there's likely to be some pass through in the months ahead. Goldman Sachs Group Inc. economists now expect the US baseline 'reciprocal' tariff rate will rise from 10% to 15% — an outcome that threatens to fuel inflation and weigh on economic Reserve Chair Jerome Powell has argued he wants to see where tariffs land and how they filter through the economy before cutting interest rates — much to the annoyance of now, the US president is hailing a win on trade, and investors seem overall relieved.'I just signed the largest trade deal in history — I think maybe the largest deal in history — with Japan,' Trump said at an event at the White House on Tuesday after announcing the deal on social media. 'It's a great deal for everybody.'
The Print
9 minutes ago
- The Print
China's Brahmaputra dam is also a military asset. It raises alarm for India
In contemporary geopolitics, infrastructure has become a strategic language of its own, one that Beijing is speaking fluently. Beyond the spectacle of scale, the Chinese online discourse quickly turned the project into a symbol of strategic ascendancy. India, the downstream neighbour, is cast as anxious and reactive . China, in contrast, is portrayed as visionary and unyielding—a master of its geography and architect of a new regional order. Chinese Premier Li Qiang, on 19 July, presided over the groundbreaking of what is set to become the world's largest hydropower dam , on the so-called 'Yarlung Zangbo', as China refers to the Brahmaputra River. Within hours, Chinese online platforms erupted in celebration. A Weibo hashtag marking the occasion—#Construction begins on lower Yarlung Zangbo Hydropower Project—amassed over 73 million views. Engineering feat or strategic signal? The Medog Hydropower Station is projected to cost $167 billion and boasts a planned capacity of 70 to 81 million kilowatts, roughly triple that of the Three Gorges Dam. Once completed, it is expected to generate 300 billion kilowatt-hours annually. The project will take a decade to build, but its signalling to the region, especially India, is immediate. Hu Xijin, former editor-in-chief of the Global Times, a daily Chinese tabloid, criticised Western media for focusing on India's ecological and geopolitical concerns while ignoring what he called an 'engineering miracle'. For Hu, the dam is not just about electricity; it is also a declaration of China's ability to tame the Himalayas and reshape geography. One Chinese commentator claimed that India's objections stem not from technical concerns, but from its deeply entrenched 'security-first' mindset. New Delhi, the commentator argued, has long prioritised control over collaboration, building its own dams while accusing others of weaponising water. 'India's alarmism,' another wrote, 'comes from its own guilty conscience.' China's dual narrative Officially, Beijing is presenting the dam as a developmental initiative, aimed at energy security, poverty alleviation, regional integration, and transforming Nyingchi into the 'Little Sichuan' or 'Jiangnan of Tibet.' Talk of water weaponisation is being brushed aside as paranoia. Commentators invoke 'non-zero-sum' logic and portray China as a responsible upstream actor. But unofficial voices tell a different story. 'India, which tries to control Pakistan with water cuts, now fears China might do the same,' one commentator quipped. Victor Gao, vice president of the Beijing-based Center for China and Globalization, was even more blunt: 'If India uses rivers as leverage against Pakistan, it should be prepared for reciprocity.' These comparisons are not new. Over a decade ago, Ye Hailin, director of Asian Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, argued that if India expects restraint from China as an upstream power, it should accept the same standard when Pakistan, downstream of India, makes similar demands. A more recent commentary on Baidu put it less diplomatically: 'Just a month ago, before the official exchange of fire between India and Pakistan, India took the initiative, cutting off water at will, then releasing it, showing little regard for the lives of Pakistani civilians. Faced with a neighbour like India, we [China] must abandon any moral restraint. We should move at our own pace, neither seeking to dominate nor to appease. Stand firm, when necessary, fight when required. Otherwise, we risk being the ones who suffer.' Also read: India's 'triple anxiety'—What Chinese media sees in Jaishankar's Beijing visit Water, border, and politics of control On Chinese social media, the discussion turned openly strategic. One user noted a road built inside the dam tunnels, ostensibly for maintenance, that leads directly to Arunachal Pradesh. 'In peacetime, it is for power,' the user wrote. 'In wartime? I do not need to spell it out.' This is infrastructure envisioned not just as an economic backbone, but as a military asset, both shield and sword. This strategic undertone also helps explain Beijing's long-standing refusal to enter a hydrological data-sharing agreement with India. As Hu Suisheng, senior fellow at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, once noted, such cooperation would implicitly acknowledge India's border position—especially over Arunachal Pradesh, which China disputes. Despite the rhetoric of regional uplift and mutual benefit, India's concerns have been routinely dismissed by the Chinese official narrative and online discourse. There has been no consultation, only unilateral action over a transboundary river system that feeds millions downstream. Beneath China's rhetoric of development flows a deeper current, shaped by quiet force and strategic intent. This is not merely the redirection of water but the rewriting of the regional order through determination and power. For New Delhi, this dam raises alarm. For Beijing, this is advantageous on multiple fronts. Cooperation may be the language used, but the headwaters of the Brahmaputra speak of dominance and unilateral action, not dialogue or mutual benefit. Sana Hashmi is a fellow at the Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation. She tweets @sanahashmi1. Views are personal. (Edited by Ratan Priya)
Indian Express
9 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Far beyond Harvard, conservative efforts to reshape higher education are gaining steam
Ken Beckley never went to Harvard, but he has been wearing a crimson Harvard cap in a show of solidarity. As he sees it, the Trump administration's attacks on the school echo a case of government overreach at his alma mater, Indiana University. Beckley, a former head of the school's alumni association, rallied fellow graduates this spring in an unsuccessful effort to stop Governor Mike Braun, a Republican, from removing three alumni-elected members from Indiana University's Board of Trustees and handpicking their replacements. No government effort to influence a university — private or public—has gotten more attention than the clash at Harvard, where the Trump administration has frozen billions of dollars in federal funding as it seeks a series of policy changes. But far beyond the Ivy League, Republican officials are targeting public universities in several states with efforts seeking similar ends. 'What's happened nationally is now affecting Indiana,' said Beckley, who bought Harvard caps in bulk and passes them out to friends. Officials in conservative states took aim at higher education before President Donald Trump began his second term, driven in part by the belief that colleges are out of touch — too liberal and loading up students with too much debt. The first efforts focused on critical race theory, an academic framework centred on the idea that racism is embedded in the nation's institutions, and then on diversity, equity and inclusion programs. Since Trump took office, officials in states including Indiana, Florida, Ohio, Texas, Iowa and Idaho increasingly have focused on university governance — rules for who picks university presidents and boards and how much control they exert over curricula and faculty tenure. As at Harvard, which Trump has decried as overly influenced by liberal thinking, those state officials have sought to reduce the power of faculty members and students. 'They've realised that they can take a bit of a step further, that they can advance their policy priorities through those levers they have through the state university system,' said Preston Cooper, a senior fellow who studies higher education policy at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. In Indiana, Braun said he picked new trustees who will guide the school 'back in the right direction.' They include an anti-abortion attorney and a former ESPN host who was disciplined because she criticised the company's policy requiring employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Braun's administration has ramped up scrutiny of hiring practices at colleges statewide. Indiana's attorney general, Todd Rokita, has sent letters to the University of Notre Dame, Butler University and DePauw University questioning the legality of their DEI programs. Butler, a private, liberal arts school in Indianapolis, was founded by an abolitionist in the decade leading up to the Civil War and admitted women and students of colour from the start. 'I hope that Butler will uphold the standards they were founded on,' said Edyn Curry, president of Butler's Black Student Union. In Florida, the state university system board in June rejected longtime academic Santa Ono for the presidency at the University of Florida, despite a unanimous vote of approval by the school's own Board of Trustees. The unprecedented reversal followed criticism from conservatives about Ono's past support for DEI programs. That followed the conservative makeover of New College of Florida, a small liberal arts school once known as the state's most progressive. After Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis appointed a group of conservatives to its governing board, many faculty left, including Amy Reid, who now manages a team focused on higher education at the free-expression group PEN America. 'When our students started organising at New College, one of their slogans was Your Campus is Next,'' said Reid, who saw the gender studies program she directed defunded and then cut. 'So no, we're not surprised when you see other states redefining what can be in a general education class, because we've seen it happen already.' The changes at several public universities are proceeding without battles of the kind seen at Harvard. In a standoff seen widely as a test of private universities' independence, Harvard has filed lawsuits against the administration's moves to cut its federal funding and block its ability to host international students. In Iowa, new DEI restrictions are taking effect in July for community colleges. And the board that governs the state's three public universities is weighing doing something similar to Idaho, where a new law imposes restrictions on requiring students to take DEI-related courses to meet graduation requirements. Historically, the Iowa board has been focused on big-picture issues like setting tuition rates and approving degree programs. Now, there's a perceived sense that faculty should not be solely responsible for academic matters and that the trustees should play a more active role, said Joseph Yockey, a professor at the University of Iowa College of Law and the former president of Iowa's faculty senate. 'What we started to see more recently is trustees losing confidence,' Yockey said. A new law in Ohio bans DEI programs at public colleges and universities and also strips faculty of certain collective bargaining rights and tenure protections. There are few guardrails limiting how far oversight boards can change public institutions, said Isabel McMullen, a doctoral candidate at the University of Wisconsin who researches higher education. 'For a board that really does want to wreak havoc on an institution and overthrow a bunch of different programs, I think if a board is interested in doing that, I don't really see what's stopping them aside from students and faculty really organising against it,' McMullen said. The initiatives on state and federal levels have led to widespread concerns about an erosion of colleges' independence from politics, said Isaac Kamola, director of the Centre for the Defence of Academic Freedom at the American Association of University Professors. 'They have to not only face an attack from the state legislature, but also from the federal government as well,' said Kamola, who is also a professor of political science at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut. In Texas, Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed a pair of bills in June that impose new limits on student protests and give gubernatorial-appointed boards that oversee the state's universities new powers to control the curriculum and eliminate degree programs. Cameron Samuels, executive director of Students Engaged in Advancing Texas, an advocacy group, said politicians in the state are taking control of universities to dictate what is acceptable. 'When someone controls the dissemination of ideas, that is a really dangerous sign for the future of democracy,' Samuels said. The 21-year-old who is transgender and nonbinary went to college in Massachusetts and got into Harvard for graduate school, but as the Trump administration began targeting the institution, he instead chose to return to his home state and attend the University of Texas in Austin. 'I at least knew what to expect,' he said
