Latest news with #globalconflict
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Bill O'Reilly meets CCP leaders, calls for cooperation with China
(NewsNation) — Bill O'Reilly said Monday that the United States has no choice but to work with China to prevent global conflict, despite the country's history of breaking agreements and engaging in espionage. 'There's no other alternative,' O'Reilly said on NewsNation's 'On Balance' after returning from meetings with what he called 'the most powerful people' in China. 'We've got to try to get a deal with China.' O'Reilly said he briefed President Donald Trump for about 30 minutes following his China trip, though he declined to share specifics of that conversation. He said Chinese officials indicated that tariffs were not their primary concern, but Taiwan remains the central issue. '2049, 100 years since Mao Zedong imposed communism, they want Taiwan under the Chinese flag,' O'Reilly said. 'I told them that while President Trump is in office, it's not going to happen militarily.' Russia severely limited after attack: Ex-Ukraine ambassador O'Reilly proposed what he called a 'plan for peace and prosperity' that would position the United States and China as global 'enforcers' of peace, potentially sidelining Russia and Iran. He said Chinese officials appeared receptive to the concept. When pressed about China's surveillance state and human rights abuses, O'Reilly acknowledged the country's authoritarian nature but distinguished Chinese leadership from Russian President Vladimir Putin, whom he characterized as more 'psychopathic.' 'I wouldn't use the word evil across the board,' O'Reilly said of China. 'It's a police state, a surveillance state. Nobody has any rights. They justify it by saying, look, we got a billion and a half people.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Telegraph
4 days ago
- Business
- Telegraph
How Britain's biggest companies are preparing for a Third World War
The year is 2027 and a major global conflict has erupted. Perhaps China has launched an attempted invasion of Taiwan, or Russian forces have crossed into the territory of an eastern European Nato country. Whatever the case, Justin Crump's job is to advise big companies on how to respond. And with tensions rising, a growing number of chief executives have got him on speed dial. The former Army tank commander, who now runs intelligence and security consultancy Sibylline, says his clients range from a top British supermarket chain to Silicon Valley technology giants. They are all drawing up plans to keep running during wartime, and Crump is surprisingly blunt about their reasoning: a global conflict may be just two years away. 'We're in a world which is more dangerous, more volatile than anything we've seen since the Second World War,' he explains. There are lots of crises that can happen, that are ready to go. 'Chief executives want to test against the war scenario, because they think it's credible. They want to make sure their business can get through that environment.' The year of worst case scenarios He rattles off a series of smouldering international issues – any one of which could ignite the global tinderbox – from Iran's nuclear ambitions, to China's threats to Taiwan, to Vladimir Putin's designs on a Russian sphere of influence in Ukraine and beyond, as well as Donald Trump's disdain for the post-1940s 'rules-based international order'. Against this backdrop, planning for war is not alarmist but sensible, Crump contends. With all these issues building, 2027 is viewed as the moment of maximum danger. 'The worst case scenario is that all these crises all overlap in 2027,' he explains. 'You've got the US midterms, which will have taken place just at the start of that year, and whatever happens there will be lots of upset people. It's also the time when a lot of the economic disruption that's happening now will have really washed through the system, so we'll be feeling the effects of that. And it's also too early for the change in defence posture to have really meant anything in Europe.' Putin and Xi Jinping, the president of China, are acutely aware of all this, he says, and may conclude that they should act before the US and Europe are more fully rearmed in 2030. 'In their minds now, the clock is ticking,' he adds. He also points to major British and Nato military exercises scheduled to take place in 2027, with American forces working to a 2027 readiness target as well. 'There's a reason they're doing it that year – because they think we have to be ready by then,' Crump says. 'So why shouldn't businesses also work off the same thinking and plan for the same thing?' He is not alone in arguing that society needs to start expecting the unexpected. In 2020, the Government established the National Preparedness Commission to ensure the UK was 'significantly better prepared' for the likes of floods, power outages, cyber attacks or wars. It has urged households to keep at least three days' worth of food and water stockpiled, along with other essential items such as a wind-up torch, portable power bank, a portable radio, spare batteries, hand sanitiser and a first aid kit. 'In recent years a series of high-impact events have demonstrated how easily our established way of life can be disrupted by major events,' the commission's website says – pointing to the coronavirus pandemic, recent African coups, Russia's invasion of Ukraine and turmoil in the Middle East. Britain is also secretly preparing for a direct military attack by Russia amid fears that it is not ready for war. Officials have been asked to update 20-year-old contingency plans that would put the country on a war footing after threats of attack by the Kremlin. All of this has led major businesses to conclude that perma crisis is the new normal, Crump says. In the case of Ukraine, Western sanctions on Russia forced companies to choose between continuing to operate heavily-constrained operations in Russia, selling up, or walking away entirely. Crump recalls speaking to several clients including a major energy company in the run-up to Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. He and his colleagues urged the business to evacuate their staff, at a point when it was still received wisdom that Putin wouldn't dare follow through with his threats. 'I had almighty arguments with some people in the run-up, because I was very firmly of the view, based on our data and insights, that the Russians were not only invading, but they were going for the whole country. But other people in our sector were saying, 'No, it's all a bluff'. 'Their team came to me afterwards and said: 'After that call, we were convinced, and we got our people out'. They got a lot of grief for that at the time, from people who were saying it was all nonsense. 'But then on the day of the invasion, they told me they got so many calls actually saying 'thank you for getting us out'.' Yet even in Ukraine, much of which remains an active war zone, life must go on – along with business. 'I've been to plenty of war zones,' says Crump. 'And people are still getting on with their lives, there's still stuff in supermarkets, and things are being made in factories – but that certainly all gets a lot more difficult.' In the case of a major British supermarket, how might executives plan for, say, a Chinese invasion of Taiwan? The first question is how involved the UK expects to be, says Crump. But if Britain, as might be expected, sides with the US at least in diplomatic terms, 'we're not buying anything from China'. That immediately has implications for a company's supply chains – are there any parts of the supply chain that would be crippled without Chinese products? But as the recent cyber attack on Marks & Spencer has demonstrated, attacks on critical digital infrastructure are also a major risk to supermarkets in the event of a war with China or Russia. 'If you look at a retailer, the vulnerability is not necessarily whether or not they can transport stuff to the shop, even in a war zone,' says Crump. 'The problem becomes when you can't operate your systems. 'If you can't take money at the point of sale, or if you have no idea where your stock is because your computer system has been taken down, you've got major problems and you can't operate your business.' Workforce gaps In a scenario where Britain becomes involved in a war itself, Crump says employers may also suddenly find themselves with gaps in their workforces. He believes things would need to get 'very bad indeed' for the Government to impose conscription, which applied to men aged 18-41 during the Second World War. But he points out that the calling up of British armed forces reservists would be very likely, along with the potential mobilisation of what is known as the 'strategic reserve' – those among the country's 1.8 million veterans who are still fit to serve. There are around 32,000 volunteer reservists and an undisclosed number of regular reserves, former regular members of the armed forces who are still liable to be called up. 'There's a big pool of people we don't tap at the moment who are already trained,' explains Crump. 'But there would be consequences if the entire reserve was called forward, which would have to happen if we entered a reasonably sized conflict. It would certainly cause disruptions. 'The medical services are hugely integrated with the NHS, for example, and we saw the effects of them being called forward with Iraq and Afghanistan.' Food supplies The sort of supermarket chaos that erupted during the Covid-19 pandemic would also return with a vengeance if a significant conflict broke out. During that crisis, grocers had to limit how many packs of loo rolls and cans of chopped tomatoes shoppers were allowed to take home, among other items, because of supply chain problems. 'If we're in a conflict, that sort of supply chain activity would increase,' notes Crump. 'So you don't necessarily have rationing imposed, but there might be issues with food production, delivery, payment and getting things to the right place. 'In a world where we don't have our own independent supply chains, we're reliant on a lot of very interconnected moving parts that have been enabled by this period of peace. 'We've never been in a conflict during a time where we've had 'just in time' systems.' Spanish blackouts: A dry run Crump brings up the recent blackouts in Spain and Portugal. British grocers initially thought their food supplies would be completely unaffected because truck loads of tomatoes had already made their way out of the country when the problem struck. But the vehicles were electronically locked, to prevent illegal migrants attempting to clamber inside when they cross the English Channel and could only be unlocked from Spain – where the power cuts had taken down computer systems and telecoms. 'People in Spain couldn't get online, so we had locked trucks full of tomatoes sitting here that we couldn't open because of technology,' Crump says. 'No one had ever thought, 'But what happens if all of Spain goes off the grid?' And I'm sure the answer would have been, 'That'll never happen' anyway.' This tendency towards 'normalcy bias' is what Crump tries to steer his clients away from. While it isn't inevitable that war will break out, or that there will be another pandemic, humans tend to assume that things will revert to whatever the status quo has been in their lifetimes, he says. This can mean we fail to take the threat of unlikely scenarios seriously enough, or use outdated ways of thinking to solve new problems. 'We've had this long period of peace and prosperity. And, of course, business leaders have grown up in that. Military leaders have grown up in it. Politicians have grown up in it. And so it's very hard when that starts to change. 'People have grown up in a world of rules. And I think people are still trying to find ways in which the game is still being played by those old rules.' Unsurprisingly, given his line of work, Crump believes businesses must get more comfortable contemplating the unthinkable. 'Go back a decade and most executives did not want to have a crisis because a crisis is bad for your career, so they didn't want to do a test exercise – because you might fail,' Crump adds. 'But the whole point is that you can fail in an exercise, because it's not real life.'
Russia Today
17-05-2025
- Politics
- Russia Today
No single power should control the world
The world should not be controlled by a single power, Myanmar Prime Minister Min Aung Hlaing has said in an exclusive interview with RT. A multipolar system is the best approach to avoid conflict, he believes. In the interview aired on Saturday, the prime minister stressed that developing countries such as Myanmar have especially suffered 'under a unipolar system.' 'That is why transitioning to a multipolar world works best for us. It is better to share global resources, to act fairly, to distribute things more evenly. Conflicts arise from inequality, so if we want to avoid conflicts, I believe a multipolar system is the best approach,' he said. 'The US and Western bloc controlled the world through unipolarity. Then it became bipolar, and from bipolarity it returned to unipolarity. This made the West stronger,' Hlaing said. However, 'in this era, Russia, China and India have made tremendous progress militarily, economically and scientifically,' the prime minister noted. 'As they have advanced, we have moved towards multipolarity and that is how it should be. No single power should control the world,' he said. If Moscow, Beijing and New Delhi, which are 'three equally important global powers,' collaborate and 'act in unison, multipolarity will become a global reality. No one will accept this unipolarity anymore,' the Myanmar leader emphasized. In order to succeed in the multipolar world, smaller countries 'must try to cooperate' with Russia, China, and India, he said. 'Making that attempt is absolutely worthwhile. We need to develop our own economic capabilities, while simultaneously increasing cooperation with each other,' he added. Hlaing was among the high-ranking foreign guests who visited Moscow for the celebration of the 80th anniversary of the victory over Nazi Germany on May 9. Earlier this year, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that relations between Moscow and Naypyidaw have been developing steadily and had 'good potential.' In 2024 alone, trade turnover between the two nations increased by 40%, he noted. Putin also expressed gratitude to the leadership of Myanmar for facilitating Russia's cooperation with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
Telegraph
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Battle Lines: The Telegraph's foreign policy, geopolitics and global conflict podcast
Battle Lines is The Telegraph's foreign policy, geopolitics and global conflict podcast. It offers expert analysis and on-the-ground reporting from China and the United States to the Middle East and Europe. Twice a week, veteran foreign correspondents Roland Oliphant and Venetia Rainey bring you on-the-ground dispatches from the world's most volatile regions and informed analysis from world-class experts. Whether it's the Russia-Ukraine war, the Israel-Gaza conflict, Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific, tensions between India and Pakistan, or the civil war in Sudan, Battle Lines covers the world's most critical flashpoints with depth and clarity. When will China invade Taiwan? Can Trump bring peace to the Middle East? What should Europe do to help Ukraine beat Russia? Is Iran building a nuclear bomb? What is the point of NATO? Can the United Kingdom still defend itself? Created by David Knowles, Battle Lines answers all these questions and more, bringing together the best of The Telegraph's international, geopolitical, and conflict reporting in one place. Plus, every Friday, the podcast delves into the seismic impact US President Donald Trump is having on the world - from peace talks to tariffs to migration policy. Don't forget to follow and leave a review to stay updated on the latest in global conflict and foreign affairs. Telegraph subscribers get early access to bonus episodes of Battle Lines and its sister podcast, Ukraine: The Latest. You can subscribe within The Telegraph app or click here for more information. Battle Lines ' hosts are: Roland Oliphant Roland Oliphant is Chief Foreign Analyst at the Telegraph. He was previously the paper's chief foreign correspondent and before that its Moscow correspondent, living in Russia for 10 years. He has reported from the frontline of the Ukraine-Russia war and Iran's capital Tehran during election time, as well as across Asia, the Middle East and Africa. Venetia Rainey Venetia is Planning Editor (Audio) at The Telegraph, and was previously the paper's Weekend Foreign Editor. Before that she worked as a foreign correspondent for over a decade, living and reporting across the Middle East, North Africa and Europe. She was the producer and writer behind Hong Kong Silenced and How To Become a Dictator - two limited series podcasts looking at the rise of China. On top of covering the week's news, Battle Lines also takes a step back to look at historical, social and cultural takes on conflict and foreign policy. Below are a selection of some of those episodes:
Telegraph
07-05-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
The world is a powder keg waiting to explode
Progress, what progress? On the 80th anniversary of VE Day, the world is edging ever closer to another apocalyptic conflagration, with India-Pakistan the latest terrifying escalation. Pax Americana has been shattered, never to return, and with it the delusions of Western modernity. In eerie parallels to the 1930s, rogue actors are initiating a series of interlinked conflicts around the world that, thanks to a web of alliances, risk joining up into one hideous global war. We don't yet know whether the massacre of Indian tourists in Kashmir by terrorists will prove to be the casus belli, or whether it might be precipitated by another outrage by Vladimir Putin, or whether the tipping point will be triggered by Iran's genocidal mullahs developing a nuclear bomb and using it. We may have to wait for China to invade Taiwan, or perhaps for an entirely different despot to make his move. What is almost certain is that conflict, perhaps even one future historians will describe as World War III, is coming, and there appears to be nobody, no mechanism, no alliance, to stop it. The situation feels hopeless. The Long Peace, as John Lewis Gaddis called it, was an accident of history, a one-off consequence of America's fleeting supremacy and the Cold War, not, as hubristic Western elites convinced themselves, the byproduct of an inevitable ascent of humanity from superstition to reason. Multipolar chaos has filled the vacuum left by America's retreat: there is no longer a global policeman. The legacy post-WWII global institutions, and the liberal, technocratic project they were meant to underpin, have been exposed as utterly useless, only viable under Pax Americana. International bodies have become ineffective, corrupt or captured, with international law (policed by the dreadful ICC), agencies (such as UNRWA) and treaties (such as the Paris Accords) routinely weaponised against the West by Marxists, Orientalists and clever third world statesmen. The EU is destroying its economies and societies. The Global South is laughing at the decadent West, including at Donald Trump's naivety, and China's President Xi is meeting his new vassal Vladimir Putin. America is no longer rich, strong or capable enough to keep the peace, and it wouldn't want to even if it could. Its efforts to do so after 9/11 ended in catastrophe, as did its meddling in Libya and elsewhere. Its confidence and attention span are shot. Years of over-consumption, profligacy and under-production have made it too dependent on inflows of funds that come with geopolitical strings attached. Its over-indebtedness and unfunded liabilities are its Achilles' Heel. Trump voters no longer want to serve as cannon fodder in forever foreign wars. His project is very much a defensive retreat, the winding down of the Great American empire, combined with a MAGA version of the Monroe doctrine, which asserts Washington's sole influence over the Americas (including Panama, Canada and Greenland). He also wants to prevent a Chinese takeover of the Pacific. He isn't really interested in much else, hence why he has been so keen to believe the lies Putin, Iranians and Houthis have been telling him. With the Europeans having spent the past 30 years squandering the peace dividend, we have ended up with a fractious Western pseudo-alliance excessively focused on counter-insurgency, that has fallen behind in the tech wars and that is physically unable to produce enough missiles or weapons. The collapse in war-fighting capacity has been staggering. Combined with the pathologies of multiculturalism, especially in Britain and Europe, and the rise of pacifism and a woke, anti-patriotic, Western self-hatred, we are even less fighting fit than we were prior to rearmament in the 1930s. The very opposite is true of our adversaries. The explosion of wealth in the Global South after it adopted versions of capitalism, while wonderful for life expectancy and quality of life, didn't bring about the Westernisation of their societies that virtually all liberals had predicted. Prosperity and the internet were meant to make wars and authoritarian rule unthinkable. It didn't work out that way. China hasn't embraced democracy and individual liberty; instead, it weaponised its wealth to become the second most powerful military power in the world and its technology to become a vicious surveillance state. The richer it grows, the more dangerous it becomes. Thomas Friedman's Golden Arches theory of conflict prevention, which posited that two countries with a McDonald's would never fight a war, was disproved in Kosovo in 1999, and when Russia invaded Ukraine. Woke imbeciles pretend only the West is expansionist or racist, but of course that isn't true. Today, Russia wants Ukraine, China wants Taiwan, and Iran, funder of Hamas and Hezbollah, wants to control the Middle East, destroy Israel and ethnically cleanse all minorities. The fusion of imperialism with ethnic hatred is as toxic today as it was in the 1930s. The balance of power is further complicated by the rise of asymmetric warfare: drones in particular can inflict immense damage on supposedly stronger countries, level the playing field and further destabilise the world. It is just a matter of time before a drone causes an event of a magnitude similar to the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in 1914. There were many smaller conflicts before the Second World War, such as the Japanese invasion of Manchuria, the Italian invasion of Ethiopia and the Anschluss. We can see similar warning signs today, starting with Putin's invasion of Crimea in 2014 under Barack Obama, a seminal moment in the world's descent into disorder. The period since 2021 has been the bloodiest since the Cold War. The Tigray War in Ethiopia, Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine and Hamas' assault on Israel, have reversed the downward trend in deaths from war.
