Philippines signs deal for 12 fighter jets: South Korea manufacturer
MANILA: The Philippines has signed a contract for 12 more FA-50 fighter jets, its South Korean manufacturer said Wednesday (June 4), three months after one of the planes crashed during a mission against communist rebels.
Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) valued the deal with the Department of National Defense at US$700 million, with delivery of the jets to be completed by 2030.
The Philippines, which has yet to confirm the pact, previously purchased a dozen of the light warplanes in 2014.
In a statement, the South Korean firm said the fighter jets would feature enhanced capabilities including "aerial refueling for extended range, (Active Electronically Scanned Array) radar, and advanced air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons systems".
One of the Philippines' original fleet of FA-50s went missing on March 4 while on a mission to provide air support for troops fighting guerrillas in a mountainous area of the southern island of Mindanao.
Rescuers found the wreckage of the plane and the bodies of two crewmen a day later.
After temporarily grounding the fleet, the Philippine Air Force ruled out any mechanical problems with the aircraft.
Air Force spokeswoman Maria Consuelo Castillo told a press conference in April that a confluence of factors had contributed to the crash, including mountainous terrain and visibility issues.
Castillo said in March that the purchase of additional FA-50s was under consideration by the defence department. - AFP
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
15 minutes ago
- The Star
Will China win the renewables race while US pivots to fossil fuels and nuclear?
US President Donald Trump's signature budget bill, signed into law earlier this month, marked a startling pivot towards fossil fuels and nuclear power, reigniting a fierce debate over how best to balance the country's energy future with its national security. The act, known officially as the One Big Beautiful Bill, rolls back Joe Biden era subsidies for solar, wind and electric vehicles – a dramatic reversal of long-standing US support for clean energy in a world racing towards decarbonisation. At the same time, the act preserves subsidies for nuclear projects, particularly fusion, which is framed as a dependable, low-carbon energy source and a long-term strategy to lessen US reliance on rare earths. Washington has described the energy overhaul as a strategic imperative rooted in national security concerns – especially after Beijing leveraged its near-monopoly over rare earths in the renewed US-China trade war. The legislation's supporters say it is a bold attempt to secure energy independence, arguing that the US must close technological gaps and mitigate supply chain vulnerabilities that could hand additional strategic leverage to Beijing. In this view, China's clean tech manufacturing dominance and control over critical minerals – essential to renewable technologies from solar panels and wind turbines to EV batteries – have left the US exposed to supply disruptions and geopolitical manipulation. Critics argue that the act prioritises short-term security and economic gains over long-term sustainability and global competitiveness – potentially ceding US leadership in the clean energy transition and threatening the planet's climate future. They also warn that the rollback of clean energy measures established by the Biden administration's 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) represents a high-stakes gamble based on a strategic miscalculation. In an illustration of the intensifying competition, just days after Trump's bill became law, Beijing unveiled a state-owned behemoth with a registered capital of 15 billion yuan (US$2.1 billion) and a target to achieve commercialisation of nuclear fusion by 2050. Last week's launch of China Fusion Energy Co Ltd signalled Beijing's ambition to lead in next-generation energy technologies, with thermonuclear power widely regarded as an ultimate energy solution. The Shanghai-based fusion company is backed by a coalition of seven state-owned giants across the nuclear and petroleum sectors, including China National Nuclear Corporation, PetroChina's Kunlun Capital, and the Shanghai Future Industry Fund. Also last week, China and the European Union issued a joint statement reaffirming their commitment to shared climate leadership and underscoring the urgency of global cooperation in the wake of the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement – for the second time under Trump – earlier this year. And at the Brics summit earlier this month, China joined the major developing nations – including India, Brazil and South Africa – in a pledge to 'intensify global efforts to contain global warming'. According to Li Shuo, director of the Asia Society Policy Institute's China Climate Hub, the legislative changes showed that the green industrial strategy previously pursued by the US had become 'politically unsustainable' in today's Washington. 'The rollback of subsidies for clean tech manufacturing and deployment will reduce domestic supply of these products and in turn dampen demand. This will slow down clean tech development in the US and underscores the challenges ahead for US decarbonisation,' he said. 'In recent years, Washington has opted not to rely on Chinese technologies yet. With what happened to the IRA, it will continue to struggle to develop viable alternatives.' Scott Moore, director of China Programmes and Strategic Initiatives at the University of Pennsylvania, said it was 'pretty clear' that Trump's goal of cutting US dependence on China in critical minerals and other areas aligned with his predecessor's approach. 'That objective has been present for some time,' he said, adding that the second Trump administration had been 'even more forward-leaning' and assertive on that front. According to Moore, 'one of the most telling examples' that the Trump White House particularly prioritises reducing US dependence on rare earths is the MP Materials deal announced earlier this month. Under the multibillion-dollar partnership deal, Washington has acquired a 15 per cent stake in the company, which owns the only operational rare earths mine in the US, Mountain Pass in California, supplying roughly 15 per cent of global rare earth elements. 'There are alternatives, but it's difficult to replicate the entire supply chain – especially the processing [that] involves highly toxic materials, which makes it challenging to get local approvals and overcome community opposition. But it's still possible,' Moore said. While the US could still narrow the gap with China on rare earths and clean energy, success would ultimately depend on cost, he suggested. Anders Hove, a senior research fellow at the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, also highlighted the challenge of processing toxic rare earth materials as posing a critical gap in the US supply chain. Hove said the legislation's fossil fuel emphasis reflected deep political divides and ideological differences in the US that could be traced back to the oil shocks of the mid-1970s. 'Since the 1970s, the two parties have grown more polarised in their positions on almost every issue,' he said. 'But starting in the 2000s, the Republican Party began to oppose any action on climate change, and renewable energy began to lose its bipartisan character. At the same time, supporting coal became a symbol of the culture war, more than [something] substantive or strategic.' Hove – whose public and private sector experience in energy policy and markets includes 12 years in China and nine on Wall Street – noted that the US under Trump and Biden, as well as Europe, each had distinct strategies to reduce their reliance on foreign sources. 'The Biden approach was more similar to Europe's, in the sense of working with trading partners like Canada or Chile to diversify critical minerals supply – including processing,' he said. Sun Haiyong, a researcher at the American Studies Centre of the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies, observed that fossil fuel interests were a core base for the Republican Party, which often downplayed climate mitigation in favour of economic and political priorities. 'The current US shift towards fossil fuels is driven mostly by the interest groups behind the Trump administration,' he said, adding that the lack of competitiveness in clean energy equipment manufacturing was also contributing to its retreat from renewables. 'Most production capacity for wind and solar technologies, energy storage systems and other related equipment is concentrated in China, which also holds technological and production advantages in processing and raw material extraction – particularly for critical minerals needed in energy transition technologies like wind turbines and energy storage.' Sun noted that there were also 'short-term economic benefits' for the Trump administration in ramping up fossil fuel production and exports – including greater economic leverage over Europe and support for the increasingly unstable US dollar. Meanwhile, China is projected to contribute 60 per cent of the world's expansion in renewable energy capacity by 2030, according to the International Energy Agency. The country produced roughly half of global solar capacity in 2023, while accounting for more than 60 per cent of global EV production. Tom Moerenhout, head of the Critical Materials Initiative at Columbia University's Centre on Global Energy Policy, said the US' entrenched status as a major producer, consumer, and exporter of fossil fuels was a driving force behind the sweeping policy shift. 'There's a refocus on those sectors,' he said, referring to renewed investment in natural gas power plants and internal combustion engine vehicles – developments shaped by both market forces and political priorities. 'The US is the world's biggest producer of both oil and gas – they get enormous revenue from that. They have deep market knowledge and strong technological expertise in fossil fuels,' Moerenhout said. 'It would make no sense for the US to suddenly abandon fossil fuels from an industrial or know-how perspective,' he noted, acknowledging that they yielded 'far more immediate cash than renewables'. Nevertheless, the refocus on fossil fuels is 'pure short-termism', according to Moerenhout, who described the legislation as a serious setback for US clean energy ambitions, with Washington widely perceived internationally as 'throwing in the towel' on renewables. 'I don't think [pulling back from clean energy] is necessarily wrong. It's just that the US is not going to compete globally,' he said. 'It's a very immature and problematic industrial policy if your goal is to be a player in tomorrow's world rather than someone left behind.' The new legislation is also designed to insulate the US economy by disqualifying products made with Chinese components or resources from federal subsidies – a move that has prompted several critical questions. Li, from the Asia Society Policy Institute, noted that with the scrapping of the IRA and the new legislation's rules limiting access to Chinese green technologies, the US cleantech landscape faced constraints on two fronts. '[The US] refuses to import Chinese clean technologies – as per Biden's original stance – and, with Trump's repeal of the IRA, it has also surrendered much of its domestic manufacturing capacity,' he said. 'This combination sets the stage for major setbacks in decarbonisation efforts over the medium to long term [and] marks a critical inflection point – not just for US-China climate dynamics, but for the global climate agenda as a whole.' 'The US is simply stepping off the field,' according to Li, who predicted that US-China climate relations would become increasingly asymmetrical. 'The US is retreating both politically and economically from climate action while China is gradually realising that decarbonisation serves its commercial interests,' he said. 'The long-standing global climate storyline, in which developed countries push developing ones to accelerate action, may well be rewritten in reverse. And we are only at the beginning of this shift.' The long-standing global climate storyline, in which developed countries push developing ones to accelerate action, may well be rewritten in reverse In Shanghai, Sun raised similar doubts about the long-term viability of Washington's pivot to fossil fuels, which he said 'cannot serve as a long-term energy solution for the US'. He said this was mainly because of the growing environmental impacts of fracking, the urgent need to address climate change, and the inevitable policy shifts driven by changes in political leadership. 'As for nuclear fusion, while the technology pathway is viable, its commercialisation is still a long way off,' he said, adding that construction of new nuclear power projects or the restart of previously halted ones in the US had long been plagued by delays, cost overruns and cancellations. Sun also cautioned against overstating the importance of the new legislation, pointing out that there were 'significant hurdles in advancing re-industrialisation'. The Oxford Institute's Hove shared this view, adding that nuclear power tended to get more expensive over time, while renewable energy was more likely to benefit from rapid learning and cost declines. 'Fusion plant [technology] is decades from being demonstrated at scale – presumably funded by the government – and commercialisation decades beyond that, if it even has any economic viability, which right now is a huge unknown,' he said. Hove also highlighted the impact of trade disputes on securing critical supplies from abroad, adding that slowing demand for wind and electric vehicles in the US was weakening incentives for companies to invest in long-term supply chains or upstream innovation. Moore, from the University of Pennsylvania, questioned whether fossil fuels should remain a long-term option, even if they could. He also predicted that wind and solar would likely remain central to the energy mix. In contrast, fusion, due to capital intensive and its dependency on specialised infrastructure, would probably remain a centralised power source, he said. Columbia University's Moerenhout rejected the notion that fossil fuels were simply a place holder until nuclear fusion became viable, noting that the technology remained a distant, expensive gamble that was often hyped by those with vested interests. 'It's not illogical to think fusion may eventually produce electricity commercially – but that day isn't coming in the next decade,' said Moerenhout, who described the legislation as a 'mixed bag'. In his view, small modular reactors are 'much closer to economic competitiveness than fusion', though they would still need real-world deployment to prove their viability. And while fusion and small modular reactors may hold long-term promise, meaningful cost reductions were already happening in proven technologies such as renewables and smart grid technologies, Moerenhout said. 'If you want to see where the biggest cost reductions for reliable electricity are happening, it's in clean energy [like] wind, solar, in demand-side management, smart meters, and so forth ... There the cost reductions are real. They're clear. They're visible. They're already happening.' - SOUTH CHINA MORNING POST
The Star
15 minutes ago
- The Star
Asian currencies fall to two-month low as tariff deadline nears
MANILA (Bloomberg): Asian currencies slid to a two-month low, weighed by a resilient dollar and uncertainty over US tariff talks with some countries. The Bloomberg Asia Dollar Index fell as much as 0.2% in early trading to the lowest level since May 19. The Philippine peso led declines, as elevated oil prices fueled concerns over the nation's crude import bill. The Indian rupee hovered near record lows. Regional currencies were set to cap their biggest monthly loss this year as the greenback surged after the Federal Reserve held benchmark interest rates. Expectations for a September rate cut have also eased following robust US economic data. Meanwhile, sentiment remains cautious with some countries yet to finalize trade agreements with the US ahead of the Aug. 1 deadline. "Asian FX markets continue to be shaped by persistent US dollar strength,' said Shier Lee Lim, lead FX strategist at Convera in Singapore. "The upcoming tariff deadlines and ongoing negotiations involving Malaysia and Thailand remain key flashpoints for market sentiment, as investors look for signs of progress or further escalation.' Central banks across the region have stepped up intervention efforts to stabilize their currencies. The Hong Kong Monetary Authority stepped in to buy HK$3.925 billion to defend the currency peg, while Indonesia's central bank intervened in the foreign-exchange markets. The People's Bank of China set a stronger-than-expected fixing to support the yuan. The Mexican peso led gains among emerging market peers after people familiar with the plans said President Donald Trump and his Mexican counterpart, Claudia Sheinbaum, plan to speak by phone, raising hopes for progress in trade discussions. Over in stocks, the MSCI Emerging Market Index fell to a two-week low. Stocks on mainland China and Hong Kong declined more than 1.5% following weaker-than-expected PMI data and as traders await the outcome of US-China trade talks. Benchmarks in South Korea also fell as disappointing earnings from Samsung Electronics Co. weighed. "Tariffs continue to impact sentiment and activity,' said Tony Sycamore, an analyst at IG in Sydney. "There remains some uncertainty as to whether China and the US can extend their trade pause for another 90 days.' --With assistance from Matthew Burgess. -- ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
The Sun
15 minutes ago
- The Sun
South Korean shares plunge 4% on US tariffs, tax hike fears
SEOUL: Round-up of South Korean financial markets: ** South Korean shares fell nearly 4% on Friday to post their biggest daily decline since early April, as U.S. tariffs and domestic tax hikes dented investor sentiment. ** The benchmark KOSPI closed down 126.03 points, or 3.88%, at 3,119.41, marking its biggest daily percentage fall since April 7. The index ended the week 2.4% lower, also the biggest since early April. ** The KOSPI underperformed the broader Asian market, which was also pressured by a slew of new U.S. tariffs, but was down less than 1%. ** U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Thursday imposing reciprocal tariffs on U.S. imports from dozens of countries, including a 15% tariff on South Korea, lower than a threatened 25% but higher than the current 10%. ** South Korea's exports rose for the second straight month in July on strong chip demand and shipments being moved forward ahead of higher U.S. tariffs. ** South Korea's government put forward plans on Thursday to roll back recently imposed tax cuts, such as those on corporate income and stock investments. ** 'Scepticism heightened over the government's push to boost the domestic stock market, with hopes of market-friendly policies retreating,' said Lee Kyoung-min, an analyst at Daishin Securities. ** Among index heavyweights, chipmaker Samsung Electronics fell 3.50%, while peer SK Hynix lost 5.67%. Battery maker LG Energy Solution slid 2.48%. ** Hyundai Motor and sister automaker Kia Corp were down 1.41% and 1.47%, respectively. Steelmaker POSCO Holdings shed 5.83%, while drugmaker Samsung BioLogics fell 3.09%. ** Securities firms dropped 6.48%, while financial groups fell 4.95%. ** Of the total 935 traded issues, only 38 shares advanced, while 885 declined. ** Foreigners were net sellers of shares worth 656.4 billion won ($467.01 million). ** The won was quoted at 1,401.4 per dollar on the onshore settlement platform, 0.67% lower than its previous close at 1,392.0. ** The most liquid three-year Korean treasury bond yield rose by 1.7 basis points to 2.480%, while the benchmark 10-year yield rose by 4.3 basis points to 2.833%. ($1 = 1,405.5300 won) - Reuters
