China Reacts to Laser Accusation by US's NATO Ally
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
China said Germany had got its facts wrong after it accused the Chinese military of using a laser against one of its aircraft.
Germany, a NATO ally, said the aircraft was taking part in the European Union's (EU) Operation ASPIDES, a defensive maritime security operation to protect international shipping in the Red Sea, the Indian Ocean, and the Gulf.
"As we have learned from the competent authorities, what Germany said is fully inconsistent with the facts that China knows," said Mao Ning, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson, at a press briefing on Wednesday, July 9.
"The Chinese Navy's escort missions in the Gulf of Aden and the waters of Somalia say much about China fulfilling its responsibility as a major country and contributing to the safety of international shipping lanes.
"The two sides should strengthen communication in a facts-based and timely way to avoid misunderstanding and miscalculation."
This is a breaking news story. Updates to follow.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
EU vowed $600B US economy investment from Trump trade deal. Hours later, European bloc admitted it can't back that promise
Less than a day after President Donald Trump claimed that the European Union had agreed to invest $600 billion into the United States as part of a trade deal that will see Trump ask Americans to shoulder a 15 percent import tax on many European goods, EU officials are quietly backtracking. The deal to avert a full-on trade war between the U.S. and one of its major trading partners came into shape over the weekend as Trump met with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen at his Turnberry golf resort in Scotland. Trump had threatened to impose a 30 percent tax on EU imports in a letter to von der Leyen earlier this month. But he told reporters traveling with him on his extended-weekend golf holiday that he and von de Leyen had agreed that the U.S. would impose 'a straight-across tariff of 15 percent' for 'automobiles and everything else' imported into the U.S. from the bloc. Trump also said the EU had agreed to open its own markets by not raising any retaliatory taxes on American goods. Though tariffs are designed to promote domestic production and purchasing by taxing imported goods, the increase in cost typically falls on consumers, not foreign governments. This is because retailers often sidestep the increased import costs by raising prices. Still, the president's public statements have indicated that he sincerely believes that tariffs are paid by foreign nations as a sort of tribute for the purpose of accessing American markets. In fact, they are paid by American importers and passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices. The European Commission president called the agreement a 'huge deal' that would 'bring stability' and 'bring predictability,' calling both benefits 'very important for our businesses on both sides of the Atlantic.' The president also claimed that the agreement would bring $600 billion into American coffers by way of investments made by the EU into U.S. companies. But on Monday, multiple EU officials walked back the massive outlay by noting that it would be made by a variety of private companies over which the bloc has no authority when it comes to corporate spending priorities. One such official told Politico that none of the funds touted by Trump would be from the public coffers of any EU nation. 'It is not something that the EU as a public authority can guarantee. It is something which is based on the intentions of the private companies,' the official said. Another official stated that the $600 billion figure had been calculated "based on detailed discussions with different business associations and companies in order to see what their investment intentions are,' but as of Monday the European Commission has not announced any plans to use any sort of incentives to encourage the investment at issue. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump is getting the world economy he wants -- but the risk to growth could spoil his victory lap
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump is getting his way with the world economy. Trading partners from the European Union to Japan to Vietnam appear to be acceding to the president's demands to accept higher costs — in the form of high tariffs — for the privilege of selling their wares to the United States. For Trump, the agreements driven by a mix of threats and cajoling, are a fulfillment of a decades-long belief in protectionism and a massive gamble that it will pay off politically and economically with American consumers. On Sunday, the United States and the 27-member state European Union announced that they had reached a trade framework agreement: The EU agreed to accept 15% U.S. tariffs on most its goods, easing fears of a catastrophic trans-Atlantic trade war. There were also commitments by the EU to buy $750 billion in U.S. energy products and make $600 billion in new investments through 2028, according to the White House. 'We just signed a very big trade deal, the biggest of them all,' Trump said Monday. But there's no guarantee that Trump's radical overhaul of U.S. trade policy will deliver the happy ending he's promised. The framework agreement was exceedingly spare on details. Most trade deals require months and even years of painstaking negotiation that rise and fall on granular details. High-stakes negotiations break Trump's way Financial markets, at first panicked by the president's protectionist agenda, seem to have acquiesced to a world in which U.S. import taxes — tariffs — are at the highest rates they've been in roughly 90 years. Several billion in new revenues from his levies on foreign goods are pouring into the U.S. Treasury and could somewhat offset the massive tax cuts he signed into law on July 4. Outside economists say that high tariffs are still likely to raise prices for American consumers, dampen the Federal Reserve's ability to lower interest rates and make the U.S. economy less efficient over time. Democrats say the middle class and poor will ultimately pay for the tariffs. 'It's pretty striking that it's seen as a sigh of relief moment,' said Daniel Hornung, a former Biden White House economic official who now holds fellowships at Housing Finance Policy Center and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 'But if the new baseline across all trading partners is 15%, that is a meaningful drag on growth that increases recession risks, while simultaneously making it harder for the Fed to cut.' The EU agreement came just four days after Japan also agreed to 15% U.S. tariffs and to invest in the United States. Earlier, the United States reached deals that raised tariffs on imports from Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines and the United Kingdom considerably from where they'd been before Trump returned to the White House. More one-sided trade deals are likely as countries try to beat a Friday deadline after which Trump will impose even higher tariffs on countries that refuse to make concessions. Trump's long-held theory now faces reality The U.S. president has long claimed that America erred by not taking advantage of its clout as the world's biggest economy and erecting a wall of tariffs, in effect making other countries ante up for access to America's massive consumer market. To his closest aides, Trump's use of tariffs has validated their trust in his skills as a negotiator and their belief that the economists who warned of downturns and inflation were wrong. Stocks rose slightly on Monday morning on tariffs that once seemed unthinkably risky. 'Where are the 'experts' now?' Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick posted on X. But the story is not over. For one thing, many of the details of Trump's trade deals remain somewhat hazy and have not been captured in writing. The U.S. and Japan, for instance, have offered differing descriptions of Japan's agreement to invest $550 billion in the United States. 'The trade deals do seem to count as a qualified win for Trump, with other countries giving the U.S. favorable trade terms while accepting U.S. tariffs,' said Eswar Prasad, a Cornell University economist. "However, certain terms of the deals, such as other countries' investments in the U.S., seem more promising in the abstract than they might prove in reality over time.'' Trump is also facing a court challenge from states and businesses arguing that the president overstepped his authority by declaring national emergencies to justify the tariffs on most of the world's economies. In May, a federal court struck down those tariffs. And an appeals court, which agreed to let the government continue collecting the tariffs for now, will hear oral arguments in the case Thursday. And he's yet to reach an accord with China — which has deftly used the threat of retaliatory tariffs and withholding exports of rare earth minerals that are desperately needed for electric vehicles, computer chips and wind turbines to avoid caving in to Trump's demands. The U.S. and China are talking this week in Stockholm, Sweden. Economists remain skeptical of the impacts for US consumers There is also skepticism that tariffs will produce the economic boom claimed by Trump. Analysts at Morgan Stanley said 'the most likely outcome is slow growth and firm inflation,' but not a recession. After all, the 15% tariffs on the EU and Japan are a slight increase from the 10% rate that Trump began charging in April during a negotiation period. While autos made in the EU and Japan will no longer face the 25% tariffs Trump had imposed, they will still face a 15% tax that has yet to appear in prices at U.S. dealerships. The administration has said the lack of auto price increases suggests that foreign producers are absorbing the costs, but it might ultimately just reflect the buildup of auto inventories to front-run the import taxes. 'Dealers built stocks ahead of tariff implementation, damping the immediate impact on retail prices. That cushion is starting to wear thin,' Morgan Stanley said in a separate note. 'Our Japan auto analyst notes that as pre-tariff inventory clears, replacement vehicles will likely carry higher price tags.' Economist Mary Lovely of the Peterson Institute for International Economics warned of a 'slow-burn efficiency loss'' as U.S. companies scramble to adjust to Trump's new world. For decades, American companies have mostly paid the same tariffs – and often none at all – on imported machinery and raw materials from all over the world. Now, as a result of Trump's trade deals, tariffs vary by country. 'U.S. firms have to change their designs and get inputs from different places based on these variable tariff rates,'' she said. 'It's an incredible administrative burden. There's all these things that are acting as longer-term drags on economy, but their effect will show up only slowly.'' Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, said that the United States' effective tariff rate has risen to 17.5% from around 2.5% at the start of the year. 'I wouldn't take a victory lap,'' Zandi said. 'The economic damage caused by the higher tariffs will mount in the coming months.'' Josh Boak And Paul Wiseman, The Associated Press Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Boston Globe
23 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Why is the Trump administration really holding up MBTA train shells?
The company strongly denies any wrongdoing and MBTA general manager Phil Eng says But the incident is another setback for a star-crossed project that's been hampered by delays, cost overruns, a pandemic, and geopolitical tensions. Advertisement Massachusetts picked the Chinese company back in 2014 because it offered the low bid and promised to assemble the trains in Springfield with shells shipped from China. To then-governor Deval Patrick, the deal was a perfect two-fer, providing the T with bargain trains while creating several hundred blue-collar jobs in a part of the state that often feels overlooked by state transportation spending. For the company, meanwhile, the deal was supposed to be its entree into the American market. The company did Advertisement President Trump slapped tariffs on imported With that history, it's hard to take the slave labor concerns completely at face value. I don't mean to minimize the issue; obviously, if the company really did violate laws against importing slave-made products that would be a massive problem, and a reason for the state to bail on the contract immediately. But the way the administration and Congress have had it out for this company makes me wonder how genuine their concerns for its workers in China really are. The trains are now years beyond schedule. There's undoubtedly plenty of blame to go around for that, and I don't mean to let the company off the hook. But what if politicians hadn't spent so much energy trying to thwart CRRC? Why was the company that made something as socially useful as trains held to such a higher standard than ones making, say, smartphones? I get the concerns about Chinese dumping — ie, using artificially low prices to gain market share at the expense of American firms. China has been accused of anticompetitive behavior when it comes to solar panels and other goods. But the T's trains are being built by American workers, and with many American components. If US government pressure results in CRRC leaving the American market, the Chinese government will barely notice. But a lot of people in Springfield will. Advertisement This is an excerpt from , a Globe Opinion newsletter about the future of transportation in the region. Sign up to . Alan Wirzbicki is Globe deputy editor for editorials. He can be reached at
