Tag:

China

AI Investment: US & China Pursue Different Paths, It’s Not an Arms Race

by Omar El Sayed - World Editor February 20, 2026

written by Omar El Sayed - World Editor

As investments in artificial intelligence (AI) soar, projections suggest spending on the technology could reach up to $700 billion this year, nearly double the amount from the previous year. This surge reflects a growing conviction among U.S. Investors and policymakers that the country must “beat China” in the AI domain. The narrative around AI development often frames it as a zero-sum competition between the U.S. And China, portraying the situation as an arms race with a definitive endpoint. However, a deeper examination reveals that the two nations are not racing towards the same goal.

“The U.S. And China are running in exceptionally different lanes,” asserts Selina Xu, who leads China and AI policy research for Eric Schmidt, the former CEO of Google. Although the U.S. Focuses on scaling efforts towards artificial general intelligence (AGI), China is more concentrated on enhancing economic productivity and making a tangible impact on society. Mischaracterizing the competition as a singular race could lead to harmful policy and business decisions. Xu warns, “An arms race can become a self-fulfilling prophecy,” indicating that an intense focus on being first may lead to neglecting necessary security and safety protocols, thereby increasing the risk of AI-related crises.

Different Priorities and Approaches

The idea of an arms race in AI draws parallels to Cold War-era strategic competition, where figures like Stephen Hawking and Elon Musk expressed concerns about the broad implications of AI. Karson Elmgren, a researcher at the Institute for AI Policy and Strategy, notes that while the arms race framework simplifies the situation, it does not accurately reflect the complexities involved. The true finish line in this context is ambiguous and potentially misaligned with the actual goals of each country.

China faces an economic slowdown, driven by issues in real estate, credit, consumption, and youth unemployment. Its leaders are looking to AI as a means to stimulate growth. AI is perceived in China as a tool to enhance existing industries, such as healthcare and agriculture, rather than a speculative frontier that could lead to AGI. Liang Zheng, an AI policy researcher at Tsinghua University, emphasizes that the primary objective is to use AI to benefit the general populace, focusing on practical applications that improve efficiency across manufacturing, logistics, and public services.

AI Integration in China

China’s investment strategy prioritizes embedding AI technology into various sectors. This approach is part of a long-term structural change, requiring businesses to invest in machinery, software, and digitalization. The AI Plus initiative aims to enhance productivity and efficiency across industries. For instance, Chinese automakers have adopted intelligent robots in factories, significantly increasing automation levels; reports indicate that China had about five times more factory robots in operation than the U.S. By 2024. These advancements allow for improved quality control and predictive maintenance.

In the healthcare sector, AI tools are being utilized for patient triage, medical image interpretation, and diagnostic support. Tsinghua University is even piloting an AI “Agent Hospital” where doctors collaborate with virtual assistants, streamlining patient appointment processes. Many applications in China utilize narrower AI designed for specific tasks, demonstrating a focus on practical, immediate benefits.

U.S. Focus on Service Sector Applications

Conversely, the U.S. Is integrating AI primarily into service-oriented and data-driven applications. Large language models (LLMs) are utilized to manage unstructured data and automate communication across various industries. For example, financial institutions employ LLM-based assistants to help customers navigate their accounts and transactions, while similar technologies aid healthcare professionals in extracting relevant information from medical documentation.

Elmgren highlights that LLM technology aligns more naturally with the U.S. Service-sector economy compared to China’s manufacturing-focused economy. This divergence in application reflects the broader economic contexts of both nations.

Competitive Landscape and Cooperation

Despite their differing approaches, competition exists between the U.S. And China in certain AI-related domains, particularly in semiconductor manufacturing. Both nations are striving for control over supply chains to ensure national security, which has led to recent tariffs and export control disputes. Graham Webster, a researcher at Stanford University, notes that China aims to develop its capability to design and manufacture advanced semiconductors independently.

Military applications of AI also represent a significant area of competition, with both countries seeking advancements in decision-making processes, intelligence improvements, and autonomous systems. The U.S. Department of Defense launched its AI Acceleration Strategy in early 2026, while China has integrated AI into its military modernization efforts under its military-civil fusion policy. However, despite these commitments, China has not designated a national champion in AI development, indicating a cautious approach to heavy investment in AGI.

Interestingly, American companies continue to engage with Chinese technology and workforce, even as the two economies slowly decouple. Xu advocates for more cooperation rather than cutthroat competition, arguing that secure and trustworthy AI requires dialogue and consensus between U.S. And Chinese labs and policymakers. The prevailing arms race narrative overlooks the reality of collaborative research, supply chain interdependencies, and the extensive exchange of talent and ideas across borders.

Looking Ahead

As both nations advance their AI agendas, understanding the distinct strategies and economic contexts is crucial for shaping future policies and international relations. The emphasis on cooperation and dialogue may yield more beneficial outcomes in the long term, especially in developing secure and effective AI technologies. Stakeholders should remain aware of this evolving landscape and the potential implications for global technological leadership.

We welcome your thoughts on how the U.S. And China’s differing approaches to AI might impact the global landscape. Share your comments and insights below.

February 20, 2026 0 comments

News

Indonesia & US Sign $38.4bn Trade Deal Under Trump’s “Board of Peace”

by James Carter Senior News Editor February 20, 2026

written by James Carter Senior News Editor

Washington D.C. – Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto and U.S. President Donald Trump solidified a new era of economic and security cooperation Thursday, signing a reciprocal trade agreement and announcing Indonesia’s commitment to deploy 8,000 troops to Gaza. The agreements were reached during Subianto’s visit to Washington for the inaugural meeting of the Trump-led “Board of Peace,” a newly formed body intended to foster international collaboration.

The trade deal, building on a framework established last summer, aims to eliminate tariffs on most American goods entering Indonesia, while the U.S. Will impose a 19% tariff rate on Indonesian goods – aligning with rates already in place for Cambodia and Malaysia. This reciprocal arrangement, hailed as a “great deal” by the White House, is expected to strengthen economic ties between the two nations and promote global prosperity, according to an official statement. The agreement focuses on bolstering economic security and fostering economic growth for both countries.

Beyond the overarching trade agreement, Indonesian and U.S. Companies finalized 11 separate deals totaling $38.4 billion, according to reports. These agreements span multiple sectors, including significant purchases of U.S. Agricultural products like soybeans, corn, cotton, and wheat. Cooperation in critical minerals and oilfield recovery technologies were also key components, alongside joint ventures focused on the development of computer chips. “We have negotiated very intensively over the last few months, and I think we have reached solid understandings on many issues,” Prabowo stated Wednesday during an address to business executives at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

The commitment of 8,000 Indonesian troops to Gaza represents a significant contribution to international efforts in the region. While details regarding the scope and duration of the deployment remain limited, the move signals Indonesia’s willingness to play a more active role in addressing the ongoing humanitarian crisis and security concerns in Gaza. This commitment was announced alongside the trade agreement during the Board of Peace meeting.

Details of the US-Indonesia Trade Agreement

The framework trade deal reached last summer laid the groundwork for the agreement finalized Thursday. The core principle involves Indonesia removing tariffs on the majority of American goods, while the U.S. Applies a 19% tariff on Indonesian imports, mirroring the rates currently applied to Cambodia and Malaysia. This structure aims to create a more balanced trade relationship between the two countries. The $38.4 billion in deals signed this week represent a substantial increase in economic cooperation, with a strong emphasis on bolstering U.S. Agricultural exports. These deals include purchases of key commodities like soybeans, corn, cotton, and wheat, providing a significant boost to American farmers.

The agreements also highlight a growing collaboration in strategic sectors. Cooperation in critical minerals is expected to enhance both countries’ supply chain resilience, while joint ventures in oilfield recovery and computer chip manufacturing aim to foster technological innovation and economic diversification. These initiatives reflect a broader effort to strengthen economic security and reduce reliance on single-source suppliers.

The Board of Peace and Indonesia’s Role

The first meeting of the “Board of Peace,” convened by President Trump, brought together leaders from various nations to discuss global challenges and explore collaborative solutions. The formation of the Board of Peace has drawn some scrutiny, with some U.S. Allies expressing reservations about the new body, as reported by ABC7 New York. Though, Indonesia’s participation underscores its commitment to multilateral diplomacy and its willingness to engage in constructive dialogue on pressing global issues. The country’s decision to contribute a substantial number of troops to Gaza further demonstrates its proactive approach to international security.

President Trump also used the Board of Peace meeting to announce pledges for Gaza reconstruction and further troop commitments, as detailed by PBS.

The coming weeks will be crucial in observing the implementation of the trade agreement and the deployment of Indonesian troops to Gaza. Further details regarding the specific terms of the trade deals and the operational parameters of the troop deployment are expected to be released soon. The success of these initiatives will depend on continued collaboration between the U.S. And Indonesia, as well as a commitment to addressing the complex challenges facing the region.

What are your thoughts on this new partnership? Share your comments below and help us continue the conversation.

February 20, 2026 0 comments

News

New START Lapsed: Can Trump Secure a New Nuclear Arms Deal?

by February 19, 2026

written by

The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) lapsed on February 5, 2026, without renewal, as the United States and Russia remain at odds over the future of nuclear arms control. The treaty, which limited U.S. And Russian strategic nuclear arsenals, expired after a decade in effect, leaving the two nations without a formal agreement governing their most destructive weapons for the first time in decades.

U.S. President Donald Trump, despite briefly considering a one-year extension proposed by Russian President Vladimir Putin in September 2025, ultimately rejected the offer. Trump announced on February 5th via social media his intention to pursue a “new, improved and modernized Treaty,” signaling a desire for a more comprehensive agreement.

Speaking before the Conference on Disarmament on February 6th, U.S. Under Secretary of State Thomas DiNanno outlined the administration’s goals, stating the U.S. Would seek to include China in future arms control discussions and attempt to limit all nuclear warheads held by both Russia and the United States. This ambition extends beyond the scope of New START, which focused solely on deployed strategic warheads.

The inclusion of China represents a significant shift in U.S. Strategy. Beijing’s nuclear arsenal has grown rapidly in recent years, increasing from an estimated 250 warheads in 2015 to 600 operational warheads currently, with projections reaching 1,000 by 2030, according to the Department of Defense. China has consistently refused to participate in nuclear arms negotiations, raising questions about its willingness to engage in arms control measures.

The Trump administration previously attempted to bring China into the arms control process during its first term. In 2020, U.S. Negotiator Marshall Billingslea symbolically placed Chinese flags at an empty table during negotiations with Russia in Vienna, a move that Beijing dismissed as “unserious, unprofessional, and unappealing.” That effort, along with a proposal for a one-year freeze on all U.S. And Russian nuclear warheads with a verification regime, failed to yield results. Moscow agreed to the freeze but rejected the verification component, which would have required substantial negotiation and implementation time.

A key sticking point remains the issue of non-deployed nuclear warheads. The Obama administration had proposed negotiations with Russia to address all nuclear warheads – deployed and non-deployed, strategic and nonstrategic – but Moscow rejected this proposal. New START only limited “deployed” warheads, meaning those mounted on deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). Removing warheads from ICBMs effectively removed them from the treaty’s constraints.

Achieving a new agreement will require navigating complex issues, including the future of U.S. Missile defense programs. In 2025, Trump announced the “Golden Dome” missile defense initiative, aiming for an impenetrable defense system utilizing space-based interceptors. The project is estimated to cost over half a trillion dollars. China and Russia have expressed concerns about the potential impact of such a system, particularly the deployment of weapons in space.

According to U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Yeaw, speaking on February 17th, “all nuclear weapons states need to be involved” in the arms control process. This suggests a potential broadening of negotiations to include the United Kingdom and France, which collectively maintain approximately 500 nuclear warheads, further complicating the process. Russia has consistently insisted on the inclusion of British and French nuclear forces in any arms control agreements.

Although the U.S. Possesses 3,700 nuclear warheads and Russia holds 4,300, the disparity in numbers may present an opportunity for a renewed bilateral agreement. Washington might also seek to revitalize the U.N. Security Council Permanent Five process – involving the U.S., Russia, China, Britain, and France – to establish confidence-building measures, such as expanding existing agreements on pre-notification of strategic ballistic missile launches. Moscow and Beijing currently have a similar agreement in place.

The administration faces the challenge of persuading both China and Russia to engage in meaningful negotiations. Addressing concerns regarding U.S. Missile defense developments, potentially through limits or increased transparency, may be crucial to securing their participation. The U.S. Will also need to consider Russia’s reluctance to discuss nonstrategic nuclear weapons and whether Washington is prepared to discuss long-range conventional strike systems, where the U.S. Holds a significant advantage.

February 19, 2026 0 comments

Entertainment

US High-Speed Rail: Why Doesn’t America Have Bullet Trains?

by Marina Collins - Entertainment Editor February 19, 2026

written by Marina Collins - Entertainment Editor

High-speed rail systems have transformed travel and commerce in many parts of the world, offering quicker journeys and economic growth. Despite the proven benefits, the United States remains largely without a high-speed rail network, relying primarily on congested highways and an often unreliable airline system. As urban populations grow and environmental concerns mount, the U.S. Faces increasing pressure to modernize its infrastructure and embrace high-speed rail.

Countries like China, Japan, and France have set the standard, with China alone constructing approximately 26,000 miles (42,000 kilometers) of dedicated high-speed rail since 2008, and planning to exceed 43,000 miles (70,000 kilometers) by 2035. In contrast, the United States has only 375 route miles authorized for speeds over 100 mph.

Experts suggest that many Americans are unaware of high-speed rail’s advantages, remaining entrenched in a car-centric mindset. William C. Vantuono, editor-in-chief of Railway Age, notes, “Many Americans have no concept of high-speed rail and fail to notice its value. They are hopelessly stuck with a highway and airline mindset.”

The Decline of Rail Travel in America

Since the 1950s, cars and airplanes have dominated long-distance travel in the U.S., leading to the decline of once-popular passenger trains. Famous railroads like the Modern York Central went bankrupt, resulting in the transfer of operations to Amtrak, which was founded in 1971. Over the decades, freight railroads have thrived, although passenger rail has languished due to a lack of priority from lawmakers and powerful lobbying from the airline and automotive industries.

However, the landscape is beginning to change. President Joe Biden’s $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill allocates a historic $170 billion for railway improvements. This includes significant investments in Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor (NEC), which connects major cities like Boston, New York, and Washington, D.C. There are also plans to reinstate passenger trains in regions that have not seen rail service for decades.

Emerging Projects and Future Prospects

One promising development is the Brightline project in Florida, which is set to build a $10 billion high-speed rail link between Los Angeles and Las Vegas by 2027. This line aims to cover 218 miles (351 kilometers) at speeds up to 200 mph, significantly reducing travel time compared to driving or taking a bus.

Brightline West’s CEO, Mike Reininger, emphasized the project’s potential, stating, “As the most shovel-ready high-speed rail project in the United States, we are one step closer to leveling the playing field against transit and infrastructure projects around the world.”

In California, the California High-Speed Rail (CHSR) project is also progressing, with plans to connect Merced to Bakersfield at speeds of up to 220 mph by around 2030. This project has faced controversies and delays but aims to ultimately link major urban areas like Los Angeles and San Francisco, potentially transforming intercity travel.

Challenges Ahead

Despite the optimism surrounding these projects, challenges remain. There are significant political and financial hurdles to overcome, as highlighted by Vantuono, who expresses skepticism about the feasibility of a nationwide high-speed rail network in the U.S. He notes, “A lack of political support and federal financial support combined with the kind of fierce landowner opposition that CHSR has faced in California means that the challenges for new high-speed projects are enormous.”

the U.S. Trails behind other nations in terms of rail electrification, with less than 5% of rail routes electrified compared to over 60% in countries like South Korea and Japan. This presents a barrier to integrating modern, sustainable technologies into America’s rail systems.

Looking Forward

As the U.S. Grapples with growing environmental concerns and infrastructure needs, high-speed rail presents an alternative to traditional travel methods. The potential for economic stimulation, job creation, and reduced congestion highlights the importance of investing in rail systems. With the growing population and urbanization, especially in California, high-speed rail may yet emerge as a vital component of the nation’s transportation strategy.

As projects like Brightline and CHSR advance, the conversation around high-speed rail is likely to evolve, shaping the future of travel in the United States. With substantial investments and a renewed focus on rail, the possibility of a high-speed rail revolution in America could finally be on the horizon.

What are your thoughts on the future of high-speed rail in the U.S.? Share your views in the comments below!