The Chinese government has agreed to resume exports of key chips for the European auto sector, according to Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof. “We were informed by China that they will enable the resumption of supplies from Chinese factories from Nexperia,” Schoof told Bloomberg Friday on the sidelines of the COP30 climate summit in Brazil. The crisis was sparked in October when the Netherlands seized control of the Dutch-based chipmaker, a subsidiary of Chinese chip giant Wingtech, prompting Beijing to impose retaliatory export restrictions. Schoof told the newswire that the resolution was the result of cooperation between the Netherlands, Germany and the European Commission, as well as recent Dutch-Chinese diplomatic talks, alongside a trade detente between the U.S. and China. German auto firm Aumovio disclosed on an earnings call on Friday that it had been informed that it had received the necessary permissions to begin importing Nexperia’s chips.

Anchal Vohra is a Brussels-based international affairs commentator. Last month, the South Korean Ambassador to the EU took a gentle bow and launched a Korean movie weekend at an independent theater in Brussels. The opening film was inspired by the true story of the abduction of 23 Korean missionaries by the Taliban in 2007 — a reminder of the risks South Korea has taken to prove its worth to its most important strategic partner, the United States. Currently, however, Seoul’s ties with Washington are under stress. And as South Korea concentrates its energies on greeting its relations with the U.S. on surer footing, the country has little time for its allies in Europe. Since returning to office, U.S. President Donald Trump has adopted a mercantilist approach to trade, leaving Seoul increasingly trapped between the U.S. and China. He has demanded that Seoul pay $550 billion in investments “upfront” if it wants tariff relief, and that it substantially increase its defense expenditure if it wants to keep the U.S. forces (USFK) deployed as a bulwark against North Korea. America’s European allies are battling identical dilemmas, being forced to up their defense spending, accept tariffs and promise more than $600 billion in investment from EU in the U.S. Yet, it seems they’re unable to keep their key Asian ally interested in the bloc or NATO in the process. “The current government is very occupied” with sorting out economic issues at home, and is busy with “the Trump situation,” said Wooyeal Paik, a professor of political science and international studies at Yonsei University. “NATO-AP4,” he said, in reference to NATO’s four partners in the Indo-Pacific, “is not on the table.” This is surprising given that over the last three years, Seoul’s ties with NATO had advanced exponentially. Former President Yoon Suk Yeol wanted Seoul to be a global player, and had deemed further cooperation necessary to confront common security threats: “South Korea should no longer be confined to the Korean Peninsula but rise to the challenge of being what I have described as a ‘global pivotal state,’ one that advances freedom, peace, and prosperity through liberal democratic values and substantial cooperation,” he wrote. Under his leadership, South Korea shared intelligence with NATO on Moscow’s deployment of North Korean soldiers against Ukraine, enhanced cooperation on seemingly benign but increasingly charged files like hybrid warfare, and indirectly supplied much-needed ammunition to Ukraine when Europe fell short. There was even talk of an Asian NATO. This pro-NATO policy was in part intended to limit Moscow’s revanchism and to discourage China from invading Taiwan. But more importantly, from Seoul’s perspective, it was meant to curtail Moscow’s growing ties with Pyongyang. Seoul has long been worried about Russia supplying military technology to Pyongyang and employing North Korean soldiers and laborers who send money back home, thus aiding the cash-strapped regime. U.S. President Donald Trump has adopted a mercantilist approach to trade, leaving Seoul increasingly trapped between the U.S. and China. | Pool photo by Allison Robbert/EPA However, in a dramatic turn of events earlier this year, Yoon tried to impose martial law and was impeached soon after. Subsequent elections then paved the way for Lee Jae-myung — a leader with a rather different worldview, seemingly more open to rapprochement with Moscow and downgrading ties with NATO. So far, Lee has said he’ll pursue a “pragmatic” foreign policy centered on national interests, a part of which is maintaining ties with China — the country’s biggest trading partner. And to the surprise of NATO’s European members, Lee didn’t attend their high-stakes summit at The Hague this year. It appears the South Korean leader has prioritized the national economy rather Europe’s security concerns, and he appears reluctant to see security in the Euro-Atlantic and Indo-Pacific theaters as linked. Plus, there were already murmurs of dissatisfaction in Seoul with a foreign policy that sanctioned Moscow during Yoon’s tenure, with Lee himself reportedly warning against taking a side in the Russia-Ukraine war. He also described Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy as a “novice politician,” asking: “Why should we get involved in someone else’s war?” Lee sees Russia as a neighbor it must, somehow, reconcile with, not as an enemy. Along these lines, Russian Ambassador to South Korea Georgy Zinoviev had already predicted better ties between Moscow and Seoul once Yoon was impeached, and he was right: South Korea invited Russian President Vladimir Putin, as well as Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, for this week’s Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit. But this doesn’t necessarily mean Lee intends to stop defense cooperation with Europe. South Korea will continue to sell weapons that free up European supplies for Ukraine. And Seoul’s supplies of ammunition to the U.S., which freed up American ammunition to be sent to Ukraine, were also critical to Ukraine’s war effort.  “South Korea wants to preserve the option of reopening relations with Russia in the future when conditions allow. This is why assistance was deliberately channeled indirectly, mainly through European partners and industrial contracts, rather than by direct lethal deliveries to Ukraine,” observed Arnaud Leveau, president of the civil society research institute Asia Centre. “Going forward, indirect support will remain the most realistic scenario. Contracts with Poland and the Czech Republic will continue, and these [will] allow Europe to free up stock for Ukraine,” he added. There is a sense, however, that the policies of South Korea’s new president are still taking shape. That even if domestic compulsions, and the fact that Trump has often expressed warmth toward his Russian counterpart, might have influenced Lee’s calculus, all is not lost. “For NATO and the EU, the way to keep Seoul engaged is through practical, low-visibility cooperation,” explained Leveau, listing cybersecurity, resilience, and industrial partnerships and discreet intelligence dialogues on maritime Southeast Asia as possible areas for collaboration. “These concrete areas matter more than big political slogans,” he said. And they may be the key to keeping one of Europe’s most crucial partners in Asia on-side.

U.S. President Donald Trump suggested he could potentially make concessions to China to alleviate trade tensions between the two economic powers. “Sure they’ll have to make concessions” if China does not want to be hit by extra tariffs on its exports to the U.S., Trump told reporters as he embarked on a tour of Asian countries. “I guess we will, too,” in order to reach a deal, Trump added. “We’re at 157 percent tariff for them. I don’t think that’s sustainable for them,” Trump said. “They want to get that down, and we want certain things from them,” he added. Trump is set to meet with Chinese leader Xi Jinping at the sidelines of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Summit in South Korea next week. Trump has also threatened to impose an extra 100 percent tariff on Chinese goods from November if China does not roll back its tightened restrictions on its rare earths exports. Asked what are the odds that he would press ahead with that extra 100 percent tariff, Trump replied: “I don’t know. I have no odds. I don’t think they would want that. It would not be good for them.” Trump will also address China’s purchases of Russian oil in the context of Moscow’s ongoing illegal war in Ukraine. “I’d love China to help us out with Russia,” he said. “We put very big sanctions on Russia. I think those sanctions are going to be very biting, very strong; but I’d like to see China help us out.”

Liam Byrne is chair of the Business & Trade Committee and a member of the U.K. Parliament. U.S. President Donald Trump’s state visit to the U.K. is no mere pageant. It is a test of whether Britain and America can enlarge the future, or if they will remain trapped in a tariff battle that serves neither party well. It was former Prime Minister Winston Churchill who warned in 1940:“If we open a quarrel between the past and the present, we shall find that we have lost the future.” This week, we must convince Trump that for all his unhappiness with America’s trade deals of yesterday, the future is the greater prize — and by working together, our countries can build a deeper partnership that helps keep the West safer, stronger and richer at a pivotal moment in world history. Prime Minister Keir Starmer did extremely well to ensure Britain was the first to strike the new “General Terms of an Economic Prosperity Deal” with the U.S. But we have to be honest: We’re now trading with our largest trading partner on terms that are worse than those we enjoyed before Trump took office. Industry called it “the best deal we could have hoped for under the circumstances.” But that phrase tells its own story. It means the best under duress, relief without permanence, and access on terms that, in some cases, are less favorable than those granted to our European neighbors. Even worse, uncertainty still gnaws at the future of our critical industries. Steel, aluminum and pharmaceuticals — all industries facing endless reviews — can’t plan investment against the specter of renewed tariffs. Boardrooms are hesitating; investors are holding back; jobs are hanging in the balance; and without clarity, capital may well migrate to safer harbors. This is why this deal can’t stop where it stands. It must be driven forward toward strategic alignment and commercial certainty during this state visit. The stakes are too high to deliver anything less — as was all too clear when Chinese President Xi Jinping gathered 20 world leaders to witness an extraordinary display of military and technology leadership in Tiananmen Square recently. We know that behind the tanks, troops, drones and hypersonic weaponry lies an invisible, formidable dark arsenal of AI capabilities — the armaments of tomorrow. With stagecraft, steel and silicon, China is making its claim to leadership clear. And unless Britain and America act, the commanding heights of the global economy will tilt East. This is the backdrop against which Trump’s visit must deliver. It is the moment to pivot from paper promises to strategic purpose and a binding bargain.   This new partnership has to be about more than tariffs. It must be about technology. As former Google CEO Eric Schmidt once said: “Technology is the power in superpower.” Britain and America have the building blocks for a formidable technology alliance: The U.S. boasts the world’s largest tech firms, deepest venture markets and broadest innovation ecosystem. Meanwhile, Britain is home to Europe’s most dynamic AI cluster, a world-leading life sciences base, universities of global caliber and the City of London’s unrivaled capital markets. Prime Minister Keir Starmer did extremely well to ensure Britain was the first to strike the new “General Terms of an Economic Prosperity Deal” with the U.S. | Andrew Harnik/Getty Images Alone, each is strong. Together, they could set the standards of the century. Therefore, the task in London this week is two-fold: First, enlarge the future. That means binding our nations around joint missions in AI, clean energy, biotech and digital trade. It means creating shared standards for data, procurement, labor and regulation. It means linking our research, finance and industrial capacity, so that when the world writes its rules, it is our rules — and our values — that prevail. Second, we must harness the promise of tomorrow to tackle the perils of protectionism today. Britain should press Trump to grant it the same terms as the EU in order to end the tariff uncertainty that still confronts our key industries, and provide the predictability investors require. Tariff relief alone isn’t enough; what matters is tariff parity — and the confidence it can unlock. So, let us be clear. This visit isn’t about gilded dinners or ceremonial splendor — though that is what will capture the media’s attention. Rather, it is about whether Britain and America can summon the imagination to expand the future and the discipline to settle the past. If we succeed, we’ll not only close the tariff gap but anchor Western leadership in the technologies that matter most. The lesson from history couldn’t be clearer: If we don’t shape the future, others will. And if technology is, indeed, “the power in superpower,” then only a U.S.-U.K. bargain, forged during this state visit, can safeguard Western leadership through tomorrow.

U.S. President Donald Trump said he is ready to impose “major sanctions” on Moscow if NATO members stop purchasing Russian oil.  In a letter to alliance members, which he published on his social network Truth Social, Trump wrote: “I am ready to do major Sanctions on Russia when all NATO Nations have agreed, and started, to do the same thing, and when all NATO Nations stop buying oil from Russia.”  He added that oil purchases by NATO states have been “shocking,” arguing that it “greatly weakens your negotiating position, and bargaining power, over Russia.” Trump said he believes ending Russian oil purchases, combined with the imposition of tariffs on China of 50 percent to 100 percent — by NATO members and the U.S. — would help bring an end to what he called a “ridiculous war.” Trump, promised in his election campaign that he would end the war within a day, concluded his statement Saturday by saying that if NATO followed his plan, the war would “end quickly.” Just this week, several European leaders were confident that they had convinced Trump that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not interested in ending the war and has to be forced to the negotiating table, officials and diplomats told POLITICO. In a flurry of diplomatic visits, the leaders discussed new financial restrictions and plans to cut off the flow of Russian oil and gas.

Chinese President Xi Jinping criticized other countries’ “bullying practices” at a major summit attended by Russia’s Vladimir Putin on Monday. “We should uphold fairness and justice,” Xi said at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in Tianjin. Xi’s China has emerged as a major ally of Putin during the course of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. In comments viewed widely as aimed at U.S. President Donald Trump and his global trade war, Xi said those gathered must “oppose the Cold War mentality, bloc confrontation and bullying practices.” Trump has targeted China and India with some of his steepest tariffs, recently upping India’s rate to 50 percent and citing its purchases of cheap Russian oil, which helps fill the Kremlin’s war chest. Speaking to an audience of around 20 leaders, including Putin and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Xi said the SCO would promote a multilateral trading system. Set up in 2001, the group began with China, Russia and four Central Asian countries, as a counterweight to Western alliances such as NATO. It now has 10 full members and 16 countries that are partners and observers, among them Iran, Belarus and Myanmar. The SCO gathering in Tianjin comes ahead of Wednesday’s main event in Beijing: China’s Victory Day parade. Putin is due to attend, alongside North Korea’s dictator Kim Jong Un, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico and Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić.

Chinese President Xi Jinping on Sunday rolled out the red carpet for Russia’s Vladimir Putin, India’s Narendra Modi and about 20 other national leaders arriving for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit. The Eurasian political and security summit — held in Tianjin this year — is a gathering designed to cement Beijing’s clout and champion its vision of a “multipolar world order.” Set up in 2001, it began with China, Russia and four Central Asian countries, as a counterweight to Western alliances such as NATO. It now boasts 10 members and 16 dialogue partners and observers. This year the summit will focus largely on U.S. President Donald Trump’s trade war. Trump has slapped 50 percent tariffs on Indian goods over New Delhi’s continued purchases of Russian oil. Putin meanwhile is facing fresh Western sanctions tied to his ongoing war in Ukraine. “How in the hell did Trump so alienate Modi that he’s now attending a summit with autocrats, Xi and Putin?” Michael McFaul, a Hoover Senior Fellow at Stanford University and former U.S. Ambassador to Russia, wrote on X. “Just last year, China and India were at war with each other!” he added. Both Xi and Modi appear to be seeking a reset in a relationship long strained by mistrust and unresolved border disputes. Analysts warn the stakes go far beyond Asia. As Chatham House’s Chietigj Bajpaee and Yu Jie put it: “What happens in this relationship matters to the rest of the world.”  “If Western countries — particularly the U.S. — are serious about supporting India as a bulwark against a rising China, they need to develop more realistic expectations of what India can deliver,” they wrote in a recent analysis paper. “India was never going to be the bulwark against China that the West (and the United States in particular) thought it was. … Modi’s China visit marks a potential turning point,” they wrote. Putin will be in China through Wednesday, when Xi is hosting a military parade to commemorate the end of World War II, following Japan’s formal surrender. Alongside Putin and North Korea’s Kim Jong Un, Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico will attend the parade, as well as Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić.

President Donald Trump released a second wave of letters sent to U.S. trading partners in Asia, Africa and Europe on Wednesday, continuing the administration’s roll-out of new tariff rates on imports from nearly every country in the world that are due to go into force Aug. 1. The Philippines is the largest, economically, of the six countries that received a letter Wednesday, sending $14.1 billion in goods to the U.S. last year. But that still pales in comparison to top U.S. trading partners like the European Union and China. The new tariff rates threatened in the letters Trump shared Wednesday are similar to those he announced on what the White House dubbed “Liberation Day” in early April, with small adjustments. The Philippines’ tariff rate, for instance, increased from 17 percent to 20 percent, while Moldova’s decreased from 31 percent to 25 percent and Iraq’s from 39 percent to 30 percent. The other recipients of the letters Trump shared Wednesday include Brunei, Algeria and Libya. In a Cabinet meeting Tuesday, Trump told the reporters his tariff-setting letters were in lieu of negotiating deals with many countries. “I just want you to know a letter means a deal. We can’t meet with 200 countries. … You have to do it in a more general way. “ The release of the latest batch of letters came after Trump signed an executive order Monday officially extending the deadline — again — for his “reciprocal” tariffs on nearly 60 trading partners, with rates ranging between 10 and 50 percent. Those duties briefly went into effect April 9 before the president suspended them until July 9. Monday’s order pushed that date to Aug. 1. Trump said Monday that the new deadline is “firm, but not 100 percent firm.” But the following day he vowed in a post on Truth Social that the Aug. 1 deadline is final. “TARIFFS WILL START BEING PAID ON AUGUST 1, 2025. There has been no change to this date, and there will be no change,” Trump wrote. “No extensions will be granted.” The latest update comes after Trump unveiled letters to 14 foreign governments Monday — 10 of them from Asia, triggering frustration and disbelief among recipients in the region. The Philippines, which received a letter on Wednesday, is another Southeast Asian country that is central to U.S. efforts to expand its economic influence and counter China. The 20 percent rate Trump is threatening to impose on exports from the Philippines is the same level Vietnam received as the result of a framework deal it struck with the Trump administration. Hanoi, which exported $136 billion worth of goods to the United States last year, initially faced a potential tariff of 46 percent, per Trump’s April announcement. The United States imported $7.5 billion worth of goods from Iraq last year; $2.4 billion from Algeria; $1.5 billion from Libya; $238 million from Brunei; and $136 million from Moldova.