Category World News

The Port of Los Angeles’ head received an email with effusive praise from a prominent city resident as he prepared a flurry of media interviews to warn of the harm caused by tariffs passed by President Donald Trump last month.

Wang Wei, the ex-wife of Chinese Consul General Guo Shaochun, requested that Port of Los Angeles CEO Gene Seroka know that she found his opinions “practical, well-reasoned, and very convincing.”

In an email on May 6, Wang wrote, “I was pleasantly surprised to see your interview on Fox News this afternoon, where you shared your insights on the effects of the US-China tariff conflict on port trade.

“Later, I looked up YouTube and discovered that you’ve recently been interviewed by a number of major networks, including CNN and CNBC, etc. I was just aware of your celebrity status and business acumen,” Wang continued.

“Thank you for standing up and making a difference in terms of US-China trade development and exchange.”

The following day, Seroka thanked Wang for her message.

He declared, “We will continue to support world trade.” We need to do so much together, they say.

The emails, obtained by Al Jazeera through a public records request, offer an unusual insight into the Chinese lobbying for Trump’s trade war, which has targeted Beijing most frequently.

Trump’s administration has accused protectionism and “unilateral bullying,” while the most severe of his tariffs, which have been halted as Washington and Beijing work toward a comprehensive trade agreement.

State and local authorities, such as the Port of Los Angeles, a self-supporting division of the City of Los Angeles, are more likely to see the advantages of business between the parties, despite the US government’s growing skepticism of China’s rise as it attempts to halt its expansion.

The busiest seaport in the Western Hemisphere, the Port of Los Angeles, announced that cargo had decreased by 35% from the previous year during the week of Wang and Seroka’s email exchange.

Seroka, who has repeatedly claimed in interviews that “no one wins” from a drawn-out US-China trade war, claimed his conversation with Wang was typical of his job as port CEO.

I have a wide range of international business relationships because I have lived in China and other Pacific Rim nations. One of many, he said, “is Ms. Wang Wei, who is also engaged in Port of Los Angeles business promotion.”

China’s Embassy in Washington, DC and Los Angeles did not respond to requests for comment.

A more pragmatic, pro-business perspective of ties is widely held at the state and local levels despite the tensions between Beijing and Washington.

Events like the US-China Sister Cities Summit held last year in Tacoma, Washington state, demonstrate how diplomatic relations between lower-level officials of the nations are not uncommon.

Washington has been critical of this engagement, though.

The US National Counterintelligence and Security Center (NCSC) warned in 2022 that China intended to “interpret” local government relations with local officials and legislators in order to “influence US policies and advance PRC geopolitical interests.”

More recently, the NCSC has issued warnings about China’s efforts to recruit current and former US officials through posing as consulting firms or think tanks.

A former Western diplomat in China told Al Jazeera that while foreign diplomats frequently speak with local officials and businesspeople about government policy, it is unusual for their families to voice their opinions.

Under the condition of anonymity, the ex-diplomat said, “Spouses or other family members of diplomats don’t typically speak with host country counterparts on policy issues, unless there happens to be an established personal relationship.”

Family members may discuss policy in private social settings with other diplomats and/or host nation representatives, but, in my opinion, it’s unusual for a spouse to discuss a policy issue with a counterpart in the host country, even privately.

A former US diplomat in China shared a similar opinion.

The ex-diplomat, who requested anonymity, told Al Jazeera, “It would be very uncommon from almost any country in the world to have a consul general’s spouse make that comment.”

“China can be a little different sometimes. Although occasionally, a Chinese diplomat’s spouse is also a government official. They may act in this way in those circumstances. Otherwise, it would primarily be written in response to comments made on cultural or interpersonal programs.

The former diplomat said that the US government’s warnings about Chinese cooperation with state and local authorities are largely “overblown,” and that “90 percent” of it is unconcerned.

The administration of US President Donald Trump is eliciting conflicting signals about whether it still supports an international agreement to end Iran’s nuclear program.

It has publicly backed a negotiated agreement, and US and Iranian negotiators had planned to meet once more this week. Trump reaffirmed his desire to work with a diplomatic resolution in a Truth Social post as recently as Thursday.

Trump later claimed that he had given Iran a 60-day deadline to reach an agreement and that the deadline had passed as Israel began its attacks on Iran. Trump had been urging “Israel and Iran to reach a deal,” and they did with his assistance by Sunday.

Trump issued a more ominous warning on Monday as he prepared to leave the Group of Seven summit in Canada early: “Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran” and declared that Iran cannot possess nuclear weapons. Later, the US president denied rumors that he had arrived in Washington, DC early to negotiate a ceasefire, stating that it was “for something much bigger than that.”

Analysts are debating Trump’s ambiguous statements about the true scope of US involvement and intentions in the Israel-Iran conflict.

Trump’s wink and nod are in discussion.

Trump has denied that the US participated in the strikes. He wrote on Sunday that “the U.S. had nothing to do with the attack on Iran tonight.”

Trump’s message was clear, according to Kelsey Davenport, director for nonproliferation policy at the US-based Arms Control Association. While diplomacy was in full swing, I believe President Trump has been very explicit about his opposition to using military force against Iran. And reports suggest that he attacked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, she said.

According to Davenport, what’s more likely is that “Israel was concerned that diplomacy would succeed, that it would mean a deal” and that it did not think [this]would be in line with its goals and interests regarding Iran.”

According to Richard Nephew, a professor at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs, Trump’s continued pursuit of a deal had troubled Israel.

Nephew, who served as the US National Security Council’s director from 2011 to 2013, said, “I think it’s the consistency that’s actually been the issue.”

However, St. Andrews University in Scotland’s Ali Ansari, a professor of Iranian history, disagreed.

“The US was aware,” They must have been aware of the timing, he said, so a wink is appropriate, he said, “so even if the specific timing did surprise them.”

Israel must take the lead and should do this on their own, he said at the same time, according to the US.

Trump might be drawn into the conflict, but perhaps not?

The above-ground portion of Iran’s Natanz facility is thought to have been destroyed by Israel. The facility’s uranium has been enriched to a 60 percent purity, which is significantly higher than the 3.67 percent required for nuclear power but below the 90 percent purity required for an atomic bomb. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the Israeli strike’s power loss may have also affected Natanz’s underground enrichment facility.

However, according to the IAEA’s assessment, Israel did not harm Iran’s other mountain-buried uranium enrichment facility, which also contains 60 percent of purity.

According to Davenport, “It’s likely that Israel would need US assistance if it actually wanted to penetrate some of these underground facilities,” referring to the 13, 600 kg (30, 000lb) Massive Ordnance Penetrator, the largest US conventional bomb.

You could likely damage or destroy some of these facilities with repeated strikes, according to Davenport, noting that Washington “has not transferred that bomb to Israel”.

Israel would require US weapons to finish its stated goal of destroying Iran’s nuclear program, according to Barbara Slavin, a distinguished fellow at the US-based Stimson Center.

Nephew, for one, did not discount the possibility that something might occur.

Trump is well aware of this, but he enjoys supporting losers. He said, “To the extent that he views the Israelis as winners right now, that is the justification for his continued support of his position and why we have a wink [to Israel],” he said.

The US ordered the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz to sail there on Friday after flying a large number of midair refueling planes there. It announced on Tuesday that it would be sending more warplanes to the area.

Ansari believes that Iran’s decision to step down could be influenced by the success of Israel’s initial attacks, suggesting that “Trump is tempted to join in just to get some of the glory.”

Although I believe even the real threat of an American attack will bring the Iranians to the table, Ansari said, “It may well be that the US joins in on an attack on Fordow.” They can accept the United States with honor, but they can’t Israel, even though they may not.

US Senator Tim Kaine, who was skeptical of American involvement, signed a resolution enacting a war powers resolution on Monday that would require the US Congress to authorize any military action against Iran.

To start a war with Iran is not in our national security interest, according to Kaine, citing the absolute necessity of the situation.

Force versus diplomacy

Obama chose a diplomatic approach that led to the creation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2015 because he did not think a military solution was attractive or feasible for Iran’s nuclear program. In accordance with that agreement, the IAEA was required to closely watch Iran’s nuclear activities to ensure that only the highest levels of uranium production were achieved.

Trump indirectly stoked the military option, according to Nephew and Davenport, when, at Israel’s request, he pulled the US out of the JCPOA in 2018.

Iran declared that it would refine uranium to 4.5 percent purity in 2021 and increase its production to 4.5 percent in 2021. The IAEA claimed to have discovered uranium particles at Fordow with an 83.7 percent purity in 2023.

President Joe Biden and President Trump both had options to the JCPOA in their first presidential campaigns.

Nephew remarked, “Setting the JCPOA on fire contributed directly to where we are today.” He claimed that “trying to find a military path rather than a diplomatic one to stop a nuclear program contributes to a proliferation path” because some nations claim that “the only way I can protect myself is if I go down this path.”

Even the regime change in Tehran, as Netanyahu has demanded, won’t solve the issue, according to Davenport, an expert on Iran’s nuclear and missile programs.

Russia’s increased sense of vulnerability may be the most important result of a recent large-scale Ukrainian drone attack named Operation Spiderweb, experts tell Al Jazeera.

The operation destroyed as much as a third of Russia’s strategic bomber fleet on the tarmac of four airfields deep inside Russia on June 1.

Days later, Russia started to build shelters for its bombers and relocate them.

An open source intelligence (OSINT) researcher nicknamed Def Mon posted time-lapse satellite photographs on social media showing major excavations at the Kirovskoe airfield in annexed Crimea as well as in Sevastopol, Gvardiyskoye and Saki, where Russia was constructing shelters for military aircraft.

They reported similar work at several airbases in Russia, including the Engels base, which was targeted in Ukraine’s attacks on June 1.

Another OSINT analyst, MT Anderson, used satellite images to show that all Tupolev-95 strategic bombers had left Russia’s Olenya airbase in the Murmansk region by June 7.

Much of the fleet remains intact but Ukraine “demonstrated to Russia that they do not have a sanctuary any more on their own territory”, said Minna Alander, a fellow with the Transatlantic Defense and Security Programme at the Center for European Policy Analysis.

“In terms of taking the war to Russian territory, it was even more important than the Kursk incursion in the sense that Ukrainians managed to hit targets of high strategic value thousands of miles from the front lines.”

Ukraine conducted a counterinvasion of Russian territory in August, catching forces in Kursk off-guard and seizing territory. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has consistently argued that the war must return to Russia. Both the Kursk offensive and Spiderweb served that purpose.

For the first time, Ukraine with its Operation Spiderweb claimed to have hit the Olenya airbase in the Russian Arctic, almost 2,000km (1,240 miles) from Ukraine, where all Tu-95 bombers were reported destroyed.

Also reportedly struck were the Belaya airbase in Irkutsk, more than 4,000km (2,485 miles) from Ukraine; the Dyagilevo airbase in Ryazan, only 175km (110 miles) from downtown Moscow; and the Ivanovo airfield, 250km (155 miles) northeast of Moscow, where a rare early warning and targeting coordination A-50 radar aircraft was destroyed.

Russia had historically based its strategic bombers at the Engels base in Saratov and the Ukrainska base in Amur province. It dispersed them to Belaya and Olenya bases in the past two years to protect them after Ukraine struck the Engels base with drones. Now Ukraine has again deprived Russia of any sense of security.

“These strategic bomber strikes were ‘asymmetric genius’,” said Seth Krummrich, a former US army colonel and vice president of Global Guardian, a security consultancy. “Cheap drones smuggled deep into Russia destroy priceless and rare Russian strategic bombers. Ukraine is outthinking and outmanoeuvring the slow and large Russian military.”

Three days before Operation Spiderweb, Zelenskyy had said he was seeking more European investment in Ukraine’s long-range capabilities.

“Of course, we cannot publicly disclose our existing plans and our capabilities, but the prospect is clear: to respond symmetrically to all Russian threats and challenges,” Zelenskyy said. “They in Russia must clearly feel the consequences of what they are doing against Ukraine. And they will. Attack drones, interceptors, cruise missiles, Ukrainian ballistic systems – these are the key elements. We must manufacture all of them.”

Ukraine has already changed Russian threat perceptions several times during this war using long-range weapons, often targeting the Russian air force.

In 2023, Ukraine started striking Russian airfields in occupied Crimea, forcing Russia to relocate its bombers.

An unnamed White House official told Politico last year that “90 percent of the planes that launch glide bombs” against Ukrainian front-line positions have been moved back inside Russia.

Ukraine has dealt Russia similar psychological blows at sea.

In 2022, it sank the Black Sea Fleet flagship Moskva using Neptune missiles. Its subsequent development of surface drones to strike other Russian Black Sea Fleet ships has forced the Russian navy to abandon Crimea for the shelter of Novorossiysk.

In December, Ukraine adapted those surface drones to launch rockets, downing two Russian helicopters near Crimea. In early May, its Magura-7 unmanned surface drones successfully downed two Russian Sukhoi-30 fighter jets using AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles originally designed for air-to-air use. No military in the world had downed fighter jets from surface drones before.

“Russian missiles in many cases have ranges of thousands of miles. The bombers don’t need to come anywhere near Ukraine to do what they do. The Arctic was a major base for attacking Ukraine even though they’re thousands of kilometres from Ukraine,” said Keir Giles, Eurasia expert at the Chatham House think tank.

Spiderweb involved 117 drones smuggled into Russia and launched simultaneously near Russian airfields where the bombers were parked.

The drones used the Russian cellphone network but were controlled from Ukraine, Giles said.

“So they were piggybacking [on the radio network] and hiding in noise. They must have had people on site because they had an operational planning based in the country to assemble these components. … People were long gone by the time the operation happened, leaving poor, hapless Russian truck drivers trying to figure out what was going on,” he said.

On June 11, Russian President Vladimir Putin put on a brave face, saying his country possesses the most modern nuclear triad in the world, but that may have been bluster rather than a threat, experts said.

“Ukraine likely destroyed the most operational segment of the fleet, evidenced by the fact that these aircraft were not undergoing maintenance at the time of the attack,” wrote Fabian Hoffman, a missile expert. “Some were even fuelled when hit, indicating they were likely scheduled for use within the next 24 hours.”

Many Syrian refugees who fled their country during the war likely experience this nightmare as a mirage of home and hope that is disappearing. A short documentary called BACK, which was produced by Yazan Rabee, follows those who go back to their haunted hometowns in the middle of nowhere. BACK explores how political violence is ingrained in the mind, especially for those who long for a place to call home after a long period of exile, using intimate testimony and striking visuals. However, as Rabee asks, did the uprising against Bashar al-Assad actually start in 2012? Or did the trauma begin decades earlier, during Bashar’s father’s bloody rule?