I am not a fan of @elonmusk on some things ( others I admire) but this piece just doesn't understands how innovation happens. I'd rather "try and fail (and make halfway progress) than fail to try" like this writer! Or pontificate and criticize people trying to make progress.…
SpaceX: • First launch of Starship V3, including the debut of the Raptor V3 engine • First launch of Starlink V3 satellites, bringing gigabit connectivity • Potential IPO
I recently spent time with a longtime mentor of mine, a long retired VC. We talked about startups and VC for a bit. We also talked about life and family. Being a dork, I took notes. With his permission (though he’ll remain anonymous), wanted to share some of his learnings as we…
Demis and I have been friends for a long time. Given the rare character traits required to be trusted with building the most powerful technology in history, he is one of the finest representatives of humanity. I trust him. https://t.co/B67IVSeTJa
You are so wrong Ro. Top prospects for generating wealth in the state will almost certainly leave the state. Every advisor would advise every enterprise that gets big momentum to have key people relocate to another state. Even people who don’t expect this initiative to pass are… https://t.co/yWE58amojL
I don't understand Vinod's argument. @rokhanna If Vinod were to pay 5% of his wealth in wealth tax and if that will solve homelessness, how does that tax deprive Vinod? What will he not be able to buy?
Wonderful to see that INSV Kaundinya is embarking on her maiden voyage from Porbandar to Muscat, Oman. Built using the ancient Indian stitched-ship technique, this ship highlights India's rich maritime traditions. I congratulate the designers, artisans, shipbuilders and the… pic.twitter.com/bVfOF4WCVm
no one wastes more money than early very rich prominent employees of big companies from a different era who raise venture capital for some interesting pet projects.
the problem with this is they have no real motivation to succeed.
Pathways to Normalizing India–China Relations: Borders, Trade, and a Multipolar Vision
In an increasingly interconnected global landscape, the relationship between India and China remains one of the most pivotal bilateral dynamics of the 21st century. As the world’s two most populous nations and rising economic powerhouses, their ability—or inability—to normalize ties will shape not only the trajectory of Asia but also the broader international order. Yet, a history of mistrust, unresolved border disputes, regional rivalries, and economic imbalances continues to cast long shadows.
Despite these obstacles, pathways for reconciliation exist. By addressing long-standing issues pragmatically and seizing opportunities for cooperation, India and China could demonstrate how two civilizational states can coexist, compete, and collaborate in a multipolar world.
Resolving the Border Conundrum: The Cornerstone of Normalization
At the heart of India–China tensions lies the unresolved boundary dispute along the Line of Actual Control (LAC). Periodic standoffs—such as the 2017 Doklam crisis and the deadly Galwan Valley clash in 2020—underscore the volatility of this ambiguity. Transforming the LAC into a formal, internationally recognized border would be the single most important step toward lasting peace.
Such a settlement would require bold political leadership to permanently delineate the line and establish mechanisms for verification. Beyond demarcation, demilitarization of sensitive zones is essential. By pulling back troops and dismantling forward military infrastructure, both countries could reduce the risk of miscalculation. Confidence-building measures such as joint border patrols, communication hotlines, and transparency in military exercises would further stabilize the frontier.
This would also pave the way for greater economic integration. Opening the border for regulated trade could stimulate local economies in Ladakh, Arunachal Pradesh, and Tibet, while creating new avenues for cross-border investment. In 2023–24, India’s trade deficit with China exceeded $100 billion—a politically sensitive imbalance. Allowing targeted Chinese FDI into India’s manufacturing, logistics, and infrastructure sectors could help offset this gap, provided such investments are subject to strict security vetting.
Navigating the Taiwan Issue: A Call for Innovative Diplomacy
While Taiwan is not a direct bilateral issue between India and China, its ripple effects on Indo-Pacific geopolitics cannot be ignored. The United States has long upheld a “One China” policy while maintaining strategic ambiguity. For India, which values both its democratic solidarity with Taiwan and its broader partnership with the United States, the Taiwan question indirectly shapes its China calculus.
Any pathway to normalization must recognize two key principles. First, Taiwan’s future should not be determined through unilateral declarations of independence or coercion. Second, any unification must be pursued peacefully and voluntarily, with respect for the will of the Taiwanese people.
The “one country, two systems” framework applied in Hong Kong has lost credibility. Fresh diplomatic thinking is needed—possibly hybrid models of autonomy or federated arrangements that preserve Taiwan’s democratic institutions while acknowledging Chinese sovereignty claims. By adopting a balanced, pragmatic stance, India could support peaceful resolution without undermining its own strategic autonomy. This would also signal that India and China can approach sensitive regional issues with maturity rather than confrontation.
Addressing Pakistan: Neutrality Over Alignment in Combating Terrorism
No discussion of India–China relations is complete without examining Pakistan’s role. China’s strategic partnership with Pakistan—exemplified by the $60 billion China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)—complicates New Delhi’s security outlook. India has suffered repeated terrorist attacks, many traced to Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). While China itself faces risks of extremism, particularly in Xinjiang, its support for Pakistan is often perceived in India as enabling destabilizing behavior.
Normalization would benefit if China adjusted its approach. Rather than providing unconditional support—through arms sales, diplomatic shielding at the UN, or infrastructure investment—Beijing could adopt a stance of neutrality. Encouraging Pakistan to rein in state-sponsored militancy would align with China’s own interests in regional stability and secure its investments in CPEC.
For India, such a shift would mark a significant confidence-building gesture, showing that China values broader Asian stability over narrow bilateral alignments. This would also lay groundwork for trilateral cooperation on counter-terrorism and regional security.
Economic Synergies: From Manufacturing to Global Infrastructure
While security concerns dominate headlines, economics offers the strongest incentive for normalization. China, facing rising labor costs and U.S. tariffs, is under pressure to diversify its supply chains. India, with labor costs less than half of China’s and a large youth population entering the workforce, presents an attractive destination.
Strategically relocating parts of Chinese manufacturing to India could create millions of jobs, deepen technology transfer, and accelerate India’s industrialization. For China, it would hedge against over-reliance on Southeast Asia or Africa for offshoring.
Globally, India and China could extend cooperation to the Global South. Africa’s infrastructure financing gap, estimated at over $100 billion annually, is too large for any single country to fill. By combining China’s expertise in mega-projects with India’s emphasis on sustainability, capacity building, and people-centric development, both nations could deliver projects that avoid the pitfalls of “debt-trap” financing. Such ventures would also enhance their credibility as leaders of the Global South.
Embracing a Multipolar World: Independence and Interdependence
Perhaps the most important dimension of normalization is its alignment with a multipolar world order. Improved India–China ties are not inherently anti-American, nor do they imply abandoning strategic partnerships with the West. Instead, they reflect the reality that India seeks to be an independent pole in global politics—one that engages the United States, China, Europe, Russia, and the Global South on its own terms.
In this vision, competition does not preclude cooperation. India and China can manage differences bilaterally while collaborating in multilateral forums such as BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and the G20. This would showcase a model of coexistence that other rival powers—from the U.S. and China to the EU and Russia—might emulate.
Conclusion: Cooperation Over Confrontation
Normalizing India–China relations is not a utopian dream but a pragmatic necessity in a turbulent century. Resolving border disputes, innovating on sensitive regional issues like Taiwan, recalibrating approaches to Pakistan, and leveraging economic complementarities could transform one of Asia’s most fraught rivalries into a partnership with global consequences.
The rewards are immense: a more peaceful Asia, accelerated development in the Global South, and a balanced international order where no single power dominates. As both nations rise, the choices they make will shape the destiny of billions. The lesson is timeless: cooperation, though difficult, yields far greater dividends than confrontation.
The Problem With How the West Is Supporting Ukraine Wars are won or lost well behind the front lines. Allies should arm Ukrainians accordingly...... For the past four months, people around the world have witnessed the macabre process of Russian forces making repeated assaults near the Ukrainian city of Bakhmut for only the tiniest of gains. ........ Russia has lost about five of its soldiers for every Ukrainian soldier lost—to say nothing of massive equipment losses. ........ Far more effective is to weaken your opponent’s forces before they get to the battlefield. ...... Though NATO countries have a variety of systems that can target Russian forces deep behind their lines, recent aid has been overwhelmingly geared toward preparing Ukraine to make direct assaults against the Russian army. The most widely discussed forms of equipment—such as Leopard 2 tanks, Bradley armored personnel carriers, and even Archer long-range artillery—are not the kinds of systems that can disrupt or degrade Russian forces far behind the front lines. ..........
Ukraine is being made to fight the war the hard way, not the smart way.
........ Unfortunately, NATO states, including the U.S., have been reluctant to provide the Ukrainians with missile systems with too long of a range, seemingly for fear of escalating tensions with Russia. Instead of allowing the Ukrainians to degrade Russian forces far from the front line, Ukraine is being prepared to attack that line. The Ukrainians’ fortitude and ingenuity up to this point suggest that they could indeed accomplish their task—but it’s been made much harder than it needs to be.
In the 1990s, Taiwan did what has long been considered impossible in the US: The island of 24 million people took a fractured and inequitable health care system and transformed it into something as close to Sen. Bernie Sanders’s vision of Medicare-for-all as anything in the world......... No health care system is perfect. But most of America’s economic peers have figured out a way to deliver truly universal coverage and quality care. The United States has not.
The political solution is one country, two systems. That is what Beijing accepted when it reclaimed the territory of Hong Kong.
The protests are so large scale. They represent the sentiment of the people in Hong Kong.
This is not about changing the political system in China. This is about keeping the political system in Hong Kong. Beijing should not have problems with that.
More than 10 weeks of protests with the Hong Kong airport shut down --- that is enough. The message is loud and clear and it needs to be heard.
The agreement of one country, two systems was between Britain and Beijing. Britain has a moral responsibility to speak up.
This revolution is being webcast live. China should not think there is a military solution to this. There has not been a police solution. Obviously. What are you going to do that the Hong Kong police has not already done? Any attempt by the Chinese military to try to mow down the protesters out in the streets is going to infect the Chinese mainland. China could see large scale protests inside China itself. 1989 will have come to China.
Or, it could negotiate with the protesters. Accept their demands. They want the CEO of Hong Kong - or whatever her title is - out. Well, let her go. They want the extradition bill scrapped. Well, scrap it. They want the chief executive of Hong Kong to be directly elected by the people of Hong Kong. Well, do it already. They want all members of the Hong Kong legislature directly elected by the people. I say, why not? They want the one country, two systems to be permanent. Make it permanent.
Carrie Lam does not have the authority to accept or reject these demands. The Hong Kong protest leaders seek to negotiate with Xi Jinping.
Accept the demands or prepare for the collapse of the Chinese Communist Party inside China itself. Should that happen, finally the unification with Taiwan can happen. Taiwan is proof Chinese people can prosper without a communist party running the show. Maybe what China needs is to get rid of the communist party to avoid the middle-income trap. You don't want to get trapped.
The Chinese constitution actually has provisions for things like free speech and other parties besides the communist party. But the fact on the ground is otherwise.
A 25% tariff on 100% of Chinese exports to the United States will bring 1989 to China. Hong Kong is leading the way. If there is a military crackdown in Hong Kong, the rest of the world should follow the US lead and also slap tariffs on Chinese exports. You might only have to do it for a few short weeks.
The world can not watch idly by. No massacre can be allowed to happen. When the people revolt like they are revolting in Hong Kong, they are always right.
A 1989 will create a federal China. Tibet will become the Arunachal Pradesh of China.
Military intervention in Hong Kong will be the death knell for the Chinese Communist Party in China. 30 years after 1989, the winds are blowing again.
There are protests also in Moscow.
The Hong Kong protesters are not organized enough. Become one organization with an elected central committee and leadership. Elect one person to be your leader and spokesperson. Basically, form one political party.
So far the protest organizers have focused on organizing the protests themselves. And they have done a fabulous job. The scale of the protests is incomparable to anything in recent history anywhere. But the organization has to go one level up. It has to become political. Five million people need to form one democratic political organization. It can be done quickly through digital tools.
These protests are like New Year's Eve in Times Square, only much, much larger, and much more sustained. One year I stood for 10 hours near Times Square. This has been going on for 10 weeks.
Ordinary citizens in the 100 biggest cities of the world all need to gather in their own cities to express solidarity with the people of Hong Kong. The governments of the world need to speak up against any possible military interventions before they happen.
There are Chinese in Hong Kong. But then there are also Chinese in London, and New York City, and Sydney. They should form the nucleus around which the non-Chinese should also congregate. One solidarity protest gathering on a Saturday or Sunday will send a strong signal to the leaders of the world. The Chinese diaspora needs to wake up.
Freedom is truly an internal matter. It is a matter of the heart.
