.jpg)
Thursday, 2 April 2026
IP3, GEP team up for Surry Green Energy Center
.jpg)
Tuesday, 10 February 2026
Miranda Kerr says all of her kids have been 'taught Vedic meditation'
Tuesday, 18 November 2025
US leaders view China as a ‘pacing threat’ − has Washington enough stamina to last the race?
Andrew Latham, Macalester College: When Donald Trump meets with Xi Jinping on Oct. 30, 2025, he won’t just be chatting with any run-of-the-mill leader of a rival nation. Rather, he will be sitting down the with the chief representative of the United States’ “pacing threat.”
In the Pentagon’s lexicon, China has increasingly been presented as a “pacing challenge” or “pacing threat” − that is, a great-power rival against which a nation measures its strength, shapes its strategy and directs its resources across every domain of national power.
The phrase and concept has risen in military and academic circles since the turn of the 21st century. Its use in Washington to describe China dates to at least 2020, when Trump’s then–Secretary of Defense Mark Esper used it in a speech in Honolulu.
But what does it mean? For a country to be seen as a pacing threat, it must be a rising yet already near-peer whose capabilities and ambitions directly challenge the dominant country’s global position. A pacing threat doesn’t merely aspire to catch up; it sets the tempo of competition.
Esper’s successor in the Biden administration, Lloyd J. Austin III, continued to call China a “pacing threat,” explaining: “It means that China is the only country that can pose a systemic challenge to the United States in the sense of challenging us economically, technologically, politically and militarily.”
Use of “pacing threat/challenge” has grown since 2009 (Ngram)
The significance goes beyond rhetoric. By defining China in these terms, Washington reorients its entire defense establishment around a new strategic benchmark. The U.S.’s defense planning, industrial policy and global posture now revolve around a single question − how to keep up with and, if necessary, outpace Beijing.
When the United States government signals to its military leaders and industrial partners that a specific country is a “pacing threat,” it is giving them a yardstick by which to judge every dollar spent, every sailor or pilot assigned and every hour of training and preparation.
Pacing threats, increasing risks
The risk of focusing so intently on one foe is, of course, that there is more than one potential adversary out there. And the concept of a pacing challenge shouldn’t imply that China is Washington’s only competitor or potential enemy.
Other rivals remain in the mix, including Russia, Iran, North Korea and a range of smaller militant groups, that could cause major problems for Washington with or without China’s involvement.
The danger for the U.S. is that in designating China its only pacing threat, it could leave blind spots elsewhere. And the objective for a U.S. leader is not simply to be ready for a potential war with China but to be ready for the next crisis wherever it may emerge.
This goal is complicated by a second risk: the urge to plan for the future at the expense of the present. It is one thing for the U.S. Navy to build a fleet and the Air Force to design a missile for 2035 to ensure that it “outpaces” Chinese innovation. But it is another to have the capability to deter or address, if necessary, a crisis or conflict in 2025.
Developing a long-term force to match or surpass China is an important objective to U.S. political and military leaders, but not at the expense of current capabilities.
If the United States is intent on remaining the world’s predominant economic, diplomatic and military force, then it must focus on both – but that is easier said than done.
Is China already ahead?
There are some who believe that America’s pacing threat has already outpaced its rival.
The United States already lags behind China in the scale and output of its defense-industrial base – particularly in the quantity of ships, missiles and other military hardware it can produce and field at speed.
China is building warships at a rate unseen in the U.S. for decades. And it has an industrial ecosystem that can deliver on new programs and scale up in a crisis.
By contrast, American factories face labor shortages, a lack of modern shipyards and glacial acquisition timelines.
If the U.S. is intent on fielding better military assets in the future, it needs them to upscale at a speed that can deter China. In other words, America’s deterrence to any pacing threat needs to start at the factory gate.
A contest of speed, not size
Facing China as a pacing threat will start with an honest U.S. accounting of the type of competition in which it is engaged. This is not merely a rivalry of fleets or firepower but a contest of tempo − who can innovate faster, build smarter and field more flexibly to shape a world in motion.
But that task is far harder for democracies, where political cycles, fiscal constraints and public skepticism about militarization often slow the mobilization of national power.
Complicating the matter is the fact that the next great arsenal will be defined not just in steel but in data, design and decision. Here, too, China at present appears to be gaining an upper hand. A September report by the Washington-based Information Technology and Innovation Foundation assessed that China was now “dramatically outperforming the United States in the vast majority of critical technological fields.”
The U.S. will not stay ahead of its pacing threat by meeting China ship for ship or system for system. The real edge is in responsiveness − the ability to outthink, outproduce and outmaneuver its competitor.
This article is part of a series explaining foreign policy terms commonly used but rarely explained.![]()
Andrew Latham, Professor of Political Science, Macalester College
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Tuesday, 4 November 2025
A 9-Year-Old Son Saves His Father from Leukemia by Donating Stem Cells

Sunday, 19 October 2025
US economy is already on the edge – a prolonged government shutdown could send it tumbling over
John W. Diamond, Rice University
The economic consequences of the current federal government shutdown hinge critically on how long it lasts. If it is resolved quickly, the costs will be small, but if it drags on, it could send the U.S. economy into a tailspin.
That’s because the economy is already in a precarious state, with the labor market struggling, consumers losing confidence and uncertainty mounting.
As an economist who studies public finance, I closely follow how government policies affect the economy. Let me explain how a prolonged shutdown could affect the economy – and why it could be a tipping point to recession.
Direct impacts from a government shutdown
The partial government shutdown began on Oct. 1, 2025, as Democrats and Republicans failed to reach a deal on funding some portion of the federal government. A partial shutdown means that some funding bills have been approved, entitlement spending continues since it does not rely on annual appropriations, and some workers are deemed necessary and stay on the job unpaid.
While most of the 20 shutdowns that occurred from 1976 through 2024 lasted only a few days to a week, there are signs the current one may not be resolved so quickly. The economy would definitely take a direct hit to gross domestic product from a lengthy shutdown, but it’s the indirect impacts that could be more harmful.
The most recent shutdown, which extended over the 2018-2019 winter holidays and lasted 35 days, was the longest in U.S. history. After it ended, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the partial shutdown delayed approximately US$18 billion in federal discretionary spending, which translated into an $11 billion reduction in real GDP.
Most of that lost output was made up later once the shutdown ended, the CBO noted. It estimated that the permanent losses were about $3 billion – a drop in the bucket for the $30 trillion U.S. economy.
The indirect and more lasting impacts
The full impact may depend to a large extent on the psychology of the average consumer.
Recent data suggests that consumer confidence is falling as the stagnation in the labor market becomes more clear. Business confidence has been mixed as the manufacturing index continues to indicate the sector is in contraction, while other business confidence measures indicate mixed expectations about the future.
If the shutdown drags on, the psychological effects may lead to a larger loss of confidence among consumers and businesses. Given that consumer spending accounts for 70% of economic activity, a fall in consumer confidence could signal a turning point in the economy.
These indirect effects are in addition to the direct impact of lost income for federal workers and those that operate on federal contracts, which leads to reductions in consumption and production.
The risk of significant government layoffs, beyond the usual furloughs, could deepen the economic damage. Extensive layoffs would shift the losses from a temporary delay to a more permanent loss of income and human capital, reducing aggregate demand and potentially increasing unemployment spillovers into the private sector.
In short, while shutdowns that end quickly tend to inflict modest, mostly recoverable losses, a protracted shutdown – especially one involving layoffs of a significant number of government workers – could inflict larger, lasting impacts on the economy.
US economy is already in distress
This is all occurring as the U.S. labor market is flashing warnings.
Payrolls grew by only 22,000 in August, with July and June estimates revised down by 21,000. This follows payroll growth of only 73,000 in July, with May and June estimates revised down by 258,000. In addition, preliminary annual revisions to the employment data show the economy gained 911,000 fewer jobs in the previous year than had been reported.
Long-term unemployment is also rising, with 1.8 million people out of work for more than 27 weeks – nearly a quarter of the total number of unemployed individuals.
At the same time, AI adoption and cost-cutting could further reduce labor demand, while an aging workforce and lower immigration shrink labor supply. Fed Chair Jerome Powell refers to this as a “curious kind of balance” in the labor market.
In other words, the job market appears to have come to a screeching halt, making it difficult for recent graduates to find work. Recent graduate unemployment – that is, those who are 22 to 27 years old – is now 5.3% relative to the total unemployment rate of 4.3%.
The latest data from the ADP employment report, which measures only private company data, shows that the economy lost 32,000 jobs in September. That’s the biggest decline in 2½ years. While that’s worrying, economists like me usually wait for the official Bureau of Labor Statistics numbers to come out to confirm the accuracy of the payroll processing firm’s report.
The government data that was supposed to come out on Oct. 3 might have offered a possible counterpoint to the bad ADP news, but due to the shutdown BLS will not be releasing the report.
Problems Fed rate cuts can’t fix
This will only increase the uncertainty surrounding the health of the U.S. economy. And it adds to the uncertainty created by on-again, off-again tariffs as well as the newly imposed tariffs on lumber, furniture and other goods.
Against this backdrop, the Fed is expected to lower interest rates at least two more times this year to stimulate consumer and business spending following its September quarter-point cut. This raises the risk of reigniting inflation, but the cooling labor market is a more immediate concern for the Fed.
While lower short-term rates may help at the margin, I believe they cannot resolve the deeper challenges, such as massive government deficits and debt, tight household budgets, a housing affordability crisis and a shrinking labor force.
The question now is not will the Fed cut rates, because it likely will, but whether that cut will help, particularly if the shutdown lasts weeks or more. Monetary policy alone cannot overcome the uncertainty created by tariffs, the lack of fiscal restraint, companies focused on cutting costs by replacing people with technology, the impact of the shutdown and the fears of consumers about the future.
Lower interest rates may buy time, but they won’t solve these structural problems facing the U.S. economy.![]()
John W. Diamond, Director of the Center for Public Finance at the Baker Institute, Rice University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Friday, 3 October 2025
Lily Collins 'loves' being compared to Sarah Jessica Parker on 'Emily in Paris'
Thursday, 11 September 2025
US Open: Alcaraz beats Sinner to clinch men's singles title and world No. 1 crown
New York, (IANS) Carlos Alcaraz defeated Jannik Sinner, the game’s premier hard-court player, 6-2, 3-6, 6-1, 6-4, to claim his sixth major title and second at the US Open.
Travelers Will No Longer Have to Remove Their Shoes in U.S. Airport Security Lines

Tuesday, 2 September 2025
‘Mile Long Table’ in Denver Seats Thousands of Strangers to Eat and Celebrate Community Together
Mile Long Table in Denver – Credit: Longer Tables
Credit: Longer TablesTuesday, 15 July 2025
Texas launches $3.8bn broadband grant programme

Wednesday, 25 June 2025
After Taylor Swift Visits Children's Hospital, Her Fans Donate Tens of Thousands to Patients

Zoe and Swift at Joe DiMaggio Children’s Hospital – credit, Monica Franco De Villa, via GoFundMe
Swift visiting Aaliyah at Joe DiMaggio Children’s Hospital – credit, Crystal Mortensen, via GoFundMeTuesday, 13 May 2025
Australia and North America have long fought fires together – but new research reveals that has to change
Climate change is lengthening fire seasons across much of the world. This means the potential for wildfires at any time of the year, in both hemispheres, is increasing.
That poses a problem. Australia regularly shares firefighting resources with the United States and Canada. But these agreements rest on the principle that when North America needs these personnel and aircraft, Australia doesn’t, and vice versa. Climate change means this assumption no longer holds.
The devastating Los Angeles wildfires in January, the United States winter, show how this principle is being tested. The US reportedly declined Australia’s public offer of assistance because Australia was in the midst of its traditional summer fire season. Instead, the US sought help from Canada and Mexico.
But to what extent do fire seasons in Australia and North America actually overlap? Our new research examined this question. We found an alarming increase in the overlap of the fire seasons, suggesting both regions must invest far more in their own permanent firefighting capacity.
What we did
We investigated fire weather seasons – that is, the times of the year when atmospheric conditions such as temperature, humidity, rainfall and wind speed are conducive to fire.
The central question we asked was: how many days each year do fire weather seasons in Australia and North America overlap?
To determine this, we calculated the length of the fire weather seasons in the two regions in each year, and the number of days when the seasons occur at the same time. We then analysed reconstructed historical weather data to assess fire-season overlap for the past 45 years. We also analysed climate model data to assess changes out to the end of this century.
And the result? On average, fire weather occurs in both regions simultaneously for about seven weeks each year. The greatest risk of overlap occurs in the Australian spring – when Australia’s season is beginning and North America’s is ending.
The overlap has increased by an average of about one day per year since 1979. This might not sound like much. But it translates to nearly a month of extra overlap compared to the 1980s and 1990s.
The increase is driven by eastern Australia, where the fire weather season has lengthened at nearly twice the rate of western North America. More research is needed to determine why this is happening.
Longer, hotter, drier
Alarmingly, as climate change worsens and the atmosphere dries and heats, the overlap is projected to increase.
The extent of the overlap varied depending on which of the four climate models we used. Assuming an emissions scenario where global greenhouse gas emissions begin to stabilise, the models projected an increase in the overlap of between four and 29 days a year.
What’s behind these differences? We think it’s rainfall. The models project quite different rainfall trends over Australia. Those projecting a dry future also project large increases in overlapping fire weather. What happens to ours and North America’s rainfall in the future will have a large bearing on how fire seasons might change.
While climate change will dominate the trend towards longer overlapping fire seasons, El Niño and La Niña may also play a role.
These climate drivers involve fluctuations every few years in sea surface temperature and air pressure in part of the Pacific Ocean. An El Niño event is associated with a higher risk of fire in Australia. A La Niña makes longer fire weather seasons more likely in North America.
There’s another complication. When an El Niño occurs in the Central Pacific region, this increases the chance of overlap in fire seasons of North America and Australia. We think that’s because this type of El Niño is especially associated with dry conditions in Australia’s southeast, which can fuel fires.
But how El Niño and La Niña will affect fire weather in future is unclear. What’s abundantly clear is that global warming will lead to more overlap in fire seasons between Australia and North America – and changes in Australia’s climate are largely driving this trend.
Looking ahead
Firefighters and their aircraft are likely to keep crossing the Pacific during fire emergencies.
But it’s not difficult to imagine, for example, simultaneous fires occurring in multiple Australian states during spring, before any scheduled arrival of aircraft from the US or Canada. If North America is experiencing late fires that year and cannot spare resources, Australia’s capabilities may be exceeded.
Likewise, even though California has the largest civil aerial firefighting fleet in the world, the recent Los Angeles fires highlighted its reliance on leased equipment.
Fire agencies are becoming increasingly aware of this clash. And a royal commission after the 2019–20 Black Summer fires recommended Australia develop its own fleet of firefighting aircraft.
Long, severe fire seasons such as Black Summer prompted an expansion of Australia’s permanent aerial firefighting fleet, but more is needed.
As climate change accelerates, proactive fire management, such as prescribed burning, is also important to reduce the risk of uncontrolled fire outbreaks.![]()
Doug Richardson, Research Associate in Climate Science, UNSW Sydney and Andreia Filipa Silva Ribeiro, Climate Researcher, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research-UFZ
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Monday, 12 May 2025
World leaders welcome first US pope


Wednesday, 23 April 2025
Skating comeback queen Liu says she can get even better for Olympics

Sunday, 13 April 2025
Post-apocalyptic 'The Last of Us' more timely than ever, say stars
Friday, 28 February 2025
Most Single Americans Look for Partners With These Career Values and Passions: New Dating Poll - Good News Network
- Passion for what they’re doing — 40%
- Prioritizing work/personal life balance — 34%
- Understanding that there is always more to learn/ways to improve — 28%
- Ability to work well with others and build relationships with colleagues — 25%
- Desire to leave a positive impact on society or other people — 21%
- Competitiveness or wanting to be successful — 19%
- Desire to leave a positive impact on the environment — 15%
- Desire to be a good manager or leader — 15%
- Commitment to pushing the boundaries and paving new roads — 15%, Most Single Americans Look for Partners With These Career Values and Passions: New Dating Poll - Good News Network
Wednesday, 26 February 2025
AI regulation around the world


