Wednesday, 26 February 2025

Coalition nuclear plan hides a 2bn tonne ‘carbon bomb’ that puts net zero by 2050 out of reach, new analysis shows.

Extract from The Guardian

 The Loy Yang coal mine and power plant in the La Trobe Valley

The Coalition has said that, if elected to government, a part of the Loy Yang station in Victoria would be one of seven sites around the country to host a nuclear reactor. New analysis doubts Australia can reach its net zero target by 2050 under the Coalition proposal.

Climate Change Authority chair Matt Kean says Dutton’s energy proposal is equivalent to adding ‘two Beetaloo basins’ worth of emissions to atmosphere.

Mon 24 Feb 2025 11.34 AEDT

Peter Dutton’s nuclear energy policy would add huge amounts of extra climate pollution to the atmosphere and make it “virtually impossible” for Australia to reach net zero by 2050, according to new analysis by a government agency.

The Climate Change Authority found the Coalition’s proposal to slow the rollout of renewable energy, keep ageing coal-fired power plants running until after 2040 and build taxpayer-funded nuclear reactors on seven sites would increase total carbon dioxide emissions by more than 2bn tonnes.

The authority’s chair, Matt Kean, said this would be equivalent to adding “two Beetaloo basins” worth of emissions to the atmosphere – a reference to the vast Northern Territory gas basin earmarked for development, which has been described as a potential “carbon bomb”.

“Any government planning to use nuclear power would have to explain how they would meet net zero by 2050,” Kean told Guardian Australia. “Are they planning to bury these 2bn tonnes of carbon pollution, eliminate agriculture or wave some sort of magic wand?

“The reality here is this is a 2bn tonne nuclear carbon emissions bomb that will be the equivalent of two Beetaloo basins of emissions added to the atmosphere. Based on the authority’s analysis, what’s clear is that under the Coalition’s nuclear plan it will be virtually impossible to meet their own commitment of net zero by 2050.”

Kean – a former New South Wales Liberal treasurer and energy minister – said the world had just had its hottest year on record for the second year running, January 2025 had maintained that level of heat, and in future decades this year would “seem relatively cool” if emissions were not rapidly cut “here and elsewhere”.

Kean said the authority’s analysis was likely to be an underestimate of the total extra pollution that would ultimately result under the Coalition’s proposal, given its optimistic assumptions about how quickly a nuclear industry could be established and generators built.

He said the Coalition’s best-case scenario assumed nuclear generators could be built in a timeframe that “no advanced economy” had been able to achieve, pointing to long delays and cost overruns in France and the US, countries that already had “deep experience in nuclear energy”.

Kean said the authority was a science-based organisation and its chartered role included examining climate policies and reporting to the Australian people on the impact of climate policies.

“It’s up to the Coalition now to explain to the Australian people how their proposal is going to stack up,” he said.

Labor has a target to reach 82% renewables in the electricity grid by 2030, up from the current level of nearly 45%. The authority said that under the Coalition’s plan there would not be 82% of electricity from zero emissions technology – renewables and nuclear – until 2042.

It calculated that keeping coal-fired power plants working for longer, as the Coalition proposes, would lead to an extra 1bn tonnes of CO2 by 2050 compared with Labor’s preferred pathway. The slower rollout of renewable energy – assumed in Frontier Economics modelling endorsed by the Coalition – would add a further 1bn tonnes in other parts of the economy, including transport and large industry.

The Coalition’s climate change and energy spokesman, Ted O’Brien did not directly respond to a question about whether his policy would lead to an extra 2bn tonnes of CO2 emissions. He accused the authority of having “sadly become a puppet of Anthony Albanese and Chris Bowen” and repeating a Labor “anti-nuclear scare campaign”.

“Instead of fulfilling their own obligations … the Climate Change Authority has fallen victim to a political takeover by the Albanese government,” O’Brien said. “I feel sorry for many decent public servants who work in the Climate Change Authority who have been thrust on the front line on the eve of an election taking a hyper-partisan position in favour of a government whose own record is to drive emissions higher.”

Official data shows national emissions dropped slightly by 3m tonnes, or 0.7%, last financial year. It followed a small post-pandemic rise the year before.

The Climate Change Authority estimated the Coalition’s nuclear proposal would result in Australia missing its commitment to cut emissions by 43% by 2030 compared with 2005 levels by almost six percentage points.

The Frontier Economics modelling assumed a first nuclear plant would be producing power by 2036. The authority’s analysis assumed there would be no delays in the Coalition’s plan, which has 13GW of nuclear capacity operating by 2049.

But many experts, including the CSIRO, have said that timeline is unrealistic, with nuclear plants unlikely to be producing electricity until the early 2040s. Nuclear plants built in western democracies are notorious for both budget and schedule blowouts.

Kean is scheduled to give evidence at a Senate estimates hearing on Monday afternoon.

Matt Kean says suggestion Coalition could sack him if they win election is ‘concerning threat’

Extract from The Guardian

 Climate Change Authority chair Matt Kean

Climate Change Authority chair Matt Kean says he will not ‘be bullied or silenced for standing up for the science and the evidence’.

Climate Change Authority chair says his job is to provide ‘frank and fearless advice’ after he criticised opposition’s nuclear energy proposal.

Wed 26 Feb 2025 01.00 AEDT

The chair of the Climate Change Authority, Matt Kean, has hit back over an opposition suggestion that his criticism of its nuclear energy proposal could lead to him being sacked if the Coalition wins government.

Kean said the shadow climate change and energy minister, Ted O’Brien, should explain if a Peter Dutton-led government would seek retribution on the authority’s expert staff that prepared the nuclear report.

“I’m not going to be bullied or silenced for standing up for the science and the evidence by Ted O’Brien or anyone. Nor will the reality of climate change be bullied or silenced by political pressure,” Kean, a former NSW Liberal energy minister, told Guardian Australia.

“My job is to continue to provide frank and fearless advice, even if that’s uncomfortable, in the interest for climate policy and the interests of the nation.”

Released on Monday, the authority report suggested the Coalition’s plans to slow down the rollout of renewable energy, extend the life of coal-fired plants and eventually build taxpayer-funded nuclear reactors would release an extra 2bn tonnes of carbon dioxide by 2050.

The opposition said the authority should instead be concentrating on delivering advice to the government on a 2035 emissions reduction target, which was expected by February but has been delayed. Government officials this week said it would be delivered to the UN by September.

In a letter to Kean responding to the report, O’Brien accused the authority of a “concerning departure from its mandate” to provide independent advice on climate policy. “Rather than providing an impartial assessment of Australia’s emissions trajectory, the Climate Change Authority has engaged in a political critique of the opposition’s energy policy. This is inappropriate for a statutory authority.”

The shadow finance minister, Jane Hume, was asked on Monday if a Coalition government would retain Kean, a former NSW state Liberal treasurer, as the chair of the authority. “That’s not a decision for me,” she replied.

“But I cannot imagine that we possibly maintain a Climate Change Authority that has been so poorly, so badly politicised. It simply isn’t serving its purpose to provide independent advice to government on its climate change policy.”

In public comments, O’Brien said he felt sorry for “many decent public servants who work in the Climate Change Authority who have been thrust on the frontline on the eve of an election taking a hyper-partisan position”.

In a letter replying to O’Brien on Tuesday, Kean said he “categorically” rejected the Coalition’s criticism. “Understanding the impact on national emissions of different pathways to decarbonise Australia’s grid and its economy is firmly within the authority’s remit,” he said.

Pointing to what he described as “public comments by your colleagues suggesting reprisals against the authority in the event of a change of government”, Kean said: “This represents a very concerning threat to the authority’s independence.

“I seek your assurance that the conscientious scientists, economists and policy analysts who work for the authority will be able to undertake their work without such attempts to chill their advice going forward.”

The spat coincided with a Labor-led parliamentary committee examining the prospects for nuclear power in Australia concluding in an interim report that it was “not a viable investment of taxpayer money”.

The government called the inquiry to scrutinise the Coalition’s proposal to lift a legislated ban on nuclear energy and eventually build taxpayer-funded reactors at seven sites. O’Brien said the interim report was a “sham” and “politically motivated”.

The election could be called any day – but Peter Dutton still hasn’t explained how his nuclear proposal will work
Adam Morton

Independent experts have said the Coalition’s policy was likely to lead to higher electricity prices for at least the next decade and potentially power shortfalls as ageing coal plants were unlikely to keep operating until nuclear plants could be built after 2040.

Committee member Monique Ryan, an independent MP in the Melbourne seat of Kooyong, said the inquiry was the fourth into nuclear energy at federal or state level over the last decade alone and “should be the last”.

“We must draw a line under nuclear in this country. We must commit to the net zero transition at speed and at scale,” she said.

Andrew Constance, a former NSW transport minister and the Liberal candidate for the marginal federal seat of Gilmore, sparked further uncertainty over the Coalition’s climate policy on Monday when he told Sky News that setting a 2035 emissions reduction target – a commitment Australia has made under the Paris agreement – would be “off the table” under the Coalition.

Dutton and O’Brien have said they would announce a climate target, but not until after the election. Constance said on Tuesday he supported Dutton’s position.

Kean – Constance’s former cabinet colleague at state level – said the Liberal candidate’s position was “disappointing” given he had previously argued Australia must do more to combat the climate crisis after the black summer bushfires and supported an ambitious renewable energy expansion at state level.

Ukraine war: Amid shifting alliances, General Assembly passes resolution condemning Russia’s aggression.

 Extract from United Nations


The UN General Assembly votes on a resolution on Ukraine.
UN Photo/Manuel Elías
The UN General Assembly votes on a resolution on Ukraine.
Peace and Security

Three years to the day since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the UN General Assembly adopted two competing resolutions on resolving the conflict on Monday, one initiated by the United States and the other by Ukraine – a sign of strategic differences within the transatlantic alliance over the way forward for peace.

The resolution tabled by the United States, which omitted mention of Russian aggression, only passed after a majority of Member States voted to add EU-led amendments which led to the US abstaining on it own motion and voting against the Ukrainian text. 

However, the text in the original US resolution was passed hours later in the Security Council – the first to do so since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine by Russia on 24 February 2022.

Until Monday’s high stakes diplomatic debates, the Security Council – which is responsible for maintaining international peace and security – has been unable to find consensus, owing largely to Russia’s veto power as a permanent member.

The two General Assembly draft resolutions put before UN Member States during the morning session both ostensibly called for peace and an end to the conflict – but diverged fundamentally.

Deputy Foreign Minister Betsa Mariana of Ukraine addresses the Eleventh Emergency Special Session (resumed) of the General Assembly on Ukraine.
UN Photo/Manuel Elías
Deputy Foreign Minister Betsa Mariana of Ukraine addresses the Eleventh Emergency Special Session (resumed) of the General Assembly on Ukraine.

Path to peace?

Tweet URL

Advancing a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine”, proposed by Ukraine and co-sponsored by a host of European countries, was a three-page document that included clauses noting that “the full-scale invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation has persisted for three years and continues to have devastating and long-lasting consequences not only for Ukraine, but also for other regions and global stability.”

It called for a commitment to “the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognised borders” and the need to ensure accountability for crimes committed under international law, through “fair and independent investigations and prosecutions at national and international level”.

The US tabled its own version alongside, titled “Path to Peace”, a brief draft limited to mourning the loss of life throughout the Russian Federation-Ukraine conflict, reiterating that the principal purpose of the UN is to maintain international peace and security and to peacefully settle disputes and imploring a swift end to the conflict, urging a lasting peace between Ukraine and Russia.

Amendments to the text were put forward by Russia and the European Union. Russia proposed adding the words “including by addressing its root causes” to the third paragraph (on a swift end to the conflict).

The EU proposed adding some of the language in the Ukrainian resolution, referring to the full-scale invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation (rather than the Russian Federation-Ukraine conflict), the “territorial integrity” of Ukraine and calling for a peace in line with the UN Charter.

US Deputy Permanent Representative Dorothy Shea addresses the Eleventh Emergency Special Session (resumed) of the General Assembly on Ukraine.
UN Photo/Manuel Elías
US Deputy Permanent Representative Dorothy Shea addresses the Eleventh Emergency Special Session (resumed) of the General Assembly on Ukraine.

A change in position

When it came to the vote, Ukraine’s version passed by 93 votes to 18. The US voted against, alongside Russia, marking a major shift of its position on the conflict and previous votes. 

The US supported a similar resolution submitted in February 2023 which received 141 votes in favour.

A total of 65 nations abstained, including South Africa, whose representative, Ambassador Mathu Joyini, said the draft “does not go far enough in terms of inclusivity and creating a positive momentum towards a peaceful negotiation”.

The US version was also adopted (93 in favour, eight against and 73 abstentions), but Member States also voted to add the European Union amendments with 60 in favour, 18 against and 81 abstentions.

The US voted against the amendments and abstained on its own resolution (the General Assembly failed to adopt the Russian amendment, with 31 in favour, 71 against and 59 abstentions).

Ukraine’s Deputy Foreign Minister Mariana Betsa told the Assembly that the way Russian aggression is answered “will define the future of Ukraine…Europe and our common future”.

Later, flanked by co-sponsors of the country’s General Assembly resolution, she delivered a statement at the media stakeout just outside the Security Council Chamber. She said the General Assembly had demanded “an early end to this war of aggression and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace in Ukraine, in line with the UN Charter”.

The General Assembly’s reaffirmation of support for international law and the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity was profoundly important, she said, warning that a peace deal that “risks rewarding aggression increases the risk” and creates a dangerous precedent for the future.

The Deputy Foreign Minister of Ukraine, Betsa Mariana (centre at podium), addresses the media outside the Security Council at UN Headquarters in New York.
UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe
The Deputy Foreign Minister of Ukraine, Betsa Mariana (centre at podium), addresses the media outside the Security Council at UN Headquarters in New York.

Security Council breakthrough

Attention turned to the Security Council in the afternoon, where a vote was due to be held on the United States resolution.

As before, there were attempts to add amendments supported by several western European countries, referring to a “full-scale invasion” by Russia and Ukraine’s territorial integrity, and proposals from Russia to acknowledge the “deeply rooted reasons” for the conflict and lasting peace in both Ukraine and Russia.

But, the amendments were voted down and the resolution was passed without any changes by the 15-member Council (10 in favour, none against and five abstentions).

Speaking after the vote, US Ambassador Dorothy Shea said Washington sincerely appreciated Council members’ support saying that it “puts us on the path to peace”.

Undermining international foundations

After a pause in proceedings, Rosemary DiCarlo, the head of UN Political Affairs, briefed the 15 Council members on the current situation in Ukraine.

She said that the Russian invasion “undermined the very foundations of the international order” and reminded delegates that, since 24 February 2022, at least 12,654 Ukrainian civilians, including 673 children, have been killed.

Referring to the Security Council resolution adopted earlier in the Council, Ms. DiCarlo insisted that peace in Ukraine must be “just, sustainable and comprehensive, in line with the Charter of the United Nations, international law and resolutions of the General Assembly”, including those adopted on Monday morning during the General Assembly emergency special session.

Find out more in our comprehensive live coverage of the day here.

UK prime minister to boost military spending to counter Russian aggression.

 Extract from ABC News

A close up shot of Keir Starmer in a room.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer says the UK must drastically increase defence spending to counter Russian aggression. (Reuters: Oli Scarff)

In short:

British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer says his government will boost defence spending by $26 billion a year by 2027.

He says the spending increase was designed to counter "tyrants" like Vladimir Putin.

European allies are growing concerned at being shut out of peace negotiations to end the war in Ukraine.

The UK will increase its defence budget to 2.5 per cent of its gross domestic product by 2027, with Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer saying Europe cannot be complacent against the Russian "menace".

Addressing the House of Commons, the prime minister said his government was entering a "new era", but reaffirmed the importance of the NATO military alliance.

"Starting today, I can announce this government will begin the biggest sustained increase in defence spending since the end of the Cold War," he told Westminster.

Defence spending is set to increase from 2.3 per cent currently to 2.5 per cent of GDP by 2027, and then 3 per cent later in the decade.

Sir Keir said the rise would equate to an extra 13.4 billion pounds ($26 billion) in spending each year.

The money would come from major cuts to the UK's international aid budget.

On social media, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth welcomed the spending rise after speaking with British Defence Minister John Healey.

"A strong step from an enduring partner," Mr Hegseth said on X.

Boost comes amid uncertainty in Europe

Starmer and Macron

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emamanuel Macron are visiting Washington DC this week. (Reuters: Gonzalo Fuentes)

Mr Starmer made the announcement a day before he is scheduled to meet US President Donald Trump in Washington DC.

Mr Trump has long urged European nations, including the UK, to increase their defence spending, accusing the US' NATO allies of being too reliant on America's military.

"So this week, when I meet President Trump, I will be clear: I want this relationship to go from strength to strength," he said.

"Strength in this world also depends on a new alliance with Europe."

In recent weeks, European leaders have grown increasingly alarmed at being cut out of talks to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine.

Earlier this week, the US split with allies and voted with Russia against a UN resolution calling on Vladimir Putin's forces to withdraw from Ukraine.

Mr Starmer said the increase was designed to counter the rise of Russian aggression.

"Tyrants like Putin only respond to strength," he said.

"They've launched cyber attacks on our NHS, only seven years ago a chemical weapons attack on the streets of Salisbury."

"We must stand with Ukraine, because if we do not achieve a lasting peace, then the economic instability, the threats to our security, they will only grow."

ABC/wires

Molly the magpie to remain with Gold Coast carers indefinitely, Queensland government rules.

 Extract from ABC News

A magpie and a dog sit on a deck facing a green yard

Best friends forever: Molly and Peggy will remain together following Queensland government ruling. (Supplied: Juliette Wells)

In short:

Queensland's environment minister has revealed Molly the magpie will not be seized by authorities, despite the Queensland Supreme Court overturning a decision to grant its Gold Coast carers a special wildlife licence.

It ends a year-long saga that began when officers from Queensland's environment department seized the magpie.

What's next?

The Queensland government will review its legislation to prevent similar issues from happening in the future.

The long-running saga of Gold Coast internet-famous Molly the magpie is finally at an end.

The state government on Tuesday confirmed the bird would not be seized, despite the couple housing it not having a licence to care for it.

Molly the magpie shot to fame in 2021 due to its unlikely friendship with Peggy the Staffordshire terrier, both of which resided at the home of Gold Coast couple Reece Mortensen and Juliette Wells.

The magpie's future was in limbo over the past few months after the Queensland Supreme Court overturned a special licence that had been granted to the carers.

Queensland Environment Minister Andrew Powell has now described Molly as "a wild bird" — saying the couple did not need a permit to keep it.

"We're not seizing the bird," Mr Powell said.

"My understanding is from the briefs I have received from my department … is the bird is free to come and go, in essence it is wild … and therefore a permit isn't required."

Man smiling at beach

Andrew Powell says authorities will not seize Molly the magpie. (ABC Gold Coast: Danielle Mahe)

Public outcry over removal

The ruling ends a year-long saga that began when officers from Queensland's environment department seized Molly in March last year.

Molly was returned about six weeks later after a public outcry and intervention by then-Queensland premier Steven Miles.

Queensland premier Steven Miles with  Reece Mortensen and Juliette Wells and Molly and Peggy

Former Queensland premier Steven Miles intervened to have Molly the magpie returned to its carers. (Supplied)

The couple, however, had to apply to the Queensland environment department for a special wildlife licence, and agree that they would not profit from the magpie or its image.

But in November, the couple lost the licence to look after the bird after that decision was found to be invalid by the Queensland Supreme Court.

State legislation under review

Mr Powell said while the case has been closed, the department was reviewing its legislation.

"To be blunt, this whole Molly the magpie episode has certainly shone a spotlight on our laws and legislation, and I and my department are looking at them to work out what needs to be improved to make sure this kind of situation doesn't happen again," he said.

Mr Mortensen and Ms Wells have been contacted for comment.

Tuesday, 25 February 2025

How Donald Trump could help make China's economy great again.

Extract from ABC News 

Analysis

A composite image of Donald Trump and Xi Jinping. Both are wearing a blue suit, blue tie and have a neutral facial expression.

Donald Trump's return to the White House may have inspired Xi Jinping to bring Beijing's business leaders in from the cold. (Reuters)

Amidst the chaotic turbulence across the Northern Hemisphere in recent days, outbursts from US President Donald Trump and the sudden arrival of Chinese warships in the Tasman Sea, you could be forgiven for overlooking a monumental U-turn in Beijing's vision for the future.

This time last week, in the Great Hall of the People, President Xi Jinping strode across the floor with a new-found sense of confidence as he greeted an array of business leaders.

It was a marked change from just four years ago, where many of those same people were left quivering and fearful of what the future may hold, including for their personal safety.

For some, the spectacle conjured up visions of Trump's recent inauguration where a gaggle of tech billionaires took centre stage.

"Now is the perfect time for private enterprises and entrepreneurs to thrive," Xi told the assembled throng.

All of them, he said, had "immense potential and promising prospects".

In from the cold was Jack Ma, the Alibaba founder who largely has been missing in action since 2020 after he launched a blistering tirade against Beijing's regulatory regime, a speech that resulted in the partial break-up of his organisation and a heavy-handed crackdown on China's billionaires.

A giant screen projected onto a building shows two Chinese men shaking hands in a formal meeting room.

President Xi and Alibaba founder Jack Ma were seen shaking hands during the meeting. (Reuters: Florence Lo)

The intervening years haven't been kind to China.

Whacked by COVID-19 and Beijing's regulatory overstep with its heavy-handed lockdowns, its economy has laboured under the weight of a self-inflicted property market meltdown that has stripped households of investment wealth, slowed growth and caused sharp rise in unemployment, particularly amongst the youth.

While the West has struggled to rein in the first inflation outbreak in half a century, China has battled to avoid a deflationary spiral that threatened to cripple its economy.

That was reflected on its stock markets, which headed south into an ever-deepening winter.

Last September, however, just as Donald Trump's campaign to return to the White House began to gather momentum, China's fortunes turned, at least on financial markets.

Faced with the prospect of an old adversary in the White House, it hatched a stimulus plan to encourage new investors that, after years of failure, finally found some traction.

And then, a month ago, China's race towards an Artificial Intelligence future suddenly began threatening Wall Street's technology titans.

Who's on one?

Jack Ma may have been the symbolic face of Beijing's policy about face.

But the other cast members in this reconciliation were every bit as important.

In addition to Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei and Tencent chief Pony Ma was the new breed in China's global business hopefuls. Car company BYD's chief Weng Chuanfu and AI sensation, DeepSeek boss Liang Wenfeng, also were in attendance.

The re-acceptance of leaders across such a broad range of industries is in stark contrast to the business purges that began with real estate tycoons five years ago that quickly moved on to technology, food delivery and even education services.

At the time, there was speculation that President Xi saw the emerging billionaire class as a threat to Beijing's authority and civil order.

Exactly what drove the sudden reunification is open to conjecture. But the Trump administration's threat of wide-ranging trade penalties including tariffs against China's already reeling economy and the turmoil in global geopolitics are difficult to ignore.

Perhaps too, was the stark realisation that China's moribund and hugely indebted state owned enterprises are grossly inefficient and that the focus needed to shift back to a more free enterprise system to generate growth and employment.

A giant screen projected in a shopping complex showing Chinese businessmen speaking at a formal hearing.

Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei, BYD boss Wang Chuanfu and New Hope founder Liu Yonghao all attended the business leaders meeting last week. (Reuters: Florence Lo)

The new Pacific battleground

The White House hasn't spared the criticism. Its most loyal allies, including Canada and Europe have come under fire, and it has roundly rejected Ukraine for having fought against an invading Russia all within a little more than a month.

They were developments that would have been keenly watched in Beijing.

At the very least, Washington has signalled a dramatic shift in its relationship with long-standing partners and allies that will create opportunities and challenges in diplomatic, trade and defence arrangements far into the future.

Diminished are the links in culture, history and democratic values.

These have been supplanted by transactional interests which, given our region is dominated by Washington's great rival, makes our future far less certain and stable than it has been for the past four decades.

Like most other countries in the region, our economy is hugely dependent upon trade with China both for export income and imports. But our diplomatic and defence ties have been firmly linked to the US and the western alliance.

For years, People's Liberation Army ships have been engaging with vessels in the South China Sea from neighbours Vietnam, the Philippines and Indonesia, which have become more frequent as it ramps up territorial claims.

Vietnam — which calls the region the East Sea — maintains the dispute is not regional but global, given the amount of vital shipping that passes through the area and is determined to thwart its neighbour's ambitions.

There also have been numerous examples of People's Liberation Army aircraft intercepting RAAF flights with dangerous mid-air manoeuvres, including one just over a week ago.

But its live fire exercises in the Tasman Sea over the weekend, while legal under international law, could only be interpreted as a statement to Canberra and Wellington about the capability and reach of China's navy and about where future allegiances may want to lie.

Subtle, it wasn't.

'Disconcerting': Richard Marles addresses China conducting live fire drills off NSW coast

Intelligence, artificial and otherwise

Is Donald Trump looking to bring China to the table or to send it packing?

Perhaps even he doesn't know.

What we do know is that on Friday, he issued a new round of Executive Orders that will block Chinese investment in American technology, food supplies, farmland, minerals, natural resources, ports and shipping.

The White House will also try to block money heading into Chinese military and industrial development which, as Rabo Bank's global strategist Michael Every notes, "given the latter's civil-military fusion policy covers a lot — and this is just as Wall Street started to get bullish on Chinese tech stocks."

Wall Street knows no boundaries when it comes to earnings. And since September last year, when China's markets found their footing, money has been pouring in.

That only accelerated after DeepSeek, the Chinese AI firm that managed to produce a highly competitive product to ChatGPT at a fraction of the cost, rattled the idea of American tech dominance and global superiority.

It was achieved despite, or perhaps because of, a US imposed ban on the all-important Nvidia chips that has driven Silicon Valley's $US450 billion a year splurge on AI.

While there has been talk that DeepSeek has a secret stash of Nvidia chips, others believe that the shortage in China prompted the Chinese company to take a different path.

The Hang Seng Index is now sitting at a three-year high as western money shifts from overblown American tech stocks and into more modestly valued Chinese firms.

That may be at an end. Or it all could change again next week.