From poverty to innovation: How Guizhou transformed into a rising tech hub
52:52 Share

Chinese President Xi Jinping's inspection in Guizhou highlights China's commitment to high-quality development. Russian President Vladimir Putin has agreed to a limited Ukraine ceasefire following a call with his U.S. counterpart Donald Trump.

and OECD has raised its 2025 forecast for China's economic growth to 4.8%. Welcome to Road Today, a news program with a different perspective. I'm Ge'anna in Beijing. To listen to this episode again or to catch up on previous episodes, you can download our podcast by searching Road Today.

Chinese President Xi Jinping has visited ethnic minorities in the southwestern province of Guizhou. He inspected a village in Qiendongnan Miao and Dong Autonomous Prefecture, where he learned about efforts to enhance social governance, preserve and promote traditional cultures, and advance rural revitalization. Qiendongnan, one of nationally recognized cultural protection areas, is home to millions of ethnic Miao and Dong people.

The Chinese president also stressed the importance of adhering to high-quality development and driving growth by further deepening reform and opening up. Xi Jinping called on the province to firm up confidence and take steps to advance Chinese modernization. To talk more on this, let's have Dr. Yao Shujie, Chang Kong professor of economics at Chongqing University.

Professor, in light of President Xi's emphasis on high-quality development during his recent inspection tour, what new opportunities and directions does this present for Guizhou's comprehensive rural revitalization? High-quality development is a specific concept for the Chinese economy, as the traditional economic development depends on large input of labor and materials.

which have a very high rate of growth, but it is relatively low quality. Nowadays, for China to achieve a two-digit or very high rate of economic growth is almost impossible, because the damage to the environment is huge.

So China has turned into the so-called high-quality economic development. High quality means that there is a certain level of growth, but also it is high quality in the sense for the natural environment, for income distribution and also for the industrial upgrading of all the industry and services.

Now, President Xi Jinping went to Guizhou, he emphasized high-quality economic growth and also the Chinese-style socialist modernization.

Now, the opportunity presented for Guizhou is very obvious. Because for the whole country, I think there's a balance development between different regions, the coastal, the middle region and now the western region. The western region benefited from the development of the modern transportation system and the internet of things and also the 5G technology.

So, like most of the Western regions, they have been detrimental - to the economic development because of the inefficient - and backward transportation system. But entering into this new century, I think lots of advances have been made - to improve the transportation system and the internet of things.

Now this presents a technological infrastructure opportunity for Guizhou. Due to the technological progress, I think big data, the so-called eastern data, is computed in the western area. Guizhou has launched the so-called big data center, which has been one of the pioneers for the country, which has been very successful in a sense.

which transformed a relatively backward province - into a rather prosperous province nowadays. The people's income, industry and other sectors - have been growing rapidly alongside -

the infrastructure development, especially the high-speed rail, motorway, and also the bridges and other things that have been rapidly constructed in the province.

Another development is that because of this transportation improvement, - I think down to the British level, the county level, - the agricultural sector has been critically revitalized. And supported by the country's national policy of poverty alleviation, - I think all the people living in the countryside - have been lifted out of poverty.

Now the next stage is that the country's policy to revitalize the countryside, the agriculture and also to improve the livelihood of the farmers. The so-called three non-problems have been gradually, you know, dissolved. And also the country, the province, have put in lots of investment to help the local people.

Another advantage or another opportunity is the opening of the Western frontier in China, especially the so-called Western connection of low transportation with the oceanic transportation to the ASEAN nations. Guizhou has played a very important role in the middle of this so-called Western frontier

you know, water and land connection corridor. A further opportunity is the growing economy center in the, you know, the Pearl River in Hong Kong and also the Chongqing, Chengdu Twin Cities

economy development area, they are also growing very rapidly. And as the neighbor of these two economic growth centers, I think Guizhou has a great opportunity to undertake industrial transformation and also transfer from the advanced region to the Western region.

And finally, I can emphasize the tourism and also culture and heritage and agriculture turning into tourism, the ecosystem construction. These are the new ideas promoted by President Xi Jinping, but it has been utilized very effectively by the local authority and the local people. So these kinds of

rural tourism, ecological construction turning into, you know, production activity and income generating opportunity. Comprehensively, I think there is a package of

good policy and also condition for the Guizhou people to be able to make another big step forward to improve their livelihood and also improve the local economic development structure.

That is very comprehensive, especially considering Guizhou's unique position as an emerging economic hub. Guizhou has long been known for its underdeveloped economy, yet it is now becoming a model for innovation and green development, as you mentioned. What specific steps has the region taken to achieve this transformation, and what lessons might other provinces learn from Guizhou's experience?

Yes, Guizhou typically, I think maybe 20 years ago, when you're talking about per capita GDP, per capita income, Guizhou ranked in the last position or at the bottom of the league table of income and economic growth among the 31 Chinese provinces and regions.

And nowadays Guizhou has been moving up rapidly. The key to success is this: the Guizhou government and the Guizhou people have been able to support the so-called industrial upgrading. And industrial upgrading, you don't actually uphold the old traditional industry. Of course, the traditional industry is important, but Guizhou actually takes a different route.

like going through the high-tech sector, especially the digital economy, big data and artificial intelligence. Now, this is actually the new emerging industries, and this new emerging industry can create a huge potential and spillover effect to all parts of the province and all sectors of the economy.

So by taking on the front-running industry, like big data and also the Internet of Things,

in artificial intelligence, Guizhou is actually making a fairly big leap forward compared to some other countries. I think because the big data and also the infrastructure development, as I just mentioned, coincide together. So that makes Guizhou a very different province, particularly the infrastructure development, which

lead to a significant growth in tourism and also attracted talents from all parts of the countries or even imported from foreign countries as well.

So this data center and also surrounding the infrastructure development lead forward to a higher level of industrial development because these are new. They are not traditional industry and new industry once they are successful.

they can have a profound effect on the transformation of the regional economy. Professor, beyond economic development, environmental protection remains a priority in China. Guizhou's push for ecological conservation aligns with China's broader green development goals.

So given such a case, how has economic growth and environmental protection been balanced effectively, especially in resource-rich but historically underdeveloped areas in China today? Yes, I think this is always a conviction.

between economic development and environmental protection. Traditionally, if you want to drive economic growth, you have to input lots of energy, particularly fuels and other highly polluting industries. So there is a big balance between the economic development and ecological protection. Now, Guizhou is facing a similar problem.

But because Guizhou is a late comer of economic development - compared to the eastern regions such as Guangdong and Zhejiang, -

So Guizhou has some late-comer advantage because it doesn't have to go through the polluting development stage. It can quickly jump or directly jump to the high-tech industry such as the data, Internet of Things and also AI technology. Another advantage of Guizhou is that because Guizhou is a mountainous region,

population density is relatively lower, significantly lower compared to the eastern counterparts. So because the population density is lower, it can exploit the advantage of conserving the natural environment, for example, like forestry, grass planting, and also protecting the water system.

So this is another advantage. The third advantage is the new technology. New technology actually allows industrial development with low carbon emissions and also less pollution, because the technological level is much higher, up to so many years of economic development in China.

And also talents, I mean, people are becoming more clever. They can enjoy the so-called high income generating activity without going through the so-called polluting activity. And finally, I think the agricultural sector, because agricultural sector in Guizhou, it is also disadvantaged by the mountainous structure. But on the other hand, they can also produce very specific product.

for example, like food and vegetables, which could be very high value. And as people's income increases, I think the demand for organic agricultural products, cultural tourism in particular,

After the Guizhou and Guangzhou, Guiyang and Guangzhou, I speak real. I think tourism from the eastern part, especially from Guangdong, has been growing exponentially. So each year, it created a lot of employment opportunity and also tourist income. That was Dr. Yao Shujie, Chang Kong Professor of Economics at Chongqing University. This is Road Today. Stay with us.

Hello, my name is Alessandro Golombievski Teixeira. I'm a professor of Public Policy Management at Tsinghua University in Beijing. I am a great listener of The Wall Today. In my opinion, The Wall Today is one of the best China radio programs.

You are listening to Road Today. China says it's pleased to see all efforts towards a ceasefire on the Ukraine conflict.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Ma Ning said China has advocated resolving the Ukraine crisis through dialogue and negotiation from the very beginning and is pleased to see all efforts toward a ceasefire as a necessary step towards peace.

Ma made remarks at a regular news briefing when asked to comment on the phone call between U.S. President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin. The White House said in a statement the two leaders agreed that the three-year Ukraine conflict needs to end with a lasting peace, and the two leaders stressed the need for improved U.S.-Russia relations.

To delve into this, let's have Kamal Makili-Aliyev, Associate Professor at the School of Global Studies at University of Goldenberg. Thanks for joining us, Professor. Thanks for having me. First of all, how would you assess the overall tone of this conversation and what kind of signals do you think both sides were trying to convey?

Well, all signs indicate that the two-hour phone conversation between President Trump and Putin, they have been cautiously pragmatic in tone. Both leaders express a willingness to discuss steps towards the de-escalation, but we can also see clear caveats here.

President Putin repeatedly underscored that a comprehensive ceasefire would be impossible unless Western military aid to Ukraine were halted. And this is intended to signal that Russia views ongoing foreign support as a key impediment to any peace initiative at this point. And President Trump, he reiterated that

His public stance more and more that he's committed to ending the war, but yet his tone also suggested that any move towards peace must also safeguard American strategic and economic interests. And he stressed this kind of need for mutual desire to end the conflict. So sort of hinting on the possibility of revisiting a lot of contentious issues if concrete concessions are offered.

So overall, both sides appear to be testing the waters right now. It's like very, very cautiously. Putin seeking to leverage Ukraine support as a bargaining chip and Trump probing for opportunities to secure concessions while maintaining U.S. commitment to its allies.

Professor, President Putin has stated that halting military aid to Ukraine is a key condition for resolving the Russian-Ukraine conflict. So given the complex dynamics between the U.S., its Western allies, and Russia, is it realistically possible for Washington to completely cut off military support to Ukraine? If so, what kind of political and military pressures might this create within the United States?

Well, my personal opinion is that even though this is right now a demand from Putin, the US military aid and its complete secession from the side of Washington is highly unlikely. Because as you said, there's some pressures that can be discussed in this context. First of all, there's strategic considerations. US policymakers

and US Western allies, they view the continued military support as critical not only for Ukraine's survival, but also for upholding this rules-based international order, even if a Trump administration has a different view on that. But there is also domestic pressures when it comes to Washington itself. There's significant political and public support for aiding Ukraine. You can see it in the polls, you can see it in the sociological studies,

cutting off the aid completely, it can actually trigger a major political backlash, both in the United States Congress, as well as among constituents and voters. And that can also, you know, deepen the risk of undermining NATO unity. So while Russia, you know, would very surely welcome the hold of US support completely,

And that would, of course, weaken the Ukrainian defense. I don't think the U.S. is going, at least at this point, prepared for such a radical step. Another key point in their talk is that Trump and Putin have agreed to hold talks regarding the Black Sea Shipping Security Initiative. What specific impacts could this have on both Russia and Ukraine, as well as Europe's economic stability, energy supplies, and broader geopolitical landscape in the region?

Well, I assume that we think about the good outcomes, right? If the talks on back-sea shipping security is going to be successful. So for Russia and Ukraine, it would be, for both countries, it means safety of critical maritime routes, and it would facilitate safer passage for Ukrainian grain exports, as well as Russian energy shipments. And Ukraine, which relies heavily on these routes to alleviate economic pressure, so the conflict might see it as a modest economic reprieve.

From the more of the continental perspective, Europe's economic stability and energy supply, they're also very much tied to the Black Sea. It's a major conduit for energy supplies and goods, and securing these lanes would help stabilize European energy markets and supply chains, reducing economic volatility that is linked to this kind of regional disruptions. And if you take even the global landscape,

It's just basically enhanced shipping security that builds into the confidence building measure geopolitically, potentially easing the tensions between Russia on one side and Western allies on the other side.

However, any shifts in control or influence over Black Sea could also recalibrate regional power dynamics and challenge the established alliances, knowing that there is a tier between the United States and European countries in this Western security alliance. Professor, on U.S.-Russian relations, both countries,

The two leaders have expressed a willingness to normalize bilateral relations and discuss the potential cooperation in economic and energy sectors. But with the Russia-Ukraine conflict still unresolved, how realistic is it for these cooperative efforts to move forward? Without a total resolution or some kind of stable resolution,

temporary resolution of Ukraine-Russia conflict, I don't think there is a lot of hope for the normalization. So any normalization is going to be conditional. Any bilateral cooperation is likely to be kind of incremental and limited. It's going to be pursued in the scenes that are less politically sensitive.

Continuation of sanctions and persistent military tensions can, you know, even restrain these kind of initiatives. So it's very hard to see how this would run in parallel if the Ukrainian conflict is not resolved. But there is also a strategic distrust that is still there between U.S. and Russia.

And as long as the conflict remains active, this can be seated distrust will limit any potential full scale normalization by itself. So the cooperation may be confined to areas where the interests minimally overlap. For example, energy or specific trade sectors, where a majority of security issues going to be remain unresolved at that time. As soon as they're going to be resolved when the situation changes and we can talk about more possibilities, of course.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has emphasized that no peace talks can succeed without Ukraine's involvement. Yet the U.S. and Russia have already discussed several key issues. In future negotiations, in your opinion, will the interests of Ukraine be adequately represented to ensure it retains a meaningful voice in the peace process?

Well, we've seen that Ukrainian President Zelensky has been very, well, has been unequivocal. No peace agreement can succeed without Ukraine at the negotiating table. And it is true because the realities on the ground also depend on the Ukrainians' behavior. But yet recent reports indicate that some discussions between U.S. and Russia, you know, they proceed on the key issues without Ukraine's direct involvement. So the first thing is the risk of marginalization.

of the whole situation with Ukraine. If negotiations continue like this in the bilateral trade between the US and Russia, without formally including Ukraine, there is a risk that the settlement could fail to address Ukraine's security and territorial concerns and then fail overall.

There's also international pressure, right? Because even if the United States is big and powerful, it still has to deal with Western allies and international organizations that exert pressure on it. They push for a much more inclusive process that ensures that Ukraine retains a meaningful voice. So future negotiations will likely at some point include Ukraine in this kind of discussions and will incorporate at least some of Ukraine's interests

If a sustainable peace is to be achieved, otherwise it's basically impossible. Professor, very briefly, what steps in your opinion are necessary right now to translate these verbal commitments into concrete actions? Well, if we follow the vision of the Trump plan, there should be establishment of a comprehensive ceasefire beyond the temporary pauses and a robust verifiable mechanism for that ceasefire would be necessary.

Then phase de-escalation and confidence building measures as the science dictates and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. Initiatives such as humanitarian corridors, prisoners exchanges, gradual withdrawal of heavy weapons from the line of contact would build trust among the parties. And then, of course, inclusive multilateral negotiations.

Thanks, Professor. That was Kamal Makili-Aliyev, Associate Professor at the School of Global Studies at University of Goldenberg. This is Road Today. We'll be back after a short break.

This is World Today. I'm Ge'anna in Beijing. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development has raised its 2025 forecast for China's economic growth to 4.8%. The forecast is up from a projection of 4.7% in December.

The upward revision follows China's better-than-expected data, highlighting OECD's confidence in the world's second-largest economy. China is one of the few major economies that OECD upgraded in its GDP forecast for this year. The latest estimates say global growth will slow to 3.1% this year and 3% next year.

He projected U.S. growth to slow to 2.2% this year and 1.6% in 2026. So for more on this, my colleague Zhao Yang spoke with Yan Liang, a professor of economics at Willamette University.

So, Yan, the OECD has raised its projection for China's economic growth to 4.8% this year from a previous projection of 4.7% in December. So why did OECD upgrade China's GDP growth forecast for the year?

Well, I think this upgrade is appropriate, given that not only that the first two months of China's economic data show that China had a really solid start of the year, but also they just concluded the two sessions and also the government

work report have indicated very strong policy support for the economy in this year. So I think combining this policy effect and also the very solid start of the year, I think this upgrade is appropriate. I think they probably will actually need to upgrade even more

given the momentum that the economy has been building in the first two months. And as you mentioned, China released the key economic data for the first two months, showing some positive signs. And we know that retail sales rose 4% in January and February, and industrial production also beat expectations, it's climbed 5.9%. So how do you view the economy at the start of this year? What are the driving forces for China's economy?

Yeah, I think that's a great question. I agree with you. I think the economy really starts at a very strong footing. You mentioned industrial output growth, the retail sales growth, but also the fixed asset investment has gone up by 4.1%. So all of these major indicators not only beat the expectation, but also really show a acceleration from the end of 2024.

So I think the economy is starting really strong. Now, in terms of the major driving forces, we know, as a matter of fact, that giving some of these policy effects, such as the trade-in program that started to roll out by the end of last year, that continued to drive the momentum forward.

We're also seeing very strong, you know, spring festival travel and spending. So that gives indication that the consumer spending has been strong and solid. Exports, as a matter of fact, also went up by 3.4 percent in the first quarter.

two months. So that is still a pretty positive contribution to the economy. And last but not the least, we also know that with the technological breakthroughs, such as the DeepSea launch in late January, that has really revitalized the stock market sentiment. We're seeing a lot trading, a lot more rally in the stock market. So all of these, I think, boost the market confidence, provide more incentives for businesses to invest and for consumers to spend.

So I think those are really the major driving forces, again, when it comes to some improvements in consumer sentiment, strong policy support, and also very positive technological breakthroughs. So all of these are driving the economy forward.

And China is one of the few major economies that the OECD upgrade its GDP growth forecast. As the organization said in its latest economic outlook, that the global GDP growth is set to slow from 3.2% last year to 3.1% this year. So, Yan, what do you think is the key risk for the global economy right now?

Well, the OECD basically mentioned the high level of geopolitical and policy uncertainty are what are presenting the substantial risks to their baseline GDP growth projections. And I

agree with their assessments. I think one of the potential big risks is the United States' trade policy, right, when it comes to their tariff policies, which Donald Trump and his administration are going to review on April 2nd, the kinds of policy, the kind of tariff scheme that they're going to impose on all the U.S. trade partners. The U.S. Treasury Secretary-Biden

Besant just mentioned that they will review the tariff rate. Some countries will see very high tariff rates. Others will see relatively low tariff rates. So there are all these potential sort of uncertainty, right, when it comes to trade fermentation. And so I think that is really affecting the global growth.

So I think, as a matter of fact, this kind of projection really hinges on how much this tariff war is going to go on and how much countries will retaliate. So I think a lot is still really unknown, as a matter of fact, for projection. So, for example, the OECD also shows some simulations. They...

assume that if the U.S. is imposing 10% on all the non-commodity imports into the United States and all other countries would retaliate proportionally, then this is going to reduce the global GDP growth by 0.3% by the third year. And it would also increase the global inflation rate by 0.8%.

four percentage points per year on average over the first three years. So in other words, this is still a quite conservative, I would say, projection, right? Only 10% of increase in tariff rate. The reality could be much worse than that.

So I think now, just because of all these uncertainties, I think that this projection could turn out to be overestimation. So we'll have to wait and see how the policies in the United States are going to really affect the global economy. And as you mentioned, the biggest reason maybe is uncertainty over Trump's tariff or trade policies. So what is this impact on the U.S. consumers and inflation?

Well, I think the U.S. consumers are definitely feeling very jittered these days. When you look at the consumer sentiment sort of survey by both the Michigan University and also by the conference board, they all show a very different

large decline in the consumer confidence in the economy for the economic prospect. And we're also seeing the reduction in the consumer spending in the first two in February in the United States. The real decline in consumer spending was

over, I believe it's over 2%. So again, consumers are feeling very uncertain about the policies, about potential job losses, giving some of these doge cuts of federal employees and also cutting government contracts, cutting government projects. So all of these, I think, weigh on to the consumer sentiments. Now, tariff is definitely another big concern because

If Donald Trump is going to impose tariffs on Mexico and Canada, that would definitely affect a lot of the consumer goods because China, Mexico and Canada account for about 40 percent of the U.S. total imports. And so consumers would see immediately a wide range of their consumer goods, right, including consumer electronics, home appliances, toys and equipment.

products and many of the products will see a jump in price. So I think that inflation pressure is going to be real and that's going to add to all this uncertainty, all these sort of anxiety about how the economy is going to go. And I think that would weigh down on consumer spending. And so that is going to, I think, in a way, harm the economy.

And the OECD said increasing trade restrictions will lead to higher costs for both production and consumption. It remains essential to ensure a well-functioning, rule-based international trading system and to keep markets open. So how do you understand it?

Well, I think this assessment, again, it's sensible, right? Because we know that, you know, these kinds of trade restrictions not only reduces efficiency, but also really disrupt the international supply chain. The global supply chain is a very well-connected, right, system of production. So when you have all these tariffs, it means that, you know, a lot of these imports of intermediate goods are going to see an increase in prices and businesses will have a hard time

to either have to shoulder this cost increase, or they have to try to find alternative suppliers. So that creates a lot of uncertainty, but also disruptions in the global supply chain. So that is going to raise the cost of production. Consumption is, of course, inevitable because the tariff is basically a regressive consumption tax on consumers, and it hurts relatively low-income families the most.

So, yes, trade restrictions are going to increase costs of production and also consumption. Not to mention it really disrupt the global trading system. And that is going to invite retaliations on other countries. So at the end, I think we look back in history, back in the 1930s, when the United States imposed the Smoot-Hawley Act,

to raise the tariff, basically that escalated the global tariff war and that eventually, you know, has reduced the global GDP growth substantially and put the U.S. deep in the Great Depression. So I think, you know, this is a real danger. And I think, you know, the OECD is right to say that we need to try to ensure open system so that countries can, you know, based on market efficiency and based on their actual needs,

to organize the production, to organize the consumption. That was Yan Liang, a professor of economics at Willamette University. Coming up, the Canadian new prime minister has announced a deal with Australia to boost the Arctic radar. This is World Today. We'll be back. China's economic growth is outperforming expectations, but questions remain.

When will the property slump end? Can consumer confidence keep up? And how much will U.S. tariffs bite? Dive in all these and more at this week's Chat Lounge, wherever you listen to podcasts and on CGTN Radio.

This is World Today. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has announced a US$4 billion deal with Australia to develop an Arctic radar system, stressing that Canada must take more responsibility for its defense as U.S. priorities shift. Carney made the announcement during his brief stop in Canadian territory near Greenland, the final leg of his first official trip as prime minister since taking office last week.

Carney has previously described the U.S. under President Donald Trump as a country Canada can no longer trust. He also characterized the radar deal as part of a broader effort to assert Canadian sovereignty over the Arctic. So for more on this, joining us on the line is

Joseph Siracusa, Professor of Global Futures with Curtin University. Thanks for joining us, Professor. Thank you very much. Professor, on his way back home, Carney made a brief stop on Canadian territory near Greenland, where he announced the radar deal and reaffirmed Canada's Arctic sovereignty, a region where Trump had previously expressed interest.

So from a military strategy and a geopolitical perspective, what deeper reasons, in your opinion, might be driving this decision?

Well, the Prime Minister of Canada is going to make it very clear to the President of the United States that Canada is far more self-reliant than Donald Trump gives it credit for. It's simply going to go diversify its sources for protection, or that is for armaments, airplanes, whatever it is. And now it's going to the Australians for radar. Australia has been working on this over-the-horizon radar for decades.

for about 40 years and it's first class equipment. I think it's 6 billion in Australia, 6.5 billion in Australian dollars. And it's going to be used in that part of the Arctic to protect the sea lanes and the approaches to Canada. Six or seven nations lay claims

to the Arctic region. But as you know, nobody owns it. There's a treaty of 59 nations in 1959 that governs the use for the place. But there is still a great deal of strategic competition there. Professor, speaking of strategic moves, during Carney's first trip to Europe,

He mentioned that Canada is looking to reduce its reliance on U.S. for security and exploring alternatives to its $13 billion U.S. dollar deal to purchase 88 U.S. fighter jets. What impact might this have on the geopolitical competition between Canada and the United States?

Could this move strain the U.S.-Canada military alliance, or is it more of a strategic maneuver to gain leverage in negotiations with Washington? Well, it won't so much affect competition in the Arctic because the United States doesn't

see itself competing there. The Canadians are using that radar there to shore up their contribution to NORVAD, which is their commitment to the United States in defense of North America.

This decision to turn its back on America for the next generation of F-35 fighters is a very serious one. The American military industrial complex and the people who make these planes count on this kind of revenue. And I think the Canadians will turn to other sources, maybe French fighters or British fighters. I mean, and more and more, Carney sees himself as part of a

Part of Europe, he is actually. He's part of NATO. He's also part of the great British Commonwealth. So this idea that Trump's picking a fight with Canada does not bode well for major alliances in the West. Then on the topic of Arctic security, Canada's defense minister recently announced plans to establish three new Arctic military hubs,

How do you view this expanding presence in the region? Could it lead to heightened military buildup and competition in the region? Well, yes, it would. Now, these so-called hubs are just military bases. Canada has some of these in Kuwait, Iraq, Germany. They're just forward bases. Americans have about eight of them.

hundred of these. And you know, it brings the money into the northern part of Canada. It makes people feel they're less isolated, but they are military bases. And he sees this as part of Canada's buildup, and he's trying to get the Canadian contribution

military contribution to 2.5% of GDP. So this is part of his way of saying this. But these bases are designed to protect Canadian interests and the approaches to Canadian soil. So these bases have a purpose for the defense minister and for Kearney.

Professor, now turning to trade tensions between the United States and Canada, Carney mentioned that he would have a comprehensive discussion with U.S. President Donald Trump on trade at the appropriate time. Given the ongoing trade war and the complexity surrounding Arctic defense cooperation, what factors might influence the timing of that conversation? That's a very good question. Donald Trump is a

dealing a great deal these days on the phone with, well, President Putin today or yesterday, etc. The idea that the Canadian prime minister will be talking to the president of the United States is ridiculous because in the past, the new prime ministers of Canada always made their first overseas visit Washington. So, you know, the phone call is really sort of a

snub about the primacy of the United States. Now, look, I've said on your show and others that these tariffs, they breed resentment and hatred and it makes diplomacy difficult, makes alliances difficult, makes trade difficult. And, you know, it just poisons the diplomatic and the alliance atmosphere. I mean, this is

this is coming home to roost. I mean, that's why I don't like these tariffs or sanctions, because they have a great deal of adverse effects. Then looking at the bigger picture, the United States has long been a vital trade partner and a security ally for Canada, shaping much of the country's economic and defense landscape. Now that Canada is actively adjusting its strategy, could this

signal a fundamental reshaping of Canada-U.S. relations in the long run? If so, where might we see the most significant changes in the short period? I think if the United States continues to fall out with Canada, I think the first step

sign of the falling out will be the loosening of the ties in NATO. As you know, Canada is one of the NATO allies in the transatlantic alliance. So, you know, there's real no relationship, I mean, a formal diplomatic relationship between the United States and Canada, but they're connected through the NORAD system, the defense system, and they're connected through the NATO system. So I think falling out with Canada would kind of

loosen the ties with NATO. And it would send to other NATO members a very clear message, which has already hit Australia, that the United States has become unreliable. And that is a very dangerous word in the world of diplomacy.

Since Trump took office, Canada has faced a series of tough measures, including tariffs, and the current administration has voiced dissatisfaction with Trump's policies. Amid these strained ties, what key issues would need to be addressed or compromised on for Canada and the United States to rebuild their relationship?

Well, Trump has gone down this tariff road, not just for trade policy or the imbalance. The fact that Americans have a trade imbalance with Canada doesn't mean much. It simply means that the Americans don't save anything. Most of the investment around the world has poured into the United States. These are very deep meanings. They're roots for these imbalances.

Trump has been using the tariffs to put pressure on the Canadians to halt the flow of

fentanyl in the United States, and I think only 1% comes in, and to halt the flow of illegal immigrants or undocumented immigrants. The border with Canada is not just 2,500 miles across. It goes up another 1,000 miles. It's nearly a 5,000-mile border. I mean, the Canadian border is unprotected, and if the Canadians wanted to let immigrants

undocumented people come in, they could let an army come in. Anyway, Trump has been using this to force the Canadians to put more troops on their borders and to interdict this flow of fentanyl. Now, I'm not so sure either one of those things is true, but

I think Trump likes to use this tariff because he doesn't have to consult anybody. You know, it's a decision that he makes in the room with maybe one or two advisers, and it gives him a great deal of clout. The trouble is, is that they're not consistent. As you know, one day he puts a tariff on Canada, and the next day he takes the tariff on

off of automobile parts and something's coming down the road on April 2nd. And of course, the atmospherics between the American people and the Canadian people is getting very chilly. I mean, there's starting to be a great deal of dislike as Canadians remove American products from their stores. And keep in mind, 90 percent of Canadians

live within 100 miles of the American border. It's not like they're dealing with some nation far, far away. I mean, the Canadians are part and parcel of the American landscape. So when you hit them with these tariffs, you're really hitting yourself. Yes, indeed. Thanks, Professor. That was Joseph Siracusa, Professor of Global Futures with Curtin University.

Hello, I am Dr. Digby James Wren, a political analyst and international relations scholar specializing in China area studies. World Today offers unmatched in-depth perspectives on China's politics, economics, business, technology and society. World Today's team of reporters and contributors provides valuable information from all of the world's major economies. I hope you can join me on World Today for the very best insights and news from China, on China, and help to build a better understanding of China's role in the world today.

Two NASA astronauts have returned to Earth after being stuck in space for over nine months. The SpaceX capsule carrying Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams splashed down in the Gulf of Mexico off the Florida coast on Tuesday, ending their prolonged mission. So for more on the story, my colleague Zhao Ying joining us in the studio. Thanks, Zhao. Hi.

After spending nine months in space, the two astronauts are finally back home. Can you describe the moment of their landing and recovery? Sure. It was a dramatic and long-awaited homecoming for them, of course. And after spending an unexpected nine months in orbit, their capsule finally made its fiery descent through Earth's atmosphere. And then parachutes deployed to slow them down, and they splashed down gently into the water.

The recovery team moved fast. The SpaceX ship hosted the capsule out of the water. The astronauts beamed and waved as they were helped out of the hatch, along with their fellow crew members, astronaut Nick Hague and cosmonaut Alexander Gorbunov.

And now a standard procedure after a long mission like this is to help astronauts onto stretchers, not because they're injured, but because their bodies need time to readjust to Earth's gravity. And medics were on hand to check them over, and soon after,

They were wicked off by helicopter to shore headed for Houston's Johnson Space Center for a flu evaluation. So this is a significant moment. And NASA called it a beautiful landing. And you could really feel their relief and excitement all around. Their mission was originally planned to last just eight days, but ended up stretching to nine months. What happened that caused such a major delay?

Yeah, they blasted off on June 5th, 2024 aboard Boeing's Starliner spacecraft for what is supposed to be a quick eight-day test flight because it was the first crewed mission for that capsule. And the goal was to dock at the International Space Station, run some checks and bring them back home. But shortly after launch, the Starliner started leaking helium, five separate leaks in fact, which is critical for pressurizing the fuel lines.

And then as they approached the station, five of its maneuvering thrusters failed and a propellant valve got stuck. And these problems made NASA and Boeing question whether the capsule could safely bring these astronauts back. And for weeks, they ran tests both in space and on the ground with a Starliner replica.

trying to figure out if they could patch it up. And Boeing was actually confident at first they could make it work. But by August, NASA decided it was too risky to put Butch and Sunny back in that capsule for re-entry. So in early September, the Starliner returned to Earth empty, landing safely but leaving the astronauts behind on the ISS.

They had to wait for a new ride home, which ended up being a SpaceX Dragon capsule. It was a tough call, but NASA just chose to prioritize safety over speed, and that is what turned this short trip into a marathon. Nine months is a long time to be orbiting 250 miles above Earth. What were Butch and Suni doing up there during their prolonged stay?

Yes, they were actually quite busy up there. They spent their days working on science experiments like growing tiny algae that could make oxygen or studying how flames behave in space. They also fixed up the station. Sunny even broke a record for the most spacewalk hours by a female astronaut. She stepped outside with Butch in January to repair a telescope and other gear.

And beyond these serious stuff, they also kept life quite fun. Like at Christmas, they wore Santa hats and tossed candy canes in zero gravity, sending holiday cheers back home. And they also exercised two hours a day on special machines to stay strong.

and they even voted in US election from space, ballots sent up and down by email. And with 16 sunrises every day, they had plenty of time to snap photos of Earth. So they were really making the most of their unexpected long haul. Then very briefly, I think to many, we are curious about this rescue effort. How did NASA and SpaceX work together to pull that off?

Well, yes. After the Boeing ride broke down last year, NASA turned to SpaceX Crew-9 mission, and that capsule launched in September with two astronauts, Nick Hague and Alexander Gubanov. And that left two empty seats for Butch and Sunny. And NASA and SpaceX worked together to adjust the plan and make sure the capsule was ready for their job. But still, they had to wait for the next crew, that is Crew-10, to take over at the space station.

The launch was delayed from February to March because a new SpaceX capsule wasn't ready. So they used an older one instead and speeding things up a little bit. And Crew 10 got there on March. And then two days later, here we are. The two astronauts are finally back on Earth. Thanks. That's my colleague Zhao Ying. That's all the time for this edition of Road. Today, I'm Guiana in Beijing. Thank you so much for listening. Bye for now.