Authored by David DeMay via AmericanThinker.com,

Ask most Silicon Valley billionaires what they think about death, and you’ll get some version of a declaration of war. Peter Thiel has funded life-extension research for years and has spoken openly about wanting to “fight death.” Jeff Bezos, Sam Altman, and a growing circle of biotech-backed investors have likewise poured billions into companies pursuing not merely longer life, but the possibility of radically slowing or even ending human aging.

Elon Musk – the wealthiest of them all and arguably the most publicly concerned with humanity’s long-term survival – has consistently argued almost the opposite.

Speaking at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in conversation with Larry Fink, Musk remarked, “There is some benefit to death.”

He warned that dramatically extending human lifespans could lead to “an ossification of society,” leaving institutions increasingly rigid and ideas “stultifying” as the same generation remained in power indefinitely.

His reasoning is straightforward. Most people form their core worldview relatively early in adulthood and rarely change it fundamentally. If those individuals never leave positions of influence, society risks locking one generation’s assumptions permanently into its political, economic, and cultural institutions. In Musk’s view, mortality is not merely a biological limitation; it is one of the mechanisms by which civilizations renew themselves.

What makes his position especially interesting is that it is not rooted in scientific pessimism. During the same discussion, Musk suggested the opposite: Aging is probably a solvable scientific problem. He noted that virtually every tissue in the body appears to age in parallel.

“You’ve never seen someone with an old left arm and a young right arm,” he observed, arguing that such synchronized aging hints at a common biological mechanism. Once that mechanism is understood, he speculated, the solution may appear surprisingly obvious.

The tension is striking. Musk appears to believe that aging is likely to become an engineering problem with an engineering solution. Yet he has shown remarkably little interest in dedicating his own fortune to solving it. His hesitation is philosophical rather than technological: He questions whether dramatically extending individual lifespans would ultimately strengthen or weaken civilization.

That places him in sharp contrast with many of his peers. For much of Silicon Valley, mortality has become the next great engineering challenge—a problem to be solved through biotechnology, artificial intelligence, and unprecedented capital investment. Musk has instead argued that society should be at least as concerned with preserving its capacity for renewal as with extending individual lives.

A second priority reinforces that distinction. Rather than focusing primarily on longevity, Musk has repeatedly argued that declining birth rates pose the more immediate civilizational threat. A society may someday conquer aging entirely, he has suggested, yet still decline if it ceases to produce enough children to replace itself. Extending the lives of existing people cannot compensate indefinitely for a shrinking number of new ones.

Taken together, his views form a coherent hierarchy of priorities. Aging is real and probably solvable, but not necessarily the most urgent problem. Indefinite life extension carries the risk of social stagnation. Declining fertility, by contrast, threatens the long-term continuity of civilization itself.

Whether one agrees with that hierarchy is another question. What is difficult to ignore, however, is that Musk’s own life reflects the priorities he describes. While many technology leaders have invested extraordinary sums in extending the human lifespan, Musk has become the father of fourteen children and has consistently argued that building the next generation matters more than indefinitely prolonging the current one.

That does not prove his family is a deliberate philosophical statement, nor does it reveal his private motivations. But it does reveal a notable alignment between his public arguments and his personal choices. Rather than devoting his fortune primarily to extending his own life, he has devoted a remarkable part of it to creating the generation that will outlive him.

Silicon Valley’s prevailing instinct has been to treat mortality as an engineering problem: extend the individual life for as long as possible. Musk has consistently offered a different answer. He sees death as one of the mechanisms by which societies remain capable of renewal, while viewing falling birth rates as the more immediate threat to humanity’s future. Whether that philosophy ultimately proves correct remains to be seen. What is already clear is that his actions are unusually consistent with his words. In that sense, Musk’s answer to mortality is not another decade of life. It is another child.

Authored by Daniel Lacalle,

Japan’s yen crisis exposes the long‑running failure of the Keynesian strategy that has dominated the country’s economic policy: chronic deficits, exploding public debt, and engineered inflation are now eroding Japan’s purchasing power, competitiveness, and monetary stability.

For decades, many mainstream analysts pointed to Japan as proof that a rich, “monetarily sovereign” country could keep an extremely high public debt without relevant consequences. The argument was simple: as long as the state can issue its currency, it can always print whatever is needed to cover deficits, refinance debt, and support public spending.

In reality, that has meant public debt soaring to around 250% of GDP, one of the highest levels in the developed world, while repeatedly increasing government expenditure and leaving large, persistent deficits. Even the IMF notes that, even after several years of moderate growth, prudence is “key to keep debt‑to‑GDP on a firmly downward path,” admitting that the current level is a structural vulnerability.

Japan’s apparent stability depended on a crucial external factor, the country’s enormous exporting capacity.

As a leading exporter of cars, technology, and capital goods, the country attracted a continuous inflow of US dollars and foreign capital that supported a stable currency and kept inflation low, despite fiscal excess. That protective layer is eroding fast. Headline inflation has edged up from 1.4% in April 2026 to 1.5% in May, while core inflation has held at 1.4%, still below the Bank of Japan’s 2% target but clearly positive after three decades of near‑zero price growth.

A key factor of the Japanese model was its export engine and the “golden goose” of capital inflows.

These two factors allowed the country to live with large debt and deficits without immediately triggering high inflation. However, that mirage is vanishing as external performance falters and inflation, though moderate, bites into real incomes.

Keynesianism did not spur growth or improve Japanese citizens’ lives. It just bloated an unsustainable government machine.

Recent data show that price increases are now broad‑based, not confined to a few categories. In May 2026, overall CPI inflation was 1.5% year-on-year. However, food prices rose 3.5% year-on-year, which is a heavy burden for households. Goods inflation stood at 2.0%, while services inflation was around 1.0%.

Underlying inflationary pressures, particularly in services and wage‑sensitive sectors, are now embedded in the system rather than an isolated energy shock. Meanwhile, real net wages are stagnant or declining. Japanese citizens face an affordability crisis.

The authorities, obsessed for years with the ludicrous “risk of deflation,” consciously tried to push inflation above zero, aiming to erode the real value of the public‑debt stock. They have achieved modest inflation, but at the cost of real wage erosion. Despite headline gains in nominal pay, inflation‑adjusted wages have fallen for four consecutive fiscal years, with a 0.5% decline in real wages in fiscal 2025 alone. Citizens are poorer, while the government is bigger, even as headline macro indicators show stability.

The most visible symptom of this model’s exhaustion is the yen. Despite repeated interventions by the Bank of Japan and a shift towards higher policy rates—the BOJ’s benchmark is now at its highest point since the mid‑1990s—the currency has slid to levels not seen in almost forty years. Each attempt to defend the yen produces a brief rebound, but the broader trend reflects markets’ concern about Japan’s long‑term fiscal and monetary sustainability.

Japan is not going bankrupt in strict terms; it is demolishing its currency, which is equivalent to an implicit default.

No one wants Japan to fail, but the model has delivered nothing in the past decade. The IMF talks about solid output growth, robust domestic demand, and low unemployment. However, domestic demand and GDP are disguised by constantly rising government spending, while low unemployment is a consequence of challenging demographic conditions. Japan’s population is aging and shrinking, and Keynesianism has made it harder for families to grow and have children.

If GDP and domestic demand were really strong, the country would have a strong currency. Instead, the yen weakness reveals investors’ skepticism regarding a model that combines very high debt, structurally positive inflation, and decades of real wage stagnation.

Japan has avoided a formal sovereign default and sudden stop in financing not because the Keynesian model is sound, but because the country still attracts a “gigantic” inflow of foreign capital and investment. Those inflows supply dollars, support asset prices, and help keep the system running despite its internal contradictions. A Bank Of Japan obsessed with raising asset prices by increasing ownership of ETFs shows it is more interested in headline figures than citizens’ cost of living.

On the surface, the wage picture in early 2026 looks encouraging. Average cash earnings grew 3.5% year‑on‑year in April 2026, marking the 52nd consecutive month of nominal wage gains and the fastest pace since late 2024. Base pay was up 3.4%, and nominal wages rose across sectors—from manufacturing and construction to information and communications and finance. Government data show that in March, nominal wages increased about 2.7%, while the consumer inflation rate used to calculate real wages stood at 1.6%, allowing real wages to rise roughly 1% in that month. However, these monthly improvements sit atop a longer‑term pattern where inflation has outpaced wage growth. Over fiscal 2025, real wages fell 0.5% and the small bounce may be short-lived as estimates show another negative real wage year for 2026. Japan’s real wages have stagnated for nearly 30 years since peaking in 1997. The inflation that policymakers wanted to generate is ultimately eroding the living standards of the citizens whose demand is supposed to sustain growth.

Against this backdrop, calls to raise taxes further to stabilize the public accounts risk pushing the system into another vicious circle. Higher taxation would likely weaken investment and capital inflows, undermine competitiveness, and intensify pressure on households. Immigration, often proposed as a demographic fix, may raise aggregate GDP but also increase fiscal strain when public finances are already deeply imbalanced, as seen in other advanced economies.

Japan’s situation is not a sudden accident; it is the culmination of policies that have been failing for decades. The country’s wealth, export capacity, and capital inflows allowed it to live with large imbalances for a long time. The difference today is that the traditional strengths have weakened, and the latest data make the structural problems clearer.

Japan shows the structural failure of a policy approach that “always seeks to expand public imbalances at the expense of citizens.” The Keynesian experiment in Japan aimed to prove that government is a key engine of growth but instead produced long‑term stagnation, high debt, and an erosion of real incomes. The yen’s weakness is simply the symptom of a larger disease: statism. And some want to repeat it in your country.

In another sign of war fatigue in the West, and perhaps amid greater realization that ‘punishing’ the Russian people is having no real effect on the course of the Ukraine war, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has finally eased restrictions on Russian athletes ahead of the 2028 Games in Los Angeles.

“The International Olympic Committee (IOC) Executive Board (EB) has provisionally lifted the suspension of the Russian Olympic Committee (ROC) that had been in effect since 12 October 2023,” the Olympic body stated Tuesday.

“The decision was taken following a thorough analysis by the IOC’s Legal Affairs Commission, considering that the ROC no longer includes as its members any regional sports organizations in territories falling under the jurisdiction of the National Olympic Committee (NOC) of Ukraine,” it continued.

Still, it sought to assure ‘solidarity’ with Ukraine, stating additionally: “The IOC stands in solidarity with the Olympic community of Ukraine, which the Olympic movement has supported since the beginning of the war, and will continue to do so.”

The past several yeas has seen Russian and Belarusian athletes compete only under ‘neutral’ status. The new policy change has yet to indicate whether Russia will be able to display its flag or colors, or play its anthem – but presumably so.

Russian athletes can now compete as long as they “meet relevant anti-doping requirements,” the IOC made clear in announcing the status change.

IOC President Kirsty Coventry has started speaking some sense:

“We don’t want to hold athletes accountable for the actions of their government.”

“We made it clear that all athletes had the possibility to compete at the Olympic Games. This is what this decision speaks to. It allows Russian athletes to take part in sports competitions. We thought it was really important for athletes to have that possibility,” Coventry said.

Some pundits have for years been pointing out a glaring double standard: Israel’s invasion of Gaza has by any estimate resulted in far more civilian deaths than the Ukraine war, yet the IOC has not considered banning Israeli athletes.

George W. Bush’s 2003 invasion of Iraq resulted in – according to various estimates – between 500,000 and one million Iraqi civilian deaths. What’s more is that it was only within years later the entire case the Neocons made for the invasion was proven an absolute fraudulent lie. Where were the IOC punitive actions against American athletes? It wasn’t even a thought.

The IOC has lifted the suspension of the Russian Olympic Committee ahead of 2028 Olympic qualification events

Also, “The IOC will take a decision in relation to the display of the Russian flag, anthem, colours or any identifications [for the Olympics] at the appropriate time.” pic.twitter.com/oQWS2AdInB

— Jackie Wong (@rockerskating) July 7, 2026

Similarly, Washington’s bombing and invasion of Afghanistan turned into a more than two-decade long quagmire full of civilian death and destruction for entire towns and villages. And not a peep from the IOC or any Olympic officials.

The clear pattern has been that only those enemies and rivals of the Western allies get banned from the games. 

Summary: 

• US strikes on Iran announced, as ‘heavy costs’ for earlier targeting of multiple commercial vessels
• Oil rises as Treasury revokes June 21 Iran oil waiver
• Hormuz Threat Level Raised To “Severe” 
• Three maritime incidents reported on Hormuz in last 24 hours 
• Another unidentified vessel hit by a Drone
• IRGC forces hit a Saudi Tanker 
• IRGC forces hit a Qatari LNG tanker

*  *  *

US Launches New Iran Strikes, In First Since Ayatollah’s Funeral

The US military has announced it has commenced fresh strikes against Iran in the wake of projectiles striking multiple international tankers in the Strait of Hormuz earlier on Tuesday. US Central Command (CENTCOM) in a public X post says its “forces have begun launching a series of powerful strikes against Iran to impose heavy costs for targeting and attacking commercial shipping crewed by innocent civilians in an international waterway.”

“The U.S. strikes are in response to Iranian attacks on three commercial vessels that were transiting the Strait of Hormuz. Iran’s demonstrated aggression was unwarranted, dangerous, and a clear violation of the ceasefire,” it added. These will mark the first US strikes against the Islamic Republic since last Friday’s start of week-long funeral ceremonies for the slain Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Trump had indicated a pause in both strikes and diplomacy was on in order for the burial to take place. The new US military escalation began around or just after midnight Tehran time.

Just before the start of the fresh Pentagon action, Mohsen Rezaei, adviser to Iran’s Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, said on Iranian state TV that American attempts to forge an alternative route in the Strait of Hormuz will lead to the failure of negotiations between the two states.

⁠”It ⁠is quite clear that the ⁠United States will lead the ⁠negotiations with Iran to failure,” Rezaei said. He also demanded the “the withdrawal of the United States from the region” – which can ensure lasting peace, he asserted. And now there could be a return to full war in Lebanon as well. Per breaking newswires:

• Israeli fighter jets carried out attacks in Barachit and Beit Yahoun in southern Lebanon
• US Strikes Targeted Air Defense Systems, Drone Sites: Axios
• Several explosions have been heard near Sirik and Qeshm in southern Iran, according to Iran’s Fars news agency: Al Jazeera

🚨A U.S. official told me the targets included Iranian air defense systems, coastal surveillance systems, surface-to-air missiles, anti-ship cruise missile sites, drone launch sites and port facilities https://t.co/II5TyO3seP

— Barak Ravid (@BarakRavid) July 7, 2026

As expected, Tehran has condemned the new attacks as a severe US violation of the MoU. Early reports suggest bombing raids on strategically situated small Iranian islands just off the Strait of Hormuz:

According to state TV, six explosions have been heard on the island of Qeshm which is the largest island in the vicinity of the Strait of Hormuz, with very geostrategic significance when it comes to Iran’s control and authority over the Strait of Hormuz.

The state TV also says that at least seven explosions have been heard in the areas close to Sirik Port which is very important because it oversees the Strait of Hormuz, another strategic point from which Iran imposes its control and authority over the Strait of Hormuz.

Treasury Revokes Iran Oil Waiver 

In a surprise move on Tuesday, the Trump admin revoked a license allowing Iran to sell oil on the open market, eliminating the primary economic benefit for Tehran as part of the interim peace deal/MOU with the US and threatening to unravel the agreement after days of skirmishes in the Strait of Hormuz. 

The Treasury Department said the June 21 license granted to Iran after several months of war would no longer apply, an announcement that came hours after the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps fired missiles and drones at ships crossing the Strait of Hormuz. The Treasury allowed for a grace period until July 17 for transactions already authorized under the license.

The price of oil rose sharply after the news, even as President Trump has boasted that his efforts to wind down the war with Iran have lowered the price of gas and other products. The price of a barrel of Brent Crude oil was almost $76.00 after the announcement, up about 5% on Monday’s closing price.

As the WSJ notes, since signing the MOU with Iran last month, which reopened the strait and ended the U.S. blockade on Iran, the US said it would only provide Tehran with financial incentives for abiding by the agreement. Allowing Iran to sell oil and to repatriate dollar-denominated revenue into the Iranian banking system was the most important incentive in convincing Tehran to enter a 60-day diplomatic process aimed at ultimately dismantling its nuclear program. 

The waiver was supposed to be in place for two months and could then have been extended. However, a US official told the WSJ that Iran’s actions in the strait were considered unacceptable and deserved a stern response. The U.S. would continue to negotiate with Iran toward a final agreement, the official said and Bloomberg added that “US official says negotiators continue to work in good faith towards a final and Iran’s actions in the Strait were wholly unacceptable to the US and will be met with consequences.” An initial salvo perhaps, preparing for more direct action to come?

According to the Journal, US officials were surprised by Iran’s attacks on commercial ships amid ongoing negotiations and the funeral of the former supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The Trump administration has sought to set up a backchannel between the U.S. military and the IRGC, a powerful military and political force in Iran, but the IRGC has been slow to engage. 

The US has continued to coordinate with commercial vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz using a route that it cleared near the coast of Oman. Over the weekend, the IRGC warned ships that it was prepared to target them if they used the route promoted by the US and Oman. Early Tuesday, Iran fired antiship cruise missiles and one-way attack drones at vessels seeking to cross the southern route. Three ships were struck, including an LNG tanker, and the US downed some of drones. 

Meanwhile, American warships remain on standby to restart the blockade of Iranian ports should Trump choose to reimpose it.

In summary, the two most critical elements of the interim deal are now under threat: the oil sanctions relief and safe passage for vessels through the Strait of Hormuz. In effect, the entire ceasefire is now in question. 

Other critical elements of the interim deal included the lifting of the US blockade on Iranian ports and commerce, as well as an agreement by Tehran to maintain “the status quo” on its nuclear program and for the U.S. to do likewise on sanctions against Iran. Tehran was also negotiating for the release of some of its frozen funds trapped by U.S. sanctions.

Perhaps worst of all, people close to the talks say there has been no substantive progress made yet by the U.S. and Iranian teams on a final nuclear agreement, with technical talks on the issue barely commencing.

Nate Swanson, former National Security Council director for Iran and currently at the Atlantic Council, said the Treasury Department’s action establishes a direct link between the reopening of the strait and the oil sanctions waiver. For the interim deal to be stabilized, Washington and Tehran would have to work through issues left open by the interim deal, he said.

“Iran wants money and the U.S. wants the free flow of energy. The MoU is too volatile to survive without some follow-on deal as neither side is getting what they want with the current status quo,” he said.

One wonders if the decision means Washington has reverted to in effect giving the US Navy carte blanche to seize Iranian tankers, also as the Gulf region awaits likely American retaliation for the earlier Tuesday Iranian attacks (see below) on several international vessels in the Strait of Hormuz.

As a reminder, exactly a week ago we wrote the following: “Iran was euphoric when as part of the Trump MOU, it got permission to flood the world with its oil after Trump effectively eliminate sanctions that had been in place for multiple decades. However, it has quickly run into another, potentially far bigger problem: as the armada of Iranian oil tankers exits the Persian Gulf, it is now struggling to find buyers before the expiry of a 60-day window granted by Washington.”

* * * 

Hormuz Threat Level Raised To “Severe” 

Qatari LNG Tanker Hit By Iranian Missile In Hormuz Chokepoint

A fully loaded Qatari LNG tanker was struck by a projectile near the Omani coast while exiting the Strait of Hormuz, raising fresh concerns that disruptions across the key energy maritime chokepoint could persist longer than traders had expected. Brent crude rose more than 1% to $72.76 a barrel as traders reassessed the war-risk premium in the Gulf area.

The Al Rekayyat, owned by Qatar’s state shipping company Nakilat, was struck early Tuesday about 8 nautical miles east of Limah, Oman, according to Bloomberg, which cited people familiar with the matter and an alert from EOS Risk Group.

EOS said the maritime incident involved either an Iranian suicide drone or a missile strike that resulted in a fire on the Al Rekayyat. No casualties were reported.

Al Rekayyat was fully loaded at Qatar’s Ras Laffan export terminal, making it the first Qatari LNG carrier targeted since the US-Iran conflict began in late February. The tanker appeared to be transiting part of the Hormuz chokepoint with its transponder off, indicating it was not on an Iranian-approved shipping route.

Following the attack, another Qatari-loaded LNG carrier, Al Areesh, made an abrupt U-turn before entering the strait and began circling, Bloomberg ship tracking data showed. Other tankers continued to sail through the highly contested chokepoint, including oil tankers and LPG carriers, using both Iran-approved and US-managed routes.

Later today, President Trump heads to a NATO summit in Ankara, where the Iran conflict is expected to be the center of discussion among world leaders.

US-Iran talks remain suspended while Tehran holds funeral ceremonies for late Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Qatar has said negotiations will resume after the ceremonies.

UBS analyst Justinus Steinhorst commented on market reaction:

Energy {UBXEENER} is among the best sectors on Tuesday after an LNG tanker was hit at Hormuz, rekindling fears around longer term disruption. Progress to normalise flows through strait appears to be stalling slightly with crossings still well below pre-conflict levels.

UBS analyst Aditi Samajpati noted:

Oil prices may remain under pressure in the near term as additional barrels from previously stranded ships in the Strait of Hormuz reach the market. UBS Wealth Management CIO however believes the current price level overestimates how quickly traffic through the waterway will normalize as it takes time for shipping confidence to be fully restored and for tankers to return to the Persian Gulf to load oil for export. The Strait is now accommodating fewer ships than before the conflict began, and the recovery of shut-in production is likely to be slower than expected, CIO says, adding that broad commodity exposure continues to offer diversification benefits in a portfolio.

Vessel flows on the Hormuz chokepoint (transponders on) remain elevated but well below pre-war levels. This may only suggest the normalization process will take longer than expected.

Kpler analyst Muyu Xu said:

The continued use of different shipping lanes suggests that traffic through the strait remains operational, but is fragmented as shipowners adopt different routing strategies based on their individual risk assessments.

Latest Iran and Hormuz headlines (courtesy of Bloomberg):

Strait of Hormuz Attacks

• Iran reportedly fired at least two missiles at commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz on Monday night, with both vessels suffering significant damage but no casualties

• A Qatari LNG carrier, Al Rekayyat, was struck by a projectile near the Omani coast on Tuesday morning as it exited the Strait of Hormuz

• Another loaded LNG tanker, Al Areesh, appears to have U-turned in the Persian Gulf on Tuesday following the strikes

• The attacks are testing a late-June US-Iran deal intended to halt attacks in the waterway as the two sides work toward a peace agreement

Diplomatic Developments

• Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned on Tuesday that negotiations on a final deal will not commence if threats continue, referencing a memorandum of understanding with the US

• Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian will travel to Iraq on Tuesday to attend funeral processions for former Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, scheduled for Wednesday in Najaf and Karbala

Market Impact

• European natural gas prices surged as much as 6% on Tuesday, the most in a month, following the attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz

• Oil prices climbed on Tuesday, with Brent trading near $73 a barrel, as the attacks highlighted continued risks to vessels in the critical waterway

• Gold fell for a second day on Tuesday, dropping as much as 1.2% to below $4,120 an ounce, as the Hormuz attacks rekindled inflation concerns

• France lowered its 2026 GDP growth forecast to 0.7% from 0.9%, citing the Middle East conflict as a factor holding back output

Oil Trade Developments

• India’s state-run refiners are in talks with traders marketing Iranian crude and preparing to buy barrels if the US extends waivers beyond August or eases restrictions

• Two supertankers hauling Saudi crude are heading to the US for the first time since February, following the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz

• Russia’s Urals crude price averaged $41.66 a barrel at western ports in early July, falling to pre-Iran war levels and less than half the level during the height of oil market turmoil in April

Via The Cradle

The Chinese navy on Monday test-launched a strategic missile from a nuclear submarine in the Pacific Ocean in the framework of its annual military exercises.

“At 12.01pm on July 6, a strategic nuclear submarine of China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy successfully launched a… strategic missile carrying a training simulation warhead into the relevant high seas of the Pacific Ocean,” spokesperson Wang Xuemeng said in a statement posted on WeChat.

“This missile test launch is a routine arrangement of China’s annual military training, and relevant countries were informed in advance,” Wang stated, adding that the missile “accurately” landed in the designated area.

China’s official Xinhua News Agency said that the test was a “routine arrangement” within the framework of China’s annual military exercises.

Papua New Guinea’s foreign minister and a New Zealand government source told AFP that China was preparing to test-fire a nuclear-capable ballistic missile.

“Yes, China has briefed me. I was personally called by the Chinese ambassador,” Papua New Guinea Foreign Minister Justin Tkatchenko stated.

After Japan was notified, it strongly urged China to reconsider moving ahead with the test launch.

“We strongly requested a reconsideration of this test launch of the ballistic missile to ensure that it does not pose a threat to Japan’s security, particularly by passing through its airspace,” according to a joint statement issued before the launch by Japan’s ministries of defense and foreign affairs.

The test launch came as China and Russia officially began their annual “Joint Sea-2026” naval exercises on Monday. The exercises are scheduled from 6 to 13 July and are taking place in the waters and airspace off the eastern Chinese port city of Qingdao.

The Chinese People’s Liberation Army (#PLA) Navy’s test launch of a strategic missile by a submarine was a routine military training exercise. It was not targeted at any specific country or target. China notified relevant countries in advance, which is in line with international… pic.twitter.com/Jo7u9ti5P5

— Global Times (@globaltimesnews) July 6, 2026

The bilateral maneuvers aim to address regional security challenges and elevate military cooperation between Beijing and Moscow.

Russian state media reported that a cruiser, a corvette, a diesel-electric submarine, and a rescue vessel from Russia’s Pacific Fleet will participate in the drills. China’s Northern Theater Command said that two destroyers, a frigate, a submarine, a supply ship, and a rescue vessel will participate.

During a visit to Beijing in May, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that Chinese and Russian military and economic cooperation “demonstrate strong momentum.”

Chinese President Xi Jinping praised the strong relationship between Beijing and Moscow.

China and Russia on Monday launched the “Joint Sea-2026” exercise at a military port in Qingdao in east China’s Shandong Province. #XinhuaNews pic.twitter.com/l6t3PNk3iD

— China Xinhua News (@XHNews) July 6, 2026

“We have been able to continuously deepen our political mutual trust and strategic coordination with a resilience that remains unyielding despite trials and tribulations,” Xi said.

Both leaders warned against a global return to the “law of the jungle,” referring to the unprovoked US-Israeli war on Iran.

Authored by Eric Utter via AmericanThinker.com,

The View’s preternaturally ignorant and repulsive Sunny Hostin recently stated:

There are times when I walk into a community and I see American flags all over the community and I suddenly feel unsafe because there’s a section of this country that has coopted the American flag and they equate being an American or an American flag with white supremacy and that should never be the symbol of white supremacy, but they have weaponized [it].

No, Sunny, you have equated the American flag with white supremacy, and you have weaponized it to fit your false narrative. 

You have attempted to demean it, cheapen it, demonize it … and everyone who fought and died for it. All for cheap praise from morons and Marxists.

I’m guessing Sunny would feel far less safe if she were surrounded by a plethora of North Korean flags, Iranian flags, Russian flags, or perhaps even Antifa flags. If not, she’s even dumber than she appears, which would be truly miraculous.

I feel a bit uneasy, a tad concerned, when I am amongst a bunch of Palestinian flags, as I was at my daughter’s college graduation. Nor do I feel comfortable when mobs of misfits are waving the LGBTQ flag or trans flag in my face. The Satanic Flag/Baphomet Church of Satan flag gives me the creeps. Any communist flag makes me sick to my stomach.

Conversely, when I am surrounded by Old Glory, I get a sense of place, belonging, and peace. I know that the folks flying them likely recognize and appreciate freedom, history, sacrifice, and the unalienable rights granted to us by our Creator. How could any flag make one feel better than that?

So, “Sunny,” how do you think the American flag made slaves feel during the Civil War? Guessing the Union banner gave them hope and courage. (Say, didn’t one or more of Sunny’s ancestors own and trade slaves?)

The American flag has given more hope to more people around the world than any other.

That is inarguable. It has made more people feel “safe” and protected than any other. Perhaps if Sunny had been in France when American and allied troops liberated it, she would have known this. Maybe if she had been in Ohrdruf, Dachau, or Buchenwald when American troops liberated those still alive in these Nazi concentration camps, she would feel a bit differently.

The stupefying ignorance of the chattering class is almost impossible to comprehend.

It is akin to trying to rationally process the size of the universe. Worse yet, this ignorance is now paired with sheer, unadulterated evil.

Those who hate America, capitalism, entrepreneurship, excellence, decency, the Judeo-Christian work ethic, Christianity, the Founders, limited government, the rule of law, and the concept of unalienable rights granted by our Creator — among other aspects of a successfully functioning democratic republic — actually despise “democracy,” liberty, tolerance, inclusion, and empathy.

Conversely, they worship themselves, and their own hatred of success and competence. And their desire to destroy all that has come before them. In their unique and misplaced attempt to trash history and elevate themselves to deity status, they reveal themselves to be some of the most contemptible and pathetic folks ever to trod the Earth.

Up until now, the politicization of AI models generally ran in one direction with US “frontier” LLM providers such as Anthropic and ChatGPT complaining consistently that Chinese open-sourced models were “distilling” (i.e. reverse-engineering) their products. And whether true or not, China has certainly been able to catch up dramatically to the US, with China’s latest open-model, GLM 5.2, viewed as just barely behind the latest comparable US offerings, while the average gap between US and Chinese models has shrunk to almost nothing.

As complaints on both sides have become more vocal (amid occasional bans of the latest Anthropic model by the White House admin), last week we reported that for the first time, China’s tech giant Alibaba banned employees from using Anthropic’s Claude ‌Code at work after the tool drew scrutiny for features that can help identify China-linked users, Reuters reported.

Fast forward to today when the Reuters reported that in the latest escalation, Beijing is preparing to fully flip the script on the US tech sector as Chinese authorities have held meetings with top tech firms over the past month about potentially restricting overseas access to China’s most advanced AI models, including those yet to be released. 

The talks follow a number of steps by Beijing to keep homegrown ‌AI within the country and underscore how China, like the US, is now treating cutting-edge artificial intelligence as a critical national asset that needs controls. Companies present at the talks included ‌tech giants Alibaba and ByteDance as well as startup Z.ai, creator of the GLM-5.2 mode, said Reuters’ sources. 

Since the emergence of DeepSeek’s R1 model last year, Chinese AI models have made massive ​inroads globally thanks to their low costs and increasing capabilities. Any decision by Beijing to limit access to those products could ripple across AI markets as costs for many businesses would likely increase. It would be a boon to AI supplier stocks  which have plunged in recent days as a result of fears that US users of LLMs may gravitate to much cheaper, if just as capable, Chinese alternatives leading to huge revenue declines at US frontier companies. 

At the meetings, led by China’s Ministry of Commerce, participants discussed putting limits on the most advanced AI models, both closed-source and more open versions, according to two of the sources.

Officials talked about making any leak or theft of proprietary AI technology an offense under China’s stringent national security law. The officials also raised the possibility of implementing new measures to restrict who ‌can fund domestic AI startups, the source added.

The scope of the ⁠potential restrictions is still being discussed, two sources said, adding that they may only apply to future models. It was not immediately clear when or even if they would come into force.

All three leading Chinese AI companies – Alibaba, ByteDance and Z.ai – have a range of AI models, some closed-source while others are open-weight, meaning users can download, run and customise the underlying systems. Alibaba’s Qwen and ByteDance’s Doubao are two of the most widely used AI models in China. Z.ai has recently set Silicon Valley abuzz as the capabilities of its ​GLM-5.2 ​model come close to leading U.S. offerings but at a fraction of the cost. 

Trump’s administration has also been deeply concerned about national security ‌implications of AI, in particular the potential for American AI products to be misused by military intelligence in China, Russia and other countries of concern. In June, it ordered that foreign nationals not have access to Anthropic’s most advanced Fable and Mythos models, which prompted the company to disable the models for all users globally as nationality could not be verified in real time.

Export controls for Fable, which is designed for the general public, have since been lifted after new safeguards were put in place. But Mythos, designed for cybersecurity professionals, is still only available to some “trusted” U.S. organizations.

Some US AI experts have also said the US needs to regulate the use of Chinese AI models. According to two of the sources, Chinese authorities are deeply worried about the ‌potential for Mythos to exploit software vulnerabilities and that Washington might deploy the model against Chinese interests.

That echoes ​concerns publicly voiced by state media and Zhou Hongyi, founder of cybersecurity firm 360, a major vendor to government ​and enterprise clients, who has said China needs to develop its own Mythos.

Amid the rising techno-nationalism, China has implemented numerous measures to protect homegrown AI this year. In April, the country’s state planner ordered Meta to unwind its $2 billion acquisition of Chinese-founded AI startup Manus. In ‌early June, authorities issued sweeping new rules, tightening control of overseas deals ​that involve Chinese investors, technology, data and national security.

China ​had also launched investigations this year into Manus and other local AI startups that had moved abroad, seeking to establish whether they have broken export control laws, according to two of the sources and a third person.

In its report, Reuters says that it was not able to learn how any potential new restrictions on overseas access to Chinese ​AI models might work. But some hints might be gleaned from a May ‌roundtable of Chinese legal experts on regulations governing open-source AI.

According to a summary of the discussions published in an official Supreme People’s Court journal, participants proposed a ​tiered system: basic open-source tools subject to a simple filing, more advanced technologies facing security reviews, and the most sensitive frontier models barred from public release or restricted ​to domestic use. 

If indeed China is about to start its own AI “firewall”, the question is what happens then? Recall, in blowback to the short-lived tokenmaxxing idiocy, a growing number of American enterprises are quietly gravitating toward cheaper Chinese models.

But if China itself limits access to US clients, does this mean that the balance of power shifts back to US LLMs which will then become the only available AI vendors to US corporations. If so, is Beijing making a big mistake depriving its nascent AI ecosystem of US client revenues, and instead allowing US models – which recently found themselves on the defensive in response to much cheaper Chinese alternative – to take an even bigger lead for round 2?