Dialogue

For the first time in nearly a decade, a senior U.S. delegation has visited Havana—reviving direct contact between two long-time adversaries at a moment of deep crisis for Cuba. The island is grappling with widespread power outages, fuel shortages, and a contracting economy, amid the long-standing U.S. embargo and its recent tightening grip on Cuba's energy lifeline. What is driving this renewed engagement? Is it the start of a breakthrough—or simply a different form of pressure? And as tensions rise, is Washington going to launch another unprovoked war on a sovereign nation?

Japan has approved a sweeping legal overhaul, lifting a decades-old ban on exporting lethal weapons. The move comes as Tokyo accelerates its military buildup, with changes that many see as eroding the constraints of its postwar pacifist constitution and raising concerns about the regional security order in Asia. Meanwhile, 126 Japanese lawmakers have visited the Yasukuni Shrine, which honors Class-A war criminals - another development that has drawn strong reactions from neighboring countries. What’s driving Japan’s rapid military shift? Why are its neighbors and other Asian nations increasingly concerned about Japan becoming a more assertive military power? And what could this mean for stability in the Asia-Pacific?

With the two-week ceasefire about to expire, all eyes are on whether the U.S. and Iran will return to the negotiating table—or drift further apart. Washington has announced a team led by Vice President JD Vance, but Tehran has yet to confirm its participation, and no U.S. delegation has departed. President Donald Trump has said the ceasefire will end "Wednesday evening, Washington time." At the same time, Iran is calling for the release of a cargo vessel seized by the U.S. Navy, along with its sailors, crew, and their families. Where does diplomacy stand now? Are both sides still preparing to talk—or bracing for the ceasefire to collapse? With pressure mounting on all fronts, are we heading toward a last-minute breakthrough—or a return to open conflict?

Beijing has hosted a remarkable series of high-level visitors from Thailand, Spain, the UAE, Vietnam and Russia. These visits come as global energy shock is intensifying, geopolitical tensions remain high, supply chains are under strain, and many countries are searching for more stable partners and broader diplomatic options. What do these visits reveal about China’s role in an increasingly unsettled world? Are countries simply responding to immediate crises, or are they repositioning themselves for a deeper, longer-term shift in the global order?

The International Monetary Fund has downgraded its global growth outlook, warning that the U.S. and Israeli war on Iran threatens to hike inflation with the possibility of a global recession. For many developing economies, especially across the Global South, the situation is even more urgent with higher energy costs, weaker currencies, and less room to respond to the crisis. How deep is the economic fallout from the conflict? Are we looking at a temporary shock or the beginning of a more structural shift in the global economy? And what does that mean to our daily lives?

The Chinese mainland has unveiled a new package of 10 measures to boost cross-Strait exchange, such as expanding direct flights, allowing more Taiwan TV dramas into the mainland market, and facilitating the sale of agricultural products from Taiwan. These policies were announced immediately after a high-level visit to the mainland by Kuomintang Chair Cheng Li-wun, the first such engagement in a decade. What do these 10 policies really aim to achieve? Why now? Could this mark a turning point in cross-Strait relations, or simply a limited step forward?

For the first time in 10 years, leaders of the Communist Party of China and the Chinese Kuomintang Party, or KMT, have met in Beijing. Xi Jinping, general secretary of the CPC Central Committee, said the meeting is of great significance for developing relations between the two parties and across the Taiwan Strait. Cheng Li-wun, Chairwoman of the KMT, presented the dialogue as a historical responsibility to avoid war and to ensure cross-Strait peace. So what's behind the historical meeting between the two parties? How will it contribute to peace and stability in the region? And what does this visit really signal - for cross-Strait relations, for Taiwan's internal politics, and for the future of exchanges across the Strait?

Japan has approved its largest-ever budget for 2026, with defense spending surpassing 60 billion U.S. dollars and reaching the 2% of GDP threshold ahead of schedule. Tokyo has revised its key security policies, and is moving to lift long-standing restrictions on lethal weapons exports. Given Japan's history, such shifts are closely watched. What is the long-term objective behind Japan's evolving military strategy? Has it departed from its postwar commitment to a purely defensive posture? And could these changes signal a more assertive – and potentially destabilizing – role in regional security?

Just hours before a U.S. deadline for major strikes on Iran’s civilian infrastructure, Washington and Tehran have agreed to a two-week ceasefire brokered by Pakistan. Under the deal, Iran will reopen the Strait of Hormuz, while the U.S. and Israel will suspend military operations. Both sides will halt attacks for two weeks as negotiations move forward. U.S. President Trump has described the move as a step toward a broader agreement, while Iran insists it is only a temporary pause—not the end of the conflict. What more do we know about this ceasefire? What are the bottom lines for each side? And can this two-week window pave the way for lasting peace, or is it merely a tactical pause before a wider war?

A new deadline is fast approaching in the Iran war as U.S. President Donald Trump warns Tehran it must reopen the Strait of Hormuz by April 7 at 8 pm Washington time or face sweeping military strikes. At the same time, Tehran has delivered a 10-point response to an earlier proposal signaling little willingness for a temporary ceasefire and instead calling for a broader, more comprehensive deal to end the war. What makes this ultimatum different? How should we understand the U.S. threats against civilian infrastructure in Iran? Are we heading toward a breakthrough or a dangerous turning point?