Now, one commodity is almost single-handedly keeping the trade relationship afloat: iron ore.Australia is the world's largest producer of iron ore, mining more than 910 million metric tonnes in the 2019-2020 financial year, according to the Australian government, almost twice as much as its nearest competitor Brazil.Iron ore is a vital component in the production of steel, and with China embarking on a $500 billion infrastructure spending spree to help the economy recover from the pandemic, Beijing's need for it has never been greater.Diplomatic relations between Australia and China fell into a deep chill one year ago, after Prime Minister Scott Morrison called for an independent investigation into the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic which threatened to challenge Beijing's narrative of the viral outbreak.The Chinese government said Morrison's request was "political manipulation," and since then Australian exports to China have faced growing barriers to entry. Overall Chinese investment in Australia plunged 62% in 2020.But experts said that unlike wine and coal, it would be tough for China to find new sources of iron ore any time soon. That means Australia's largest source of trade revenue may be secure."Australia is the largest iron ore producer in the world and on the other hand China is the largest steel producer in the world," said Heiwai Tan, professor of economics at Hong Kong University Business School. "It isn't that easy for them to get into a new round of trade wars over this particular product."The mining boomFor more than two decades, China and Australia have helped rapidly grow each others' economies through a soaring trade in raw resources, especially iron ore and coal.In 2000, at the beginning of China's economic boom, Australian exports to the country were just over 6 billion Australian dollars ($3.6 billion). Fifteen years later, China is Australia's largest trading partner by far in terms of exports and total value of trade -- overtaking Japan, the US, South Korea and New Zealand -- with exports of almost 92 billion Australian dollars ($74 billion).Some economists claim the mining boom in Australia helped the country avoid recession during the global financial crisis in 2008.The trade has remained strong over the years, despite rising political tensions between Beijing and Canberra — including new legislation designed to limit foreign interference, introduced by Australia in 2017.By 2019, almost two-thirds of China's iron ore came from Australia, more than it imported from Brazil, South Africa and India combined, according to the Observatory of Economic Complexity.At the same time, iron ore made up almost a quarter of Australia's entire exports in 2019, 81.7% of which went to China.The lack of diversity in Australia's exports leaves it vulnerable to any major impact on its main sources of revenue, experts said. And while there could be other markets for the country's iron ore, they might take time to develop."China's making up around four-fifths of Australian iron ore exports, so what that tells me is we don't have too many other destinations that we do business with in a big way," said Sean Langcake, principal economist at BIS Oxford Economics in Sydney.But economists said while Australia may eventually locate new buyers for its iron ore, it would be much more difficult for China to find new sources of iron ore to power its economy.Alternate sourcesExperts said Australia's iron ore has two main advantages for Chinese buyers: it is high quality and reliable.Australia produces a higher amount of hematite iron ore than any other country, which contains a larger quantity of usable iron than itabirite or magnetite. According to lobbying group the Minerals Council of Australia, hematite usually contains more than 50% iron compared to as low as 16% in magnetite.Economist Langcake said it was easier and cheaper to process ore with a higher iron content, making it more attractive to steel producers.In a report released in February 2021, the Minerals Council estimated that Australia has more than three times as much magnetite resources as its nearest competitors Brazil and India. China is believed to have none."With China still experiencing significant growth and new frontiers expanding in South and East Asia, Australia's standing as a low-cost, reliable supplier of quality iron ore puts it in a strong position to continue as a provider of choice for global steel makers," Minerals Council chief executive officer Tania Constable said in a statement.At the same time, experts said Australia was a regular and reliable supplier of iron ore to China, partly due to its stable political system and economic environment.A report from the United States Geological Survey in 2017 found that while Brazil and India's iron ore production has risen and fallen over time, Australia's has reliably grown every year from 2000 to 2015.While Brazil seems like it would be a natural alternate source for China's iron ore, its production has been damaged over the past decade due to a series of disasters which have disrupted major mines.In 2015, mining company Samarco had to pay $6.2 billion to the Brazilian government after a dam collapsed at one of its sites, burying a village and killing 19 people. Four years later, another dam burst at an iron ore mine in southeast Brazil, killing 270 people when it flooded the workers' cafeteria and dozens of homes under a wave of toxic sludge.Shane Oliver, chief economist at AMP Capital in Australia, said Brazil's poor handling of the coronavirus pandemic in 2020 and 2021 has also set back production, while Australia had mostly brought the disease under control."It is virtually impossible for China to replace Australian iron ore in the short term," Oliver said. "They'd still have a short fall ... It took a long time for Australia to build up so it will take a long time for other countries to do [the same]."'Economic losses and political gain'Even the valuable trade hasn't been able stop calls from both countries to diversify their iron ore business.In March, an Australian parliamentary committee released a report calling on the government to prioritize finding "opportunities for Australia to diversify its export markets.""India, Vietnam and Indonesia, in particular, present valuable opportunities for Australian businesses. As such, ensuring access to these markets should continue to be a priority for the Australian Government," the report said.Over the past year, Chinese state-run media has been pushing for Australia to be cut out of the iron ore trade. In April, the state-run tabloid Global Times reported that Chinese companies were exploring opportunities to export iron ore from Africa.It quoted an expert who said that Australia's move to help the United States "contain China" had "seriously lowered Chinese companies' favorable assessment of Australia."Both Langcake and Oliver said it was likely both China and Australia would look to diversify their trade relationships slowly over the coming decades, given the growing political divide between the two countries.But with the iron ore trade likely to continue as a major driver for economic growth in both China and Australia, the two countries might be stuck with each other for the foreseeable future.Tan, from Hong Kong University, said diplomatic ties between the two countries could only deteriorate so much when they were still linked by iron ore."It's really a calculation between economic losses and political gain ... I think there would be some overall constraints on how far they can go," he said. "I remain optimistic."

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Remnants of a large Chinese rocket launched last week are expected to plunge back through the atmosphere this weekend in...

Over the last couple of weeks, Nigeria’s minister for Communications and Digital Economy, Isa Pantami, has been in the news not for a major breakthrough in his ministry, but for the wrong reason that has strong links with his past. Pantami has a documented history of views, activities and associations that make him a fit candidate for both domestic and international close watch on matters relating to terrorist support and sympathies. This disposition has made him an unfit person to hold high public office in a nation that is part of the global campaign against terrorism and extremism. The attention, which the minister has drawn lately, is simply because his past actions and alignments do not fit the profile of someone who should be entrusted with a strategic public office. For these reasons, there have been strident calls by Nigerians for the minister to vacate the office, which he occupies. We are in agreement with that call. But it is disquieting that, in spite of all the anomalies in the Pantami affair, the Presidency, through Garba Shenu, Buhari’s media aide, has stepped in to defend and protect Pantami from public demands that he be held accountable for his past. It is surprising, to us, that a government that is fighting insecurity should take this position and retain such a personality as a cabinet member instead of sacking him and apologizing to Nigerians. Government shouldn’t be fighting insecurity and terrorism and at the same time having in its fold someone who professes adoration for fundamentalists and terrorist organizations. Government, by its stand on Pantami, is inadvertently encouraging other people, especially the young ones in the midst of unemployment and poverty, to toe that path since it is no longer a crime. It is telling the young ones that they can do or say whatever they like, turn round and tell the world that they have repented and that is all. This, in our view, should not be condoned, unless the government is telling Nigerians and the rest of the world that anybody could be a criminal except those who are in the corridors of power or have connections in government. The danger in all of this, however, is that this is a government that is seeking assistance from Europe and America in its fight against insecurity and terrorism, yet it has the dossier of people like Pantami in its fold but not doing anything about it. With this, the foreign nations would be asking questions if Nigeria is truly serious in its fight against insecurity. Even if the president does not ask the minister to resign, we demand that the minister should take the honourable path and quit office. That is a global best practice and we have seen it happen here in Nigeria when Kemi Adeosun, former finance minister, resigned when accused of certificate forgery. Besides his integrity, President Buhari should let the minister go because continuing to retain him in office amounts to making his administration unpopular both locally and internationally. Sacking the minister has the advantage of serving as a deterrent, especially to young Nigerians, not to engage or support cultism, terrorism, militancy or banditry because such acts will haunt them and deny them good opportunities later in life. The Pantami case is not a helpless one if the government should reason with Nigerians. There are two simple and easy ways out it. The first, which is the easier, is for Pantami to resign his appointment and tender an unreserved apology to all Nigerians. The second one is for Buhari to exercise his prerogative of ultimate presidential responsibility by relieving Pantami of his appointment in order to save himself, his administration and the nation the lingering embarrassment of the minister’s continued stay in office. Chidi Amuta, a public affairs commentator argues that if the president keeps Pantami in office, he will have embraced terrorists, and could lead the public to unsavoury conclusions that can only load up his already bulging baggage of political liabilities. We cannot agree more.

In an exclusive and wide-ranging interview, Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba also touched on the buildup of Russian forces on Ukraine's border, potential military support from the United States, and President Joe Biden's offer of a summit with Russian leader Vladimir Putin. Kuleba's comments about Donald Trump's fraught term in the White House follow the 2019 scandal involving Trump and allegations that he pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate his political rival Biden and his son, Hunter ahead of the 2020 election. The long-running crisis upended politics in Washington, and evolved into a full-blown impeachment investigation -- of which Trump was later acquitted.Kuleba said of the Trump administration: "It was a difficult time and at that point we were all focused on one thing ... on maintaining bipartisan support in the United States."The minister added that the Ukrainian government will continue to invest in relations with both Democrats and Republicans in the US to ensure relations between the two countries are on more "solid ground."Giuliani was 'playing politics'Kuleba also told CNN that he was "not aware" of any formal request for assistance from the FBI, concerning Trump's long-time attorney Rudy Giuliani.Last month, federal agents executed a search warrant at the Manhattan home of Giuliani in connection with a long-running criminal investigation into his involvement with Ukraine in the latter years of Trump's presidency.Kuleba said Ukraine would be "open to helping" any FBI request, as the country has "nothing to hide." The minister added that he could not say if Giuliani acted criminally. But Kuleba said that "he was definitely playing politics and he put the situation at risk for Ukraine, and for the country's relationship with Washington." "We did our best to avoid the trap and maintain that bipartisan support from the United States." Creeping annexation Secretary of State Blinken's visit to Ukraine on Wednesday comes at another delicate moment in the country's relationship with Russia, amid a buildup of Russian troops along the Ukrainian border and in Crimea."[We are] gravely concerned," Kuleba said of the movements. "I think every country would be extremely concerned seeing how hundreds and thousands of troops and heavy military machinery is being masked along your border."Kuleba raised concerns about Russia's recent assertion in what should be shared waters between Ukraine and Russia in the Sea of Azov calling it a "creeping annexation." In a show of force, Moscow recently sealed off the strategic Sea of Azov to non-Russian state vessels until October in what Ukraine says is a violation of international law, and against a 2003 agreement between Ukraine and Russia to share the waters. "The Sea of Azov...is low hanging fruit for Russia. After the illegal annexation of Crimea and the takeover of the control over the Kerch Strait, Russia can conduct this creeping annexation of the Sea of Azov. And it's constantly reinforcing its military presence there and disrupting trade routes," Kuleba told CNN.The massing of Russian troops in the region over recent weeks has reignited tensions in eastern Ukraine, where government forces have battled Russian-backed separatists demanding independence from Kiev since 2014.The Kremlin has repeatedly said these are just military exercises, but Kuleba rejected any suggestion that the risk posed by Russia was being overstated, saying the threat was "real." "When green men appeared in Crimea in 2014, Russia claimed these were not their soldiers, that it was not Russia and yet the peninsula was illegally occupied by Russian military forces," he said. "Green men" is the Ukrainian term for professional soldiers wearing Russian combat fatigues but no identifying insignia."So at least today, they admit that it's them, but they're just exercising. But even if it's just an exercise, what they've been exercising is an encirclement of Ukraine, and defensive operations against Ukraine."NATO membership Amid this tension, Kuleba said he would be discussing a "list" of US military support with Blinken, when he arrives in Kiev.As part of this, Ukraine will request air defense systems and anti-sniper technology, said Kuleba. "I want to make it clear that it's not only about receiving it from the United States, but also about buying it from the United States," he added. "We want this partnership to work both ways. It should be mutually beneficial." Kuleba said he wants Ukraine to be treated by the United States as the "eastern border of democracy" in the central Europe and Black Sea region and be integrated into the West -- including NATO. Indeed the minister believes Ukraine's ascension to NATO will arrive in only a matter of time."The path to NATO membership is absolutely on the table already ... NATO membership does not come in a day. We have plenty of time to settle the conflict. But we have to have a clear a step by step road map of our accession to NATO. And this is where the United States can help us." 'Beautiful piece of diplomacy' As for Biden's recent offer of a summit with Putin, Kuleba was optimistic, calling it "a beautiful piece of diplomacy." He believed the summit offer "bought time," as Putin would not break rules while a meeting is being planned to discuss the rules -- even if not all Ukrainians saw it that way."I understand those who do feel anxious (about the summit), because of the lack of information, because of conspiracy theories, because of the inherited fear of betrayal," he said."But I see it from another perspective -- from the professional diplomatic perspective. And I do not see anything that would go against the interests of Ukraine, at least at this point," Kuleba added.

LONDON (Reuters) - The Group of Seven scolded both China and Russia on Wednesday, casting the Kremlin as malicious and Beijing as a bully,...