MUNICH, Germany — NATO members on Saturday weighed the U.S.’ possible withdrawal from the military alliance if Donald Trump returns to the White House, with Hillary Clinton saying he would waste no time in quitting if re-elected.

Clinton urged delegates at the Munich Security Conference to take her one-time presidential rival’s tough talk “literally and seriously” as anxiety mounts over the future of the U.S.-led pact.

“He will pull us out of NATO,” Clinton told attendees during a lunchtime session.

Trump stoked fresh concerns over the U.S.’ commitment to NATO last weekend when he said he would “encourage” Russia to attack any member that doesn’t meet its spending targets. He has long criticized the alliance’s failure to ensure members make good on their obligation to contribute 2% of gross domestic product to defense.

Amid such rhetoric, the U.S. Congress passed a bill in December aimed at preventing any U.S. president from unilaterally withdrawing from the alliance without congressional approval.

U.S. Republican Senator Jim Risch, ranking member of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, on Saturday dismissed talk of the U.S. quitting NATO, saying: “We have answered that question.”

“It would take a two-thirds vote in the United States Senate to get out — that is never going to happen,” he told CNBC in Munich.

Clinton said, however, that Trump could actually just refuse to fund the alliance. “The U.S. will be there in name only,” she said.

Concerns over the U.S. and Europe’s continued military coordination have dominated discussions at this year’s annual defense summit in Germany, as the specter of a second Trump presidency looms large and a contentious aid package for Ukraine hangs in the balance in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte earlier Saturday referenced constant “moaning and whining” at the event about the future of NATO under Trump.

“Stop moaning and whining and nagging about Trump,” he said.

He was one of many European voices, including that of German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, who said that Europe needed to become self-sufficient in the face of a more uncertain future with its closest diplomatic ally.

“No matter what happens in the U.S. … we have to be able to protect ourselves,” Frederiksen said.

Indeed, Germany’s defense minister said that his country’s commitment to spend 2% of GDP on defense should be just the start, noting that the threshold could rise to 3.5% if necessary.

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg struck a more sanguine tone on transatlantic coordination, however, saying that believes the U.S. will remain “a staunch and committed NATO ally” whatever happens in the upcoming election.

“I expect that regardless of the outcome of the U.S. elections in November, the U.S. will remain a staunch and committed NATO ally,” he told CNBC’s Silvia Amaro. “It is in the security interests of the United States to have a strong NATO.”

Stoltenberg acknowledged Trump’s frustration with member spending, but said “that is now changing.” On Wednesday, NATO announced that 18 of the alliance’s 31 members will meet the 2% spending target this year.

NATO member countries first committed to minimum spending targets in 2006, but by 2014 only three had met the threshold.

The alliance will mark its 75th anniversary this year at an annual summit to be held in Washington in July. Senator Risch said he would like to see all members committing to meeting their target by that point.

“Talk about it happening years in the future isn’t now, and we’re always interested in now,” he said. “That’s helpful to the relationship: everybody keeping the commitments that they made.”

Apple is facing a number of issues in China, with geopolitical risks mounting and the economy still not firing as many would have hoped.

But the biggest challenge of all, according to analysts, could be a resurgent Huawei after a purported major semiconductor breakthrough that flew in the face of U.S. sanctions.

The latest chip, made by China’s biggest semiconductor manufacturer SMIC, has sparked concern in Washington and raised questions about how it was possible, without the company being able to access critical technologies.

But there is also scrutiny on whether the process being used to make these new chips is efficient enough on a large scale to sustain a Huawei comeback.

Alongside Apple and Samsung, Huawei is one of only a few companies that has designed its own smartphone processor. This was done through the Chinese firm’s HiSilicon division.

The chip however was manufactured by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., or TSMC. U.S. export restrictions, which effectively barred Huawei from using American technology anywhere along the chipmaking process, meant the Chinese company could no longer source its chips from TSMC.

The Taiwanese chipmaker is the most advanced semiconductor manufacturer in the world. There is no Chinese company that can do what TSMC does. That’s why shockwaves were sent through the political and tech world when Huawei quietly released the Mate 60 Pro in China this month, with analysis showing a chip inside made by SMIC.

Along with Huawei, SMIC is on a U.S. trade blacklist called the Entity List. Companies on this list are restricted from buying American technology. Meanwhile, SMIC’s technology is seen as generations behinds the likes of TSMC.

So how could this have been done with the huge amount of sanctions on both Huawei and SMIC?

Huawei’s smartphone chip is called the Kirin 9000S, which combines the processor and components for what appears to be 5G connectivity. 5G refers to next-generation mobile internet that promises super-fast speeds. Huawei has not confirmed the phone is 5G capable, but reviews have shown the device is capable of hitting download speeds associated with 5G.

The semiconductor has been manufactured using a 7 nanometer process by SMIC, China’s biggest contract chipmaker, according to an analysis of the Mate 60 Pro by software company TechInsights.

The nanometer figure refers to the size of each individual transistor on a chip. The smaller the transistor, the more of them can be packed onto a single semiconductor. Typically, a reduction in nanometer size can yield more powerful and efficient chips.

The 7nm process is seen as highly-advanced in the world of semiconductors, even though it is not the latest technology.

For years, SMIC struggled to make 7nm chips. That’s in part because it couldn’t get its hands on a very expensive piece of kit called an extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography machine. These are made by Dutch firm ASML, but the company has been restricted by its government from sending these machines to China.

Many thought this would hold back SMIC’s ability to make advanced chips. But it seems to have made it happen without these tools.

In a blogpost this month, Dan Hutcheson, vice chair of TechInsights, said the 7nm chip “demonstrates the technical progress China’s semiconductor industry has been able to make without EUV lithography tools.”

Huawei was not immediately available for comment regarding this story when contacted by CNBC.

From a technology perspective, it is significant that SMIC has manufactured chips using a 7nm process without ASML’s EUV machines.

Pranay Kotasthane, deputy director of the Takshashila Institution, told CNBC that it is likely that equipment used for older manufacturing processes are being “repurposed” for these more advanced chips. But he believes the process is likely being undertaken with “lower efficiency” than if SMIC were to use cutting-edge equipment.

And that’s a key point. While SMIC is able to create 7nm chips, it’s unclear how efficient, profitable and sustainable that is on a bigger scale. A closely watched metric is “yield” — the number of chips made out of a specific wafer.

If a chip manufacturer’s yield is low, then the process is not seen as efficient and can be costly. While the yield of SMIC’s 7nm process for Huawei chips is not known, it is “probably low,” Kotasthane said.

It is a waiting game to see if SMIC can produce the number of chips that Huawei requires at a profitable scale.

The technology advancement has certainly rattled Washington. The U.S. Department of Commerce issued a statement this month saying it is looking to get more information on Huawei’s chip.

SMIC’s 7nm manufacturing process has also exposed some of the weaknesses in the U.S.’s export restriction strategy, which could lead to further curbs.

“There will be pressure on the U.S. to reconsider its export controls strategy, which was based on the assumption that controls would prevent Chinese companies from producing advanced-edge chips, while the business-as-usual approach would continue at the trailing-edge nodes. It is increasingly becoming clear that this distinction doesn’t work in reality,” Kotasthane said.

He added that Washington may look at other areas of the chip design and manufacturing process to enact further restrictions.

The Wall Street Journal reported this month that Chinese central government staffers had been banned from using iPhones and other foreign branded phones for work and even prohibited them from being brought into the office.

China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said last week there weren’t any regulations prohibiting the purchase and use of foreign phones.

As geopolitical tensions between the U.S. and China continue to bubble under the surface, it is perhaps a potential Huawei resurgence that poses the biggest threat to Apple.

“It’s expected that Huawei will pose a bigger challenge to Apple in China than the geopolitical issue,” Will Wong, a senior research manager at IDC, told CNBC.

“This is because Huawei not only has the same premium brand image as Apple but also is a national pride in China.”

Apple is seen as a high-end smartphone maker and Huawei had directly competed with the U.S. firm in China for years. But Huawei’s sales fell off a cliff when it couldn’t equip its smartphones with 5G technology and the latest chips.

Any kind of resurgence in this area, as appears to be the case with the Mate 60 Pro, could make Huawei’s new phones an attractive option again for Chinese buyers.

“The biggest threat from Huawei is its continuous development in technology, not only in chips but also in new form factors like foldables,” Wong added.

The defense attorney for Donald Trump’s valet Walt Nauta complained Friday that he received threats after special counsel Jack Smith revealed that a Mar-a-Lago IT director had admitted to giving false testimony in the former president’s classified documents criminal case.

The lawyer, Stanley Woodward, had represented IT director Yuscil Taveras when his client gave that false testimony to a grand jury, according to Smith’s recent court filing.

Only after Taveras dropped Woodward and got another lawyer did he change his story, admitting he was told to destroy security footage, Smith said in Tuesday’s filing.

Woodward on Friday blasted Smith’s filing as a “brazen and overt effort” to influence the case’s judge and “the court of public opinion” by quoting from a sealed document Woodward had previously submitted in connection with issues surrounding his representation of Taveras.

Woodward’s outrage toward the prosecutor was laid out in his new filing in federal court for the Southern District of Florida, after Smith raised concerns about the defense attorney’s potential conflicts of interest in the case.

Woodward currently represents Nauta and other witnesses in the case, but he no longer represents Taveras.

On Friday evening, Smith in a new filing responding to Woodward’s claims said that permission for public disclosure of “all information” related to a hearing in Washington on Woodward’s potential conflicts in the case “was expressly granted” on July 31 by a judge there after the special counsel requested authorization of such disclosure.

Trump, Nauta and Mar-a-Lago maintenance worker Carlos De Oliveira are charged in federal court in Florida with crimes related to Trump’s retention of classified documents after leaving the White House. They have all pleaded not guilty.

Among other things, the defendants are accused of a scheme that aimed to erase surveillance security footage at Mar-a-Lago — Trump’s private club in Palm Beach, Florida — showing boxes of classified records being moved around there by Nauta and De Oliveira.

Nauta’s legal fees are being paid for by Trump’s political action committee, according to public election commission filings.

Woodward disputes the idea that he currently has a conflict of interest, and he asked Judge Aileen Cannon in his filing Friday for a week to submit a detailed rebuttal explaining his position.

Woodward also revealed Friday that Smith’s disclosure of the Taveras situation has created blowback for the lawyer.

“In the time since the government’s submission, defense counsel has received several threatening and/or disparaging emails and phone calls.”

“This is the result of the Special Counsel’s callous disregard for how their unnecessary actions affect and influence the public and the lives of the individuals involved in this matter,” Woodward wrote.

De Oliveira is accused of asking Taveras to delete the footage at Trump’s behest.

On Tuesday, Smith filed a document raising concerns that Woodward has a conflict of interest because he might have to cross-examine his former client, Taveras.

Smith noted that Woodward was serving as Taveras’ lawyer when the IT director testified before a Washington, D.C., grand jury in March.

During that testimony, Taveras “repeatedly denied or claimed not to recall any contacts or conversations about the security footage at Mar-a-Lago,” Smith wrote.

On June 20, Smith’s office notified Taveras, “through Mr. Woodward … that he was the target of a grand jury investigation in the District of Columbia into whether he committed perjury” during his testimony in March, the prosecutor wrote in the filing.

After the chief federal district judge in Washington had a federal public defender give advice to Taveras about the potential conflict of being represented by Nauta’s attorney, Taveras told the judge “he no longer wished to be represented by Mr. Woodward,” Smith wrote.

And “immediately after” accepting the public defender as his new lawyer, Taveras “retracted his prior false testimony,” Smith wrote.

Taveras also “provided information that implicated Nauta, De Oliveira, and Trump in efforts to delete security camera footage, as set forth in the superseding indictment,” the prosecutor wrote.

Smith asked Cannon, the Florida judge, to schedule a hearing on Woodward’s alleged conflict of interests with “Mr. Woodward’s clients present and independent counsel available to provide them with advice should they so desire.”

In his filing Friday, Woodward wrote that Smith “did not, and still has not, alleged any actual conflict in defense counsel’s representation of Mr. Nauta.”

“It has not done so for the obvious fact that no conflict would arise unless and until Trump Employee 4 [as Taveras is identified in court filings] testified against Mr. Nauta,” Woodward wrote.

The Ukrainian counteroffensive that launched in June against Moscow’s invasion has run into a Russian wall. 

In the run-up to the Ukrainian push, weapons from Western allies — such as tanks, artillery and other equipment — poured into Ukraine. Despite some small gains, Ukrainian forces have yet to see a large breakthrough, leaving some to wonder what else is needed.

“This is about as hard as it gets,” said Bradley Bowman, senior director of the Center on Military and Political Power at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. “Think World War I with drones. … That’s a little bit what the Ukrainians are facing. And so in our microwave culture here in the United States, we want results yesterday, but that’s just not the way it works when you’re confronting a military like the Russians.”

Land mines have been a massive problem for Kyiv’s forces. Russia has deployed large tracts of the explosive devices, including mines aimed at troops as well as mines that are designed to take out armored vehicles like tanks, slowing down any Ukrainian advance. And with Russia’s ability to lay mines with specialized artillery, keeping cleared lanes open to send forces through has been a struggle.

“Let me be clear, this would present a significant challenge for any force that is trying to take it without the full scope of Western capabilities,” said Dmitri Alperovitch, executive chairman of Silverado Policy Accelerator and co-founder of CrowdStrike.

Many in Kyiv have called for the introduction of Western fighter jets, such as the F-16, to beef up the beleaguered Ukrainian Air Force, which has managed to keep flying and fighting despite what on paper is an overwhelming Russian advantage in air power. These fighters would also help take the pressure off of air defense forces, which consists of older Soviet surface-to-air missile systems that are difficult to resupply, and the newly provided Patriot missile system. Just sending F-16s to Ukraine wouldn’t turn the tide overnight. It would take months, if not years, of training to get the most out of these expensive jets.

“These weapons are not silver bullets,” said Mick Ryan, a retired major general of the Australian army and adjunct fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “There’s no such thing as a single weapon system that will provide that. It’s when you have lots of different weapons systems in the air on the ground. You have operators who are technically proficient and then you’re able to undertake the collective combined arms training, that’s when you have a really war-winning capability.”

Watch the video above to find out if more big-ticket, U.S.-made weapons such as F-16s, the Patriot missile system and HIMARS can turn the tide in Ukraine.

North Korea’s first attempt at launching a military spy satellite resulted in failure on Wednesday, with South Korea’s military picking up wreckage after the carrier rocket crashed into its western waters.

North Korea’s state media agency, the Korean Central News Agency, said that an “accident” occurred during the launch of a military reconnaissance satellite.

“The carrier rocket ‘Chollima-1’ fell to the West Sea of Korea after losing thrust due to the abnormal starting of the second-stage engine after the separation of the first stage during the normal flight,” it said on the English language version of its website.

The rocket, with a mounted satellite, was launched at 6:27 a.m. local time as it previously announced.

North Korea’s state media added that the failed launch was due to “low reliability and stability of the new-type engine system applied” to the carrier rocket and the “unstable character of the fuel used.”

South Korean officials added that they are in the process of recovering “what could be the wreckages from the purported ‘space launch vehicle’ fired by North Korea.”

South Korea, Japan and the U.S. condemned North Korea’s Wednesday morning launch and emphasized that it was a violation of a United Nations security council resolution.

The U.S.’s National Security Council said in a statement: “The door has not closed on diplomacy but Pyongyang must immediately cease its provocative actions and instead choose engagement.”

“The United States will take all necessary measures to ensure the security of the American homeland and the defense of our Republic of Korea and Japanese allies,” it added.

North Korea state media added that it will make a second attempt “as soon as possible” after looking into the “serious defects” from Wednesday’s launch.

Officials in South Korea and Japan also acknowledged the possibility of an imminent launch from Pyongyang.

“North Korea has consistently shown its intention to strengthen its nuclear and missile capabilities, and we believe there is a possibility that it will continue to launch various types of missiles, conduct nuclear tests, and engage in other provocations in the future,” Japan’s chief cabinet secretary Hirokazu Matsuno told reporters in a briefing.

South Korea’s presidential office also said that its National Security Council convened a meeting following North Korea’s launch.

“The NSC members decided to continuously monitor North Korea’s possible additional launch and maintained cooperation with allies and friendly nations,” South Korea’s NSC said.

China wants foreign investment, but it wants them on its own terms.

However, Beijing’s terms aren’t clear for now — and it’s raised concerns and triggered second guessing in the global business community.

Last Monday, state broadcaster CCTV singled out a consulting company for not complying with China’s national security laws.

Shanghai-based Capvision Partners was just the latest company recently subjected to such investigations in the mainland. In March, U.S. due diligence firm Mintz told Reuters police raided its Beijing office, and detained some of its Chinese staff. In April, U.S. management consultancy Bain & Co reportedly confirmed police visited its Shanghai office.

These firms provide due diligence services, which companies and investors routinely employ to determine whether suppliers are complying with rules and regulations – not just in China, but in other jurisdictions as well. They also audit supply chains, among many other services.

At a time when China is actively encouraging foreign investment into the world’s second-largest economy that has been deeply hurt by the country’s long-held zero-Covid policy, such an escalation in China’s concerns about data is hurting sentiment and seems at odds with its overt claims of openness.

“It may seem a paradox,” said Chong Ja Ian, an associate professor at the National University of Singapore who studies Chinese foreign policy. “But this is consistent with what we have seen of the current China leadership: they want more control over all facets of society.”

“This is a government that built its legitimacy on performance, so they would be anxious to maintain a perception of control when the country is facing more pressures from different directions now,” he told CNBC.

“This is a government that built its legitimacy on performance, so they would be anxious to maintain a perception of control when the country is facing more pressures from different directions now, including demands for more access to information,” Chong added.

At a regular press conference helmed by China’s Foreign Ministry a week ago, Beijing appeared keen to downplay the Capvision probe as an isolated incident.

“These are normal law enforcement actions consistent with Chinese laws that aim to promote sound and well-regulated growth of relevant sector and safeguard national security and development interests,” said ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin.

“The enforcement actions seem very arbitrary now,” Lester Ross, a foreign lawyer in China, told CNBC. “To have multiple companies involved now in this crackdown and the restriction of financial data to foreigners, it appears that Chinese security departments are on to something larger.”

“A major question about Chinese law generally is the need for greater precision in delineating what’s permissible and what’s not: so much of what is now regarded as national security or state secrets is not sufficiently defined or classified,” Ross added.

The accusations against Capvision included claims the consultancy was among those used by foreign institutions with “complex backgrounds” as a pretext to steal state secrets and intelligence in key sectors while evading the law. Chinese authorities alleged that Capvision accepted more than 2,000 remittances from hundreds of overseas companies totaling $70 million between 2017 and 2020, according to a CNBC translation.

State-owned CCTV claimed that Capvision tapped on a vast “network of experts” of about 300,000 people in areas ranging from domestic policy research, national defense and military technology to banking, finance and medicine.

The CCTV program also claimed to feature one of Capvision’s experts who was convicted of disclosing information relating to the number of unnamed military aircraft on the inventory of a particular institution or company, according to a CNBC translation.

In a sign that last week’s state media report has triggered plenty of reassessment in the business community, the state-owned Securities Times reported last Thursday that Chinese regulators have instructed mainland Chinese brokerages securities firms to strengthen compliance over sensitive information, expert invitation and interviews.

The American and European chambers of commerce in China also expressed concern.

The recent investigations “risk heightening uncertainty at a time when European companies are looking for clear signs that China’s business environment is becoming more reliable and predictable,” the European Chamber of Commerce in China said in a statement. “The European Chamber respects the rule of law and expects it to be followed in these cases.”

Last Wednesday, Capvision pledged to “actively address” demands by Chinese authorities about the company’s negligence of its national security responsibilities, having formed a three-person internal “compliance committee” chaired by its chief executive Xu Rujie.

“We are deeply aware we have failed to fully comply with national security responsibilities in our past business activities and there are major hidden dangers and loopholes that have led to serious danger to the country’s national security,” the Shanghai-based company said in a statement, according to a CNBC translation.

Without more details on what is permissible could make it more difficult for prospective investors to do their due diligence before committing to deals, particularly given the nature of doing business in China.

“In a state-driven economy like China’s, a lot of local Chinese companies would have dealings with the government at various levels,” said Chong from NUS. “So some commercial data would inevitably have political and national security implications.”

“I am not sure if the Chinese government is interested in being more precise about what it means,” the professor added. “After all, ambiguity and lack of clarity is a tool commonly used by authoritarian governments to retain and enhance its control.”

A new bill from a bipartisan group of lawmakers, if passed, would ban TikTok in the U.S. after years of broad concern across the Trump and Biden administrations about potential Chinese government influence on the company.

Social media stocks including Meta and Snap were positive Tuesday when the news broke. Meta shares were up more than 6% and Snap was up more than 3% as of late morning.

TikTok, owned by Chinese company ByteDance, has raised fears in the U.S. that Chinese government officials could gain access to U.S. user data under Chinese law that could compel the company to hand over information. TikTok has insisted U.S. user data is safely stored outside of China, which it says should keep it out of reach of government officials.

But the company’s reassurances have done little to turn down the heat on TikTok. The Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. is in talks with the company about how to resolve some of the data concerns, though a solution has reportedly been delayed. FBI Director Christopher Wray testified before Congress recently that he’s “extremely concerned” about the Chinese government’s potential influence through TikTok on U.S. users.

The new bill, introduced by Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and Reps. Mike Gallagher, R-Wisc., and Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., would ban “all transactions from any social media company in, or under the influence of, China, Russia, and several other foreign countries of concern,” according to a press release.

The ANTI-SOCIAL CCP ACT — which stands for Averting the National Threat of Internet Surveillance, Oppressive Censorship and Influence, and Algorithmic Learning by the Chinese Communist Party — explicitly names ByteDance and TikTok as subject to the restrictions in the bill, “unless and until the date on which the President certifies to Congress that the company no longer meets any of the conditions described,” such as being subject to “substantial influence” by a country of concern.

“It is troubling that rather than encouraging the Administration to conclude its national security review of TikTok, some members of Congress have decided to push for a politically-motivated ban that will do nothing to advance the national security of the United States,” a TikTok spokesperson said. “We will continue to brief members of Congress on the plans that have been developed under the oversight of our country’s top national security agencies—plans that we are well underway in implementing—to further secure our platform in the United States.”

Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

Ukraine’s defense intelligence agency said Monday that its country’s forces had killed Russian Army Major General Vitaly Gerasimov, and that other senior Russian Army officers “were also killed or wounded” in action near the city of Kharkiv.

Gerasimov was identified by the intelligence agency as the chief of staff and first deputy commander of the 41st Combined Arms Army.

He previously participated in the second Chechen war, and Russian military actions in Syria, according to the agency’s post announcing his demise.

The agency, which said Gerasimov had been “liquidated,” claimed that data obtained related to his death “show significant problems with communication” in Russia’s army, “and with the evacuation of their defeated units.”

The post contains embedded audio files purporting to be intercepted communications between Russians discussing Gerasimov’s death near Kharkiv, which is the second-largest city in Ukraine.

The online investigative news outlet Bellingcat reported that the phone number of the person receiving that call belongs to a senior officer in the FSB, Russia’s national security agency, who was linked to the phone by open-source data.

The reported killing comes days after another deputy commander of the 41st Combined, Gen. Andrei Sukhovetsky, was fatally shot by a Ukrainian sniper. Sukhovetsky also was commanding general of Russia’s 7th Airborne Division.

Russian President Vladimir Putin last week confirmed Sukhovetsky’s death.