China Hands 14-Year Jail Term to Lawyer Who Called for Xi to Quit Xu Zhiyong criticized president for early handling of virus Xi Jinping has cracked down on dissent over decade in power Xu Zhiyong Photographer: Greg Baker/AP By Bloomberg News 10 April 2023 China has handed a 14-year prison term to human rights lawyer Xu Zhiyong, who once called on President Xi Jinping to resign over his handling of the pandemic. Xu was sentenced by a court in Linshu county, in the coastal province of Shandong, on a charge of subverting state power, Luo Shengchun, the wife of another activist, told Bloomberg News on Monday. Luo said lawyers involved in the case also informed her that her husband Ding Jiaxi, got a 12-year term on the same charge. Xu and Ding were tried in secret in June last year after joining a gathering that discussed ways to bring democracy to China. “It’s absolutely nonsense,” Luo said, referring to the sentences. “They have no rule of law at all. This shows this government doesn’t want to follow any rules.” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said Monday at a regular briefing that the case was being handled according to the law. He didn’t provide more details. Xi has cracked down on dissent in his first decade in power. Late last year, his government responded to the most widespread protests in decades by arresting demonstrators and keeping a police presence on the streets of Beijing for days afterward. China soon after started unwinding the harsh Covid Zero rules that had sparked simultaneous street protests in dozens of cities. Xu and Ding were detained after meeting with other activists in Xiamen in 2019. Xu went into hiding because several other people who attended the gathering were detained, and he later published an open letter calling on Xi to step down over how the early days of the coronavirus outbreak were handled.
Trudeau suggests China uses slave labour in lithium production Doina Chiacu Apr 29, 2023 https://www.afr.com/markets/commodi...-labour-in-lithium-production-20230429-p5d47d Washington | Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Friday suggested that China uses slave labour in the production of lithium as he discussed Canada’s efforts to ramp up production of the critical metal used in electric vehicle and other batteries. Canada last fall announced a tougher policy on critical mineral investment - particularly from China - as it worked to shore up its domestic supply of critical minerals after the global pandemic exposed supply chain problems that caused major production disruptions. Canada Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. The Canadian Press Canada has significant sources of lithium, Trudeau said, but China has made strategic choices over the decades that have made it by far the world’s largest producer of the lithium used in cell phones and electric vehicles. “If we’re honest ... the lithium produced in Canada is going to be more expensive. Because we don’t use slave labour,” Trudeau said in remarks at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York. “Because we put forward environmental responsibility as something we actually expect to be abided by. Because we count on working with, in partnership with indigenous peoples, paying their living wages, expecting security and safety standards.” A representative for the Chinese Embassy in Ottawa did not respond to a request for comment. The United States has alleged use of forced labour by China in sectors including mining and construction. Last year, a US law took effect banning imports from China’s Xinjiang region over concerns about forced labour. Chinese firms own, operate or finance most of the Democratic Republic of Congo’s cobalt mines, the US Labor Department said in a recent report. “Our research shows that lithium-ion batteries are produced with an input - cobalt - made by child labour,” it said. In December, the United Auto Workers union called on automakers to shift their entire supply chain out of China’s Xinjiang region after a report by Britain’s Sheffield Hallam University suggested that nearly every major automaker has significant exposure to products made with forced labour. China denies abuses in Xinjiang, a major cotton producer that also supplies much of the world’s materials for solar panels. Diplomatic tensions between Canada and China have been running high since the detention of Huawei Technologies executive Meng Wanzhou in 2018 and Beijing’s subsequent arrest of two Canadians on spying charges. In November, Canada ordered three Chinese companies to divest from Canadian critical minerals, citing national security. China in response accused Ottawa of using national security as a pretext and said the divestment order broke international commerce and market rules.
Chinese President Xi Jinping's quest for self-reliance led to policies that attempted to make the country less dependent on the U.S. That may have been more important to the current trend than former U.S. President Donald Trump's trade war. (Source photos by AP and Reuters) https://asia.nikkei.com/Editor-s-Pi...is-Xi-not-Trump-started-on-path-to-decoupling Analysis: Xi, not Trump, started on path to decoupling The leader's desire to be independent of U.S. influence has been consistent for 11 years KATSUJI NAKAZAWA, Nikkei senior staff writer April 20 Katsuji Nakazawa is a Tokyo-based senior staff and editorial writer at Nikkei. He spent seven years in China as a correspondent and later as China bureau chief. He was the 2014 recipient of the Vaughn-Ueda International Journalist prize. When did supply-chain disruptions begin? Some might feel it all started with the export restrictions the U.S. slapped on China, be it for anger over unfair practices or over fear of a rising military rival. Many in China believe the root cause of U.S.-China decoupling lies in former U.S. President Donald Trump's stances. But Trump's policies were only one dimension of a much longer development. Since 11 years ago, a movement to decouple from America was happening in China. "It was Xi Jinping who made the first crucial statement that led to the separation of the U.S. and Chinese economies," said a retired party veteran, noting this happened just before he ascended to the Chinese Communist Party's top leader. The fact that Xi has stayed true to his original instincts shows that he is a strong-willed politician who follows through on his original intentions. Whether that is a good thing or not for the Chinese economy, is another debate. It all started around the party's 18th national congress, held in November 2012. For context, the national congress was delayed significantly due to the political turmoil over former top Chongqing official Bo Xilai. During the quinquennial event, Xi, the leader in waiting, raised concern that the Chinese economy was being "hijacked" by the U.S. As leader, he was determined to correct the situation. Donald Trump and Xi Jinping meet on the sidelines of the G-20 summit in Osaka, Japan, in 2019, with U.S.-Chinese relations at a turning point. © AP Xi's statements were behind closed doors and not publicized. But with 3,000 delegates attending the national congress, it had many people talking about it. At the time, however, people in China did not realize that Xi's intentions would have massive consequences for China's economy and society later on. It was in the era of President Hu Jintao -- and unlike now -- unfettered discussions were still possible, as long as they were held only within the party. Thus Xi's remark about the Chinese economy being "hijacked" became widely known, sources said. At the heart of Xi's frustration was former paramount leader Deng Xiaoping. Deng, who was born in 1904 and died in 1997, introduced the policy of "reform and opening-up" in 1978 and laid the groundwork for China becoming the world's second-largest economy. Despite the international praise of Deng, Xi believed that the Western-oriented economic structure Deng installed -- and his proteges worshipped -- led to corruption, worship of money and blind admiration of Western systems within the party and military. Deng's policies were to blame for the Chinese economy being "hijacked," or dominated, by the U.S., the logic goes. Former President Hu Jintao is escorted out of the closing ceremony of the party congress on Oct. 22, 2022, as Li Keqiang, left, and Xi react. In Hu's time, unfettered discussions were still possible within the party. (Photo by Yusuke Hinata) From Xi's perspective, U.S. companies were operating freely in the Chinese market and making huge profits. China's group of private companies, too, were doing business at home and abroad, outside the party's control. The conclusion was drawn that unless these issues were all corrected, the country's one-party rule was at risk. The attempt to terminate the hijacking led to a drastic reversal of Deng's policies. It was no longer going to be about cooperation and closer economic relations with the U.S. While the path to decoupling was not clear back in 2012, in retrospect, Xi's inner circle was beginning to consider reducing China's economic dependence on the U.S. Five years later, when the party held its next national congress in 2017, the Xi administration began to push for "military-civilian fusion." Tapping China's private-sector for military-grade technologies was a way for the Chinese military to reduce dependence on the U.S. Sensing the unfriendly move, the U.S. began to cut off cutting-edge technology from China. This has enormously impacted the private sector. Trump, who came into power that year, continued this trend with tariffs on Chinese goods and a trade war. Xi's prescriptions for tackling U.S. dependence has always been zi li geng sheng, self-reliance. He has also tried "dual circulation" -- an economic policy that seeks to reduce the role of foreign trade in driving the Chinese economy. But whatever Xi's visions for an ideal Chinese economy were, the reality was that the Chinese economy, being so dependent on the outside world, was not going to function properly if self-reliance was the guiding philosophy. Jack Ma at the Bund Summit in Shanghai on Oct. 24, 2020. The Alibaba founder has since been forced to give up most of his shares in a financial subsidiary. © AP In 2020, Ant Group, a financial affiliate company of Chinese e-commerce giant Alibaba Group, was abruptly forced to delay its planned listing, with no rational reason given. This symbolized the central leadership's uneasiness with tech giants operating outside the party's control. The contradiction between being under party control and abiding by Western disclosure rules came to the fore in the fate of U.S-listed Chinese companies. One by one, major Chinese state-owned companies that could not meet information disclosure requirements set by U.S. regulators were delisted from stock markets in the country. Earlier this year, Alibaba founder Jack Ma was forced to give up control of Ant by relinquishing most of his treasured shares in the financial company. Alibaba also announced a decision to split itself into six business groups. In the world of semiconductors, the U.S.-China battle for technological supremacy has made it difficult for multinationals to supply high-performance chips to China. As a result, China's leading telecommunications equipment makers lost significant shares of the global smartphone market. Restrictions on semiconductor supplies to China by the "Chip 4" alliance of the U.S., Taiwan, South Korea and Japan remain a major topic. Xi attends the closing ceremony of the National People's Congress at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, on March 14, 2012. In Chinese power politics, careers are often built on years of toil in quiet conformity. © Reuters To some extent, Xi has got what he wanted. The U.S. is probably not hijacking the Chinese economy today. But it has also become difficult for Chinese companies -- both state-owned and private -- to expand operations around the world without restrictions. This has become a drag on Chinese economic growth. In the 11 years under Xi, the fundamental principle that moves China has changed. The party's political logic takes precedence over any logic of economic freedom. The economy is but a tool to complement Communist-led politics. One question to ask is: What if the policy is fundamentally wrong in terms of improving people's livelihoods? Xi has already acquired ultimate power, and those around him are all his close aides. There is no one who can fundamentally correct the basic policy that the top leader has pushed ahead for political reasons. Even Premier Li Qiang, who is ranked second after Xi in the party hierarchy and is in charge of the economy, is no exception. Li is a former personal secretary to Xi -- more of an executive officer than a full-fledged board member, in corporate terms. A medical worker pre-examines a patient during a surge in infections at Tongji Hospital in Shanghai on Dec. 26, 2022, right after China ended its zero-COVID policy. © Reuters Official figures released by China on Tuesday show that the country's economy grew 4.5% in real terms in the January-March quarter. The growth rate was higher than initially expected, as service consumption, such as eating out and travel, picked up due to the end of the zero-COVID policy. But property development remains mired in the doldrums, and private-sector investment is not growing. Small and midsize manufacturing companies, which have supported the Chinese economy, are also in a serious slump. If they do not get back on their feet, it will become impossible to secure jobs for huge numbers of new university graduates and others. Foreign companies, including Japanese ones, are gradually shifting some production from China to Southeast Asia and India. It emerged in March that a veteran male employee of Astellas Pharma, a major Japanese drugmaker, was detained by Chinese authorities immediately before he was due to return to Japan from Beijing. He has worked in China for more than 20 years. The Astellas detention is beginning to seriously impact Japanese companies operating in China. The owner of a small-to-medium-sized Japanese company operating in China, told Nikkei on condition of anonymity, that they are moving production from China's Zhejiang province to Vietnam. "We were already shifting away and away from China. Everything is more expensive and there are political risks. The Astellas detention will only accelerate this trend." Since his pledge to fight American hijacking 11 years ago, Xi has followed through. U.S.-China decoupling has progressed step by step. Non-American companies are also caught up in the storm. Although the latest data show growth picking up, the outlook for the Chinese economy is far from bright. What will happen to it over the next four to five years? That depends on where Xi takes his politics.
Set aside what the Chinese is doing, why trudeau is talking about partnering with indigenous people in his own country? is he not a pm for the canadian? sounds strange politics to me.
Germany failed with Russia, world must not do the same with China: ex-defence minister By Latika Bourke May 2, 2023 https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe...hina-ex-defence-minister-20230501-p5d4rg.html Scholz delivered his landmark Zeitenwende speech that promised a turn around in military posture, and committed to spending at least 2 per cent of GDP on defence, as per NATO guidelines. There are concerns that Scholz is either backtracking on his pledge or going too slowly. NATO estimates that just seven countries will spend 2 per cent or more on defence this year. Among those falling short of that benchmark is Germany, Europe’s largest economy, which is expected to keep investment at 1.49 per cent. By contrast, Greece has boosted its defence spending to 3.54 per cent of its GDP; the United States will spend 3.49 per cent, the largest amount in dollar terms. Kramp-Karrenbauer said she had pressed for more spending, but Scholz was more focused on reducing debt. Defence expenditure of NATO member states depicted as a share of GDP in percentage terms.CREDIT:NATO “I think Mr Scholz thought it would not be necessary to put more money in the armed forces, especially when you are not able to make new gaps in the budget, you have to cut other programs and this is what, especially, the political party of Olaf Scholz was and is not willing to do – still. “It’s absolutely crucial that Germany as the chancellor promised in the last year that we spend 2 per cent of our GDP for security.” Europe’s largest economy since 1980 and the third-largest in the world has long frustrated US presidents including Barack Obama and Donald Trump who said it should be doing more to guarantee the security of the Continent. “I guess the saying goes that Europe was dependent on Russian energy, American security and Chinese economy,” Alexander Stubb, former prime minister of Finland, which has just joined NATO said. Kramp-Karrenbauer said part of Germany’s reluctance to shoulder an appropriate burden lay in the very genesis of NATO. “I know this view of German politics. I think it has to do with our history, with our tradition. “The purpose of NATO, stated by the first secretary-general of NATO, was to keep the Russians out, the US in and the Germans down and this is what we have internalised. “But this is not enough any more,” she said. She conceded that Putin’s invasion of Ukraine had come as a big shock in Berlin, despite his annexation of Crimea in 2014. Angela Merkel, then chancellor and outgoing Christian Democrat Union leader, right, applauds Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer on being elected to lead the party in 2018.CREDIT:BLOOMBERG “Before Crimea we were on the way to the diminishing our armed forces because we say we will live forever in peace and freedom, as Francis Fukuyama said inThe End of History,”she said. “There was no feeling that there was an immediate threat coming from Russia.” She said Berlin should have listened to the warnings from the Baltic and formerly Soviet-occupied states. “They told us but we were convinced that the Russian interests and what is at stake in this conflict were too high to start this war in Ukraine so it took us by surprise.” She urged her country not to make the same mistake when it came to China. Germany is reviewing an earlier decision to allow Chinese investment in its largest port in Hamburg. AKK opposes it. “We shouldn’t be naive and we should be aware of what is behind this investment. “We have to define security in the much larger sense. It’s about resilience, it’s about infrastructure. It’s about not being too reliant on autocratic systems like ... Nord Stream 2 and Russia.”
Chinese secret police stations put America and all US citizens at high risk for four terrifying reasons, expert warns https://www.the-sun.com/news/8037700/china-secret-police-stations-america-security-risks/
The few remaining western social media companies in China are departing... LinkedIn shuts service in China, lays off employees https://fortune.com/2023/05/09/linkedin-china-shuts-down-incareer-ends-layoffs/
China's fragile economy has dictated that President Xi Jinping find a counter to the effectiveness of wolf-warrior propaganda. His solution? An open internet debate on the Taiwan issue. (Nikkei montage/Kyodo, Getty Images, Reuters) https://asia.nikkei.com/Editor-s-Pi...-messaging-machine-tamps-down-Taiwan-war-hype Analysis: China's messaging machine tamps down Taiwan war hype Wolf-warrior propaganda proves too effective, leaving authorities rattled KATSUJI NAKAZAWA, Nikkei senior staff writer May 11, 2023 Katsuji Nakazawa is a Tokyo-based senior staff and editorial writer at Nikkei. He spent seven years in China as a correspondent and later as China bureau chief. He was the 2014 recipient of the Vaughn-Ueda International Journalist prize. A remarkable conversation is taking place on the internet in China, where the screws of censorship are tightened every year, squeezing freedom of speech. Suddenly, a ban on an all-sides debate over China unifying Taiwan by force appears to have been lifted. A contrarian and even taboo view has been allowed to flourish -- that deciding to forcibly unify Taiwan now would be unrealistic and even dangerous. This is new. That arguments and headlines espousing this viewpoint have remained on the internet without being deleted by Chinese censors clearly shows that authorities accept the cautious stance. It is safe to say that the upper echelons of Chinese leadership intend for it to spread, at least to a certain extent. The frank internet discussions do not only come ahead of this year's Group of Seven summit, which begins May 19 in Hiroshima, Japan, but are tied to it. For the sake of "peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait," Japan, the U.S. and other G-7 nations are expected to strengthen their cooperation frameworks to prevent China from changing the status quo by force. South Korea, Australia and India have all been invited to a so-called outreach meeting in Hiroshima. Japan, the U.S., Australia and India will also hold a Quad summit in Sydney on May 24. An American F-35 fighter jet at a base in Japan: The U.S. and other G-7 nations are set to express determination to maintain "peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait" at their upcoming summit in Hiroshima. (Photo by Katsuji Nakazawa) As things stand, anonymously written articles that thoroughly reject China's hawkish "wolf-warrior diplomacy" are being reposted on different portals, with their content slightly changed and the tone of their headlines becoming increasingly strong. They all emphasize the likelihood of China being plunged into a "four-front operation," suggesting the country would be surrounded by enemies on four sides. Another belief is also gaining disciples: Those who shout "Taiwan unification by force" are "stupid." On the first of the four fronts, the Chinese military would face American, Japanese and Taiwanese forces in the Taiwan Strait and surrounding areas. On the second front, Chinese forces would face off against American and South Korean troops on the Korean Peninsula. On the third, China would square off against American and Australian forces in the South China Sea and South Pacific. If the U.S. side controls the Malacca Strait -- a thin body of water that opens to the Andaman Sea -- and counters China in the South China Sea, Beijing would see its energy supply disrupted and would not be able to keep its economy going. In the South Pacific, Australian troops hold the key. Finally, Chinese forces would face off against Indian troops on the country's southwestern border. In 2020, Chinese and Indian forces clashed in this region for the first time in 45 years, resulting in deaths on both sides. Indian soldiers stand in formation at an airbase in Leh, in the Ladakh region near the disputed border with China, in September 2020. In a contingency, the border could be a fourth front for the Chinese military to contend with. © Reuters Regarding the second front, U.S. and South Korean leaders have agreed that a U.S. Navy nuclear ballistic missile submarine will make a port call in the Asian country. There is a possibility that the port call will happen in the near future. In regard to the third front, rotational deployments of nuclear-powered attack submarines to Australia are planned under the AUKUS security framework with the U.S. and the U.K. Those pushing the four-front theory in China are fully aware of these recent international developments. Chinese forces would surely be spread thin and placed at an obvious disadvantage if forced to fight on all four fronts. The situation is reminiscent of the ABCD encirclement against Japan before World War II, when the Americans, British, Chinese and Dutch banded together for a series of embargoes that dealt a severe blow. The Chinese Communist Party regards unifying Taiwan as its historical mission and says it will not hesitate to use force against the island if necessary. Yet caution in regard to this mission has been allowed to take hold on China's internet. Opinions that appear to be inconvenient to China's leadership, led by President Xi Jinping, have not been taken down. The complicated background that has led to this situation can, at least partly, be traced to Russian President Vladimir Putin. It has been more than a year since his forces failed to quickly occupy Kyiv, Ukraine's capital, after the Russian military's full-scale invasion. A source familiar with party and public opinion in China said Putin has set "a bad example." What if Chinese forces were to fail to quickly take Taipei by force and instead become mired in a Putin-like failure? Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping leave a reception in Moscow in March. Some say Putin's war in Ukraine has set a "bad example" for China. © Reuters The fact is some Chinese bureaucrats and military officers who think seriously about the path the country should follow are of the opinion that attempting to unify Taiwan by force right now would be a very dangerous gamble. Trends in public opinion have also become a major issue within China. Some ordinary Chinese have come to sincerely believe that war will break out over Taiwan in the near future, pitting Chinese forces against formidable U.S. troops. A Chinese national who lives abroad and owns a company recently returned to his home country for the first time in about three years, after the strict zero-COVID policy was lifted. The entrepreneur was shocked to hear ordinary people, even close friends, whispering to one another that as war is imminent, they must think seriously about what they should do. Wealthy people in China are particularly worried about a decline in the real value of their assets. Condominium prices in China are still on the decline. Those who own multiple properties want to sell and monetize at least one of them and transfer the proceeds out of China, according to the Chinese entrepreneur. The U.S. is expected to dispatch a nuclear ballistic missile submarine to South Korea in a show of force. © Yonhap/Kyodo Another proprietor who also temporarily returned to China was earnestly advised by friends -- who believe wolf-warrior propaganda -- to permanently return to China as soon as possible. The friends warned that if war erupted, foreign countries where American troops are stationed, such as South Korea and Japan, would be dangerous, this person said. They believe it is safe to live in China. Despite wolf-warrior diplomats barking about a battle against the U.S., an armed clash is not necessarily in the cards. But partly due to these diplomats' belligerent remarks, some ordinary Chinese are beginning to think an early unification of Taiwan by force is possible. It is in this context that the voices of concern are growing -- and are being allowed to grow -- louder. Like in any other country, parents in China do not want to send their children to battle. This feeling has spread on Chinese social media, striking a chord among quite a few netizens. While China does not rule out unifying Taiwan by force, its military and security experts know from experience that doing so would be very difficult. Therefore, it became necessary to calm, for now, a groundswell of public opinion inflamed by wolf-warrior propaganda. A military parade in front of Beijing's Tiananmen Square in 2015: China has refused to rule out unifying Taiwan by force. (Photo by Takaki Kashiwabara) If the impression that China is on a war footing continues to strengthen, it would also leave Xi's leadership team with fewer strategic options. The most important thing for success is to remain vague on whether and when any action might be taken. Unpredictability is of strategic importance. If the impression were to take hold that a war over Taiwan is imminent, it would also put the brakes on foreign companies expanding into China, not to mention trigger an outflow of Chinese assets abroad. The effect on China's economy would be significant. To dispel this war notion, a certain logical explanation was necessary. Thus the four-front argument has been used effectively, and even proven convenient to President Xi.
My gut feeling is that if Japan comes to aid of Taiwan, the Chinese will find and sink all its battleships in ports and at sea. The hatred is strong. On the other side of the token, the Japanese would nuke US if they have any, the sentiment is equally raw.