TAIPEI, Taiwan – Russian President Vladimir Putin said that Ukraine could be placed under a “temporary administration” as part of a peace process that could include help from North Korea and other Moscow allies.
The announcement came as South Korea reported that the North appeared to have dispatched at least another 3,000 soldiers to Russia in January and February.
Speaking about efforts to settle the war during his visit to Murmansk, Russia, Putin said not just the United States, but also all BRICS countries, as well as North Korea, could be partners for cooperation, according to the Russian news agency Tass.
“This is not only the United States but also the People’s Republic of China, India, Brazil, South Africa, all BRICS countries,” Putin said.
“And many others, for example, including the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,” he said, using North Korea’s official name, without elaborating.
The United States brokered a tentative ceasefire agreement between Ukraine and Russia this week to halt hostilities in the Black Sea and ensure safe navigation for commercial vessels.
However, Russia’s compliance is contingent upon the lifting of certain Western sanctions, particularly those affecting its agricultural exports. European leaders have expressed skepticism about easing sanctions, saying that the time is not right for such actions.
China has maintained a complex stance on the Russia-Ukraine war, emphasizing respect for Ukraine’s sovereignty while also acknowledging Russia’s security concerns regarding NATO expansion.
North Korea has reportedly deployed up to 12,000 troops and supplied ballistic missiles to support Russia’s efforts in Ukraine, marking its first significant military involvement abroad since the 1950s. Neither Russia nor North Korea has confirmed the claims made by the U.S. and South Korea.
Additional troops to Russia
The Russian leader’s remarks came as the South Korean military confirmed that North Korea appeared to have additionally dispatched at least 3,000 soldiers to Russia in January and February in support of Moscow’s war against Ukraine.
“Of the some 11,000 North Korean soldiers dispatched to Russia, 4,000 casualties have occurred, and it appears that some 3,000 or more have been additionally dispatched in January and February,” the South’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, or JCS, said.
The JCS said the North continued to supply missiles, ammunition and artillery equipment to Russia, including “a considerable amount of short-range ballistic missiles and around 220 pieces of 170 millimeter self-propelled howitzers and 240 mm rocket launchers.”
It added Pyongyang appeared to be making technological upgrades to launch another military spy satellite, although there were no imminent signs of such a launch.
The JCS also noted that North Korea appeared to be carrying out a smaller number of wintertime military training sessions compared with last year, attributing the fall to troop mobilization for various construction works, preparation for additional deployment to Russia and chronic energy shortage.
North Korea unveiled on Thursday what appears to be its first airborne radar system and suicide attack drones equipped with artificial intelligence, adding to indications that Russia has provided technical assistance in exchange for the North sending troops to fight Ukraine.
Separately, Russia’s top official said preparations were under way for North Korean leader Kim Jong Un’s visit to Russia this year, the latest sign of deepening ties between Moscow and Pyongyang.
Speaking to journalists in Moscow on Thursday, Russia’s deputy foreign minister Andrey Rudenko said Moscow was preparing for Kim’s visit to the country, Tass reported, without elaborating.
It would be Kim’s third visit to Russia, following his trip to Vladivostok in 2019 and the Vostochny Cosmodrome space center in the Amur region in 2023.
Russia and North Korea have aligned closely since Putin and Kim signed a mutual defense treaty during the Russian leader’s visit to Pyongyang last year. It elevated military cooperation and resulted in the deployment of North Korean troops to Russia.
Edited by Mike Firn and Stephen Wright.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Taejun Kang for RFA.
HAGATNA, Guam – Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has reaffirmed the US is committed to defending the Pacific territories of Guam and Northern Mariana Islands and said any attack on them would be an attack on the mainland.
Hegseth touched down in Guam from Hawaii on Thursday as part of a regional tour, his first as defense secretary, in which he is seeking to shore up long-standing alliances to counter China.
Amid US-China competition in the Pacific, Guam and the neighboring Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands have become increasingly significant in supporting American naval and air operations, especially in the event of a conflict over Taiwan or in the South China Sea.
Both territories are within range of Chinese and North Korean ballistic missiles and the U.S. tested a defense system in Guam in December.
Any attack on Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands would be met with an “appropriate response,” Hegseth said during his brief visit.
“We’re defending our homeland,” Hegseth said. “Guam and CNMI are vital parts of America and I want to be very clear – to everyone in this room, to the cameras – any attack against these islands is an attack against the U.S.”
“We’re going to continue to stay committed to our presence here,” Hegseth said. “It’s important to emphasize: we are not seeking war with Communist China. But it is our job to ensure that we are ready.”
U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth (left) meets with Guam governor
Lou Leon Guerrero (center) and CNMI governor Arnold Palacios (right) on his visit to the U.S. Pacific territory of Guam on Mar. 27, 2025.(Defense Department/Handout)
Hegseth’s week-long tour comes against a backdrop of Chinese assertiveness. Its coast guard vessels have repeatedly encroached into the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone in the South China Sea and around the Japanese-controlled Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea.
His visit will be closely watched in the Pacific for signs of the Trump administration’s commitment to traditional allies following a rift between Washington and Europe that has tested the decades-old transatlantic alliance.
The trip also threatens to be overshadowed by the fallout from revelations that Hegseth and other national security officials discussed attack plans against Yemen’s Houthis on the messaging app Signal with a journalist present.
Located closer to Beijing than Hawaii, Guam is known as the “tip of the spear,” with 10,000 military personnel, an air base for F-35 fighters and B-2 bombers and home port for Virginia-class nuclear submarines.
The security pledge from Hegseth comes as debate on Guam’s future as a U.S. territory has intensified, with competing calls by some residents for full statehood and U.N.-mandated decolonization, led by the Indigenous Chamorro people.
Defending Guam and CNMI, Hegseth said, aligns with President Donald Trump’s “goal to achieve peace through strength by putting America first.”
He delivered remarks at Andersen Air Force Base and took an aerial tour of Guam before meeting with the governors of Guam and Northern Mariana Islands, Lou Leon Guerrero and Arnold Palacios, respectively.
China’s short- and mid-range missiles cannot reach Guam, but its intermediate-range missiles, including DF-26, nicknamed the “Guam Express,” can.(Vijdan Mohammad Kawoosa/Reuters)
Guerrero appealed to Hegseth about the “great impact” the U.S. military buildup on Guam has had on the island’s residents.
The Defense Department controls about a quarter of Guam’s land and is preparing to spend billions to upgrade the island’s military infrastructure as another 5,000 American marines relocate from Japan’s Okinawa islands.
“We welcome you and we welcome the position and the posture that President Trump has,” Guerrero told Hegseth, during opening statements before their closed door meeting.
“We are the center of gravity here. We are the second island chain of defense,” she said. “We want to be a partner in the readiness effort but national security cannot happen without human health security.”
Guerrero sought funding for a new hospital, estimated to cost US$600 million.
“Our island needs a regional hospital capable of handling mass casualties, whether from conflict or natural disasters,” she told Hegseth.
Guam governor Lou Leon Guerrero (left) exchanges greetings with U.S.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth (right) on his visit to the U.S. Pacific territory, Mar. 27, 2025(Mar-Vic Cagurangan/BenarNews)
Afterwards Guerrero told reporters she didn’t have time to discuss the housing crisis caused by the US military buildup.
Earlier this month Guerrero warned in her ‘state of the island’ address of U.S. neglect of Guam’s 160,000 residents, where one-in-five are estimated to live below the poverty line.
“Let us be clear about this: Guam cannot be the linchpin of American security in the Asia-Pacific if nearly 14,000 of our residents are without shelter, because housing aid to Guam is cut, or if 36,000 of our people lose access to Medicaid and Medicare coverage keeping them healthy, alive and out of poverty,” Guerrero said.
At the end of his Guam visit, Hegseth announced he’d also reached an “understanding” with President Wesley Simina of the Federated States of Micronesia for planning and construction of US$400 million in military infrastructure in Yap state.
Simina’s office would not confirm to BenarNews he had met with Hegseth in Guam, saying only he was “off island.”
As an unincorporated U.S. territory, Guam residents are American citizens but they cannot vote for the U.S. president and their lone delegate to the Congress has no voting power.
Stefan Armbruster in Brisbane contributed to this story.
BenarNews is an online news outlet affiliated with Radio Free Asia.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Mar-Vic Cagurangan for BenarNews.
Chinese government officials have called for a boost to the national biotech capacity and the introduction of a novel food framework at its Two Sessions summit.
Chinese lawmakers have issued calls to speed up the development of its alternative protein ecosystem, with a focus on R&D and manufacturing, IP protection, and regulatory support.
This month’s Two Sessions summit in Beijing convened lawmakers from across the country to ratify legislation, review government work, and set an economic agenda for the forthcoming year.
Preceding the event were several documents indicating the government’s willingness to propel its alternative protein industry to new heights, which analysts saw as a sign of more things to come.
At the summit, some of China’s top government officials proved them right. For example, in his opening day speech to the National People’s Congress (NPC), Li Qiang, the premier of the State Council, called for deeper integration of strategic emerging industries, which included biomanufacturing, according to industry think tank the Good Food Institute (GFI) APAC.
This was followed by calls from several of his deputies who identified parts of the food system where China needed to ramp up its efforts. This included “strengthening IP protections for microbial proteins, leveraging underutilised ingredients like microalgae to help achieve China’s carbon neutrality goals, and redoubling efforts to upskill and grow the domestic future-food workforce”, said GFI APAC.
National and local governments enthused about novel foods
Courtesy: CellX
Perhaps the most sweeping statements came from Wei Chen, deputy of the NPC. In his address, he recommended that the country “expand the boundaries of food resources” and promote resource innovation, including “in-depth exploration, nutritional evaluation, and industrial production of alternative proteins”.
He further highlighted the importance of increasing “the policy guarantee for the development and application” of novel foods and developing talent in this industry to upgrade the national food system and improve global competitiveness.
Technologies like gene-editing and synthetic biology could help “create high-nutrition, high-function novel food ingredients”, according to Chen, who promoted multidisciplinary integration to realise the potential of microbial technology for nutrition, health and sustainable development goals.
Additionally, he called upon the National Health Commission and the State Administration for Market Regulation to establish “a flexible regulatory framework” to ensure the safety and traceability of novel food resources, according to GFI APAC. Chen stressed the goal of introducing unified novel food standards “as early as possible”.
It’s not just national policymakers promoting alternative proteins. Provincial and city governments are doing so too. The Suzhou Industrial Park, jointly governed by Chinese and Singaporean officials, this month released its 2025-27 action plans for biomanufacturing food, which state its “intent to obtain cell engineering equipment and microbial identification devices that can help scientists cultivate new food ingredients”, said GFI APAC.
In China’s most populous region, the Guangdong province, local officials are planning to build a biomanufacturing hub to pioneer tech breakthroughs in plant-based, microbial and cultivated proteins. “The officials said that the new hub will be specifically geared towards expanding market acceptance of future foods by enhancing their ingredients, texture, and functionality,” GFI APAC noted.
Meanwhile, the country saw its first alternative protein innovation centre open in Beijing last month, fuelled by an $11M investment from public and private investors to develop cultivated meat and fermentation-derived proteins.
Can the statements turn into reality?
Courtesy: Jimi Biotech
The remarks at the Two Sessions summit are the latest in a long list of policy efforts to put China atop the global alternative protein race.
In an official notice about China’s agricultural priorities before the summit, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs (MAFRA) identified the safety and nutritional efficacy of alternative proteins as a key priority, while research in novel food tech to create the next generation of food was also highlighted.
A week later, the No. 1 Central Document (which signals China’s top goals for the upcoming year), underscored the importance of “building a diversified food supply system”, including efforts “to cultivate and develop biological agriculture and explore novel food resources.”
The following day, a briefing by MAFRA featured a call to action to “develop new food resources such as plant-based meat”, according to GFI APAC.
The government’s current five-year agriculture plan encourages research in cultivated meat and recombinant proteins, while the bioeconomy development plan aims to advance novel foods too. President Xi Jinping has called for a Grand Food Vision that includes plant-based and microbial protein sources.
Leaders in the US have already highlighted fears of being overtaken by China’s biotech prowess. And experts suggest that for the East Asian country to decarbonise, half of its protein consumption must come from alternative sources by 2060.
How likely are all these statements to become a reality? “After a National People’s Congress deputy puts forward a suggestion during the Two Sessions conference, the Working Committee for Deputies Affairs takes these suggestions and directs them to the relevant government departments for further consideration,” Mirte Gosker, managing director of GFI APAC, told Green Queen.
She clarified that in most cases related to alternative proteins, the relevant department would be MAFRA. “The exceptions would be for situations like regulatory supervision or judicial affairs, which are instead sent to the National Supervisory Commission,” she said.
“After further study, the reviewing department will provide feedback on the suggestion as to whether or not it will be pursued further, but any deputy suggestions are taken very seriously. That’s why it’s so significant that deputies are lining up to show their support for deeper public investments in protein diversification.”
Several examples of upgraded Republic of China Army (RoCA) M60A3 main battle tanks were sighted at a training facility earlier in March, open-source imagery circulated on social media channels have revealed. The most obvious enhancements were the redesigned turret with shaped armour plates as well as a remote weapon station (RWS) of apparent indigenous manufacture. […]
Cheering crowds thronged outside the Cape Town International Airport on Sunday, March 23, to welcome the South African ambassador expelled from the US after being subjected to repeated attacks for his stance in solidarity with Palestine.
“Ebrahim Rasool is a race-baiting politician who hates America,” US State Secretary Marco Rubio accused in a X post on March 15.
“We have nothing to discuss with him and so he is considered PERSONA NON-GRATA,” Rubio added, sharing the alt-right Breitbart News report on the academic observations Rasool had made on the white supremacist character of the “MAGA movement” in a webinar hosted by a South African think tank.
Recently, when entering restaurants or leaving official events, North Korean trading officials dispatched to China have been seen taking off lapel pins featuring the smiling faces of national founder Kim Il Sung and his son Kim Jong Il and pretending to be South Korean, two sources in China told Radio Free Asia.
All North Korean officials overseas are required to wear the “Kim Bu-ja” — or “father-son” — pins to show their allegiance to the men known respectively as “Great Leader” and “Dear Leader.”
The Kim dynasty is now in its third generation. Kim Il Sung, who ruled from 1948 until his death in 1994, was succeeded by Kim Jong-il, who ruled until 2011, after which his son Kim Jong Un took over as supreme ruler.
“Last week, I visited a famous restaurant in Shenyang with an executive from a North Korean trading company I knew through business,” a source from the Chinese city told RFA Korean, requesting anonymity for personal safety.
“When he arrived at the restaurant, he took off his Kim Bu-ja badge, put it in his pocket, and asked me not to say that he was North Korean,” he said.
“Furthermore, he not only hid Kim Bu-ja’s badge, but also asked me to introduce him as a South Korean,” he continued.
Easy to tell
Another source in Yanji city, in China’s Jilin province, said he had witnessed the same behavior.
“Recently, it’s hard to see North Korean officials wearing portrait badges,” he said. “North Korean officials take off their Kim Bu-ja badges and pretend to be South Koreans when they leave official events.”
It wasn’t clear why the North Korean officials wanted to hide their identity, the first source said. He speculated that it was because South Koreans in China are treated as wealthy.
“We don’t know the exact reason why these officials are taking off their Kim Bu-ja badges, but they might be embarrassed to be officials from North Korea, one of the poorest countries in the world,” he said.
Despite their efforts, the second source said that it was easy to tell that the men were from North Korea as soon as they started talking given their accent and manner of speech.
“North Korean officials can dress like South Koreans in terms of clothing and hairstyles, but if you talk to them, it’s immediately obvious” that their from the North.
Many Chinese can also easily tell the difference, he said.
“Some North Korean officials who have been in China for a long time are actually lamenting their situation,” with the North Korean economy on the brink of collapse, to their acquaintances in China, he said.
“It’s understandable how North Korean officials feel about not being able to reveal that they’re North Koreans overseas,” he said.
Edited by Malcolm Foster.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Kim Ji-eun for RFA Korean.
Critics have long accused the agency — and its affiliated outlets such as Voice of America, Radio Free Europe and Radio Free Asia — of being a propaganda arm of US foreign policy.
But to the current president, the USAGM has become a promoter of “anti-American ideas” and agendas — including allegedly suppressing stories critical of Iran, sympathetically covering the issue of “white privilege” and bowing to pressure from China.
Propaganda is clearly in the eye of the beholder. The Moscow Times reported Russian officials were elated by the demise of the “purely propagandistic” outlets, while China’s Global Times celebrated the closure of a “lie factory”.
Meanwhile, the European Commission hailed USAGM outlets as a “beacon of truth, democracy and hope”. All of which might have left the average person understandably confused: Voice of America? Wasn’t that the US propaganda outlet from World War II?
Well, yes. But the reality of USAGM and similar state-sponsored global media outlets is more complex — as are the implications of the US agency’s demise.
For the better part of a century, Voice of America has broadcast into countries whose governments censored free information. The Trump administration has dismantled VOA’s parent organization, put all of its employees on leave and ended funding for independent media agencies.… pic.twitter.com/TzagYQwNIx
Public service or state propaganda? The USAGM is one of several international public service media outlets based in Western democracies. Others include Australia’s ABC International, the BBC World Service, CBC/Radio-Canada, France Médias Monde, NHK-World Japan, Deutsche Welle in Germany and SRG SSR in Switzerland.
Part of the Public Media Alliance, they are similar to national public service media, largely funded by taxpayers to uphold democratic ideals of universal access to news and information.
Unlike national public media, however, they might not be consumed — or even known — by domestic audiences. Rather, they typically provide news to countries without reliable independent media due to censorship or state-run media monopolies.
On the other hand, the independence of USAGM outlets has been questioned often, particularly as they are required to share government-mandated editorials.
Leaving a void Ultimately, these global media outlets wouldn’t exist if there weren’t benefits for the governments that fund them. Sharing stories and perspectives that support or promote certain values and policies is an effective form of “public diplomacy”.
Yet these international media outlets differ from state-controlled media models because of editorial systems that protect them from government interference.
The Voice of America’s “firewall”, for instance, “prohibits interference by any US government official in the objective, independent reporting of news”. Such protections allow journalists to report on their own governments more objectively.
In contrast, outlets such as China Media Group (CMG), RT from Russia, and PressTV from Iran also reach a global audience in a range of languages. But they do this through direct government involvement.
Though RT states it is an autonomous media outlet, research has found the Russian government oversees hiring editors, imposing narrative angles, and rejecting stories.
A Voice of America staffer protests outside the Washington DC offices on March 17, 2025, after employees were placed on administrative leave. Image: Getty Images/The Conversation
Other voices get louder The biggest concern for Western democracies is that these other state-run media outlets will fill the void the USAGM leaves behind — including in the Pacific.
Worryingly, the differences between outlets such as Voice of America and more overtly state-run outlets aren’t immediately clear to audiences, as government ownership isn’t advertised.
An Australian senator even had to apologise recently after speaking with PressTV, saying she didn’t know the news outlet was affiliated with the Iranian government, or that it had been sanctioned in Australia.
Switched off Trump’s move to dismantle the USAGM doesn’t come as a complete surprise, however. As the authors of Capturing News, Capturing Democracy: Trump and the Voice of America described, the first Trump administration failed in its attempts to remove the firewall and install loyalists.
This perhaps explains why Trump has resorted to more drastic measures this time. And, as with many of the current administration’s legally dubious actions, there has been resistance.
But for many of the agency’s journalists, contractors, broadcasting partners and audiences, it may be too late. Last week, The New York Times reported some Voice of America broadcasts had already been replaced by music.
Critics have long accused the agency — and its affiliated outlets such as Voice of America, Radio Free Europe and Radio Free Asia — of being a propaganda arm of US foreign policy.
But to the current president, the USAGM has become a promoter of “anti-American ideas” and agendas — including allegedly suppressing stories critical of Iran, sympathetically covering the issue of “white privilege” and bowing to pressure from China.
Propaganda is clearly in the eye of the beholder. The Moscow Times reported Russian officials were elated by the demise of the “purely propagandistic” outlets, while China’s Global Times celebrated the closure of a “lie factory”.
Meanwhile, the European Commission hailed USAGM outlets as a “beacon of truth, democracy and hope”. All of which might have left the average person understandably confused: Voice of America? Wasn’t that the US propaganda outlet from World War II?
Well, yes. But the reality of USAGM and similar state-sponsored global media outlets is more complex — as are the implications of the US agency’s demise.
For the better part of a century, Voice of America has broadcast into countries whose governments censored free information. The Trump administration has dismantled VOA’s parent organization, put all of its employees on leave and ended funding for independent media agencies.… pic.twitter.com/TzagYQwNIx
Public service or state propaganda? The USAGM is one of several international public service media outlets based in Western democracies. Others include Australia’s ABC International, the BBC World Service, CBC/Radio-Canada, France Médias Monde, NHK-World Japan, Deutsche Welle in Germany and SRG SSR in Switzerland.
Part of the Public Media Alliance, they are similar to national public service media, largely funded by taxpayers to uphold democratic ideals of universal access to news and information.
Unlike national public media, however, they might not be consumed — or even known — by domestic audiences. Rather, they typically provide news to countries without reliable independent media due to censorship or state-run media monopolies.
On the other hand, the independence of USAGM outlets has been questioned often, particularly as they are required to share government-mandated editorials.
Leaving a void Ultimately, these global media outlets wouldn’t exist if there weren’t benefits for the governments that fund them. Sharing stories and perspectives that support or promote certain values and policies is an effective form of “public diplomacy”.
Yet these international media outlets differ from state-controlled media models because of editorial systems that protect them from government interference.
The Voice of America’s “firewall”, for instance, “prohibits interference by any US government official in the objective, independent reporting of news”. Such protections allow journalists to report on their own governments more objectively.
In contrast, outlets such as China Media Group (CMG), RT from Russia, and PressTV from Iran also reach a global audience in a range of languages. But they do this through direct government involvement.
Though RT states it is an autonomous media outlet, research has found the Russian government oversees hiring editors, imposing narrative angles, and rejecting stories.
A Voice of America staffer protests outside the Washington DC offices on March 17, 2025, after employees were placed on administrative leave. Image: Getty Images/The Conversation
Other voices get louder The biggest concern for Western democracies is that these other state-run media outlets will fill the void the USAGM leaves behind — including in the Pacific.
Worryingly, the differences between outlets such as Voice of America and more overtly state-run outlets aren’t immediately clear to audiences, as government ownership isn’t advertised.
An Australian senator even had to apologise recently after speaking with PressTV, saying she didn’t know the news outlet was affiliated with the Iranian government, or that it had been sanctioned in Australia.
Switched off Trump’s move to dismantle the USAGM doesn’t come as a complete surprise, however. As the authors of Capturing News, Capturing Democracy: Trump and the Voice of America described, the first Trump administration failed in its attempts to remove the firewall and install loyalists.
This perhaps explains why Trump has resorted to more drastic measures this time. And, as with many of the current administration’s legally dubious actions, there has been resistance.
But for many of the agency’s journalists, contractors, broadcasting partners and audiences, it may be too late. Last week, The New York Times reported some Voice of America broadcasts had already been replaced by music.
Prominent Chinese influencer Liu Zhenya, also known as “Yaya,” left Taiwan Tuesday evening on orders from the Taiwanese government after she got in trouble for social media posts that appeared to support China’s use of force to take over Taiwan.
Initially, Liu resisted leaving and held a press conference to protest the decision, claiming the Taiwan government was abusing its power. She was criticized by protesters who gathered at the scene and shouted anti-China slogans.
But Liu left Taiwan on Tuesday evening, March 25, just before the deadline set by the Taipei government two weeks earlier.
Beijing considers Taiwan a breakaway province that needs to be “reunified” with China, by force if necessary.
The video that got Liu in trouble was from May 2024. At that time, she posted a video on her Douyin social media account about China’s “Joint Sword 2024A” military exercises around Taiwan.
In the video, she called the Chinese military drills “the most intimidating and aggressive exercises ever,” and expressed support for defending national sovereignty. “Maybe tomorrow morning, the island will be filled with five-star red flags,” she said. “Just thinking about it makes me happy.”
This video was later reposted on the official Facebook account of Taiwan.cn, a media outlet under the Taiwan Affairs Office in Beijing.
On March 12, Taiwan’s National Immigration Agency, or NIA, determined that her actions violated regulations on residency for mainland Chinese nationals and revoked her residency permit on the grounds of “endangering national security and social stability.”
It also imposed a five-year ban on reapplying for the permit and said she must leave the island by March 25.
Heckled at press conference
On Tuesday, Liu held a press conference to criticize the NIA’s decision to revoke her residency, calling it an abuse of power. Liu defended her comments, insisting that she had never advocated for military unification.
“I support peaceful unification. My discussion of military unification was based on an analysis of the current situation,” she said. “Talking about military unification is different from advocating for it.”
Liu also appealed to the Taiwan government not to separate her from her children, who live in Taiwan with her Taiwanese husband.
Throughout the press conference, protesters repeatedly shouted, “Welcome Yaya back to China,” along with other chants like “Yaya, go back to China!” and “June 4,” a reference to the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre that Beijing has attempted to cover up.
Ba Jiong, a Taiwanese influencer who had originally reported on Liu’s actions, claimed Liu’s refusal to leave voluntarily was an attempt to stage a dramatic exit, with Taiwanese immigration officers escorting her onto the plane.
Ba Jiong said this would allow Liu to create propaganda for Chinese state media.
“Yaya wants to take a symbolic gesture back to China,” he said. “We’ll help fulfill her wish by holding signs like ‘June 4’ and images of Xi Jinping and the former Foreign Minister Qin Gang who went silent, making sure she has no material to use for her propaganda.”
Taiwan’s Premier Cho Jung-tai said that freedom of speech must have limits. “Freedom of speech has boundaries, and the boundary is the survival of the state,” he said. “One cannot defame the country and still expect it to protect you.”
In a separate interview, Interior Minister Liu Shih-fang pointed out that Liu was not just an ordinary mother. “She is waging a legal, public opinion, and psychological battle, and she has also received support from many pro-China Taiwanese and influencers.”
Liu confirmed that NIA had made a decision regarding Liu, urging her to leave voluntarily. “If she does not depart by the deadline, we will take compulsory measures, and this decision has not changed,” she said.
Edited by Malcolm Foster.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Chunmei Huang for RFA Mandarin.
MANILA — U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is set to visit the Philippines this week, the first trip by a top official from the new Trump administration to a long-time American defense ally in Southeast Asia.
He is scheduled to arrive on Friday amid heightened territorial tensions in the South China Sea between Manila and Beijing over Chinese coast guard encroachments in the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone.
In Manila, Hegseth is to meet with his Philippine counterpart, Gilberto Teodoro Jr., to discuss their nations’ long-standing defense alliance.
“In a few days, my counterpart, the honorable Pete Hegseth, secretary of defense of the United States of America, will be paying a visit to the president and to myself where we will discuss ways to enhance our bilateral and trilateral and squad partnership,” Teodoro told reporters on Monday.
Apart from its 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty with Washington, the Philippines has a year-old trilateral defense pact with the United States and Japan. It is also a member of the “Squad,” an informal grouping of countries including the U.S., Australia, and Japan that have staged joint maritime activities in the South China Sea since last year.
After a two-day stay in the Philippines, Hegseth will go to Japan to attend the commemoration of the 80th anniversary of the Battle of Iwo Jima and meet with Japanese officials.
The American defense chief’s first official visit to Asia comes on the heels of controversy over his and other senior U.S. government officials discussing top-secret plans for a military operation on an encrypted messaging app with a journalist present. Critics are calling it a flagrant violation of information security protocols.
Hegseth, who was in Hawaii on Tuesday meeting officials of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, will stop in Guam before traveling on to Manila.
In the Philippine capital, Hegseth “will advance security objectives with Philippine leaders and meet with U.S. and Philippine forces,” Chief Pentagon Spokesman Sean Parnell said in a statement last week.
Reacting to Hegseth’s visit, Beijing warned that any security agreement involving Manila and other nations “should not target any third party” or escalate regional tensions.
“Facts have repeatedly proven that nothing good could come out of opening the door to a predator. Those who willingly serve as chess pieces will be deserted in the end,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun said on Tuesday.
“Our message to some in the Philippines: [S]top serving as other countries’ mouthpiece and no more stunt[s] for personal political agenda[s].”
Questions about American commitment
Asia-Pacific defense experts have been keeping an eye on the Trump administration’s stances on geopolitical developments in Europe, and what this could mean to Manila in terms of Washington’s support.
However, since President Donald Trump took office in January, both U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Hegseth have separately issued statements to assure Manila that Washington’s commitment to the defense of Philippine territorial waters remains “ironclad.”
Hegseth’s visit to Manila is a good opportunity to “reinforce these commitments amid doubts in its security policies,” according to Filipino security and geopolitical analyst Sherwin Ona.
“For the Philippines, it is crucial to get Washington’s renewed commitment and support for its armed forces modernization program,” Ona, who teaches at De La Salle University in Manila, told BenarNews. “The U.S. also plays a vital role in strengthening mini-lateral security arrangements.”
The Trump administration has begun holding talks with Moscow and Kyiv aimed at ending the Ukraine war.
“With the shift in U.S. policy in Europe, I think allies in the Indo-Pacific are anxious to hear the secretary’s view,” Ona said. “For Manila, how does this translate to actual assistance and presence in the SCS [South China Sea], Taiwan and the region.”
Two helicopters fly over U.S. troops during live-fire joint military exercises between the Philippines and the United States, in Zambales province, Philippines, April 26, 2023.(Jason Gutierrez/BenarNews)
For geopolitical analyst Julio Amador III, Hegseth’s trip is a “good sign” showing that the new Trump administration is giving priority to America’s close ally in Southeast Asia.
Amador noted that President Trump had a “history” of supporting the alliance between the two nations. It dates back to 1951 when both sides signed the Mutual Defense Treaty, which calls on the two allies to support each other in times of war.
“Trump 2.0 is a welcome development for the Philippines for two reasons,” he said. “First, there is a sense of familiarity as the Philippines already has experience managing relations positively with the previous Trump administration.”
Amador also said that many of those in the Trump 2.0 cabinet were “hawkish on China” in disposition. The “deterrence umbrella against China is all expected to increase in intensity and volume,” Amador said. This includes the joint military drills that are annually carried out between the two nations.
Hegseth will arrive in the Philippines as Manila and Washington prepare for their annual large-scale military exercises here next month.
The Balikatan, or shoulder-to-shoulder, Exercise, which will kick off on April 21 and last until May 9, will feature a joint sail between the allies and Japan.
The U.S. Mid-Range Capability (MRC) Launcher arrives for deployment in Northern Luzon during the Salaknib drills involving Philippine and U.S. troops, April 8, 2024.
(Capt. Ryan DeBooy/U.S. Army)
There will also be live-fire exercises in the north, as well as an amphibious landing drill in the Batanes archipelago to defend it against imaginary invaders. Facing Taiwan, Batanes is the Philippines’ northernmost group of islands.
This week, the United States and the Philippine armies launched their own exercises, called Sabak. About 2,000 U.S. Army Pacific personnel joined their 3,000 Philippine Army counterparts in various drills designed to showcase their commitment to “safeguarding the Philippines’ territorial integrity.”
Second Typhon system
Meanwhile, Filipino military officials welcomed news that the U.S. was sending a second Typhon mid-range missile system to the Asia-Pacific region.
While exact details have yet to be released, U.S.-based Defense News said that the U.S. Army’s 3rd Multidomain Task Force was “readying its Typhon battery for deployment in the Pacific theater.”
In April 2024, the missile system was brought to the Philippines as part of joint military exercises with the United States.
It was the first time the U.S. had deployed the mid-range system in the Asia-Pacific region – a move that angered rival superpower China.
Beijing said the move “gravely threatens regional countries’ security, incites geopolitical confrontation and arouses high vigilance and concerns of countries in the region.”
BenarNews is an online news organization affiliated with Radio Free Asia.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Jason Gutierrez for BenarNews.
TAIPEI, Taiwan – China has released all employees of a U.S. corporate due diligence firm who had been detained in Beijing for the past two years in a move seemingly aimed at reassuring foreign businesses amid declining foreign investment.
In May 2023, Beijing reportedly detained five staff members of Mintz Group after the U.S. firm conducted corporate due diligence investigations into the potential use of forced labor in goods supplied from Xinjiang.
China has faced international criticism over allegations of forced labor in Xinjiang, where Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities are reportedly detained and made to work in cotton and manufacturing industries. Beijing has denied the claims, describing them as false and insisting that the facilities are vocational training centers aimed at countering extremism.
The detention of Mintz Group staff turned out to be the beginning of a sweeping crackdown on consultancy and due diligence firms, including Bain & Company’s office in Shanghai and Capvision Partners.
At that time, foreign firms with business in China expressed concern that the crackdown damaged investor confidence in the world’s second-largest economy.
“We understand that the Mintz Group Beijing employees who were detained, all Chinese nationals, have now all been released,” Mintz Group said in a statement to Reuters on Tuesday.
“We are grateful to the Chinese authorities that our former colleagues can now be home with their families.”
China has not responded to the company’s statement.
The release came a day after China’s top officials vowed to welcome more multinational companies. The country is eager to stabilize foreign investment and attract new capital as policymakers seek to boost domestic consumption to mitigate the effects of U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods.
Since taking office in January, the Trump administration has imposed 20% tariffs on all Chinese imports, accusing Beijing of failing to adequately curb the flow of fentanyl into the United States.
Official data show that foreign direct investment in China fell by 27.1% in local currency terms in 2024 compared to the previous year – the steepest decline since the 2008 global financial crisis.
“China remains committed to expanding high-level opening-up of market, improving the business environment and welcoming more multinational companies to deepen their investment in China,” China’s Vice Premier He Lifeng said at the China Development Forum in Beijing.
Separately, Chinese Premier Li Qiang, speaking at the forum on Sunday, also urged countries to open their markets to combat “rising instability and uncertainty.”
U.S. Republican Senator Steve Daines, a staunch supporter of President Donald Trump, met Li on Sunday with seven senior executives from U.S. companies. Daines called the meeting a chance for them to air their views on the business environment in China directly to Li.
Some 86 company representatives from 21 countries came to the business forum this year, with American firms making up the largest group of attendees, China’s state broadcaster CCTV reported.
Edited by Taejun Kang and Stephen Wright.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Alan Lu for RFA.
Diverse procurement strategies exacerbates capability gaps within and between Indonesia’s armed forces. Indonesia proposed raising its defence expenditure to $10.6 billion (IDR165.2 trillion) for FY2025, of which nearly 42 percent will go on procurements. In election campaigning, incoming president Prabowo Subianto promised to elevate defence spending to attain a level of 1.5 percent of GDP […]
Chinese coast guard vessels intruded more than 60 times in the past year in waters near Taiwan-held Kinmen islands, which lie close to mainland China, Taiwan’s coast guard says.
The spate of incursions follows a February 2024 incident when a Chinese speedboat capsized after evading inspection by Taiwan’s coast guard. Two Chinese men died. The incident raised tensions between Taiwan and China.
Since then, China’s coast guard has mounted what it describes as “law enforcement” operations, but which Taiwan calls “grey zone” activities intended to undermine its control.
Last Thursday, four Chinese coast guard ships encroached into waters south of Kinmen and were driven away, only to return the following day, the Taiwanese coast guard said in a statement Friday. It added that there had been 63 incursions since the February 2024 incident.
A Taiwanese analyst described that as an effort to undermine Taiwanese sovereignty of the islands, which are home to about 200,000 people.
“The deployment of coast guard ships denies the legitimacy of local law enforcement and denies Taiwan’s jurisdiction and sovereignty,” said Lee Chun-yee, an associate researcher at the National Defense Security Research Institute, a think tank under Taiwan’s defense ministry.
“It intends to regard the waters of Taiwan’s outlying islands such as Dongsha and Kinmen as Chinese waters, so it has these jurisdictions. This is coercion against us,” Lee added.
Dongsha, also known as Pratas, refers to a Taiwanese-held atoll southwest of Taiwan.
China has yet to comment publicly on the Taiwanese allegations. Beijing considers Taiwan a breakaway province which it threatens to seize by force if necessary. Self-ruled Taiwan, which has a democratically elected government, views itself as a sovereign state.
Kinmen is an archipelago that lies less than 10 kilometers (6 miles) from China’s Fujian province but more than 180 kilometers (110 miles) from Taiwan’s main island. Its residents have family and history on both sides of the Taiwan Strait, and shuttle regularly by ferry back and forth to the Chinese city of Xiamen.
Taiwan describes as “prohibited waters” the territorial waters around Kinmen that extend about halfway to the Chinese coast, or roughly 4 kilometers (2.5 miles) to the north and northwest. “Restricted waters” extend a little further, about 8 kilometers (5 miles), to the south.
But Chinese officials have said they will not recognize those restrictions. Locals on Kinmen have told RFA that even before the February 2024 incident, Chinese fishing boats were helping themselves to fish that were once the preserve of Kinmen’s fishing community.
Edited by Mat Pennington.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Hsia Hsiao-hua for RFA Mandarin.
The Economist is an influential weekly magazine that was founded way back in 1843. But its age hasn’t lent it much ability at all to analyze China’s economy, making embarrassingly bad predictions about this country over the last few decades that show us crystal clear: if you want to understand China and its economy, DO NOT read The Economist.
The magazine has got it wrong on so many major subjects, most recently being China’s huge successes in the AI sector.
Just yesterday they were forced to admit that success, with an article calling China’s AI boom “astonishing,” but just a few years ago they told readers not to hold their breath about the country’s chances in AI.
And their predictions over the decades that China was about to collapse even put serial self-loathing China-hater Gordon Chang to shame, and they were once hilariously even against China’s high speed rail!
Today we’ll take a closer look at some of The Economist’s embarrassing bad China takes.
This is Reports on China, I’m Andy Boreham in Shanghai. Let’s get reporting!
TAIPEI, Taiwan – Chinese President Xi Jinping’s family continues to hold millions of dollars in business interests and financial investments, said a recent U.S. report, raising suspicion that they might have benefited from Xi’s position despite his decade-long anti-corruption campaign.
Xi launched an anti-corruption drive shortly after he took power in 2012, aimed at rooting out corruption at all levels of the Communist Party. The campaign, which targeted both high-ranking “tigers” and low-level “flies,” led to the investigation and punishment of hundreds of thousands of officials.
But the U.S.-backed intelligence agency Office of the Director of National Intelligence, or ODNI, said Xi’s relatives have retained significant financial holdings, and they may have benefited from political connections through private and state-owned businesses.
“Their [Chinese leaders’] senior-level positions would have granted access to privileged information and both private and state-owned enterprise actions could have advantaged family holdings due to their connections to persons with political power,” said the ODNI in a report released on Thursday. It didn’t identify any direct influence from the leaders contributing to growth in family investments.
But it warned that centralized power, a lack of independent oversight, and minimal accountability, especially at the provincial level, are systemic factors that allow corruption to thrive in China. The report said these factors enable government officials to increase their personal wealth through corruption at a rate estimated to be four to six times their official salaries.
“Higher-ranking officials, who have greater access to state resources, benefit the most from bribery and illicit financial dealings,” said the ODNI, citing membership in China’s National People’s Congress, or NPC, as an example.
“Potential benefits of NPC membership incentivize individuals to pay high costs to join, often through bribes, and to accept bribes while a member, or even upon completion of service, to facilitate business deals,” it added.
The NPC, China’s legislative body that serves primarily as a rubber-stamp parliament, is perceived as a status symbol and vehicle through which to gain access to sensitive government information.
Xi’s anti-corruption drive
Since taking power, Xi has positioned himself as a staunch opponent of corruption, launching an unprecedented crackdown within the Chinese Communist Party, or CCP, the government, and the military.
According to the ODNI, from 2012 to 2022, nearly five million officials have been investigated, with 4.7 million found guilty.
“In his words, Xi intended to make government officials ‘unable and unwilling to be corrupt,’” said the ODNI.
The report also acknowledged that Xi’s early anti-corruption investigations primarily targeted high-ranking officials associated with his predecessors.
But a decade-long drive widened its focus to officials from various factions, including those with close personal ties to Xi.
Notably, in recent months, Xi has removed several top military officials, including Defense Minister Li Shangfu and Admiral Miao Hua, both of whom were considered close allies.
Their abrupt dismissals underscore the CCP’s ongoing concerns about loyalty and military effectiveness, particularly within the People’s Liberation Army, which Xi has ordered to be combat-ready for a potential conflict over Taiwan by 2027.
Edited by Taejun Kang and Stephen Wright.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Alan Lu for RFA.
TAIPEI, Taiwan – Taiwan’s annual military exercises have set 2027 as the potential year of a Chinese invasion – the first time it has specified a particular date for the imagined offensive – as the island’s leader promised to increase its defense spending amid U.S. pressure.
Taiwan holds the Han Kuang Exercise annually to test its military readiness against potential Chinese invasion. The exercise, planned for July 9-18, will involve joint operations among the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps, featuring live-fire drills, amphibious landings, and simulated missile strikes.
In this year’s drills, the island plans to focus on simulating the defense of the island with scenarios based on a potential offensive in 2027, according to Taiwan’s defense ministry.
“The Han Kuang exercise has always been designed to simulate scenarios that could occur within the next one to two years,” the island’s defense minister Wellington Koo said in a press conference on Wednesday.
“With the acquisition of new weapon systems, our training must continuously undergo validation to ensure combat effectiveness,” Koo said.
China considers Taiwan a breakaway province and has ramped up military pressure through drills and incursions. Taiwan, however, sees itself as a sovereign state and continues to bolster its defenses.
Taiwan’s announcement came after U.S. Strategic Command Commander Anthony J. Cotton warned at a defense conference on Tuesday that as China accelerates its military expansion, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army, or PLA, could “seize Taiwan by 2027.”
In February, Taiwan’s defense ministry proposed to double the duration of the drillS to 10 from five days, while deploying more reserve brigades as part of the efforts to scale up its defensive strength.
Defense budget increase
Separately, Taiwan’s President Lai Ching-te announced on Thursday that the island would increase its defense budget to more than 3% of gross domestic product, or GDP.
Its current defense budget is approximately 2.4%.
In a speech to the American Chamber of Commerce on Thursday, Lai emphasized his administration’s commitment to ensuring the defense budget surpasses 3% of GDP while “continuing national defense reforms.”
Lai’s remarks were the most recent attempt to reassure both U.S. and domestic critics who argue that Taiwan is not investing enough in its own defense.
U.S. President Donald Trump has called on Taiwan to raise defense spending to as much as 10% of GDP – significantly higher than what the U.S. or its key allies allocate – in an effort to deter China.
Since Lai took office in May 2024, China has intensified pressure on Taiwan through heightened military activity, including large-scale joint air and sea exercises and frequent deployments of warplanes and naval vessels near the island.
It has also introduced new military equipment, such as landing barges designed for amphibious operations, and increased cyber and influence operations to sway public opinion in Taiwan.
Beijing announced in early March that it was increasing its 2025 defense budget by 7.2% to US$246 billion, marking the fourth consecutive year of more than 7% growth in defense spending.
“Taiwan plans to advance our cooperation with the U.S. and other democracies in upholding regional stability and prosperity,” Lai said.
Edited by Taejun Kang and Stephen Wright.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Alan Lu for RFA.
The Trump administration might let hundreds of millions of dollars in aid pledged to Pacific island nations during former President Joe Biden’s time in office stand, says New Zealand Foreign Minister Winston Peters.
The Biden administration pledged about $1 billion in aid to the Pacific to help counter China’s influence in the strategic region.
However, Trump last month froze all disbursements of aid by the US Agency for International Development (USAID), for 90 days pending a “review” of all aid spending under his “America First” policy.
Peters told reporters on Monday after meetings with Trump’s USAID acting head, Peter Marocco, and his national security adviser, Mike Waltz, “more confident” about the prospects of the aid being left alone than he was before.
Peters said he had a “very frank and open discussion” with American officials about how important the aid was for the Pacific, and insisted that they “get our point of view in terms of how essential it is”.
NZ Foreign Minister Winson Peters . . . . “We are looking ahead with more confidence than when we arrived.” Image: TVNZ 1News screenshot RNZ
“In our business, it’s wise to find out the results before you open your mouth, but we are looking ahead with more confidence than when we arrived,” Peters said, pushing back against claims that the Trump administration would be “pulling back” from the Pacific region.
“We don’t know that yet. Let’s find out in April, when that full review is done on USAID,” he said. “But we came away more confident than some of the alarmists might have been before we arrived.”
Frenzied diplomatic battle The Biden administration sought to rapidly expand US engagement with the small island nations of the Pacific after the Solomon Islands signed a controversial security pact with China three years ago.
The deal by the Solomon Islands sparked a frenzied diplomatic battle between Washington and Beijing for influence in the strategic region.
Biden subsequently hosted Pacific island leaders at back-to-back summits in Washington in September 2022 and 2023, the first two of their kind. He pledged hundreds of millions of dollars at both meets, appearing to tilt the region back toward Washington.
The first summit included announcements of some $800 billion in aid for the Pacific, while the second added about $200 billion.
But the region has since been rocked by the Trump administration’s decision to freeze all aid pending its ongoing review. The concerns have not been helped by a claim from Elon Musk, who Trump tasked with cutting government waste, that USAID would be shut down.
“You’ve got to basically get rid of the whole thing. It’s beyond repair. We’re shutting it down,” Musk said in a February 3 livestreamed video.
However, the New Zealand foreign minister, who also met with Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Tuesday, said he held out hope that Washington would not turn back on its fight for influence in the Pacific.
“The first Trump administration turned more powerfully towards the Pacific . . . than any previous administration,” he said, “and now they’ve got Trump back again, and we hope for the same into the future.”
Radio Free Asia is an online news service affiliated with BenarNews. Republished from BenarNews with permission.
This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.
Global CEOs including Qualcomm’s Cristiano Amon and Saudi Aramco’s Amin Nasser will travel to Beijing next week for an annual development forum, with some likely to meet with President Xi Jinping and other Chinese leaders, according to Bloomberg and Barron’s.
More than 70 executives from companies including FedEx, Pfizer, Siemens, BMW, Mercedes-Benz and Blackstone Group are flocking to the China Development Forum on March 23, Reuters reported.
They will be hosted at the Diaoyutai State Guesthouse from March 23-24, while any meetings with Xi will take place on March 28, the agency quoted a source familiar with the matter as saying.
Cristiano Amon, CEO of Qualcomm, participates in the keynote conversation at CES 2024, in Las Vegas, Nevada, U.S. Jan.10, 2024.(Steve Marcus/Reuters)
China has said it will take steps to “stabilize” foreign investment amid plummeting investment inflows in recent years.
Inbound foreign direct investment, or FDI, fell by 13.7% in 2023 to US$163 billion, according to statistics from the Ministry of Commerce, although the country remained the number four destination for investors in the world, according to the International Monetary Fund.
Investor confidence has been hit by “slower-than-expected economic recovery following COVID-19, lower prospects for long-term growth, capital controls, lack of policy predictability and regulatory transparency, and tensions in the U.S.-China relationship,” according to the U.S. State Department’s 2024 Investment Climate Statement.
Is Chinese economy slumping?
U.S.-based current affairs commentator Guo Baosheng said that despite the official claims of a 5% growth rate, China’s economy has entered a recession.
“This forum is mainly aimed at the bosses of large global companies, hoping that they will come to China to invest,” Guo told RFA Mandarin.
“Xi Jinping is hoping to send a clear signal to the world that China will continue to remain open and attract more investment,” he said.
“At the same time, China is also responding to Trump’s China policy, hoping to downplay the impact of U.S. tariffs on China and boost the economy to surpass the United States.”
Financial commentator Si Ling said the majority of reported attendees are from the United States.
“China still regards the United States as a very important economic and trade partner,” Si said.
“Xi Jinping seems to be showing goodwill to multinational executives to show he’s sincere about more [economic] openness, but actually he is using both soft and hard tactics,” he said.
“There are rumors that Xi Jinping will meet with U.S. President Donald Trump this year, and that there may even be a state visit,” Si said, adding that Xi is hoping strengthen his hand in negotiations with Washington by boosting foreign investment by major companies.
Trust in Chinese government
Xi is also relying on their investments to boost China’s flagging economic growth, yet it remains to be seen whether potential foreign investors have enough trust in the Chinese government to follow through, he said.
The Financial Times reported that Xi may meet with some 20 of the invited CEOs on March 28, but that arrangements have yet to be finalized, and that some executives are unwilling to stay in Beijing for four days after the Forum wraps up.
According to current affairs commentator Gu Yi, much is riding on this meeting for Xi Jinping.
Allan Gabor, chairman of AmCham Shanghai, attend the China International Import Expo, in Shanghai, China November 6, 2024.(Nicoco Chan/Reuters)
“Xi Jinping is hoping to establish his supreme position as core leader of the economy as well as in politics,” Gu said.
“He’s not just looking to turn around China’s economic outlook — he wants to have a profound impact on the global economic landscape,” he said.
According to Reuters, Chubb CEO Evan Greenberg and Mastercard CEO Michael Miebach are scheduled to attend, as well as the CEOs of Brookfield Asset Management, investment fund Franklin Templeton and pharma giants Eli Lilly and Medtonic.
Top European executives will also be in the mix, with executives from Novartis, Siemens, Nestle, Deutsche Bank and Møller-Mærsk scheduled to be at the Forum alongside Inter IKEA, Thyssenkrupp and insurer Swiss Re, it said.
According to a list seen by Reuters, South Korean chip giant SK Hynix is sending its CEO Kwak Noh-Jung, while Brazilian aerospace manufacturer Embraer’s CEO Francisco Gomes Neto and Indian steelmaker Tata Sons Chairman Natarajan Chandrasekaran will also attend.
Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Malcolm Foster.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Qian Lang for RFA Mandarin.
The vast majority of people in Greenland oppose becoming part of the United States, despite Donald Trump’s threats to colonize their land.
A staggering 85% of Greenlanders do not want to join the US, according to a poll published in January by a Greenlandic newspaper.
Just 6% of people in Greenland support Trump’s proposal to annex their homeland. (The remaining 9% are undecided.) Greenland is an autonomous territory of Denmark, although polls have long shown that the majority of people there, who are of indigenous Inuit descent, consider themselves to be a separate country and want formal independence.
TAPEI, Taiwan – South Korean and Chinese authorities faced off at sea for two hours last month after Chinese authorities blocked the South’s attempt to investigate a steel structure set up by Beijing in their overlapping waters in the Yellow Sea, according to South Korea’s foreign ministry.
The standoff occurred on Feb. 26, when South Korea’s Korea Institute of Ocean Science and Technology deployed its research vessel RV Onnuri to examine the structure in the Provisional Measures Zone, or PMZ – a contested area where the exclusive economic zones of both nations overlap.
South Korean intelligence had earlier detected China’s construction of a mobile steel structure measuring more than 50 meters in both height and diameter in the waterway, also known as the North Sea
As the RV Onnuri approached, four Chinese personnel in two rubber boats intercepted it, preventing South Korean researchers from deploying inspection equipment, officials from the South’s foreign ministry told media.
Although the South Korean vessel said its investigation was legitimate, the Chinese side said the structure was an aquafarm and asked the Korean vessel to leave.
In response, South Korea’s coast guard dispatched patrol ships, resulting in a standoff with Chinese maritime authorities that lasted for two hours.
Some of the Chinese civilians were reportedly carrying knives but no physical clash occurred.
“We have delivered our firm position to China regarding the reported incident,” South Korea’s foreign ministry spokesperson Lee Jae-woong said in a press briefing on Tuesday.
“We are actively working with related government agencies to ensure the legitimate maritime rights and interests in the Yellow Sea.”
China has neither declined nor acknowledged the reports.
Such confrontations are rare between China and U.S. ally South Korea, which have built up extensive business relations despite China’s support for South Korea’s main rival, North Korea.
In a response to a question about the reported dispute, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Mao Ning said that she was “not familiar with the specifics” but added that the situation in the Yellow Sea was “stable.”
“Regarding the maritime disputes between the two sides, China and the ROK maintain sound communication through the dialogue and cooperation mechanism of maritime affairs, and the maritime law enforcement authorities of the two countries also have smooth communication channels,” said Ning, referring to South Korea by its official name, the Republic of Korea.
South Korea and China signed a China-ROK Fishery Agreement in August 2000, which came into effect in June 2001. The agreement established a PMZ in the Yellow Sea, allowing fishing vessels from both countries to operate within the zone and the joint management of marine resources.
The agreement prohibits any activity beyond navigation and fishing in the PMZ.
Despite the agreement, China has installed several large steel structures in the zone, including two in April and May of last year, and another this year, raising concerns in South Korea over potential territorial disputes.
China has insisted that the structures are for aquaculture purposes.
Edited by Mike Firn.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Taejun Kang for RFA.
Chinese officials have ordered Uyghurs in the northwestern region of Xinjiang to send video proof that they are not fasting during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, according to police officers and social media posts by Uyghurs.
In a post on the Chinese social media platform Douyin, a resident of Peyziwat county in Kashgar prefecture said he must record a video of himself eating lunch every day until Eid al-Fitr, the holiday marking the end of Ramadan, which this year falls on March 29.
He said he must then send the video to the village cadre responsible for overseeing people living in the community, adding that he’s been doing this “to stay out of trouble.”
“Wherever I go, be it the market or the hospital, I must record a video of me having lunch every day and send it to the village cadre,” he says. “My daily proof is being saved on my phone.”
Daytime fasting during Ramadan is one of the Five Pillars of Islam, and most Muslims around the world observe the practice freely.
But for years now, China has banned fasting during Ramadan as part of broader restrictions and bans on religious practice among Muslims in Xinjiang under the guise stamping out religious extremism. Chinese officials also have forbidden Uyghurs from gathering at mosques to pray on Fridays and from observing Muslim holidays.
That, in turn, is part of the China’s even wider, systematic persecution of Uyghurs and their culture, which has included mass detentions, forced labor and efforts to replace the Uyghur language.
Police confirmation
Police and government officials across Xinjiang contacted by Radio Free Asia confirmed that residents are being required to provide proof that they are not eating during Ramadan.
A police officer in Peyziwat county said residents there, including Uyghur police, did not have permission to fast during Ramadan.
“We implemented a system in which residents need to send us video proof that they did not fast during Ramadan,” she said. “I have residents who send their proof to me.”
The measure is being carried out in Gulbagh, Bayawat and Terim townships of Peyziwat county, she said.
A staff member of a government office in Peyziwat county, who declined to be identified so he could speak freely, said that submitting videos as proof that Uyghurs are not fasting has been implemented countywide.
Cadres at lower government levels are requiring residents to send them their videos of eating meals between sunrise and sunset, though the orders from higher-up officials didn’t specify this, he said.
They decided it would be an effective method to ensure that no one under their supervision would fast during Ramadan, the staffer said.
Some cadres even telephoned residents demanding they show that they were eating on the spot, he added.
So far, Uyghur residents have not refused their demand because they are aware that others currently detained have been punished for fasting during previous Ramadans, he said.
Collective feast
A staff member of a government office in Peyziwat’s Misha township said that in addition to the video requirement, authorities are planning a collective feast for the general public to ensure that Uyghurs are eating during the day, she said.
“To disrupt the activities of people who secretly fast, we are planning to organize collective eating activities,” she said.
A staffer at the state security branch of the Kucha County Police Bureau said that “even older people above the age of 65 cannot fast. We have a printed document about this restriction.”
So far this year, Xinjiang government officials and Chinese state media have been relatively quiet about the holy month.
In previous years, authorities held public meetings warning Muslims not to fast and patrolled Uyghur neighborhoods, inspecting homes during daytime and spying on residents at night to make sure they were eating.
They also enforced measures to make sure that Uyghur-run restaurants remained open, distributed food and drink to Uyghur government staff, and organized collective feasts.
“As Muslims around the world observe Ramadan in prayer and reflection, Uyghur Muslims are imprisoned, enslaved in forced labor, and suffocated under relentless surveillance,” said Rushan Abbas, executive director of the Washington-based Campaign for Uyghurs, in a statement on Feb. 28, at the start of Ramadan.
“Stripped of their religious freedom, they are banned from fasting, praying, or even identifying as Muslim — while the Chinese regime brazenly continues its crimes against them.”
Translated by RFA Uyghur. Edited by Roseanne Gerin and Malcolm Foster.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Shohret Hoshur for RFA Uyghur.
In the year since Hong Kong passed its “Article 23” legislation, national security police have hauled in the friends of a pro-democracy activist in Taiwan over comments he made on social media, and are increasingly monitoring people’s social media interactions.
Fu Tong, who now lives in democratic Taiwan, said police back home seem to be targeting online speech since the passing of a second national security law that includes a broader “sedition” offense than earlier legislation.
“It’s pretty serious now,” Fu told RFA in an interview on Monday. “Before, they would just read my posts. But since Article 23, they have even been monitoring my interactions with my friends.”
A friend of his was hauled in for questioning by national security police after Fu left a comment on their Facebook account, he said.
“Now, I daren’t leave comments on my friends’ Facebook [posts],” he said.
Images of activists Simon Cheng, Frances Hui, Joey Siu, Johnny Fok and Tony Choi are displayed during a press conference to issue arrest warrants in Hong Kong, Dec. 14, 2023.(Tyrone Siu/Reuters)
The Safeguarding National Security bill, commonly known as Article 23, was passed on March 23, 2024.
It came amid a crackdown on dissent that has used both the 2020 National Security Law and colonial-era sedition laws to prosecute and jail people for protest and political opposition in unprecedented numbers.
Chilling effect
The government said the legislation was needed to plug “loopholes” left by the 2020 National Security Law and claims it is needed to deal with clandestine activity by “foreign forces” in the city, which the ruling Communist Party blames for the 2019 mass protest movement that was sparked by plans to allow extradition to mainland China.
The law proposes sentences of up to life imprisonment for “treason,” “insurrection,” “sabotage” and “mutiny,” 20 years for espionage and 10 years for crimes linked to “state secrets” and “sedition.”
It also allows the authorities to revoke the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region passports of anyone who flees overseas, and to target overseas activists with financial sanctions.
Human rights lawyer Chow Hang-tung is seen inside a vehicle after being detained in Hong Kong, Sept. 8, 2021.(Tyrone Siu/Reuters)
The concept of “collusion with foreign forces ” runs throughout the draft bill, and sentences are harsher where “foreign forces” are deemed to be involved.
Fu said Article 23 has had a chilling effect on Hong Kong-related activism, even overseas, with fewer exiled Hong Kongers turning out for protests and other events in Taiwan.
He said activists still plan to go ahead with a protest marking the first anniversary of the Article 23 legislation in Taipei on Sunday, however.
Eric Lai, a research fellow at the Center for Asian Law, Georgetown University, said there are other examples of the law being used to censor social media.
In May 2024, Hong Kong police arrested jailed human rights lawyer Chow Hang-tung and five other people — the first arrests to be made under the recently passed Article 23 security law — for making social media posts with “seditious intent” ahead of the anniversary of the June 4, 1989, Tiananmen Square massacre.
Being watched
He said the government is using the legislation to bolster the feeling that ordinary people are being watched.
“Over the past year, the most common charge used to prosecute people under Article 23 has been sedition,” Lai said. “Sedition is kind of a catch-all offense, and the government is using it to target more ordinary Hong Kongers.”
“The point is to warn Hong Kongers that they’re not immune just because they’re not a political figure … and that ordinary people are also being monitored when they go online,” he said.
Eric Lai, a research fellow at the Center for Asian Law at Georgetown University, is seen in an undated photo.(Tang Zheng/RFA)
The government hasn’t made public details of the number of prosecutions under the law to date, but Lai said that the cases that make the news may only be the tip of the iceberg.
He said the recent confiscation of exiled pro-democracy lawmaker Ted Hui’s assets only came to light because Hui himself spoke out about it.
He said the law grants sweeping powers of surveillance to the authorities, increasing the size of the police dragnet to include everyday comments and activities.
“The biggest difference between Article 23 and the 2020 National Security Law is that Article 23 provides more powers for the Hong Kong government to chip away at the system,” Lai said.
“The government can decide not to parole people if it judges them to be a threat to national security, and it can prevent defendants from seeing a lawyer, and hold them in police stations for longer than before,” he said.
He said it was significant that the Court of Appeal allowed an injunction against the banned 2019 protest anthem “Glory to Hong Kong” after the Article 23 legislation was passed.
Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Malcolm Foster.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Chen Zifei for RFA Mandarin.
Australia must stare down the Trump administration’s attempt to influence research by applying a consistent approach to foreign interference, former Higher Education and Science minister Kim Carr says. The former Victorian senator joined scientists in warning current members of parliament have not done enough to confront the Trump administration’s attempts to influence Australian research areas…
TAIPEI, Taiwan – China has increased incursions by its aircraft and warships in the Taiwan Strait with 59 sorties reported from Monday evening to Tuesday morning, as it repeated warnings against any “external interference” on the “Taiwan question.”
Taiwan’s ministry of defense said 43 of the sorties crossed the median line in the strait, which has long served as the de-facto boundary between the self-governed island and the mainland.
Besides fighter jets, a number of unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones, were deployed, as well as two balloons.
Taiwan’s armed forces “closely monitor maritime and aerial activities,” and are conducting joint operations to track and respond to Chinese incursions, the island’s ministry said.
Beijing considers Taiwan a breakaway province that needs to be “reunified” with China, by force if necessary.
China has waged a campaign against what it sees as “separatist” efforts by Taiwan and warned other countries against “meddling in the Taiwan issue.”
Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told a regular press briefing on Monday that Beijing “firmly opposes official interaction of any form between China’s Taiwan region and countries having diplomatic ties with China.”
“The Taiwan question is at the core of China’s core interests, which brooks no external interference,” Mao said, repeating a long-held position.
“The government of the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal government representing the whole of China,” the spokeswoman said. “Taiwan is never a country, not in the past, and never in the future.”
China often steps up incursions and warnings in response to visits to the island by U.S. legislators, or visits overseas by the island’s leader, but there was no obvious factor being this week’s activity apart from recent diplomatic efforts by Taiwan to reinforce cooperation with “like-minded” countries and democracies.
Taiwan air force F-16V fighter jets during an undated exercise in this photo released on Feb. 21, 2025(Taiwan defense ministry)
Taiwan immediately dismissed the Chinese spokesperson’s comments.
“Such clichés that contradict the facts, reverse right and wrong, and go against the will of the 23.5 million Taiwanese people are not worth refuting,” the island’s foreign ministry said.
The ministry reiterated its position that Taiwan is “a sovereign and independent country.”
“China has no right to interfere in the exercise of any legitimate rights of a sovereign state,” it said.
Foreign ministers of the Group 7 world’s most developed countries emphasized at a meeting last week “the importance of maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait.”
The ministers reiterated in a statement their opposition to any unilateral attempts to change the status quo by force or coercion.
Edited by Mike Firn.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by RFA Staff.
A Taiwanese editor who published many books banned in China was tried last month in Shanghai on charges of “secession,” a government spokesperson said in comments widely reported by the island’s media.
Li Yanhe, more widely known by his pen-name Fucha, or Fuchsia, was detained some time in March 2023 after traveling to China to cancel his household registration as part of his naturalization as a citizen of democratic Taiwan.
Li, who is ethnically Manchu, founded the Eight Banners imprint under Taiwan’s Book Republic publishing group in 2009, using it to publish non-fiction works on China’s overseas infiltration and influence operations, the 1989 Tiananmen massacre, and other work critical of Beijing.
He is among hundreds of Taiwanese nationals to disappear in China over the past 10 years, rights groups told the United Nations in December.
“The Shanghai No. 1 Intermediate People’s Court held a public trial and issued a verdict in the first instance on Feb. 17, 2025,” Taiwan’s Central News Agency quoted a spokesperson for China’s Taiwan Affairs Office as saying.
No verdict has yet been issued, according to reports in the United Daily News and Central News Agency.
“The court tried the case strictly in accordance with the law and fully protected the various litigation rights enjoyed by Li Yanhe and his defense counsel in accordance with the law,” spokesperson Chen Binhua told Central News Agency.
Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council told the agency it was aware of all of the details of Li’s case, but wasn’t making them public in accordance with his family’s wishes.
Taiwanese publisher Li Yanhe, better known by his pen-name Fucha, left, in an undated photo, left.(Eight Banners Publishing House via Facebook)
“The fundamental purpose of the Chinese Communist Party’s detention of Fu Cha is to create a chilling effect in Taiwan’s cultural and academic circles,” the Council was quoted as saying. “This case clearly shows the authoritarian nature of Chinese Communist Party rule.”
It said the case had once more demonstrated that Taiwanese nationals should be aware of the risks associated with travel to China.
Public trials are ‘meaningless’
Taiwanese rights activist and NGO worker Lee Ming-cheh, who served a five-year prison sentence in China after disappearing on a visit there himself, dismissed the claim that Li had had a “public trial.”
“Public trials in China are meaningless,” Lee told RFA Mandarin on March 17. “Who was it open to?”
“China did not proactively inform the outside world of Fu Cha’s verdict,” he said. “Today, it responded passively responding to a question about an allegedly secret trial.”
According to Lee, the charge of secession can be laid against anyone who doesn’t support Beijing’s territorial claim on the island.
“Anyone who doesn’t support their one country, two systems idea is basically an independence activist in the view of the Chinese government,” Lee said, adding that Li could wind up making a forced public statement in future.
Taiwan was ruled as a Japanese colony in the 50 years prior to the end of World War II, but was handed back to the 1911 Republic of China under the Kuomintang, or KMT, government as part of Tokyo’s post-war reparation deal.
The KMT made its capital there after losing a civil war to Mao Zedong’s communists that led to the founding of the People’s Republic of China.
While the Chinese Communist Party claims Taiwan as an “inalienable” part of its territory, Taiwan has never been ruled by the current regime in Beijing, nor has it ever formed part of the People’s Republic of China.
Zeng Jianyuan, chairman of the overseas-based New School for Democracy, said the authorities have yet to make the verdict public.
“This case is attracting international attention, yet the media and human rights groups following the case have no way of finding out what the verdict was,” Zeng said. “The Taiwan Affairs Office is simply talking nonsense.”
According to Article 103, Section 2 of China’s Criminal Law, those who “incite secession and undermine national unity” can receive jail terms of “no less than five years” if their case is deemed serious.
There are also concerns that China will treat Li as a Chinese national and refuse to allow him to return home to Taiwan after his sentence has been served, Lee said.
Viewed as a ‘traitor’
Li had intended to renounce his Chinese household registration on his trip as part of his naturalization process as a citizen of Taiwan, but had been detained before he could get to it, he said.
“If the Chinese government treats him as a Chinese national, then he won’t be allowed back to Taiwan when his sentence is complete,” Lee said.
Zeng said Beijing regards Li as a “traitor” because he retains his Chinese nationality and his membership of the ruling Chinese Communist Party.
“That’s why the Chinese Communist Party wants to punish him severely,” Zeng said.
Li was born in the northeastern Chinese province of Liaoning to a Manchu family, and joined the Chinese Communist Party after graduating from university, before rising to become vice president of the Shanghai Literature & Art Publishing House.
He married a Taiwanese woman in 1996, and settled in Taiwan in 2009. His last Facebook post was made on March 12, 2023.
The Republic of China has remained a sovereign and independent state since 1911, now ruling just four islands: Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu.
The island began a transition to democracy following the death of KMT leader Chiang Kai-shek’s son, President Chiang Ching-kuo, in January 1988, starting with direct elections to the legislature in the early 1990s and culminating in the first direct election of a president, Lee Teng-hui, in 1996.
Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Malcolm Foster
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Huang Chun-mei for RFA Mandarin, RFA Cantonese.
BANGKOK—The company at the vanguard of plans to mine deep sea metals used in electric vehicle batteries has surrendered a third of its Pacific Ocean exploration area after a breakdown in cooperation with the island nation of Kiribati, paving the way for China to add to its regional foothold in the contentious industry.
The Nasdaq-traded The Metals Company, or TMC, said in a U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission filing it terminated, effective mid-January, an agreement with a Kiribati state-owned company that gave it exploration rights to a 74,990 square kilometer (28,950 square mile) area of seabed in the northeastern Pacific.
The termination appears to be at the instigation of Kiribati, one of the 19 countries exercising rights over sea bed in a vast area of international waters in the Pacific regulated by the International Seabed Authority, or ISA, a U.N. body.
Kiribati’s Ministry of Fisheries and Ocean Resources said on Monday it held talks last week with China’s ambassador to “explore potential collaboration for the sustainable exploration of the deep ocean resources.”
Mining of the potato-sized metallic nodules that carpet swathes of the sea bed is touted as a source of minerals needed for green technologies, such as electric vehicles, that would reduce reliance on fossil fuels.
Skeptics say such minerals are already abundant on land and warn that mining the sea bed could cause irreparable damage to an ocean environment that is still poorly understood by science.
It has been a divisive issue in the Pacific, where some economically lagging island nations see deep sea mining as a potential financial windfall that could lift living standards and reduce reliance on foreign aid while other island states are strongly opposed.
A polymetallic nodule from the seabed is displayed at a mining convention in Toronto, Canada on Mar. 4, 2019.(Chris Helgren/Reuters)
Kiribati told the ISA in June last year that exploration of its area hadn’t progressed due to the COVID-19 pandemic and “operational difficulties with its technical partner,” DeepGreen Engineering, a subsidiary of TMC.
An ISA report on Kiribati’s progress toward deep sea mining said it had indicated it was looking for a new partner.
Industry in trouble?
The new path for Kiribati comes as environmental groups raise fresh questions about the viability of an industry that has long promoted a renewable energy narrative to deflect criticism.
Amid a general retreat by large corporations from commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, TMC and other deep sea mining companies have shifted to emphasizing national security, defense and mineral supply security as benefits of the industry, said Greenpeace deep sea mining campaigner, Louisa Casson.
The shift has come, she said, after some battery and car manufacturers said they didn’t want to use deep sea minerals and as an evolution in battery technology could reduce the need for some of the minerals in deep sea nodules.
Casson said this was clouding the outlook for deep sea miners and TMC’s surrender of a third of its exploration area was “another sign of a stuttering industry.”
“The self-styled industry frontrunner is crumbling. The last weeks have repeatedly shown that the deep sea mining industry is failing to live up to its hype and downsizing plans before it’s even started,” Casson said.
“There’s never been a better time for governments to take decisive action to protect the ocean from this faltering, risky industry.”
TMC’s chief executive, Gerard Barron, did not respond to a request for comment.
Other signs of the industry’s troubles, Casson said, include a Norwegian deep sea mining company halving its small workforce due to lack of financing and another miner, Impossible Metals, delaying mining trials planned for early 2026.
Closer China ties
A presentation TMC gave to investors in February said preliminary results of its research into the environmental effects of deep sea mining were “encouraging.”
Based on mining tests TMC conducted, marine life returns to the seabed after a year and sediment plumes generated by the giant machines that hoover up the nodules are released at depths deeper than tuna fisheries, it said.
Research not linked to the industry, meanwhile, has shown that the site of a deep sea mining test in 1979 has not recovered more than 40 years later.
China’s President Xi Jinping and Kiribati’s President Taneti Maamau (left) attend a welcoming ceremony at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, China Jan. 6, 2020.(Jason Lee/Reuters)
The permanent secretary of Kiribati’s ocean resources ministry, Riibeta Abeta, didn’t respond to questions.
The low-lying atoll nation of some 120,000 people in Micronesia has cultivated closer ties to China in the past decade while its relations with traditional donors New Zealand and Australia have become strained. It’s part of a tectonic shift in the region as China uses infrastructure and aid to challenge U.S. dominance.
China last month signed agreements including cooperation on deep sea mining with the semiautonomous Cook Islands in the South Pacific, angering its traditional benefactor New Zealand.
The Cook Islands has an abundance of polymetallic nodules within its exclusive economic zone and doesn’t require ISA approval to exploit them.
The Cook Islands hopes for an economic windfall but some of its citizens are concerned about environmental damage and the mining industry’s influence in their country including public relations efforts in schools and funding for community organizations.
Aside from Kiribati, The Metals Company has agreements with Tonga and Nauru to explore and eventually mine their areas in the Clarion Clipperton Zone—the ISA-administered seafloor in the northeastern Pacific.
Its work with Nauru appears to be the furthest advanced. This month, TMC said it was finalizing an application to the ISA for approval to begin mining in the area allocated to Nauru, a 21-square kilometer island home to 10,000 people.
Edited by Mike Firn.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Stephen Wright for RFA.
Australia is caught in a jam, between an assertive American ally and a bold Chinese trading partner. America is accelerating its pivot to the Indo-Pacific, building up its fighting forces and expanding its military bases.
As Australia tries to navigate a pathway between America’s and Australia’s national interests, sometimes Australia’s national interest seems to submerge out of view.
Admiral David Johnston, the Chief of the Australia’s Defence Force, is steering this ship as China flexes its muscle sending a small warship flotilla south to circumnavigate the continent.
He has admitted that the first the Defence Force heard of a live-fire exercise by the three Chinese Navy ships sailing in the South Pacific east of Australia on February 21, was a phone call from the civilian Airservices Australia.
“The absence of any advance notice to Australian authorities was a concern, notably, that the limited notice provided by the PLA could have unnecessarily increased the risk to aircraft and vessels in the area,” Johnston told Senate Estimates .
Johnston was pressed to clarify how Defence first came to know of the live-fire drill: “Is it the case that Defence was only notified, via Virgin and Airservices Australia, 28 minutes [sic] after the firing window commenced?”
To this, Admiral Johnston replied: “Yes.”
If it happened as stated by the Admiral — that a live-fire exercise by the Chinese ships was undertaken and a warning notice was transmitted from the Chinese ships, all without being detected by Australian defence and surveillance assets — this is a defence failure of considerable significance.
Sources with knowledge of Defence spoken to by Declassified Australia say that this is either a failure of surveillance, or a failure of communication, or even more far-reaching, a failure of US alliance cooperation.
And from the very start the official facts became slippery.
Our latest investigation –
AUSTRALIA’S DEFENCE: NAVIGATING US-CHINA TENSIONS
We investigate a significant intelligence failure to detect live-firing by Chinese warships near Australia, has exposed Defence weaknesses, and the fact that when it counts, we are all alone.
— Declassified Australia (@DeclassifiedAus) March 7, 2025
What did they know and when did they know it The first information passed on to Defence by Airservices Australia came from the pilot of a Virgin passenger jet passing overhead the flotilla in the Tasman Sea that had picked up the Chinese Navy VHF radio notification of an impending live-fire exercise.
The radio transmission had advised the window for the live-fire drill commenced at 9.30am and would conclude at 3pm.
We know this from testimony given to Senate Estimates by the head of Airservices Australia. He said Airservices was notified at 9.58am by an aviation control tower informed by the Virgin pilot. Two minutes later Airservices issued a “hazard alert” to commercial airlines in the area.
The Headquarters of the Defence Force’s Joint Operations Command (HJOC), at Bungendore 30km east of Canberra, was then notified about the drill by Airservices at 10.08am, 38 minutes after the drill window had commenced.
When questioned a few days later, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese appeared to try to cover for Defence’s apparent failure to detect the live-fire drill or the advisory transmission.
“At around the same time, there were two areas of notification. One was from the New Zealand vessels that were tailing . .. the [Chinese] vessels in the area by both sea and air,” Albanese stated. “So that occurred and at the same time through the channels that occur when something like this is occurring, Airservices got notified as well.”
But the New Zealand Defence Force had not notified Defence “at the same time”. In fact it was not until 11.01am that an alert was received by Defence from the New Zealand Defence Force — 53 minutes after Defence HQ was told by Airservices and an hour and a half after the drill window had begun.
The Chinese Navy’s stealth guided missile destroyer Zunyi, sailing south in the Coral Sea on February 15, 2025, in a photograph taken from a RAAF P-8A Poseidon surveillance plane. Image: Royal Australian Air Force/Declassified Australia
Defence Minister Richard Marles later in a round-about way admitted on ABC Radio that it wasn’t the New Zealanders who informed Australia first: “Well, to be clear, we weren’t notified by China. I mean, we became aware of this during the course of the day.
“What China did was put out a notification that it was intending to engage in live firing. By that I mean a broadcast that was picked up by airlines or literally planes that were commercial planes that were flying across the Tasman.”
Later the Chinese Ambassador to Australia, Xiao Qian, told ABC that two live-fire training drills were carried out at sea on February 21 and 22, in accordance with international law and “after repeatedly issuing safety notices in advance”.
Eyes and ears on ‘every move’ It was expected the Chinese-navy flotilla would end its three week voyage around Australia on March 7, after a circumnavigation of the continent. That is not before finally passing at some distance the newly acquired US-UK nuclear submarine base at HMAS Stirling near Perth and the powerful US communications and surveillance base at North West Cape.
Just as Australia spies on China to develop intelligence and targeting for a potential US war, China responds in kind, collecting data on US military and intelligence bases and facilities in Australia, as future targets should hostilities commence.
The presence of the Chinese Navy ships that headed into the northern and eastern seas around Australia attracted the attention of the Defence Department ever since they first set off south through the Mindoro Strait in the Philippines and through the Indonesian archipelago from the South China Sea on February 3.
“We are keeping a close watch on them and we will be making sure that we watch every move,” Marles stated in the week before the live-fire incident.
“Just as they have a right to be in international waters . . . we have a right to be prudent and to make sure that we are surveilling them, which is what we are doing.”
Around 3500 km to the north, a week into the Chinese ships’ voyage, a spy flight by an RAAF P-8A Poseidon surveillance plane on February 11, in a disputed area of the South China Sea south of China’s Hainan Island, was warned off by a Chinese J-16 fighter jet.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry responded to Australian protests claiming the Australian aircraft “deliberately intruded” into China’s claimed territorial airspace around the Paracel Islands without China’s permission, thereby “infringing on China’s sovereignty and endangering China’s national security”.
Australia criticised the Chinese manoeuvre, defending the Australian flight saying it was “exercising the right to freedom of navigation and overflight in international waters and airspace”.
Two days after the incident, the three Chinese ships on their way to Australian waters were taking different routes in beginning their own “right to freedom of navigation” in international waters off the Australian coast. The three ships formed up their mini flotilla in the Coral Sea as they turned south paralleling the Australian eastern coastline outside of territorial waters, and sometimes within Australia’s 200-nautical-mile (370 km) Exclusive Economic Zone.
“Defence always monitors foreign military activity in proximity to Australia. This includes the Peoples Liberation Army-Navy (PLA-N) Task Group.” Admiral Johnston told Senate Estimates.
“We have been monitoring the movement of the Task Group through its transit through Southeast Asia and we have observed the Task Group as it has come south through that region.”
The Task Group was made up of a modern stealth guided missile destroyer Zunyi, the frigate Hengyang, and the Weishanhu, a 20,500 tonne supply ship carrying fuel, fresh water, cargo and ammunition. The Hengyang moved eastwards through the Torres Strait, while the Zunyi and Weishanhu passed south near Bougainville and Solomon Islands, meeting in the Coral Sea.
This map indicates the routes taken by the three Chinese Navy ships on their “right to freedom of navigation” voyage in international waters circumnavigating Australia, with dates of way points indicated — from 3 February till 6 March 2025. Distances and locations are approximate. Image: Weibo/Declassified Australia
As the Chinese ships moved near northern Australia and through the Coral Sea heading further south, the Defence Department deployed Navy and Air Force assets to watch over the ships. These included various RAN warships including the frigate HMAS Arunta and a RAAF P-8A Poseidon intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance plane.
With unconfirmed reports a Chinese nuclear submarine may also be accompanying the surface ships, the monitoring may have also included one of the RAN’s Collins-class submarines, with their active range of sonar, radar and radio monitoring – however it is uncertain whether one was able to be made available from the fleet.
“From the point of time the first of the vessels entered into our more immediate region, we have been conducting active surveillance of their activities,” the Defence chief confirmed.
As the Chinese ships moved into the southern Tasman Sea, New Zealand navy ships joined in the monitoring alongside Australia’s Navy and Air Force.
The range of signals intelligence (SIGINT) that theoretically can be intercepted emanating from a naval ship at sea includes encrypted data and voice satellite communications, ship-to-ship communications, aerial drone data and communications, as well as data of radar, gunnery, and weapon launches.
There are a number of surveillance facilities in Australia that would have been able to be directed at the Chinese ships.
Australian Signals Directorate’s (ASD) Shoal Bay Receiving Station outside of Darwin, picks up transmissions and data emanating from radio signals and satellite communications from Australia’s near north region. ASD’s Cocos Islands receiving station in the mid-Indian ocean would have been available too.
The Jindalee Operational Radar Network (JORN) over-the-horizon radar network, spread across northern Australia, is an early warning system that monitors aircraft and ship movements across Australia’s north-western, northern, and north-eastern ocean areas — but its range off the eastern coast is not thought to presently reach further south than the sea off Mackay on the Queensland coast.
Of land-based surveillance facilities, it is the American Pine Gap base that is believed to have the best capability of intercepting the ship’s radio communications in the Tasman Sea.
Enter, Pine Gap and the Americans The US satellite surveillance base at Pine Gap in Central Australia is a US and Australian jointly-run satellite ground station. It is regarded as the most important such American satellite base outside of the USA.
The spy base – Joint Defence Facility Pine Gap (JDFPG) – showing the north-eastern corner of the huge base with some 18 of the base’s now 45 satellite dishes and covered radomes visible. Image: Felicity Ruby/Declassified Australia
The role of ASD in supporting the extensive US surveillance mission against China is increasingly valued by Australia’s large Five Eyes alliance partner.
A Top Secret ‘Information Paper’, titled “NSA Intelligence Relationship with Australia”, leaked from the National Security Agency (NSA) by Edward Snowden and published by ABC’s Background Briefing, spells out the “close collaboration” between the NSA and ASD, in particular on China:
“Increased emphasis on China will not only help ensure the security of Australia, but also synergize with the U.S. in its renewed emphasis on Asia and the Pacific . . . Australia’s overall intelligence effort on China, as a target, is already significant and will increase.”
The Pine Gap base, as further revealed in 2023 by Declassified Australia, is being used to collect signals intelligence and other data from the Israeli battlefield of Gaza, and also Ukraine and other global hotspots within view of the US spy satellites.
It’s recently had a significant expansion (reported by this author in The Saturday Paper) which has seen its total of satellite dishes and radomes rapidly increase in just a few years from 35 to 45 to accommodate new heightened-capability surveillance satellites.
Pine Gap base collects an enormous range and quantity of intelligence and data from thermal imaging satellites, photographic reconnaissance satellites, and signals intelligence (SIGINT) satellites, as expert researchers Des Ball, Bill Robinson and Richard Tanter of the Nautilus Institute have detailed.
These SIGINT satellites intercept electronic communications and signals from ground-based sources, such as radio communications, telemetry, radar signals, satellite communications, microwave emissions, mobile phone signals, and geolocation data.
Alliance priorities The US’s SIGINT satellites have a capability to detect and receive signals from VHF radio transmissions on or near the earth’s surface, but they need to be tasked to do so and appropriately targeted on the source of the transmission.
For the Pine Gap base to intercept VHF radio signals from the Chinese Navy ships, the base would have needed to specifically realign one of those SIGINT satellites to provide coverage of the VHF signals in the Tasman Sea at the time of the Chinese ships’ passage. It is not known publicly if they did this, but they certainly have that capability.
However, it is not only the VHF radio transmission that would have carried information about the live-firing exercise.
Pine Gap would be able to monitor a range of other SIGINT transmissions from the Chinese ships. Details of the planning and preparations for the live-firing exercise would almost certainly have been transmitted over data and voice satellite communications, ship-to-ship communications, and even in the data of radar and gunnery operations.
But it is here that there is another possibility for the failure.
The Pine Gap base was built and exists to serve the national interests of the United States. The tasking of the surveillance satellites in range of Pine Gap base is generally not set by Australia, but is directed by United States’ agencies, the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) together with the US Defense Department, the National Security Agency (NSA), and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).
Australia has learnt over time that US priorities may not be the same as Australia’s.
Australian defence and intelligence services can request surveillance tasks to be added to the schedule, and would have been expected to have done so in order to target the southern leg of the Chinese Navy ships’ voyage, when the ships were out of the range of the JORN network.
The military demands for satellite time can be excessive in times of heightened global conflict, as is the case now.
Whether the Pine Gap base was devoting sufficient surveillance resources to monitoring the Chinese Navy ships, due to United States’ priorities in Europe, Russia, the Middle East, Africa, North Korea, and to our north in the South China Sea, is a relevant question.
It can only be answered now by a formal government inquiry into what went on — preferably held in public by a parliamentary committee or separately commissioned inquiry. The sovereign defence of Australia failed in this incident and lessons need to be learned.
Who knew and when did they know If the Pine Gap base had been monitoring the VHF radio band and heard the Chinese Navy live-fire alert, or had been monitoring other SIGINT transmissions to discover the live-fire drill, the normal procedure would be for the active surveillance team to inform a number of levels of senior officers, a former Defence official familiar with the process told Declassified Australia.
Inside an operations room at the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD) head office at the Defence complex at Russell Hill in Canberra. Image: ADF/Declassified Australia
Expected to be included in the information chain are the Australian Deputy-Chief of Facility at the US base, NSA liaison staff at the base, the Australian Signals Directorate head office at the Defence complex at Russell Hill in Canberra, the Defence Force’s Headquarters Joint Operations Command, in Bungendore, and the Chief of the Defence Force. From there the Defence Minister’s office would need to have been informed.
As has been reported in media interviews and in testimony to the Senate Estimates hearings, it has been stated that Defence was not informed of the Chinese ships’ live-firing alert until a full 38 minutes after the drill window had commenced.
The former Defence official told Declassified Australia it is vital the reason for the failure to detect the live-firing in a timely fashion is ascertained.
Either the Australian Defence Force and US Pine Gap base were not effectively actively monitoring the Chinese flotilla at this time — and the reasons for that need to be examined — or they were, but the information gathered was somewhere stalled and not passed on to correct channels.
If the evidence so far tendered by the Defence chief and the Minister is true, and it was not informed of the drill by any of its intelligence or surveillance assets before that phone call from Airservices Australia, the implications need to be seriously addressed.
A final word In just a couple of weeks the whole Defence environment for Australia has changed, for the worse.
The US military announces a drawdown in Europe and a new pivot to the Indo-Pacific. China shows Australia it can do tit-for-tat “navigational freedom” voyages close to the Australian coast. US intelligence support is withdrawn from Ukraine during the war. Australia discovers the AUKUS submarines’ arrival looks even more remote. The prime minister confuses the limited cover provided by the ANZUS treaty.
Meanwhile, the US militarisation of Australia’s north continues at pace. At the same time a senior Pentagon official pressures Australia to massively increase defence spending. And now, the country’s defence intelligence system has experienced an unexplained major failure.
Australia, it seems, is adrift in a sea of unpredictable global events and changing alliance priorities.
Peter Cronau is an award-winning, investigative journalist, writer, and film-maker. His documentary, The Base: Pine Gap’s Role in US Warfighting, was broadcast on Australian ABC Radio National and featured on ABC News. He produced and directed the documentary film Drawing the Line, revealing details of Australian spying in East Timor, on ABC TV’s premier investigative programme Four Corners. He won the Gold Walkley Award in 2007 for a report he produced on an outbreak of political violence in East Timor. This article was first published by Declassified Australia and is republished here with the author’s permission.
Debate on Guam’s future as a US territory has intensified with its legislature due to vote on a non-binding resolution to become a US state amid mounting Pacific geostrategic tensions and expansionist declarations by the Trump administration.
Located closer to Beijing than Hawai’i, Guam serves as a key US strategic asset, known as the “tip of the spear,” with 10,000 military personnel, an air base for F-35 fighters and B-2 bombers and home port for Virginia-class nuclear submarines.
Local Senator William A. Parkinson introduced the resolution to the legislature last Wednesday and called for Guam to be fully integrated into the American union, possibly as the 51st state.
“We are standing in a moment of history where two great empires are standing face-to-face with each other, about to go to war,” Parkinson said at a press conference on Thursday.
“We have to be real about what’s going on in this part of the world. We are a tiny island but we are too strategically important to be left alone. Stay with America or do we let ourselves be absorbed by China?”
His resolution states the decision “must be built upon the informed consent of the people of Guam through a referendum”.
Trump’s expansionist policies
Parkinson’s resolution comes as US President Donald Trump advocates territorially expansionist policies, particularly towards the strategically located Danish-ruled autonomous territory of Greenland and America’s northern neighbour, Canada.
“This one moment in time, this one moment in history, the stars are aligning so that the geopolitics of the United States favour statehood for Guam,” Parkinson said. “This is an opportunity we cannot pass up.”
Guam Legislature Senator William A. Parkinson holds a press conference after introducing his resolution. BenarNews screenshot APR
As a territory, Guam residents are American citizens but they cannot vote for the US president and their lone delegate to the Congress has no voting power on the floor.
The US acquired Guam, along with Puerto Rico, in 1898 after winning the Spanish-American War, and both remain unincorporated territories to this day.
Independence advocates and representatives from the Guam Commission on Decolonisation regularly testify at the UN’s Decolonisation Committee, where the island has been listed as a Non-Self-Governing Territory since 1946.
Commission on Decolonisation executive director Melvin Won Pat-Borja said he was not opposed to statehood but is concerned if any decision on Guam’s status was left to the US.
“Decolonisation is the right of the colonised,” he said while attending Parkinson’s press conference, the Pacific Daily News reported.
‘Hands of our coloniser’
“It’s counterintuitive to say that, ‘we’re seeking a path forward, a path out of this inequity,’ and then turn around and put it right back in the hands of our coloniser.
“No matter what status any of us prefer, ultimately that is not for any one of us to decide, but it is up to a collective decision that we have to come to, and the only way to do it is via referendum,” he said, reports Kuam News.
With the geostrategic competition between the US and China in the Pacific, Guam has become increasingly significant in supporting American naval and air operations, especially in the event of a conflict over Taiwan or in the South China Sea.
The two US bases have seen Guam’s economy become heavily reliant on military investments and tourism.
The Defence Department holds about 25 percent of Guam’s land and is preparing to spend billions to upgrade the island’s military infrastructure as another 5000 American marines relocate there from Japan’s Okinawa islands.
Governor Lou Leon Guerrero delivers her “State of the Island” address in Guam on Tuesday . . . “Guam cannot be the linchpin of American security in the Asian-Pacific if nearly 14,000 of our residents are without shelter . . .” Image: Office of the Governor of Guam/Benar News
Military presence leveraged
The island has in recent years leveraged the increased military presence to demand federal assistance and the territory’s treasury relies on at least US$0.5 billion in annual funding.
“Let us be clear about this: Guam cannot be the linchpin of American security in the Asian-Pacific if nearly 14,000 of our residents are without shelter, because housing aid to Guam is cut, or if 36,000 of our people lose access to Medicaid and Medicare coverage keeping them healthy, alive and out of poverty,” Guerrero said.
Parkinson’s proposed legislative resolution calls for an end to 125-plus years of US colonial uncertainty.
“The people of Guam, as the rightful stewards of their homeland, must assert their inalienable right to self-determination,” states the resolution, including that there be a “full examination of statehood or enhanced autonomous status for Guam.”
“Granting Guam equal political status would signal unequivocally that Guam is an integral part of the United States, deterring adversaries who might otherwise perceive Guam as a mere expendable outpost.”
If adopted by the Guam legislature, the non-binding resolution would be transmitted to the White House.
A local statute enacted in 2000 for a political status plebiscite on statehood, independence or free association has become bogged down in US courts.
‘Reject colonial status quo’
Neil Weare, a former Guam resident and co-director of Right to Democracy, said the self-determination process must be centred on what the people of Guam want, “not just what’s best for US national security”.
“Right to Democracy does not take a position on political status, other than to reject the undemocratic and colonial status quo,” Weare said on behalf of the nonprofit organisation that advocates for rights and self-determination in US territories.
“People can have different views on what is the best solution to this problem, but we should all be in agreement that the continued undemocratic rule of millions of people in US territories is wrong and needs to end.”
He said the 250th anniversary of the US Declaration of Independence next year can open a new venue for a conversation about key concepts — such as the “consent of the governed” — involving Guam and other US territories.
… 
