Japan and the United States signed an agreement on 15 May to jointly develop the Glide Phase Interceptor (GPI), a next-generation missile defence system capable of defeating hypersonic missiles that are deployed by China and Russia and being developed by North Korea. The GPI Cooperative Development Project Arrangement was initially agreed between Japan’s Prime Minister […]
A Filipino civilian convoy called “Atin Ito” claims to have breached China’s blockade around the Huangyan Dao, also known as Scarborough Shoal, in the South China Sea. The convoy reportedly aimed to resupply Filipino fishermen but stopped 50 nautical miles from the shoal. The Philippine Coast Guard and Navy monitored the mission. What are the real goals behind it? Are the fishermen being exploited, and are there other forces at play? Join us as we uncover the real story behind this high-stakes maritime drama.
The United States and its Western allies have stepped up a media campaign to accuse India of running an assassination policy targeting expatriate dissidents.
The government of Narendra Modi, India’s prime minister, has furiously denied the allegations, saying there is no such policy.
Nevertheless, the American Biden administration as well as Canada, Britain and Australia continue to demand accountability over claims that New Delhi is engaging in “transnational repression” of spying, harassing and killing Indian opponents living in Western states.
The accusations have severely stained political relations. The most fractious example is Canada. After Prime Minister Justin Trudeau publicly accused Indian state agents of involvement in the murder of an Indian-born Canadian citizen last year, New Delhi expelled dozens of Canadian diplomats.
Relations became further strained this month when The Washington Postpublished a long article purporting to substantiate claims that Indian security services were organizing assassinations of U.S. and Canadian citizens. The Post named high-level Indian intelligence chiefs in the inner circle of Prime Minister Modi. The implication is a policy of political killings is sanctioned at the very top of the Indian government.
The targets of the alleged murder program are members of the Sikh diaspora. There are large expatriate populations of Sikhs in the U.S., Canada and Britain. In recent years, there has been a renewed campaign among Sikhs for the secession of their homeland of Punjab from India. The New Delhi government views the separatist calls for a new state called Khalistan as a threat to Indian territorial integrity. The Modi government has labeled Sikh separatists as terrorists.
The Indian authorities have carried out repression of Sikhs for decades including political assassination in the Punjab territory of northern India. Many Sikhs fled to the United States and other Western states for safety and to continue their agitation for a separate nation. The Modi government has accused Western states of coddling “Sikh terrorists” and undermining Indian sovereignty.
Last June, a prominent Sikh leader was gunned down in a suburb of Vancouver in what appeared to be a professional hit-style execution. Hardeep Singh Nijjar was murdered by three assailants outside a religious temple. Indian state media described him as a terrorist, but Nijjar’s family denied he had any involvement in terrorism. They claim that he was targeted simply because he promoted Punjabi separatism.
At the same time, according to The Post report, the U.S. authorities thwarted a murder plot against a well-known American-Sikh citizen who was a colleague of the Canadian victim. Both men were coordinating efforts to hold an unofficial referendum among the Sikh diaspora in North America calling for the establishment of a new independent state of Khalistan in the Punjab region of northern India.
The Post article names Vikram Yadav, an officer in India’s state spy agency, the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), as orchestrating the murder plots against the Sikh leaders. The Post claims that interviews with US and former Indian intelligence officials attest that the killings could not have been carried out without the sanction of Modi’s inner circle.
A seemingly curious coincidence is that within days of the murder of the Canadian Sikh leader and the attempted killing of the American colleague, President Biden was hosting Narendra Modi at the White House in a lavish state reception.
Since the summer of last year, the Biden administration has repeatedly pressured the Modi government to investigate the allegations. President Biden has personally contacted Modi about the alleged assassination policy as have his senior officials, including White House national security advisor Jake Sullivan, Secretary of State Antony Blinken and CIA director William Burns. Despite New Delhi’s denial of such a policy, the Modi government has acceded to American requests to hold an internal investigation, suggesting a tacit admission of its agents having some involvement.
But here is where an anomaly indicates an ulterior agenda. Even U.S. media have remarked on how lenient the Biden administration has been towards India over what are grave allegations. It is inconceivable that Washington would tolerate the presence of Russian or Chinese agents and diplomats on its territory if Moscow and Beijing were implicated in killing dissidents on American soil.
As The Washington Post report noted: “Last July, White House officials began holding high-level meetings to discuss ways to respond without risking a wider rupture with India, officials said. CIA Director William J. Burns and others have been deployed to confront officials in the Modi government and demand accountability. But the United States has so far imposed no expulsions, sanctions or other penalties.”
What appears to be going on is a calculated form of coercion by the United States and its Western allies. The allegations of contract killings and “transnational repression” against Sikhs in the U.S., Canada, Britain, Australia and Germany are aimed at intimidating the Indian government with further embarrassing media disclosures and Western sanctions. The U.S. State Department and the Congress have both recently highlighted claims of human rights violations by the Modi government and calls for political sanctions.
The objective, it can averred, is for Washington and its Western allies to pressure India into toeing a geopolitical line of hostility towards China and Russia.
During the Biden administration, the United States has assiduously courted India as a partner in the Asia-Pacific to confront China. India has been welcomed as a member of the U.S.-led Quad of powers, including Japan and Australia. The Quad overlaps with the U.S. security interests of the AUKUS military partnership with Britain and Australia.
Another major geopolitical prize for Washington and its allies is to drive a wedge between India and Russia.
Since the NATO proxy war blew up in Ukraine in February 2022, the United States has been continually cajoling India to condemn Russia and to abide by Western sanctions against Moscow. Despite the relentless pressure, the Modi government has spurned Western attempts to isolate Russia. Indeed, India has increased its purchase of Russian crude oil and is importing record more quantities than ever before the Ukraine conflict.
Furthermore, India is a key member of the BRICS forum and a proponent of an emerging multipolar world order that undermines U.S.-led Western hegemony.
From the viewpoint of the United States and its Western allies, India represents a tantalizing strategic prospect. With a foot in both geopolitical camps, New Delhi is sought by the West to weaken the China-Russia-BRICS axis.
This is the geopolitical context for understanding the interest of Western powers in making an issue out of allegations of political assassination by the Modi government. Washington and its Western allies want to use the allegations as a form of leverage – or blackmail – on India to comply with geopolitical objectives to confront China and Russia.
It can be anticipated that the Western powers will amplify the media campaign against India in line with exerting more hostility toward China and Russia.
Nestlé has introduced six new coffee lines to China, which include plant-based beverages and a first-of-its-kind upcycled innovation.
Already a market leader for 36 years now, global CPG giant Nestlé has invigorated its coffee portfolio in China to meet the growing demand for sustainable, plant-based bottled drinks.
Part of the new range are two vegan ready-to-drink offerings (Coconut Americano and Oatmeal Latte) and an upcycled coffee offering (Guoran Light Coffee) that is new to the Chinese market. The shake-up, which sees all sub-brands integrated into the Nescafé lineup, comes as Nestlé aims to consolidate its position in the country’s evolving coffee sector.
“Consumers’ coffee consumption is increasing, from initially one cup a day to possibly two to three cups a day. For us, this is an opportunity,” Alfonso Troisi, senior VP for coffee at Nestlé Greater China, said in a press chat at the Food & Beverage Innovation Forum (FBIF) last month. “As consumers enjoy coffee in more scenarios, we also need to expand more applicable products.”
Keying into consumer preferences
Courtesy: Nestlé China
The Coconut Americano contains over 20% coconut water and is low in sugar and fat content, while the oat-based Oatmeal Latte has 7g of dietary fibre (which is why it’s positioned as a breakfast option).
This will speak to the increasingly health-conscious Chinese consumer. A 2023 report by Asymmetrics Research noted how milk alternative brands are highlighting attributes like ‘no sugar/cholesterol/trans fat’, ‘good for brains/eyes’, and ‘high protein/calcium’ on product packaging, alongside cleaner labels.
“China is promoting healthier and more nutritious food options in response to the Healthy China policy,” said David J Ettinger, chief representative officer at law firm Keller and Heckman Shanghai. “Therefore, foods offering health benefits and high nutritional value are going to likely lead the way. Chinese consumers will look to healthier options, like alt-proteins, so it will be up to the alt-protein industry to demonstrate that these novel foods provide another nutritious option for consumers.”
Moreover, the use of coconut and oat is a shrewd move from Nestlé, as Chinese consumers have indicated their preference for these flavours. There are more oat milk options in China than any other plant-based alternatives, thanks to its dominance in coffee. In tier 1 and 2 cities, oat and coconut have become common milk choices in lattes.
As for the upcycled beverage, this makes use of cascara, the outer husk of coffee cherries that are typically discarded. In many cultures and countries, this red ‘coffee fruit’ is used to make hot and iced teas, and it’s something increasingly being adopted by specialty coffee companies.
Cascara has a slightly sweet and fruity flavour, and while it does contain caffeine, it’s present in much smaller amounts than the seeds enclosed within, Troiso explained. “In Yunnan, people will make coffee peels into coffee fruit tea for drinking. Therefore, we use it as the main ingredient to make it a drinkable drink every day,” he added.
The Nestlé executive suggested that this product – the result of 10 years of work – was launched with the circular economy and the regenerative food system in mind. “The use of the same coffee bean has expanded from the conventional method of making coffee to the use of the entire coffee fruit, including the peel, and its value has been fully explored,” he said.
“Chinese consumers still like fruit tea flavours, whether it is fruit juice, or other flavoured and tea-based beverages. Therefore, we hope that in addition to coffee lovers, we will also want some other users to try this new product.”
Taking on the Chinese coffee boom
Courtesy: Nestlé China
Coffee consumption in China is increasing, with people drinking two to three cups a day. The market reached 617.8 billion yuan ($85.5B) in 2023, and is slated to surpass the trillion-yuan mark ($138B) by next year. It has resulted in increased competition between coffee companies like Luckin, Costa, Starbucks, as well as Nestlé. While it dominates the instant coffee realm, the latter’s targeted move into bottled drinks represents its need – and willingness – to adapt.
“China has a highly dynamic coffee market and growth, and tends to form its own unique and constantly evolving coffee consumption trends,” Troiso told FoodNavigator-Asia. “Based on insights into the local coffee market, we have rearranged our product lines based on consumption scenarios and target groups to ensure better and more targeted product innovation based on consumer needs.”
In fact, last year, Nestlé appointed its first local R&D head for Greater China to identify emerging market trends and preferences of younger consumers. The conglomerate has also shortened its product launch cycle from 12-18 months to eight to 10 months, and is now aiming to bring that down to six months. Nescafé, meanwhile, will soon launch a coffee innovation centre in Shanghai to capitalise on the coffee opportunity.
“We pay close attention to the various stages of consumers’ lives and what kind of coffee needs they have in those stages,” Troiso said at FBIF. “We found that the majority of Chinese users were exposed to coffee for the first time during the gaokao [the national college entrance exam]… As they enter the workforce, their needs change, and we adapt our products to those changes.”
He added: “Our goal is to be a brand that can stay close to the needs of consumers, such as providing products that lift spirits and meet the needs of different user groups. We want to create a brand image that is close to the minds of consumers. In recent years, we have also worked to promote the sustainability of coffee, which has also resonated more with young people.”
Troiso suggested sustainability is the joint responsibility of the entire industry, reiterating Nescafé’s 2030 plan of cutting emissions in half and sourcing 50% of its coffee through regenerative agriculture by the year. “We have clear targets to reduce carbon emissions, so we have taken different measures at all levels,” he said.
“In addition, consumer awareness is also very important. We strive to educate consumers about the sustainability of coffee and share information about sustainable coffee, because consumer choices drive progress on sustainable projects.”
Democratic Taiwan has stepped up security protections for five prominent political pundits sanctioned by China for spreading “false information,” criticizing the move as a violation of the island’s democracy ahead of the inauguration of President-Elect Lai Ching-te, Beijing’s least-favored candidate in January’s elections.
China’s Taiwan Affairs Office on Wednesday said it would “punish” Wang I-chuan, who holds a high-ranking position in the island’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party, Taoyuan city councilor Yu Pei-chen, New Taipei city council election candidate Lee Zheng-hao, TV talk show host Liu Bao-jie and political commentator Edward Huang.
Chinese officials accused the five, all of whom make regular appearances in Taiwanese media, of “spreading falsehoods and negative information” about China and creating division, but without giving specific examples of their alleged comments.
The move signals that tensions in the region are unlikely to abate with the inauguration of Lai, whose platform is highly similar to that of outgoing Democratic Progressive Party President Tsai Ing-wen.
The commentators’ remarks had “deceived some people on the island, incited hostility and confrontation between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, and hurt the feelings of compatriots on both sides,” Taiwan Affairs Office spokesperson Chen Binhua told a news conference in Beijing on Wednesday.
While the threatened sanctions — which will likely mean entry bans for the pundits and their families and bans on doing business with any company associated with them — are largely symbolic, Chen also took aim at Lai, calling on him to choose between peace with China or “the evil path of provocation and confrontation.”
He said the sanctions would be similar to those applied to Taiwan’s premier, foreign minister and parliamentary speaker in 2021.
While Beijing has never ruled out a military invasion to enforce its territorial claim on Taiwan, it has more recently vowed to achieve “peaceful unification” with the island through propaganda and economic pressures.
Last week, it emerged that Taiwanese artists working in China – a highly lucrative market for actors, celebrities and musicians fluent in Mandarin – are routinely required to sign agreements pledging not to oppose China’s claim on the island if they want their work to be publicly accessible.
Taiwan has never been ruled by the Chinese Communist Party, nor formed part of the 74-year-old People’s Republic of China, and most of its 23 million people have no wish to give up their sovereignty or democratic way of life to be ruled by China, according to multiple public opinion polls in recent years.
“[Taiwan] is a democratic country where people’s freedom of expression is clearly protected by the Constitution, and China has no right to interfere in that,” Olivia Lin, spokesperson for the Presidential Office, said in a Facebook post on Wednesday.
Lin said the Chinese Communist Party has always dealt with disagreement by using “threats and suppression.”
“They’re now trying to extend that to Taiwan in violation of our democracy and freedoms, naming and threatening media commentators and their families,” Lin said, adding that the move would only fuel distrust of China among Taiwan’s 23 million people.
“The government will make every effort to ensure the safety of everyone concerned,” Lin said. Interior Minister Lin Yu-chang said in a Facebook post that he had instructed the National Police Agency to ensure the safety of the five media personalities and their families, Taiwan’s Central News Agency reported.
Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council said freedom of speech is protected in Taiwan, and challenged Beijing to deal more confidently with the island’s “free, democratic and diverse society.”
‘Highest medal of honor’
Lee Cheng-hao laughed off the sanctions at the start of his show on Wednesday, saying, “My phone exploded with messages when I was on my way into the studio this morning. This is unbelievable!”
Meanwhile, Yu described China’s sanctions in a Facebook post as “the highest medal of honor.”
“The ‘commie’ Taiwan Affairs Office finally put me on its blacklist!” he wrote, thanking the “enemy forces” for the validation, and vowing to continue to “fight communism and love Taiwan forever.”
China’s sanctions come after the Mainland Affairs Council warned Taiwanese to reconsider non-essential travel to China in the wake of a slew of national security legislation that it said could put them at risk of detention, interrogation and imprisonment.
“Taiwanese citizens are constantly at high risk of mainland Chinese authorities determining that they have crossed a national security red line,” it said in a May 9 statement on its website.
“There have been several instances in recent years in which Taiwanese citizens were falsely accused of offenses against national security during their visits to China,” the statement warned. “They were subsequently tried, imprisoned, and some of them were even sentenced to ‘deprivation of political rights,’ a punishment that prevents Taiwanese citizens from returning to Taiwan despite the completion of their prison sentence.”
Since amendments to the Counter-Espionage Law took effect last July, some Taiwanese citizens traveling to China for religious, academic or business purposes have “experienced prolonged interrogations or inspections of their electronic devices such as cellphones and computers at the airport; some of them were subjected to detention or interrogation after entering mainland China,” the statement said.
Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Joshua Lipes.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Huang Chun-mei for RFA Mandarin.
A group of 20 Taiwanese lawmakers is set to arrive at disputed Taiping island in the South China Sea on Saturday on a visit likely to provoke protests from some of Taiwan’s neighbors.
Taiwan has occupied the island, also known as Itu Aba since 1956, but it is also claimed by Vietnam, the Philippines and China.
The group of legislators from the opposition Kuomintang (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party plans to spend a morning on the island to declare sovereignty, inspect newly developed facilities such as a harbor and typhoon shelter, and greet troops stationed there, according to the head of the delegation, Ma Wen-chun.
Ma, who co-chairs the legislature’s Foreign and National Defense Committee, wrote on her Facebook page on Thursday that the Republic of China (Taiwan) “has always stood firm in protecting Taiping island” and that its sovereignty was irrevocable.
She criticized the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) for failing to support calls for President Tsai Ing-wen to visit Taiping island before she leaves office.
No DPP legislator has registered to join Saturday’s trip.
Message to DPP
The Taiping visit takes place just two days before Tsai’s successor, Lai Ching-te, is sworn in as president on May 20.
The trip is aimed at sending a defiant message about Taiwan’s sovereignty to the DPP, said Lin Ying-yu, an assistant professor at Tamkang University’s Graduate Institute of International Affairs and Strategic Studies.
“The opposition wants to convey the criticism that the DPP’s stance is too weak in defending the sovereignty over our islands,” Lin told Radio Free Asia.
(Google Maps)
Taiping – the largest of the naturally formed features within the Spratly archipelago – is 1,600 km (994 miles) from Taiwan’s Kaohsiung city, 380 km (205 miles) from Palawan island in the Philippines and 580 km (360 miles) from Vietnam’s central coast.
As both Vietnam and the Philippines also claim the island, they are likely to protest the visit, Lin said.
Vietnam’s ministry of foreign affairs did not immediately respond to RFA’s inquiries.
A Vietnamese political scientist, Huynh Tam Sang from Vietnam National University, said that the KMT was trying to put pressure on the DPP and incoming President Lai.
“The fact that the DPP has remained muted over this contentious territorial issue opens the door for the KMT to boost its profile at home,” Sang told RFA.
The visit by Taiwanese lawmakers would “undoubtedly be met with some protests from Vietnam,” the analyst said, adding that it would be more symbolic and diplomatic rather than an angry resolute response as Hanoi “has no interest in fueling this issue”.
“Due to the mutual benefits of strong economic ties, increasing investments from Taiwan, and an influx of Vietnamese migrant workers to Taiwan, Hanoi has a vested interest in keeping relations amicable with Taipei,” Sang added.
The Philippines may adopt a similar approach amid China’s increased aggression in the South China Sea, analysts said. There are 155,000 Filipino migrant workers in Taiwan, accounting for 21% of the total foreign workforce.
Taiwan’s then-president Ma Ying-jeou visited Taiping island on Jan. 28, 2016. (Taiwan Presidential Office)
President Tsai has not been to Taiping during her two terms in office but Presidents Chen Shui-bian and Ma Ying-jeou visited the island in 2008 and 2016, respectively. Vietnam protested strongly both times, calling the visits “serious violations of Vietnam’s sovereignty” and demanding Taiwan “immediately stop its wrongful actions”.
Edited by Mike Firn and Taejun Kang.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Staff.
A convoy of Filipino civilian boats set sail on Wednesday in a show of defiance to assert Manila’s claim over a disputed shoal in the South China Sea, amid reports that Beijing had deployed dozens of ships to the area.
More than 100 small wooden boats accompanied the convoy of several slightly larger boats, which were loaded with fuel and food as they departed for Scarborough Shoal, a rock within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone (EEZ) that China has effectively controlled since 2012.
The voyage is being led by Atin Ito! (This Is Ours!), a broad coalition of nationalist and civilian organizations.
“The Philippines is ours, China leave,” some volunteers chanted as they carried posters with the same message. Catholic volunteers brought figurines of the Virgin Mary aboard the boats.
The flotilla set sail after 7 a.m. from a port in Masinloc, a town on the west coast of Luzon, the largest island in the Philippines. Later in the day, the small boats returned to shore while four of the main boats continued with their voyage to Scarborough Shoal, known as Panatag Shoal or Bajo de Masinloc in the Philippines.
A few hours after their morning departure, the flotilla conducted what organizers called “a peace and solidarity regatta” about 20 nautical miles off Masinloc.
At around 11 a.m., participants placed 12 symbolic buoys to assert Manila’s sovereign rights over the West Philippine Sea, Manila’s name for South China Sea waters within its EEZ. They also distributed food and fuel supplies to some fishers in the area before the small boats returned to shore and the larger ones continued with their journey.
“At least, we are now showing the world that Filipinos are fighting back,” Agustin Bustillo, 55, captain of one of the bigger fishing boats, told BenarNews, an RFA-affiliated news service. “But I hope the problem will be settled through peaceful means.”
One of the five main fishing boats used in the Filipino civilian convoy prepares to depart for Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea, May 15, 2024. (Jojo Riñoza/BenarNews)
A BenarNews reporter was among a group of journalists aboard one of the civilian boats heading to the shoal.
At around 6 p.m., two China Coast Guard (CCG) ships were seen shadowing and trying to block the civilian boats, which were still hundreds of miles from their destination.
The Philippine Coast Guard (PCG), which had sent three ships to protect the civilians, said one of the CCG ships was about 1,800 yards (1,650 meters) from the convoy, while the other was a mile away as of early evening.
The two coast guards exchanged radio challenges, both insisting their countries’ jurisdiction over the area even as the civilian convoy decided to continue its course to the shoal.
“They are trying to divide the contingent. Our boats are exercising evasive maneuvers while the PCG continues to maintain its close distance to the convoy to thwart any further attempt from CCG vessels,” Emman Hizon, one of the convoy’s organizers, told reporters.
Volunteer Aira Villamil, 21, said she felt mixed emotions while witnessing China’s actions at sea. While defiant, she said she feared what might happen.
“It’s scary because they are deliberately trying to block us while we are passing. It is super scary because we don’t know what they’ll do to us,” she told BenarNews in an interview aboard one of the fishing boats.
Asked about the civilian convoy on Wednesday, China asserted its sovereignty over the shoal, which it calls Huangyan Dao. It also warned the Philippines against violating Beijing’s jurisdiction.
“If the Philippines abuses China’s goodwill and infringes upon China’s territorial sovereignty and jurisdiction, we will defend our rights and take countermeasures in accordance with the law. Relevant responsibilities and consequences shall be borne solely by the Philippines,” foreign ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin told reporters in Beijing.
Expected standoff
The resource-rich Scarborough Shoal lies within Manila’s 200-nautical mile EEZ, as mandated under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). But it has been under Beijing’s de facto control since 2012, when China wrested control from the Philippines after a weeks-long standoff.
China claims almost the entire South China Sea. In 2016, after Manila sued Beijing, an international court invalidated China’s expansive claims and ruled that the shoal is a traditional fishing ground for the Philippines, Vietnam, and China. Beijing has refused to acknowledge the ruling, asserting what it calls historical claims over the waters.
Wednesday’s voyage is Atin Ito!’s second supply mission to the West Philippine Sea. In December 2023, it set out to deliver supplies and Christmas gifts to Filipino troops stationed aboard the BRP Sierra Madre at Second Thomas (Ayungin) Shoal, but the convoy was forced to turn back after consistent shadowing by Chinese ships.
Filipino fishermen place symbolic buoys carrying the message ‘WPS, Atin Ito!’ (‘West Philippine Sea, this is ours!’) in waters within the nation’s 200 nautical-mile exclusive economic zone, May 15, 2024. (Jojo Riñoza/BenarNews)
The convoy is expected to arrive near the shoal early Thursday to distribute supplies to Filipino fishermen operating in waters around the shoal. Because of the expected presence of Chinese ships, organizers do not know if they will be able to reach their destination.
Days before the convoy set sail, Beijing sent ships to the area, with Chinese state media reporting on Monday that the CCG was conducting training in Huangyan Dao. This was on top of the constant presence of two or three Chinese ships.
In a post on X (formerly Twitter) Ray Powell, who heads Stanford University’s Gordian Knot Center for National Security Innovation and monitors activities in the South China Sea, said a Chinese force of 43 ships was stationed near the shoal, seemingly ready to face the civilian flotilla.
Two weeks ago, on April 30, CCG ships fired water cannon at Manila’s government ships near the shoal, causing damage.
The Philippine government summoned Zhou Zhiyong, the deputy chief of mission at the Chinese embassy in Manila, and “demanded that Chinese vessels leave Bajo de Masinloc and its vicinity immediately.”
China claimed those operations were “professional, standardized and legal,” saying the Philippines’ actions infringed on Beijing’s sovereignty over the area and violated “international law and basic norms of international relations.”
The Philippine civilians remained unfazed despite the risks. Rafaela David, one of the Atin Ito! organizers, said the convoy was seeking to “normalize” access to the West Philippine Sea.
“If China is militarizing our own EEZ, we’re there to civilianize our own seas because at the end of the day, we stand by the belief that the West Philippine Sea should be accessible to ordinary citizens,” David told reporters in Botolan, a town in Zambales province, on the even of the trip.
Days before the mission, Global Times, the Chinese Communist Party’s official mouthpiece, accused the group of being funded by the United States and planning to provoke China. The group denied it.
“We have our own minds,” Edicio dela Torre, 80, a former priest turned activist and one of the coalition’s leaders, said during the same briefing on Tuesday. “China does not believe in civilian actions because they think all these are part of the government.”
David said China’s reaction shows it was rattled by the civilian movement.
“Ordinary Filipinos are coming hand-in-hand in peaceful means, showing they are not intimidated by someone as big as China,” he said.
BenarNews is an RFA-affiliated news service.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Jojo Riñoza and Camille Elemia for BenarNews.
Zhang Zhan, jailed for reporting on Covid in Wuhan, has made no contact with outside world
Concerns are growing about the wellbeing of one of China’s most prominent citizen journalists who has failed to make contact with the outside world after she was supposed to have been released from prison.
Zhang Zhan, 40, a lawyer turned citizen journalist, was detained in May 2020 after she travelled to Wuhan to report on the early days of the Covid-19 pandemic. Her videos and social media posts drew attention to the government’s stifling of information about the spread of the disease and the harsh lockdowns that were being imposed.
No end to the twists and turns in the genocide of the Palestinian people. Violate the ground they possess, commit violations against the body they possess, and provoke them into violence. The coordination of using the “V” words to prevent victory applies to the suppression of those who fight for the sanctity of life, against oppression, and for the peace and comfort of everyone.
Images and reports of the campus protests against those assisting and abetting in the genocide of the Palestinian people did not show violence by the campus campers — no bloody faces, no prostrate corpses, no images of broken windows, no sticks and stones to break bones — not until police arrived to unsettle and beat the protestors, and counter-demonstrators violated their rest, committed violations against the barriers that politely separated them from the public, and impolitely provoked the protestors into countering the violence committed upon them.
Faulty strategy by the counter-protestors. Marches, congregations, and protests generally aren’t “big news” after the first day. Front-page news needs thrills, excitement, sensation. Front page news adores violence. The violence provoked by counter-protestors gave the campus protestors a space on the front page and an introduction to a wider audience.
Who are the protestors? They are dedicated people who want those who enable genocide to disinvest from their investment in the slaughter of innocents.
Who are the counter-protestors? They are unlawful people who defend Israel’s genocide.
Who should government and law favor and protect? In the hypocritical American democratic system, genocide is selective, those who seek the contemporary genocide are favored and those who combat the genocide are thwarted. The genocide of the Palestinian people, certified by United Nations (UN) Human Rights officials as genocide, is selected by US government officials as not genocide, not even to be regarded as a serious oppression of innocent people. One difference between UN Human Rights officials and US government officials — the former does not follow the Zionist agenda and the latter promotes it.
Rather than call in the National Guard to shoot up the campus, as was done at the 1970 Kent State protest, where the Ohio National Guard fired on students and ended the Vietnam War demonstrations, a propped-up Joe Biden read from a Zionist-prepared script.
Not a peaceful process and against the law… People have the right to get an education, the right to get a degree, the right to walk across the campus safely without fear of being attacked… No place for anti-Semitism or threats of violence against Jewish students, no place for islamophobia, no place for racism in America.
President Biden indirectly said, “We will allow the police and counter-demonstrators to forcibly remove those against the genocide and return the campuses to the control of the genocide perpetrators and those assisting in the genocide.” By changing the nature of the campus protests from being against genocide to harboring racism, the US president informed all citizens that we should disregard the genocide and bring contemporary genocidal maniacs and contemporary genocide victims together and this will do away with the racism that has caused the genocide. Biden should read the New York Times observations of the violence at UCLA, which shows all violence committed by counter-protestors while the police stand by and permit the violence. His attitude and the speed with which police have attempted to squash the campus protests has a comparison — student protest at Tiananmen Square.
Tiananmen Square
On April 22, 1989, the day of former CCP general secretary Hu Yaobang’s funeral, tens of thousands of students gathered in Tiananmen Square to mourn his death. From this assembly merged a petition for a meeting between student representatives and government officials to discuss government corruption and more freedom of assembly and speech for the masses. Three meetings were held between the demonstrators and government officials and no agreement was obtained. One of these was a nationally televised meeting between Prime Minister (PM) Li Peng and leaders of the students’ movement. I recall viewing the televised broadcast and remember student leaders were confusing and contradictory in their demands and Li Peng was confused at what he was hearing.
In a gesture of conciliation, PM Li Peng and Communist Party leader, Zhao Ziyang, went to Tiananmen Square and talked with hunger strikers. According to the official New China News Agency, Communist Party leader Zhao told the students, ”You have good intentions. You want our country to become better. The problems you have raised will eventually be resolved. But things are complicated, and there must be a process to resolve these problems.” Prime Minister Li Peng concluded that chaos in Beijing was spreading all over the country and demanded that the students refrain from further demonstrations.
For 44 days, up to one million students and citizens, some from Taiwan, occupied the Square and its surroundings, slept in tents, littered China’s most important Plaza with refuse and rubble, prevented tourists from exploring, and detoured Soviet Union President Mikhail Gorbachev to “an obscure back entrance into China’s Great Hall of the People for what was planned as a solemn ceremony marking the first Sino-Soviet summit in three decades.” During that time, no police interfered within the Square, no protestor was arrested, and no violence occurred.
Several times, unarmed Chinese troops (PLA) tried to reach Tiananmen Square and convince the demonstrators to leave. From television reports of those days, which were before the Internet and are difficult to reestablish today, I remember unarmed Chinese soldiers in buses being attacked as they moved toward Tiananmen Square. The buses were set on fire with soldiers unable to evacuate; other unarmed soldiers were badly beaten. An infamous photo of an incinerated PLA soldier was an unpleasant image. Rather than publish the disturbing image I have given it a link.
On June 4, 1989, with martial law in effect and no other means to dislodge the crowd from Tiananmen Square, Chinese troops entered Beijing and fought their way to the Square. The rest is history, severely distorted by Western media, which claimed thousands were killed at Tiananmen Square when no students were killed in the Square. The few hundred fatalities were civilians on the avenue leading to Tiananmen Square, shot by PLA forces who retaliated against those who attacked them and blocked their passage, and soldiers killed by anti-government citizens.
Comparison of China’s (PRC) response to the Tiananmen Square protest and US response to campus protests reveals the hypocrisy of US democratic action.
Student protestors exercised freedom of assembly and camped out in China’s main square for 44 days. Chinese police did not interfere. US police arrived on US campuses only a few days after the protestors camped out on university grounds. Freedom of assembly is fruitless without a place to assemble. Where else can students assemble other than on their campus?
Top officials of the PRC met and dialogued with the students, one time at Tiananmen Square and three times in Beijing. No American government official met with any of the students. Without the voice receiving a response from those to whom the speech is directed, free speech is only a word. It is a voice in the wilderness when controlled media masks the expressions.
Student protestors at Tiananmen faulted their government’s domestic policies; they wanted more freedoms for themselves ─ a subjective petition. Student protestors at US campuses faulted their government’s foreign policy; they wanted their government not to assist in denying the ultimate freedom to a human being, the freedom to live ─ an objective petition
Tiananmen had other dissidents, who had grievances against the government and supported the students’ demands. Students may have disagreed on tactics but no counter-demonstrators or provocateurs appeared in the square. The Chinese respected the student demands and their right to protest. The US protests featured counter-demonstrators supporting a foreign government and eager to provoke. Elements of the US public did not respect the student demands and their right to protest. Videos show many of the counter-protesters wearing pro-Israel slogans on their clothing, playing Israel’s national anthem, and singing an Israeli song about the Israel Defense Forces’ campaign in Gaza. The media promoted a ridiculous assertion that Hamas influenced the students and did not publicize Israelis’ role in the counter-demonstrations.
The PLA performed brutally in its objective of clearing Tiananmen Square of all inhabitants. Considering martial law had been declared and resistance to their march to the square caused the casualties, the troops’ brutality was proportioned by the wounds inflicted upon them. In the US colleges, police were brutal and that brutality was not proportional to the wounds inflicted upon them.
Conclusion
Government and public response to the protests reveal much about the nation where the protests occur. The campus protests showed the courage of America’s new generation, the apathy of the US public, and the treachery of the US government ─ the downfall of America.
The encounter between the campus protestors and the counter-protestors at the UCLA campus tells the story. A protest against genocide can solicit questions, and maybe arguments, but no sane human being forcibly counters those who demonstrate against a genocide. A deceptive treachery of dismantling a most valid demonstration by considering it anti-Semitic because it prevented a few students from attending class is incredulous. Observing LA Police standing aside while counter-demonstrators representing a foreign nation, beat, intimidate, and provoke American youth indicates the US has no leadership; it is influenced by a foreign power.
The Zionists saw the WWII massacre of Jews as their most opportune moment ─ use the genocide to convince the world that Jews were not safe without their own nation. Anytime, anyone complains about Israel’s deceptions and oppressions, bring in media stooges to publicize the WWII genocide and use the opportunity to denigrate the complaint as anti-Semitic. The next step has the ADL raise an alarm of redundant and manipulated statistics showing a rapid growth in anti-Semitism ─ Jews are in trouble and need protection. Attention to Israeli Jews’ oppression of the Palestinians is sidetracked by attention to spurious anti-Semitism.
The hundreds murdered each day by Israeli Jews are considered less significant than the one or two Jewish persons who have received rude remarks from American youth. The deaths of the Palestinians, similar to the deaths of the WWII European Jews, have been perverted and used to reinforce the belief in a Zionist mission of helping well-educated, well-positioned, and well-established Jews escape spurious anti-Semitism. This hides the truth of the Zionist mission ─ seizing all Palestinian land and resources and expelling and murdering the Palestinian community.
As soon as the campus demonstrations started, the Zionists did what they always do, turned a negative into an opportunity. The demonstrations have been shadowed by false charges of a spontaneous hatred of Jews, the same Jews who are responsible for the genocide. The Jews who deserve animosity for their participation in the genocide are now the victims of those rallying against the genocide. Growing hatred of innocent Jews is now the topic.
The campus demonstrations have stirred the world but have been prevented from accomplishing their purpose of changing US foreign policy ─ stop aiding and abetting Israel in the genocide. Just the opposite, with false charges of massive “anti-Semitism” promoted by Israel’s stooges and invading the conscience of the Western world, Israel has its green light to commit genocide of the Palestinians.
I am against my country’s revolutionaries
Wounding a sheath of wheat
Against the child
Any child
Carrying a hand grenade
I am against my sister
Feeling the muscle of a gun
Against it all
And yet
What can a prophet do to a prophetess
When their eyes
Are mad to drink
The sight of the raiders’ hordes?
I am against boys becoming
Heroes at ten
Against the tree flowering Explosives
Against branches becoming scaffolds
Against the rose-beds turning to trenches
Against it all
And yet When fire cremates my friends My youth And country
How can I Stop a poem from becoming a gun?
The Philippine coast guard has sent ships to monitor what Manila suspects to be China’s illegal island building in the South China Sea, the Presidential Office said.
The office of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. said in a statement that since April, the coast guard vessel BRP Teresa Magbanua had been operating near Sabina Shoal, known in the Philippines as Escoda Shoal, to keep a watch on China’s “supposed illegal activities.”
Sabina Shoal is a low-tide elevation in the Spratly Islands, well inside the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone (EEZ) but also claimed by China, Taiwan and Vietnam. It is only 75 nautical miles (140km) from the Philippine island of Palawan.
An EEZ gives the coastal state exclusive access to natural resources in the waters and in the seabed.
Philippine coast guard spokesman Jay Tarriela said in the statement that crushed corals had been dumped on the reef – an indication of land reclamation. However, the suspected island building appeared to be at an initial stage, he said.
Tarriela also said that besides the BRP Teresa Magbanua, two more coast guard vessels had been deployed on a rotating basis to monitor the area.
“We are alarmed by this,” said Jonathan Malaya, assistant director general of the Philippine National Security Council.
Malaya told a press conference on Monday that similar “crushed corals” were detected earlier on Sandy Cay, another group of low-lying reefs near Philippines-occupied Thitu island, also known as Pag-asa island.
“These were crushed corals and it was obvious that they came from another place,” Malaya said.
Suspected dumped corals on Sabina Shoal (Philippine Coast Guard)
The Philippines in March launched a scientific research mission on Sandy Cay, prompting China to protest.
Beijing has yet to respond to the latest allegations regarding Sabina Shoal.
Monitoring procedure
Tarriela explained in a post on the social platform X, formerly Twitter, that the Philippine coast guard had implemented a “standard operating procedure” to inspect Sabina Shoal for any dumped crushed corals.
After more than three weeks of monitoring, the coast guard discovered that “crushed corals were dumped and it is highly likely that the maritime features were altered.” The force has released some photo evidence of the damaged corals.
“We must stay vigilant and not lose sight of the illegal activities and aggressive behavior exhibited by China in Escoda (Sabina) Shoal,” Tarriela wrote in his post.
“Not only does this pose a threat to our sovereignty, but it also causes significant damage to our marine environment,” the coast guard spokesman wrote.
Sabina Shoal. (Google Maps)
In a report released last December, the Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative (AMTI) and the China Ocean Institute – both based in the United States – said that competing states in the South China Sea had caused “the largest active man-made reef destruction in human history.”
The organizations named China as the most egregious actor by far, having wiped out roughly 4,648 acres (19km2) of reefs in four years between 2013 and 2017. Most destruction was due to dredging and landfill to construct infrastructure on artificial islands.
Beijing carried out most of its island building activities during that period and by 2022 had fully militarized the three largest reefs – Subi, Mischief and Fiery Cross.
Jason Gutierrez in Manila contributed to this report.
Edited by Mike Firn.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Staff.
Western accusations of doping by Chinese swimmers threaten to exacerbate China-US tensions, undermine the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) and seriously harm the upcoming Paris Olympics.
The controversy was ignited by investigation reports at the New York Times and German TV broadcaster ARD. These media outlets suggest there has been a cover-up of a mass doping incident among Chinese top swimmers with connivance of the Chinese Anti Doping Agency (CHINADA) and complicity from the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA). This story served as red meat to the hyper aggressive leader of the US Anti Doping Agency (USADA), Travis Tygart. It has prompted western swimming competitors to loudly complain. For example, the NY Timesreports that US team swimmer Paige Madden thinks medals from the Tokyo Olympics should be reallocated. “I feel that Team USA was cheated.” British swimmer James Guy says, “Ban them all and never compete again.” What might be considered whining and poor sportsmanship is effectively being encouraged by western media.
The NY Times and ARD are the same two media that precipitated the accusations of “state sponsored doping” in Russia. It did enormous damage to thousands of Russian athletes and resulted in different levels of banning starting with the Rio Olympics in 2016. Although widely accepted as “truth” in the West, the claims of widespread Russian doping were weak when evidence was required. Most Russian athletes who challenged their banning were exonerated. The major accusers, the Stepanovs and Grigory Rodchenkov, were themselves guilty of doping and profiting from doping. Despite this, the banning has continued and escalated after the Russian intervention in Ukraine. The accusations and banning were useful in propelling the “new cold war” and “new McCarthyism”.
NYT and ARD, and their anonymous informants, may be seeking to do something similar to China. USADA has issued a response in which they say China may be engaging in “systematic doping” under a “coordinated doping regime”. On May 6 USADA’s Tygart escalated his attacks. He implies the Paris Olympics will be a “train wreck” because of WADA complicity in China’s “cheating”. He hopes the US government will “step in and help lead and fix this.” Surely a recipe for success.
What happened
On Jan 1 – 3 in 2021, the Chinese swim team was having a domestic swim meet. It was in the midst of covid lockdown. As usual, the team was drug tested but this time a strange thing happened: many swimmers tested positive for a trace amount of the banned medication trimetazadine (TMZ).
The China Anti Doping Agency (CHINADA) investigated and reported the facts to the World Anti Doping Agency as required. They found:
* 23 swimmers tested positive for a very small amount of trimetazadine (TMZ)
* the swimmers were from different regions of China with different coaches and trainers
* all 23 were staying at the same hotel eating in the same dining room
* none of the swimmers staying at a different hotel tested positive
* some of the swimmers tested positive one day, negative the next
* tests in the hotel kitchen showed the presence of TMZ on the air vent and counters
CHINADA concluded the positive TMZ tests were from hotel food and the athletes were not at fault.
They reported the incident and investigation to the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) and the international swimming federation now known as World Aquatics (formerly FINA). Both organizations examined the facts and agreed with the findings.
Because the athletes were deemed to have no fault, the incident and names of the athletes were not publicized. WADA regulations indicate that there should be no publicity or naming of athletes deemed innocent and without an “Anti Doping Rule Violation” (ADRV).
How it has been reported
Approximately a year later, in 2022, anonymous sources reported this incident to the NY Times and ARD. Since then, the two media outlets have done further investigation but kept the story secret until two weeks ago.
The US Federal Bureau of Investigation is looking into the situation.
The NY Times and ARD say they have been investigating this story for two years. The release appears timed to have maximum impact and possible damage, just months before the Paris Olympics.
USADA accuses WADA
The US Anti Doping Agency (USADA) is led by the hyper-aggressive Travis Tyler. He has used the reports to claim that WADA is complicit in a Chinese “cover-up”. In a TV interview before a large national audience Tygart said, “China didn’t follow the rules. They effectively swept this under the carpet because they didn’t find a violation. They didn’t announce a violation. They didn’t disqualify the athletes from the event at which they tested positive. And this is absolutely mandatory under the world anti-doping code that all nations are required to follow.”
WADA has responded that Tygart’s comments seem “politically motivated”. They say CHINADA followed the rules, investigated and reported as required. They say China did NOT have to announce it to the world, or name the individual athletes for the very good reason that false accusations of doping can destroy a career. WADA regulations say the names of athletes should NOT be publicized until or unless it is confirmed they have an Anti Doping Rule Violation.
WADA appoints independent investigator
WADA is the international organization charged with supervising global anti-doping in sports. With its headquarters in Canada and most of its leaders from NATO countries, it is a largely western organization.
They are highly sensitive to criticism from the West. It has pushed back against some of the most extreme criticism, for example from the USADA head. They have also appointed an independent investigator to review what happened in China and whether WADA was correct to accept the Chinese investigation and report.
WADA appointed Eric Cottier, the prosecutor general of a Swiss region. WADA headquarters are in Canada but the organization is registered in Switzerland. USADA has criticized the appointment suggesting that Cottier is not sufficiently “independent”.
Thoms Bach, head of the International Olympic Committee, has voiced support for WADA.
WADA has defended their actions in a press conference and fact sheet about the case.
The controversy may quiet down. But a lot of poison has been spread around. Encouraged by the NY Times and other media, numerous western athletes now claim they feel “cheated” out of medals at the Tokyo Olympics since 5 medals were won by Chinese swimmers involved in the TMZ “doping scandal”.
It is also possible the controversy will continue. Will the “Sports Czar” of the Biden Administration get involved? Will the FBI be designated to investigate? These are now possible in the wake of the Rodchenkov Anti Doping Act which passed Congress in 2020.
Reader comments following articles indicate there is a wellspring of anti-China hostility encouraged by the accusations. The most popular comment on this article says, “When will democracies learn that authoritarian regimes play dirty, and should be viewed as suspect not deserving of good faith.” Another says,”No one knows doping like China knows doping, China knows doping best.” Another one says, “China cheats. Russia cheats. Just like the East Germans did before them. Their governments will meet the same fate as they did.”
Pushback
There has been some pushback to the sensational anti-China accusations. For example, Denis Cotterell is a world class coach who has trained both Australian and Chinese Olympic swimmers. He has spoken out strongly in support of the Chinese swimmers. He says, “I can see what they (the swimmers) go through. I see the measures… The suggestion that it’s systemic is so far from anything I have seen here the whole time. They are so adamant on having clean sport.”
An insightful article from an Australian academic sports authority and popular sports commentator suggests there are political forces at work: “WADA – like the United Nations and other organizations – finds itself in the cross hairs of the great power struggle of our time: a rising China and its challenge to US dominance.”
Geopolitical Consequences
According to the “2024 Annual Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community”, China is “challenging longstanding rules of the international system as well as U.S. primacy within it.” China’s positive “international image” is a challenge to U.S. leadership. By this logic, it is in the US interests to damage China’s international reputation and standing.
This raises the question: How did the TMZ get into the hotel kitchen and into the food being served to these Chinese athletes?
In February 2022, accusations of intentional doping were heaped on the Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva. A trace amount of trimetazadine (TMZ) was detected in a drug test taken seven weeks before the Beijing Olympics. There are similarities to the Chinese case: same drug, same trace amount detected, same mystery as to how it was ingested.
Because she could not explain how it got there, Valieva was condemned in the West and ultimately had her international career destroyed. The Russian figure skating sweep was prevented and the Russian team lost their gold medals. The controversy distracted and partially ruined the Beijing Olympics. The “intelligence community” undoubtedly considers this a success.
How did the TMZ get in the hotel kitchen in China? Who are the “whistle blowers” who informed the New York Times and ARD and supplied the names of the athletes who tested positive for the trace amount of TMZ?
The anti doping crusade is being manipulated by powerful forces with ignoble intentions.
Taiwanese TV and movie actor Wu Mu-hsuen was recently forced to sign a pledge to support China’s territorial claim on democratic Taiwan, or the show she had just finished filming would be ditched, according to multiple local media reports.
Wu was approached by the film crew after wrapping up filming of the online drama “Hey! Come a bit closer” in China last year, and told to sign the agreement or the show would never be aired, her agent Chen Hsiao-chih told several Taiwanese media outlets in recent days.
According to Wu’s agent, the practice is now commonplace when Taiwanese artists work in China, and plenty of other stars have been forced to sign agreements pledging that Taiwan is “a part of China,” and that there can be no independence for the island, according to reports in the island’s Central News Agency, Liberty Times and TVBS.
Taiwan has never been ruled by the Chinese Communist Party, nor formed part of the 74-year-old People’s Republic of China, and most of its 23 million people have no wish to give up their sovereignty or democratic way of life to be ruled by China, according to multiple public opinion polls in recent years.
The news about the agreements has highlighted concerns over China’s “soft power” influence over Taiwan, as Beijing vows to achieve “peaceful unification” with the island through propaganda and economic pressures.
Signing agreements
A former film and television industry worker who gave only the surname Chen for fear of reprisals said such requests are common, and don’t typically come from Chinese officials, but from the production team of the show that Taiwanese artists are working on.
“The Chinese producers have put a lot of money into filming these shows, and they’re afraid that if the artist gets into trouble after filming is done, the whole drama will be thrown out [by ruling Chinese Communist Party censors],” Chen told RFA Mandarin in an interview on May 9. “So they ask the artists to make a commitment in that regard.”
He said all artists, including Chinese nationals, are asked to sign commitments to refrain from drugs or pornography or anything else that could endanger the reputation of the show.
Taiwanese TV and movie star Wu Mu-hsuen in an undated photo. (mumu92013 via Facebook)
The version of the agreements handed to Taiwanese artists also includes a commitment to support Beijing’s claim on China, or to refrain from supporting independence for Taiwan, Chen said, adding that anyone who doesn’t comply will likely be added to a Chinese government blacklist, which means the huge and lucrative Chinese market is closed to them.
“Artists need to be very clear about this — it’s unreasonable to criticize them and to still want to make money from them,” Chen said, adding that most artists “aren’t very political,” and are willing to comply.
“The Chinese market is so big, that they don’t see the need to offend people just to make a fuss about something,” Chen said.
He said the deals have become more ubiquitous with the rise in tensions across the Taiwan Strait that followed the landslide victory of ruling Democratic Progressive Party President Tsai Ing-wen in 2016.
‘Forced to take sides’
While it has refused to rule out invading Taiwan by military force, Beijing vowed in January to step up its efforts to achieve “peaceful unification” with the island after Taiwanese voters in January elected Beijing’s least favorite candidate Lai Ching-te — Tsai’s right-hand man — as their next president.
“Peaceful unification” refers to the Chinese Communist Party’s attempts to bring the island under its control through propaganda, threats and infiltration rather than armed invasion, analysts have told RFA in recent interviews.
“They wouldn’t be asking artists to sign such deals if the leaders on both sides of the Taiwan Strait were in a state of harmony,” Chen said. “When there are high-level political tensions, then people further down are unlucky enough to be forced to take sides.”
An employee of Taiwan’s terrestrial broadcaster TTV who asked to be identified only by the surname Wang said she, too, would steer clear of hiring people with known political views to make entertainment shows.
“We’re a purely commercial TV station with no political affiliation, so we would definitely consider when filming TV shows and movies whether someone we hire has a specific political orientation,” Wang said. “We would avoid hiring politicians.”
“While professional criteria are given priority, we would still be concerned if the political overtones were too strong,” she said.
She said some shows that do showcase political themes simply won’t sell in the heavily restricted Chinese market.
“There are a lot of people in the film and TV industry who are unable to sell their shows or movies due to political leanings,” Wang said.
“But it’s a choice — some see the Chinese market as very important, so won’t go anywhere near politics, while others give politics top priority,” she said.
Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Roseanne Gerin.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Jenny Tang for RFA Mandarin.
The People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN)’s third and most advanced aircraft carrier, Fujian, completed its maiden sea trial and returned to Shanghai’s Jiangnan shipyard on Wednesday 8 May, according to the official Xinhua news agency. Citing official sources, Xinhua reported that the aircraft carrier completed tests of its power and electrical systems and achieved “the […]
The senior U.S. official for North Korea met with her Chinese counterpart in Tokyo and expressed concern about the forcible repatriation of North Koreans from China, the U.S. State Department said.
During Thursday’s discussions with China’s Special Representative on Korean Peninsula Affairs Liu Xiaoming, Jung Pak noted North Korea’s “provocative and irresponsible rhetoric toward its neighbors,” the department said in a statement.
“She [Pak] also expressed continued U.S. concerns regarding the forcible repatriation of North Koreans, including asylum seekers, to the DPRK and called on Beijing to uphold its non-refoulement obligations,” said the department. DPRK, or the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, is North Korea’s official name.
The U.N. principle of non-refoulement is supposed to guarantee that “no one should be returned to a country where they would face torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and other irreparable harm.”
Pak also stressed concern about Pyongyang’s deepening military cooperation with Moscow, saying that Russia’s veto of a mandate extension for a U.N. panel that monitored North Korean sanctions would hamper efforts to implement U.N. Security Council resolutions, according to the statement.
Pak’s remarks came after international non-governmental organization Human Rights Watch published a report on Wednesday saying China had recently forcibly returned about 60 North Koreans.
“The Chinese government forcibly returned about 60 North Korean refugees on April 26, putting them at grave risk of enforced disappearance, torture, sexual violence, wrongful imprisonment, forced labor, and execution,” said HRW.
It cited Stephen Kim, the pseudonym of an underground missionary, as saying that the Chinese government had forcibly returned the North Koreans from China’s Jilin and Liaoning provinces.
Kim told HRW that the Chinese authorities had apprehended at least 92 North Koreans since January but could not confirm whether anyone among the 92 was forcibly returned on April 26, adding that it was highly unlikely.
This round of forced returns came soon after North Korean leader Kim Jong Un met with China’s third highest official, Zhao Leji, on April 13. HRW noted that the meeting had “raised concerns among North Koreans in exile and rights activists that China might speed up forced repatriations of North Koreans.”
Beijing routinely labels North Koreans as illegal “economic migrants” and forcibly repatriates them under a 1986 bilateral border protocol with Pyongyang.
China’s foreign ministry said in October last year there were no North Korean “defectors” in China but North Koreans had illegally entered for economic reasons and that China always handled the issue according to the law.
HRW earlier reported that it confirmed China had forcibly returned more than 670 North Koreans since Pyongyang closed its northern border in early 2020. This includes more than 500 North Koreans on Oct. 9, 2023; 40 on Sept. 18, 2023; 80 on Aug. 29, 2023; and about 50 in July 2021.
In Tokyo, Pak also discussed North Korea with her South Korean and Japanese counterparts and underscored the importance of maintaining close trilateral cooperation in addressing issues around North Korea, including security threat, human rights and humanitarian challenges created by the North, the department said in a separate statement.
Edited by Mike Firn.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Taejun Kang for RFA.
My poems were written in anger after Tiananmen Square. But what motivates most prison writing is a fear of forgetting. Today I am free, but the regime has never stopped its war on words
Most of my manuscripts are locked up in the filing cabinets of the ministry of security, and the agents there study and ponder them repeatedly, more carefully than the creator himself. The guys working this racket have superb memories; a certain chief of the Chengdu public security bureau can still recite the poems I published in an underground magazine in the 1980s. While the literati write nostalgically, hoping to go down in literary history, the real history may be locked in the vaults of the security department.
The above is excerpted from my book June 4: My Testimony, published in Taiwan in 2011. I wrote that book three times, the later drafts on paper much better than the paper I used for writing in prison, which was so soft and brittle I had to write very lightly. Paper outside prison is solid and flexible enough that you don’t have to worry about puncturing it with the tip of a pen. Thus, I restrained myself and filled in a page of paper, and then how many thousand – ten thousand? More? How many ant-sized words can be packed on to a page? Who knows.
On 10 October 1995, at two in the afternoon, three police cars carrying about a dozen special agents burst in on me. Everything was carried out in accordance with “legal procedures”, the officers’ IDs and search warrant were presented, the entire search process was meticulously videotaped, and all written matter in the house (including manuscripts, letters, and notes) was confiscated. And this included the very nearly completed draft of this testimony – more than 300,000 characters representing my painstaking efforts of the past year and a half.
I was breathing normally, signed with a smile, and asked: “Should I bring clothes?” The answer: “No.” I was uneasy leaving my money and valuables at home as I prepared to be the guest of the state for a long time. The agents laughed.
At 10 o’clock in the evening, I exited the Baiguolin police station in the Xicheng district of Chengdu and was politely told: “Don’t leave the city for the next month.” Thank God, my head was still on my shoulders and I could still write.
I cursed my carelessness with the foulest language imaginable and set about rewriting with all my might. Without inspiration or passion, the pen slashed the paper to ribbons, and often I could only produce a few hundred words a day. Staring at the paper was useless, and cold sweat couldn’t solve my writer’s block. But I’d made a bet; I couldn’t admit defeat. I wanted to use this to validate my own stupid way of living as an insignificant individual – a bet with the world’s largest dictatorship – with writing materials, so that in future my kids won’t think their dad was just talking big.
Following U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s visit to China in April, where he met with Chinese President Xi Jinping, various rumors around his visit surfaced in social media posts in both Chinese and English.
Below is what AFCL found.
Did Chinese officials not accompany Blinken to the airport?
A X user “Indo-Pacific News – Geo-Politics & Defense” claimed that Blinken was “humiliated” by Chinese officials who decided not to greet his arrival and departure.
“Blinken departed #China and only the US ambassador said farewell at the airport … Even when he arrived to Beijing, he was only greeted by a low-level official and US embassy staff,” reads the claim shared in X post on April 27.
Claims that Chinese officials and Xi himself deliberately snubbed Blinken were false. (Screenshot/X)
This is false. Images taken by Reuters and Associated Press show that several Chinese officials saw Blinken off, taking a group photo with the secretary of state before he boarded the plane.
Blinken poses for a photo with Chinese officials that accompanied him to the airport before boarding the plane. (Screenshot/Associated Press)
Former Washington correspondent at China’s state-run Xinhua News Agency Yang Liu and current CCTV reporter Shen Shiwei also noted that the claim was false, posting a photo of the Director General of the Chinese Foreign Ministry’s Department of North American and Oceanian Affairs Yang Tao shaking hands with Blinken at the airport as he saw him off.
Chinese news reporters Yang Liu and Shen Shiwei posted a photo of Chinese officials seeing off Blinken at the airport (Screenshot / X)
Did Xi express impatience with Blinken?
The X user “Indo-Pacific News – Geo-Politics & Defense” also claimed that Xi expressed impatience with Blinken through his body language before the meeting began, as well as responding “good” when told that Blinken would be leaving on the night of the meeting.
The claim was shared alongside a 40-second clip that shows Xi greeting Blinken and posing for the press.
But the claim is false. The clip is taken from footage of Blinken and Xi’s prior meeting in June 2023, not in April 2024.
A review of the 2024 meeting’s clip shows several key differences; including the lighting of the room, the color of Xi’s tie, and a change in the mask and tie of Hong Lei — the Director-General of the Chinese Foreign Ministry’s Protocol Department who is shown in both videos.
Furthermore, Xi did not respond “good” after being told that Blinken would leave that night, but rather only repeated the phrase “leaving tonight.”
Several differences exist in the footage of last year and this year’s meetings. (Screenshot/C-SPAN)
Was Blinken’s reception a slight in comparison to German Chancellor Scholz?
Another X user “ShanghaiPanda” claimed in a post on April 25 that China gave Blinken a downgraded diplomatic reception compared to German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who visited China in mid-April.
“No red carpet, and met by Kong Fu-An, Director General of the Shanghai Foreign Affairs Office. A province-level Foreign Affairs Office counts as a Bureau Chief, or a Level 5, Rank 11–12 Civil Servant. This is one step below the welcome Olaf received when he landed in Chongqing,” reads the claim.
Shanghai Panda claims China offered a downgraded reception for Blinken compared to Scholz. (Screenshot/X)
But the claim is misleading. Both the political status and nature of the two politicians’ visits differed significantly, which makes a direct comparison between their respective receptions inaccurate.
The choices of reception arrangement for the two men are in line with official protocol guidelines outlined by the Chinese Foreign Ministry and adhere to the spirit of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.
The German chancellor is the head of the country’s federal government, while the U.S. secretary of state is a cabinet official. Blinken’s two diplomatic trips to China were both labeled as “visits,” while Scholz’s trip was more formally designated an “official visit.”
China’s guidelines dictate that national leaders be received by a red carpet and the corresponding level of local officials at whatever airport they are landing in.
This customary practice was followed when Scholz landed at his first stop at Chongqing airport, where he was greeted by the city’s Vice Mayor Zhang Guozhi and Chinese Ambassador to Germany Wu Ken, as reported by Reuters.
The guidelines do not stipulate that cabinet officials be similarly received.
AFCL debunked similar rumors about China extending humiliating receptions of Blinken when the secretary first visited China in 2023.
Did China deliberately not arrange a “red line” at the airport in order to show displeasure?
The Somali Institute of Chinese Studies claimed on X on April 26 that China had deliberately omitted a “guiding red line” when the secretary disembarked off his plane at Shanghai in order to signal displeasure.
“Blinken was given a directional red line for guidance during his last visit to Beijing last year, in it was a message which he failed to understand. Again, as seen yesterday, he didn’t even receive a directional red line,” reads the claim in part.
The message referenced a red line visible in front of the secretary when he disembarked at the Beijing airport during his 2023 trip.
But the claims are false.
The line was merely an equipment restriction area marking at the airport that did not hold any figurative significance, as reported by AFCL.
The Somali Institute of Chinese Studies said that China’s deliberate omission of a red line at the airport was meant to signal displeasure to Blinken. (Screenshot/X)
A video on X posted by Jennifer Hansler — a CNN reporter who accompanied the U.S. officials during Blinken’s recent trip – clearly shows a similar line painted in an unclear color behind Chinese officials standing to receive Biden as he walks down a gangway while disembarking at the Beijing airport.
Was Blinken’s trip a US plea to China ?
Hu Xijin, former editor-in-chief of the Chinese state-run tabloid Global Times, commented in a Weibo post before Blinken’s arrival that the trip was a “pleading tour.”
“To be precise, his trip to China should be considered a ‘pleading tour,’ despite the fact that the U.S. side made some ‘tough’ publicity before his visit.”
Hu Xijin, former editor-in-chief of the Global Times, deleted a Weibo post in which he mockingly referred to Blinken’s visit to China as a “pleading tour” (left). (Screenshot /Weibo & X)
This is false. China’s Foreign Ministry announced before Blinken’s arrival that the visit was “at the invitation of Wang Yi.” The ministry also announced before the secretary’s previous visit in June 2023 that all arrangements were agreed upon beforehand by China and the U.S.
Translated by Shen Ke. Edited by Shen Ke, Taejun Kang and Malcolm Foster.
Asia Fact Check Lab (AFCL) was established to counter disinformation in today’s complex media environment. We publish fact-checks, media-watches and in-depth reports that aim to sharpen and deepen our readers’ understanding of current affairs and public issues. If you like our content, you can also follow us on Facebook, Instagram and X.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Rita Cheng for Asia Fact Check Lab.
Two Malaysian SMEs are presenting their plans for local production of UAVs at DSA 2024. Pen Aviation is launching the PEN35V, a 35kg quadrotor designed primarily for. Celestial Dynamics is preparing to produce under licence, a range of Chinese drones designed by Jin Hong, a subsidiary of AVIC. The PEN35V is on display here at […]
China has defended its recent maneuver against an Australian naval helicopter in the Yellow Sea, deemed by Canberra to be “unsafe and unprofessional,” saying it was “legitimate and reasonable.”
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on Tuesday said his government had communicated to China “through all of our channels, at all measures at our disposal” that it was “unacceptable” when a Chinese fighter jet dropped flares close to an Australian helicopter in international waters, endangering the crew.
Separately, Australia’s defense ministry said in a statement the incident took place on Saturday when the Royal Australian Navy’s Hobart was undertaking “routine activities” during a U.N. mission to monitor sanctions against North Korea in international waters in the Yellow Sea.
The Yellow Sea is a marginal sea of the Western Pacific Ocean between mainland China and the Korean Peninsula.
A MH-60R Seahawk helicopter launched from the Hobart was intercepted by a Chinese fighter aircraft which released flares across the flight path of the Australian aircraft, the Australian ministry said, adding that the unsafe maneuver “posed a risk to the aircraft and personnel.”
While there were no injuries, the Australian government “expressed concern” and said it expected all countries, including China, “to operate their militaries in a professional and safe manner.”
China’s response
The Chinese defense ministry responded late on Tuesday that Australia “was confused between right and wrong.”
Ministry spokesman Zhang Xiaogang said between May 3-4, when the Chinese military was holding training exercises in the Yellow Sea, an Australian military helicopter was sent from the Hobart three times “to conduct close reconnaissance and disrupt China’s normal training activities.”
Zhang said that China’s warnings and forcing the helicopter to leave were “legitimate, reasonable, professional and safe, and fully complied with international law and international practice.”
The Chinese spokesman called on Australia to “respect China’s sovereignty and security concerns, stop spreading false narratives … and stop all dangerous and provocative actions.”
The missile guided destroyer HMAS Hobart. (Royal Australian Navy)
Australia has been sending vessels and aircraft to the area to enforce U.N. Security Council sanctions against North Korea since 2018. A military analyst said the missions were being carried out “in international airspace over international waters in the Yellow Sea.”
“The Chinese claim lacks any basis in evidence, and deliberately mischaracterizes the actions of the Australians,” Malcolm Davis, a senior analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, told Radio Free Asia.
“There was no justification whatsoever for the Chinese to release flares in the manner they did, which was in an aggressive, unsafe and unprofessional manner,” Davis added.
Daniel Kritenbrink, U.S. assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs, said that Washington was “deeply concerned” to see reports of the incident.
Similar encounters
Flares when fired at an aircraft at close proximity could get into the engine and cause the plane to crash.
In late October 2023, a Chinese warplane also used flares against a Canadian shipborne maritime helicopter over the South China Sea. The Sikorsky Cyclone helicopter was launched from the Royal Canadian Navy frigate Ottawa to search for a previously detected submarine in international waters.
China accused Canada of conducting a “malicious and provocative act with ulterior motives.”
In another incident last November, Australia said that a Chinese destroyer operated its sonar device near divers from the Royal Australian Navy’s Toowoomba, causing them minor injuries.
The divers were working to clear a fishing net tangled in the ship’s propellers in international waters near Japan when a Chinese warship approached them and released sonar pulses, forcing them to surface.
The Toowoomba was also conducting operations in support of U.N. sanctions enforcement against North Korea at the time.
Edited by Mike Firn and Taejun Kang.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Staff.
