This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Radio Free Asia.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Radio Free Asia.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on ProPublica and was authored by ProPublica.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on The Grayzone and was authored by The Grayzone.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Human Rights Watch and was authored by Human Rights Watch.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
Some Chinese social media users claimed that the United States proposed scammers in Myanmar be called “terrorists” at the United Nations, which was vetoed by China, citing information provided by Chinese AI chatbot Doubao.
But the claim is false. The U.S. has never made such a proposal. Experts warn that AI responses are not always accurate.
The claim was shared by an X user on Jan. 12 who said China rejected a U.S. proposal at the U.N. to label scammers in Myanmar as terrorists, following the recent high-profile abduction and subsequent rescue of Chinese actor Wang Xing.
Wang was rescued after being lured to Thailand under the pretense of a film role and subsequently trafficked to a scam center in Myanmar. Following his return to China on Jan. 11, Wang revealed in a live stream that approximately 50 other Chinese victims were freed from the same facility.
The X user cited a response from AI chatbot “Duobao” as evidence that the U.S. has proposed calling the scam operators “terrorists.”
Duobao is an advanced artificial intelligence chatbot developed by ByteDance, the parent company of TikTok.
Launched in August 2024, Doubao has rapidly become China’s most popular AI application, boasting 51 million monthly active users as of November 2024.
But the claim is false.
Keyword searches found no official or credible reports to show that the U.S. made such a proposal at the U.N.
A review of minutes of the U.N. Security Council meetings in 2024 also found no such discussion.
Duobao response
AFCL asked Doubao a question about the purported U.S. proposal.
The AI chatbot responded: “There is currently no firm information confirming the U.S. made such a proposal nor that China or any other country vetoed it.”
AI systems reflect the material used to “train” them, experts say.
“Doubao is a large-scale language model trained using similar methods and facing similar problems as ChatGPT,” said Hsin-Min Wang, an information science researcher at Taiwan’s Academia Sinica.
AFCL has previously reported that Chat GPT is not always credible, as it responds to prompts based on probability calculations after being trained with large amounts of online text.
Ethan Tu, the founder of Taiwan AI Labs, previously told AFCL that AI learns the bias and ideas from the assorted texts of the collected corpus it is being fed for language training.
“Its output reflects the cultural ideas found in the market it was trained in.”
Translated by Shen Ke. Edited by Taejun Kang.
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 Dong Zhe for Asia Fact Check Lab.
This content originally appeared on The Real News Network and was authored by The Real News Network.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on The Intercept and was authored by The Intercept.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
Part of a three-story series on the fight for and rebuilding of Myanmar’s Kayah state following the 2021 coup. Read Part 1 here.
DEMOSO, Kayah state, Myanmar – The officers of Station 8 in Myanmar’s southern Shan state pile out of their police car, a beat up minivan with bad brakes and a busted front light. Their mission: set up a checkpoint to search for yaba, a type of methamphetamine that’s become a scourge in Southeast Asia.
Young and slight, this contingent from the new Karenni State Police, or KSP, looks more like students on an immersive career day than a group of no-nonsense cops. A few practice waving cars to the side of the road – striving to convey a confident authority but struggling to suppress embarrassed grins.
After what locals say was years of abuse by the former police force run by Myanmar’s repressive military regime, a little humility isn’t a bad thing.
“Before, civilians didn’t trust the police, so they didn’t come to see us,” says Bel Kyaw May, 29, the commander of Station 8 who, like a chaperone, patiently watches over his officers from the side of the road. “We’re more friendly.”
The KSP was established in August 2021, six months into a civil war triggered by the Myanmar military coup.
The importance of developing a rebel-backed police force in the midst of this ongoing conflict may not be immediately clear. But rebels and outside observers of Myanmar say that for the insurgency to succeed, its backers must not only beat better-armed government troops on the battlefield but assure a traumatized public that they can replace the services that have been lost in the fighting, including security.
“If you don’t do that, you run the risk of losing the support of the population, which in the case of the Karenni movement is really critical,” says Jason Tower, a Bangkok-based analyst at the United States Institute of Peace. Karenni is a catch-all for the various ethnic groups in Kayah.
“The revolution isn’t going to end tomorrow.”
The rebel effort to rebuild the governmental institutions, they say, can serve as a model for federal democracy and a showcase for how best to avoid the mistakes of the past, which included a Myanmar Police Force that was often an instrument of military repression.
In other words, quite a lot is riding on the success of Bel Kyaw May and his bright-eyed recruits. “Now it’s revolutionary time,” he said through an interpreter. “Young people are asking, what can I do for the state?”
The challenges facing the rebels in general and the KSP in particular, however, are considerable. The biggest is a lack of resources. Insurgent leaders have created a nominal state government called the Interim Executive Council that raises revenue through fundraising, taxes and business levies.
But 70% of what it collects goes to warfighting, with the remainder split among the KSP and health, education, humanitarian and other agencies in Kayah established by the council. That means that the KSP must try to deal with rising drug use and violence – consequences of the traumas of four years of war – on a shoestring budget.
Bo Bo, the KSP’s chief spokesman, said the monthly allotments are only about 10% of what his force needs. There were 638 officers in the force as of August – 558 of whom were men and 180 of whom were women. Bo Bo estimates a few hundred more officers are still needed.
The van that ferried the officers to the checkpoint is a 1996 Toyota Granvia that would have a hard time chasing down a scooter. There are more cops than guns and so few uniforms, most days officers stay in civilian clothes.
They also aren’t regularly paid. Most live at the stations and give thanks to their constituents at every meal because that’s usually where their food comes from.
“Our effectiveness is a little lower because we don’t have much manpower; we don’t have much money,” Bo Bo, who leads a station in Mese in southern Kayah state, told RFA.
At the heart of the force are officers like Bo Bo and Bel Kyaw May, both of whom were members of the Myanmar Police Force but resigned after the coup to join a countrywide worker strike known as the Civil Disobedience Movement, or CDM, to pressure the junta to back down. More than 100 former MSP officers are now with the KSP.
In earlier decades, the police force had been accused of harsh tactics, but, according to Tower, it had begun to reform after a previous military dictatorship agreed to share power in 2011.
In the post-coup crackdown, bad habits resurfaced, as Myanmar Police Force officers busted up rallies and arrested protesters. But the coup also highlighted the fact that a number of officers, like Bo Bo and Bel Kyaw May, were more reform-minded.
Shy and soft-spoken, Bo Bo said he had dreamed of being a scientist growing up but had gone to the police academy because it was free and offered steady employment after graduation. He was first assigned to a station in his home township but was soon transferred farther away because the military didn’t want its officers to have ties to local communities, he said.
He said he quickly became disillusioned by the corruption he witnessed during those years. A friend once reported his bike was stolen but decided not to pursue the case when he learned that the required bribe was more than his bike was worth.
Officers could be roused to work on serious offenses like murder or rape, but the outcome was often preordained, Bo Bo said.
“True and false doesn’t count,” Bo Bo said. “If you had money, you win.”
The success of the insurgents on the battlefield has given them a chance to reset the relationship between police and the communities they serve, the USIP’s Tower said.
“Whereas in the past, the police were the oppressors of the communities,” he said. “There was no concept of the idea of community security or community policing.”
Part of what fueled corruption in the Myanmar Police Force was the low-pay of the officers. KSP officers make even less. They often go weeks without pay. As a hedge against the type of graft that plagued the old force sprouting in the new one, recruits must complete courses that include instruction not only on police procedure but also on Karenni history and the principles of democracy and human rights that underlie the revolution here.
And in the Kayah rebel government organizational chart, the KSP sits under civilian control, unlike the Myanmar State Police, which was overseen by the military.
Still, there appeared to be a few hiccups in the operation when RFA visited. One detainee at Station 8 was being held with one ankle bound in an old fashioned British stockade, a holdover from colonial days. “Sunday” turned out to be a member of the police force. His crime? He said he’d be gone for one week but took two instead.
Other detainees at the two stations RFA visited were teens who had been caught by their parents using drugs. Fearing they were losing control of their children, they had asked the KSP to put them in jail as a form of rehabilitation.
Criminal suspects, meanwhile, can sit in jail for weeks without having their cases adjudicated because there are so few judges and attorneys in Kayah.
The other challenge the young officers of the KSP face are the not insignificant dangers of their jobs.
Station 8 is located off the main road among terraced hills of yellow-green stalks of rice swaying in the wind. The picturesque setting, the youthful attractiveness of the officers, and the fact that they live at the station gives it a summer-camp vibe.
But the risks are real, and the main benefit of Station 8’s setting is that it’s hidden. The military junta would likely bomb the station if it knew where it was. Station 2 to the south was bombed on Sept. 5, 2024. Among the injured was Zin Zin Aung, the wife of a KSP officer. Her five-month-old fetus didn’t survive the attack.
KSP officers are also outgunned by local drug dealers, some of whom have ties to ethnic armies in the area.
Poppy fields cover the landscape in southern Shan, near the border with Kayah. In the chaos created by the war, Myanmar has become the number one exporter of opium in the world, according to the United Nations Office for Drugs and Crime.
“Sometimes the drug dealers give a warning: We can kill you anytime,” Bel Kyaw May said.
Behind horn-rimmed glasses and a serious expression, Shun Lai Yee Win, 20, acknowledged the risks she and her fellow officers face in a brief interview with RFA. She said she joined the KSP and Station 8 simply because she wanted to be part of the process of building a new, more just society.
The old police force “was corrupt, always showing their power to civilians,” she said, before the officers set off to establish the checkpoint.
Wiliam Tun, 28, who was among the civilians who were stopped, had the same opinion. “We were afraid of the military police,” he said. “They will put you in jail just to do it.”
Asked if he minded being stopped and searched by the KSP officers, he shook his head no. He knew several from the community, he said.
“These are all my friends.”
Soe San Aung for RFA Burmese contributed reporting. Edited by Boer Deng and Abby Seiff.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Jim Snyder and Gemunu Amarasinghe for RFA.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on AlternativeRadio and was authored by info@alternativeradio.org.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on The Real News Network and was authored by The Real News Network.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on The Real News Network and was authored by The Real News Network.
This content originally appeared on The Intercept and was authored by The Intercept.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on The Real News Network and was authored by The Real News Network.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on The Intercept and was authored by The Intercept.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
New Delhi, Feb 4, 2025—The Committee to Protect Journalists calls on the Indian government to end its weaponization of regulatory measures targeting independent journalism following a decision to revoke The Reporters’ Collective’s nonprofit status and the tax exempt status of The File.
“Journalism is a public service. The Indian government should not abuse regulatory processes to target investigative journalism,” said Beh Lih Yi, CPJ’s Asia program coordinator. “The government must immediately reverse these orders against The Reporters’ Collective and The File, which could set a dangerous precedent for other non-profit media in India and severely undermine public interest journalism.”
The Reporters’ Collective (TRC) said in a January 28 statement that the loss of its nonprofit status “severely impairs” its ability to do work and “worsens the conditions” for independent journalism in the country.
The revocation of a nonprofit status means entities will be taxed as a commercial entity, subjecting donations to taxation, which could discourage potential funding. The tax could potentially be applied retrospectively. TRC is known for its investigative reporting on Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s ruling government, ranging from corruption, government accountability, to allegations of corporate cronyism, and unethical business practices against the Adani Group, one of India’s wealthiest conglomerates.
The directive against TRC follows a disturbing pattern of financial and legal pressures on independent media. In December 2024, the Bengaluru-based Kannada website The File, which has conducted investigations into all political parties in the southwestern state of Karnataka, also faced a similar tax order, which was reviewed by CPJ. The order revoked its tax exemptions, deeming its activities commercially oriented despite its public interest reporting.`
In February 2023, income tax authorities in India searched BBC offices in New Delhi and Mumbai as part of an income-tax investigation, weeks after the broadcaster aired a documentary critical of Modi.
CPJ contacted the commissioner of Central Board of Direct Taxes and the exemption commissioner in Delhi and tax authorities in Bangalore about TRC and The File’s cases but did not receive responses.
This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by CPJ Staff.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on The Real News Network and was authored by The Real News Network.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on The Real News Network and was authored by The Real News Network.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on The Intercept and was authored by The Intercept.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Sunday visited Panama to relay President Donald Trump’s concerns about alleged Chinese control of the Panama Canal and to repeat his threats to reassert U.S. control over the key trade route.
After touring the canal and meeting with Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino, Rubio called China’s influence in the Panama Canal a “violation” of the treaty under which the United States handed over control of the waterway to Panama.
“Absent immediate changes, it would require the United States to take measures necessary to protect its rights,” Rubio said according to a State Department statement.
What have Trump and Mulino said?
During his inaugural address on Jan. 20, Trump said that “China is operating the Panama Canal. And we didn’t give it to China. We gave it to Panama, and we’re taking it back.”
In response, Mulino said on Jan. 22 that the canal is “is and will continue to be Panama’s.”
“Panama is moving forward. Panama is not distracted by these kinds of statements,” Mulino said at the Davos Forum in Switzerland. “Over time, we have been an ally and friend of the United States; partners in large part in important benefits, not only through the Canal, but also participants, being the main user of the Canal, transporting goods to and from the United States.”
“One cannot ignore public international law,” he said. “So, I think that does not concern me, because that is strictly impossible in law.”
Does China control the Panama Canal?
The United States invaded Panama in 1989, overthrowing then-President Manuel Noriega –- a one-time U.S. ally who was later targeted for his role as an international drug kingpin. The canal was handed over to Panama in 1999 under a treaty signed by President Jimmy Carter in 1977.
Any nation is allowed to use the transoceanic waterway, which lifts massive cargo vessels above sea level through a series of interconnected locks and back down again, connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.
Beijing says it has no control over the running of the canal, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told journalists on Jan. 22.
“We agree with Panamanian President Mulino that Panama’s sovereignty and independence are not negotiable and the canal is not directly or indirectly controlled by any major power,” Mao told a regular news conference in Beijing.
“China does not participate in the management and operation of the canal and never interferes in canal affairs,” she said. “We always respect Panama’s sovereignty over the canal and recognize the canal as a permanently neutral international waterway.”
However, Panama granted a concession to operate the ports of Balboa and Cristobal, on the Pacific and Atlantic sides of the Canal, to Hutchison-Whampoa in 1996, which is owned by Hong Kong billionaire Li Ka-shing and has since been merged into his CK Hutchison Holdings.
The U.S. government has previously said it does not believe that the concession represented a threat to the canal.
“Several entities of the U.S. Government, including the Federal Maritime Commission and the staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, have researched this issue extensively and have not uncovered any evidence to support a conclusion that the People’s Republic of China will be in a position to control Canal operations,” according to the Department of State FAQ on the canal.
The neutrality of the Canal and its operations are guaranteed by the Neutrality Treaty and associated protocols, to which 36 other countries are party, it said.
RELATED STORIES
Victor Li ‘prays’ Hong Kong can keep global financial center status
China calls on Hong Kong tycoons to help kickstart national economy
Beijing sees Trump presidency as ‘critical’ juncture for Sino-US ties
What is the extent of Chinese influence in Panama?
While attempts by Chinese state-owned enterprises to acquire ports in Latin America have been largely unsuccessful, Li Ka-shing’s expansion in the region has been unimpeded.
In 2017, Panama severed diplomatic ties with democratic Taiwan and established relations with the People’s Republic of China, becoming the first Latin American country to join President Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road global supply chain and infrastructure program.
The move paved the way for Chinese companies — both private and state-owned — to plow hundreds of millions of dollars into a new cruise terminal and a bridge across the canal.
Li, probably Hong Kong’s most famous businessman, has been courted by Beijing since the 1997 handover of Hong Kong to Chinese rule. He has close connections to the highest levels of leadership, and has been received by past Presidents Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao.
The U.S. investigation into Li’s Panama Canal concession in 1999 concluded that it was largely safe from Chinese influence because of Hong Kong’s status as a separate trading jurisdiction from the rest of China.
That separate status — called into question as China stepped up its political control over the city in the wake of mass popular protests — was officially revoked under the last Trump administration through an executive order in July 2020, which said the city was “no longer sufficiently autonomous to justify differential treatment in relation to the People’s Republic of China.”
So what is Li Ka-shing’s international role?
In 1991, when Hong Kong billionaire Li Ka-shing’s CK Hutchison acquired Britain’s biggest seaport at Felixstowe, the city’s rags-to-riches tycoon was just getting started.
Now, he heads a multinational cargo port empire with operations in 53 ports in 24 countries in Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America.
Experts say Li is trusted both by Beijing and the wider international community, and that his ventures are seen as a way for China to bring influence to bear, but without making it too obvious.
While not all of Li’s corporate investments can be seen as a disguised form of Chinese diplomacy, many of his Latin American ventures are ports in highly strategic locations, often in countries that initially lacked diplomatic ties with Beijing, according to Hong Kong political scientist Simon Shen.
Many of the countries Li invests in once recognized the Republic of China on Taiwan rather than the People’s Republic of China. Yet the pace of his investments slowed once Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou — who advocates warm ties with Beijing — took power.
Investments made by Li haven’t typically set off many alarm bells in the corridors of Western governments; CK Hutchison has won contracts that a Chinese state-owned enterprise could only dream of.
But according to Shen, complaints were emerging in U.S. right-wing media of Chinese influence in the Panama Canal as early as 2011.
Those concerns have now become mainstream under the Trump administration.
What does this mean for Hong Kong?
Hong Kong’s shift from an international free port to a city that is increasingly run along mainland Chinese lines has led to a change in attitudes to the activities of its business community.
“Hong Kong isn’t the city it was back in the day — it is a Chinese port,” Taiwanese national security research Shih Chien-yu told RFA Cantonese in a recent interview. “Naturally, other countries are going to have doubts.”
According to Hong Kong entrepreneur Herbert Chow, the ongoing crackdown on political dissent in Hong Kong is coming back to bite its companies, which are now more likely to be viewed as Chinese.
He said China should consider making some concessions, including releasing jailed media tycoon Jimmy Lai, to boost the city’s international image.
“So many Hong Kong businesses have gone to Southeast Asia now to put down roots and break away from the politically sensitive connection to China,” Chow said.
CK Hutchison was invited to respond to this article, but hadn’t replied by the time of writing.
Translated and edited by Luisetta Mudie.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Ha Syut.
This content originally appeared on Human Rights Watch and was authored by Human Rights Watch.
TAIPEI, Taiwan – North Korea condemned U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio for calling it a “rogue state” in its first direct criticism of the Trump administration, about a week after the U.S. president suggested he might try to revive contacts with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.
Rubio referred to North Korea and Iran as “rogue states” in a Jan. 30 interview while discussing foreign policy challenges. He emphasized the importance of addressing the threats posed by those countries, highlighting their destabilizing activities and the need for a robust U.S. response.
A North Korea foreign ministry spokesperson dismissed Rubio’s comments and said U.S. hostility was incessant.
“It is necessary to mention how absurd and illogical it is that the most depraved state in the world brands another country a rogue state,” the North Korean spokesperson said, as cited by the state-run Korean Central News Agency, or KCNA, on Monday.
“The hostile words and deeds of the person who is in charge of the U.S. foreign policy served as an occasion of confirming once again the U.S. hostile policy toward the DPRK which remains unchanged.
“We will never tolerate any provocation of the U.S., which has always been hostile to the DPRK and will be hostile to it in the future, too, but will take tough counteraction corresponding to it as usual.”
The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, or DPRK, is North Korea’s official name.
It marked the North’s first public criticism of the new U.S. administration since Donald Trump returned to the White House last month.
Trump launched an unprecedented diplomatic effort on North Korea during his first term, meeting Kim three times, but in the end making no progress on persuading him to give up his nuclear and missile programmes in exchange for relief on sanctions.
Trump mentioned his effort on North Korea during his presidential campaign but it had until Monday refrained from making direct comments about him or his government.
South Korea’s unification ministry said the North was responding quickly to measures and remarks from the new Trump administration, following a pledge on the “toughest” response to the U.S. in a key party meeting at the end of last year.
“To be clear, the one that undermines international rules and threatens the peace of the international community is North Korea itself,” said the South Korean ministry spokesperson, Koo Byoung-sam.
“South Korea, the U.S. and the international community share the goal of completely denuclearizing North Korea.”
North Korea’s remarks came about a week after Trump was asked in an interview if he planned to “reach out” to the North Korean leader.
“I will, yeah. He liked me,” Trump said.
RELATED STORIES
Interview: Trump would like to resume personal diplomacy with Kim Jong Un
Trump calls North Korea ‘nuclear power,’ Seoul disagrees
North Korea conducts missile tests days before Trump takes office
In a sign that Trump might intend to revive his diplomatic effort on North Korea, he has picked as a senior White House official an aide, William Beau Harrison, who was involved in planning summits with Kim in Singapore in 2018 and in Vietnam in 2019.
Trump met Kim for a third time on the heavily fortified border between the two Koreas later in 2019 when Trump became the first U.S. president to set foot on North Korean soil.
But the meetings led to no progress on efforts to get North Korea to abandon its nuclear and missile programs.
Edited by Mike Firn.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Taejun Kang for RFA.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.