The “Global Security Initiative” (GSI) announced by Xi Jinping in April 2022 was finally elaborated nine months later in the form of a concept note after the start of his unprecedented third mandate as the leader of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and as the Supreme leader of China. The initiative is supposed to present a new plan for a “common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security.” Instead of a new plan and vision, the GSI seems repackaged from Xi’s speeches on a global Sinocentric order at the Conference on Interaction and confidence building measures in Asia (CICA) and other past statements.

On the surface the basic principles of the GSI include China’s offer of itself as an honest broker in conflicts while respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all nations and upholding the principles of the United Nations Charter. Noble ambitions which are not followed through by actual Chinese policy. In the South China sea, China is a regional bully which ignores the interests of Vietnam and Philippines in the South China sea with the People’s Liberation Army and the Coast guard encroaching on local fishermen’s activities. China also inhibits these small countries from oil exploration in their own territorial seas due to such intimidation with also illegal military installations on artificial islands aimed at absolute control and insecurity. The same insecurity which China offers to protect against in the GSI. China does not respect the UN Convention on Laws of the Sea (UNCLOS) in the South China sea, neither does it heed to the 2016 ruling of the arbitral tribunal. Such unilateral actions show its contempt for the UN Charter and UN entities when they are contrary to China’s needs. Another point in the GSI that China doesn’t respect in practice where it seeks to replace UN institutions with those that it can control or dominate. An example is its attempt to control ASEAN and its consensus-based decisions. Two years where ASEAN has been deadlocked in its 56-year history were 2012 and 2016 when the declaration mentioned the South China sea. ASEAN was unable to issue a statement due to veto by Cambodia, a close Chinese ally.

According to the concept paper, China also wants to build international platforms and mechanisms for exchange and cooperation to address challenges in areas like counter terrorism, cyber and information security and bio security.

China had put forward a Global Initiative on Data Security a few years back which made a lot of news. But what does not make it to the news often is how Beijing backed hackers have for years been stealing data from a number of countries. According to a cyber security firm called TeamT5, government and military units in South and Southeast Asia have become a common target for China’s hackers. In the second half of 2022, there was a 20 per cent increase in China linked cyber-attacks against Southeast Asian countries compared to 2021. Countries like Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Indonesia and India have all had to face increasing frequency of cyber- attacks over the past few years.

Besides cyber-attacks, sensitive data of many countries is also at risk of finding its way to China. Let us not forget the case of African Union where from 2012 to 2017, sensitive data from the servers of AU headquarters in Addis Ababa found its way every night to servers in Shanghai. AU officials were unaware until this data theft was revealed in 2017. The incident made it to the news only in 2018 revealing the lengths to which China would go to spy on countries and organizations it seeks to manipulate for its own interests.

Coming to addressing the challenges in areas of counter terrorism, China practices the placing of technical holds and blocks on listing of terrorists by the UNSC 1267 Committee. Between June and October 2022, China placed technical hold on listing of at least five terrorists, undermining not only the multilateral resolve to combat terrorism but also the legitimacy of a UN body. Similarly on biosecurity, we all know how important it is to find the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic so that all of humanity can benefit and the world does not have to face a shock of this scale again. The investigations into the origin of the pandemic are, however, held up because China failed to cooperate and provide unrestricted access to the WHO team that was given this task. What is even more disturbing is that China systematically destroyed data that could have been useful for the investigation.

The list of such examples can be endless but let us look at one last aspect. The paper claims that ‘Humanity is an indivisible security community. Security of one country should not come at the expense of that of other.’ But recent revelations show that the principle of indivisible security means that China’s security cannot be compromised even at the expense of that of other countries. According to a report in September and December 2022 by human rights organization Safeguard Defenders, China operates a network of over 100 overseas police stations based on bilateral security arrangements and joint policing initiatives to monitor, harass and repatriate Chinese citizens and silence protestors against China. Several countries are now investigating how China managed to set up these police stations without their knowledge and what loopholes were missed out in the bilateral security cooperation agreements they signed with China.

L'articolo China’s Global Security Initiative proviene da InsideOver.

L'articolo Xi is using the CPC to control China like never before proviene da InsideOver.

In an unprecedented provocation, Pakistan conducted airstrikes on April 16 in Afghanistan’s eastern Khost and Kunar provinces to target alleged hideouts of the terrorist group, Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). The air raids resulted in the killing of 47 innocent civilians, including children and women, and more than 20 injuries. The incident has significantly increased tensions between the acting Taliban government in Afghanistan and Pakistan. As a result, there is a likelihood of more violent clashes in the border areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

In its official statement on the incident, Taliban warned of “dire consequences” if Pakistan conducts similar attacks in the future. Zabiullah Mujahid, the Taliban’s Deputy Minister of Information and Culture and Chief Spokesperson, issued a stern warning that “Pakistan should not test the Afghan people’s patience,” otherwise it will face “bad consequences.” Pakistan, on the other hand, did not acknowledge the airstrikes and blamed the recent spike in cross-border attacks allegedly emanating from Afghanistan and the Taliban government’s failure to stop TTP’s activities for tensions between the two neighboring countries.

Pakistan’s attack on the Afghan soil is a likely violation of Article 2(1) of the United Nations’ Charter, which clearly states that “use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.” The United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan said in a statement that it was “deeply concerned” by civilian deaths caused by air strikes, and the mission was verifying the extent of casualties. Additionally, an Afghan representative of the United Nations Children’s Fund confirmed that, “In Khost, 12 girls and three boys were killed; in Kunar, three girls and two boys were killed.”

Despite these statements, the Taliban regime has not taken any major diplomatic steps to internationalise the issue to put pressure on Pakistan besides summoning Islamabad’s Ambassador in Kabul. The obvious reason for this lackadaisical response from Taliban is its dependence on Islamabad. Pakistan has been at the forefront in doing Taliban’s bidding for the international recognition since the fall of Kabul in August last year, with no major success so far.

Following last week’s air attacks, several anti-Pakistan protests have taken place in different parts of Afghanistan. The Taliban government is under pressure to handle growing anti-Pakistan sentiments in the country after recent airstrikes and regular cross-border aggression from the Pakistani security forces.

For Afghans living along the Durand Line, airstrikes are the reminder of last two bloody decades of violent fighting between the Taliban and foreign forces (US and NATO). What Pakistan’s airstrikes have done is that they have reopened old wounds for the border population in Afghanistan. This brazen show of power, which is part of Pakistan’s counter-terrorism strategy, will not work in the long-term and may result in a violent pushback from Afghanistan in tribal areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province and former Federally Administered Tribal Areas agencies.

More importantly, there is a growing sense of mistrust and anger among the Pashtun population on both sides of the Durand Line. Even after seven months of the Taliban takeover of Kabul, the border areas in Afghanistan are seeing persistent violence amid growing food and refugee crises. On the other hand, the contentious issue of the Durand Line remains unresolved despite several meetings between Taliban government and Islamabad. Perhaps, Islamabad misconstrued Taliban’s intentions on the issue and misjudged that the group would not raise objections on the border fencing after coming to power in Afghanistan.

Furthermore, there is an apparent frustration in Islamabad over Taliban’s inability and disinterest in addressing the TTP issue. As a mediator, Taliban helped to conduct several rounds of negotiations between Islamabad and TTP. Those talks even led to ‘one-month’ long ceasefire and a truce agreement last year.[9] However, negotiations fell apart after TTP accused Pakistan of violating the terms of truce. The terror group resumed attacks in December, and fresh attempts to restart talks between Islamabad and TTP failed miserably. In April this year, the TTP announced a rare spring offensive – ‘Al-Badr’ – against Pakistani “security forces and their collaborators.” This has further exacerbated insecurities in Islamabad, leading to more differences with its proxy Taliban government in Kabul.

In conclusion, Pakistan’s attack on the Afghan soil can be seen a sign of frustration. It appears that Pakistan’s powerful military establishment has decided to take the war against terrorism into Afghanistan. The mistrust between the Taliban and Islamabad has possibly reached to a level of no return. The recent airstrikes in Khost and Kunar are a warning call for the Taliban regime in Kabul. An immediate resumption of peace talks between TTP and Pakistan may provide some breathing room for the Taliban government. However, that scenario seems unlikely after TTP announced the spring offensive against Pakistan’s security forces. As a result, the coming months may see a spike in border clashes between the Taliban fighters and Pakistan’s security forces. Rawalpindi may consider announcing a military offensive in Waziristan or increase their cross-border counterterrorism offensive in Afghanistan.

L'articolo Pak airstrikes in Khost and Kunar demonstrate end of Islamabad-Rawalpindi honeymoon proviene da InsideOver.

The geostrategic compulsions created by the Ukraine and Afghanistan crises compelled Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi to visit South Asian countries to find common ground and project a unified front with headwinds expected from the West. Within a span of six days from March 22-27, Wang Yi visited Pakistan, Afghanistan, India and Nepal.

During his visit to Pakistan, Wang Yi expounded ‘four suggestions’ for development of Sino-Pakistan relations. All these suggestions revolved around benefits only for China which clearly reflects Chinese priorities for Pakistan. The emphasis was on Pakistan’s support of Chinese policies at multilateral forums, revitalization of CPEC, strengthening anti-terrorism cooperation in context of security concerns of Chinese nationals in Pakistan and close multilateral cooperation perhaps in context of cooperation on Afghanistan. While the recently announced $4.2 billion debt rollover by China would come as a relief to Islamabad, the political turmoil in Pakistan would exacerbate Beijing’s worries.

Another key feature of the visit was China’s first time participation at the OIC as a guest invitee. China perceives OIC as an important platform for its outreach to the Muslim world, to mediate for Ukraine crisis in favour of Russia, and to garner support on Afghanistan. The Foreign Minister’s surprise visit to Afghanistan was intended to signal that the Afghan issue remains important in the current international peace and security agenda for China. While the Afghan side appeared keen on Chinese finances, the Chinese side continued its rhetoric of ‘not interfering with Afghanistan’s internal affairs’. However, during March 30-31, at the 3rd Foreign Ministers’ meeting of Iran, Pakistan,
Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, China exhibited high level of financial commitment to the Taliban regime, especially in the mining sector. It is supposedly learnt that privately China did not support Pakistan’s endeavour to push for political legitimacy of the Taliban regime.

The Chinese Foreign Minister’s visit to India could be seen primarily in context of projection of a China-India alignment on the Ukrainian crisis. China issued three separate readouts of Wang Yi’s meetings with Indian leaders, with a common emphasis on delinking the border issue from the overall development of bilateral relations, contrary to the Indian stand of border issues being the centrepiece of bilateral relations. This rhetoric, that found consonance in Chinese media and social media as well, is aimed at propagating Beijing’s image as a benevolent regional player who is willing to set differences aside for strengthening bilateral relations.

Wang Yi’s last stop of his South Asian tour was Nepal. His trip to Nepal gave rise to speculation that implementation of BRI projects would find a major push during the visit. For Nepal, financing of BRI projects appears a key roadblock, with the Nepali side looking for grants rather than loans from China. Though BRI featured in all the official Chinese handouts of Wang Yi’s meetings, none of the nine agreements signed
were related to the BRI. China, however, conveyed its support for Nepalese request for up-gradation to ‘Observer’ status with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).

Beijing appears to be feeling the pressure, with the US drawing parallels of Ukraine with Taiwan, and Europe asking Beijing to mediate with Russia to stop the war. China obviously does not want to be clubbed or isolated with Russia in the current scenario, and is looking to garner support. Wang Yi’s reference to Asia becoming a ‘chessboard of game between major powers’ reflects Beijing’s apprehension that the US may use the India card as a geopolitical tool in its rivalry with China. The larger aim of China’s regional initiatives, however, remains a concern.

L'articolo Chinese Foreign Minister’s South Asian tour proviene da InsideOver.

Tiananmen in Chinese means “Gate of Heavenly Peace”. But what happened at Tiananmen Square in 1989 negates the very meaning of the word. Around 10,000 Chinese people were killed by its own government for seeking democratic rights. Thousands of other peaceful demonstrators were injured, later hunted down and jailed. The issue is still a taboo in China. The victims of the 1989 massacre are still waiting to get justice as accountability for the tragedy was never fixed. Even the families of the victims seeking to commemorate the occasion are harassed by the Chinese authorities.

Chinese authorities detained, questioned, and arrested the families of the victims and social activists who were planning to mark the Tiananmen tragedy anniversary. Such suppression tactics have seen a surge since Xi Jinping took the reins of China in 2013. Every year, families especially mothers of those killed in the brutal military action in Tiananmen Square gather to seek justice for their deceased loved ones and to explain the “state-led terror and suffocation” they go through for seeking justice. Yin Min, whose 19-year old son was killed in the 1989 massacre, said “It feels that there’s no end in sight. We are all at ages where death can happen any day, and we’d like to see the truth revealed and justice upheld while we are still alive.

Families and activists were kept under surveillance on the 30th anniversary in 2019. Chinese rights activist Hu Jia said the state security police followed her everywhere, even during a trek to remote mountains. Families of the victims were followed and their telephones were monitored in order to prevent them from marking the anniversary or speaking to journalists. The members of a group named ‘Tiananmen Mothers’ were placed under house arrest in the run-up to the 1989 movement’s anniversary. Zhang Xianling, who lost her son in the Tiananmen crackdown, said “I asked them what date they would be leaving on, and they said they didn’t know… Human rights violations are so common in China.” When Zhang’s son asked her if the army would open fire, she did not believe it and said no to him. Three hours later he was killed.

As many as 131 ‘Tiananmen Mothers’ published a letter in 2016 recounting their horrible ordeal while seeking justice. They said they were subjected to constant harassment, intimidation, and even false accusations by the Chinese security agencies. “For us, family members of the victims’ families, it has been 27 years of state terror and suffocation. All these actions undoubtedly desecrate the souls of those who perished in the crackdown and insult the honour of the living,” read the letter.

Arrests, censorships, surveillance are part of Jinping’s “China Dream” that wants everyone to forget about the Tiananmen killings, said Sophie Richardson, China director at Human Rights Watch. “But suppressing the truth has only fuelled demands for justice and accountability,” she said. Until two years ago, the people of Hong Kong would freely commemorate the Tiananmen tragedy. Hundreds of Hong Kongers held protests demanding vindication, accountability and justice for victims of the 1989 massacre. However, the Beijing government cracked down on the protestors in 2019.

It started witch-hunts of those who participated in the Hong Kong rallies commemorating the Tiananmen killings. Eight activists were sentenced to up to 14 months in jail. This however urged more Hong Kongers to fight for the Tiananmen case. Media tycoon Jimmy Lai said “If commemorating those who died because of injustice is a crime, then inflict on me that crime and let me suffer the punishment of this crime.” After awarding 14 months in prison, activist Lee Cheuk-yan told the court “If there was a provocateur, it is the regime that fired at its own people. If I must go to jail to affirm my will, then so be it.”

Yaqiu Wang, senior researcher on China at Human Rights Watch, said the Beijing government never paid a price at home or abroad for the Tiananmen Massacre, which emboldened state-sponsored abuses in the country. The families of the 1989 tragedy blamed the Beijing government for ignoring their appeal seeking a resolution to the “miscarriage of justice”. They said the government pretended that the Tiananmen genocide never happened. Coming heavily on the communist government for the “unscrupulous slaughter” of its own citizens, the ‘Tiananmen Mothers’ said “A government that forgets, conceals, and covers up the truth of historical suffering has no future—it is a government that is continuing to commit crimes!”

L'articolo Amid suppression and censorship by Beijing, Tiananmen massacre victims await justice proviene da InsideOver.

Well meaning incentive systems devised by international community for the socio-economic upliftment of developing countries may also end up as a tool in the hands of exploitative classes in these societies. Pakistan’s performance under the Generalised Scheme of Preferences Plus (GSP+) scheme of the European Union (EU) is an interesting case in point where even after passage of 8 years, little improvement is seen in the condition of poor labourers including women and children. This lack of progress speaks volumes about the vested interests of the exporter lobby in Pakistan which despite enjoying significant tariff benefits under GSP+ deprive the weaker sections of even their basic rights. The stagnant economic condition and poor human rights of these workers also expose the silent support extended to this lobby by a complicit political and diplomatic class, which ensures the continuation of these benefits by reassuring the EU about Pakistan’s intent of working on the pitiable condition of women and children employed in affected industries.

The game has been in open display for the past few years during the visits of EU representatives to Pakistan for evaluating the progress achieved on desired areas under GSP+. During one such visit in February 2022, EU’s Special Representative for Human Rights, Eamon Gilmore called out Pakistan’s poor performance in three major areas, i.e. education, rights of children and women in the country. Pointing towards the state of labour rights, he observed that women earn less than minimum wage in the textiles industry, a sector benefiting significantly from the programme. On education, Gilmore noted that a large number of children are out-of-school and are being placed in a cycle of disadvantage. However, despite noting these abject human rights conditions, the EU appears prepared to extend the benefit to Pakistan for another two years.

The European Institute for Asian Studies (EIAS) through its policy brief published in March 2022 sheds more light on this vicious cycle which has seized the vulnerable workers in Pakistan. According to the report, Pakistan has greatly benefited from generous tariff preferences (mostly zero duties on two thirds of all product categories) under the GSP+ arrangement since 2014. However, a closer look at the labour conditions in the country reveals a disturbing picture. Trumping the original idea of making a positive impact on labour conditions in Pakistan, the concessions have effectively turned into a piggy bank for the powerful business lobby. Most of the advantages out of the scheme get pocketed by the business elite and modern Zamindars (feudal landlords), with little positive impact on the poorest levels of society. This results in a tendency to declare themselves poor while siphoning the benefits under the scheme to offshore bank accounts.

Ironically, policy markers chose to look the other way for most of the time. Perhaps they are guided by a notion that it is important to maintain their GSP+ status to avoid their own responsibility of improving working conditions and providing job growth in the country. They also fear that any considerable improvement in the socioeconomic condition may lead to Pakistan losing the privileges. As a result, EU unknowingly end up incentivizing policy makers in Pakistan to keep workers poor and slow down innovation. On paper, several laws and regulations exist or have been introduced by Pakistan to comply with the conventions. Yet, the responsible institutions fail to implement some of the most basic elements of these conventions. Required control mechanisms and enforcement procedures are also found lacking. The occasional critical voice raised by local NGOs, academics, trade unions and civil society groups in Pakistan seems to fall on deaf years.

The EIAS report contends that labour conditions and children & women’s rights have not been improving sufficiently in Pakistan. In fact, despite being officially outlawed for years, bonded labour arrangements (debt slavery) continue to be widespread. Many of Pakistan’s estimated 60 million illiterate people in rural areas have no other option but to sell their workforce for minuscule wages to local landlords, who charge the workers and their families for living on their properties. Captured in a spiral of rising debt, an estimated 3 million people in Pakistan effectively live as indentured servants.

Furthermore, child labour is commonplace with poor children having no choice but to support their families. This leaves them unable to attend school for formal education. There are currently over 2 million child labourers in Pakistan. Overall, women and children are among the most vulnerable groups, subjected to human trafficking and forced to work under inhumane conditions; putting them at great risk of facing sexual violence. Law enforcement in this regard has been abysmally weak, particularly outside of the densely populated Punjab province, which accounts for a disproportionate 98% of convictions of human traffickers in the country.

The Pakistan Workers Confederation (PWC) alleges a “state of near non-implementation” with regard to many of the International Labour Organization (ILO)’s core labour conventions. Its reports show serious deficiencies in adherence to safety standards, the right to unionise, or equal treatment of women. A PWC report also highlights a stark example of workers’ poor condition in Sialkot, a city in Punjab province. Being a global hub for the production of surgical instruments and sports equipment (with about 70% of global football manufacturing), many multinational companies operate factories in the city. Yet, many workers earn below the minimum wage here. Moreover, even though the GSP+ conditions require all workers to receive social security cards, only 10% of the workforce have actually received them. On top of that, Pakistan is yet to ratify the ILO’s 1970 Minimum Wage Fixing Convention.

Despite glaring lack of compliance, the EU refrains from suspending GSP+ benefits for Pakistan; this forms a major part of criticism voiced against the scheme. The need for greater clarity, transparency, standardised procedure is increasingly being felt to ensure trickling down of benefits to the deserving sections of the Pakistani society. Unfortunately, a failure on this account would subject EU to accusations of putting geopolitical and geo-economic considerations over the original intent of GSP + programme.

L'articolo Feudal Businesses cornering GSP plus benefits in Pakistan proviene da InsideOver.

Tiny Lithuania is showing the way to Europe, how to protect universal values like human rights and liberal democracy and also the unity of the European Union from the challenges posed by China. Bigger members of the EU, Germany, France and Italy, as well as the United Kingdom, have toughened their stance towards the dragon.

Lithuania has withdrawn from the so-called 17+1 group, a China – led format founded in 2012 with the aim to expand co-operation between Beijing and countries in central and east Europe; through investment and trade focussing on infrastructure projects such as bridges, motorways, railway lines and modernization of ports. Members of the group included 12 members of the EU and five Balkan states. Some of these countries overlapped the Warsaw Pact countries of yore that ended after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The 17+1 group is seen as a forum to split the EU and also to extend China’s flagship Belt and Road Initiative in central and east European countries to extend the footprint of the dragon in Europe.

Lithuania started challenging Beijing’s attempt to extend hegemony over Europe over the issue of human rights; its parliament passed a resolution condemning the suppression of Uyghurs. Lithuania also worked out a new set of ties with Taiwan. In November 2021, Lithuania became the first country in Europe to allow Taiwan to open a de facto embassy in Lithuanian capital Vilnius.
China had started mounting pressure on Lithuania from much earlier to desist it from allowing Taiwan to open an embassy in its own name.

In August 2021 China recalled its ambassador to Lithuania. This was accompanied with a threat, asking Lithuania “immediately to rectify its wrong decision and take measures to rectify the damage and not to move further down the wrong path,” and warning it of “potential consequences.” Not to be browbeaten, however, Lithuania recalled its ambassador to China in September. In December, Lithuania closed its embassy in Beijing and pulled the last diplomat out.

To help Lithuania out from the major economic pressure that it faces from China, Taiwan has created a $200 million fund for investments in Lithuania. Lithuania is a member of the EU and also of NATO. The U. S. has condemned “China’s coercion” of Lithuania and said all countries should be free to determine how to handle relations with Taiwan without interference from Beijing.

Thus, while Taiwan has just 15 formal diplomatic allies, it maintains informal ties with all major nations through trade offices that act as de facto embassies, including in the United States and Japan, despite the threats from China.

On the other hand, China is getting into difficulties in its relationship with major nations of EU, including Germany, France and Italy, as well as the U. K; all G-7 nations. Opinions have started moving against China in these west European countries because of human rights abuses in Xinxiang, suppression of democratic norms in Hong Kong and the threatened invasion of Taiwan. In March 2021, EU imposed sanctions on four Chinese individuals and a Chinese entity for violation of human rights in Xinxiang. Beijing reacted by imposing counter-sanctions on parliamentarians of the EU.

On the economic field, there is concern over the absence of a level playing field in China as well as Chinese attempts at securing critical technologies from the west. There is a growing awareness among member nations of the EU that unless the distortions generated by state capitalism are corrected, European firms cannot compete at par in the Chinese market. Worse, the lack of competition in China can put European companies at a disadvantage in their own market. Foreign companies lack access to the Chinese market and private companies face unequal treatment vis-à-vis state-owned companies. Subsidies, cheap funds and lower tax burden, help Chinese companies finance acquisition of companies abroad. China’s transformation into a market economy should be the best answer to the distortions generated by state capitalism, but China reforming to a true market economy is gloomy, especially under the leadership of Xi Jinping.

Even during the period of Covid – 19 pandemic, Chinese companies have been trying to acquire foreign assets in distress in strategic locations, including the USA, the U.K., Germany, France and India; forcing several countries to tighten their Foreign Direct Investment policies.

“Chinese acquisitions lead to undesirable technology transfers, Chinese acquirers enjoy unfair advantage because of government subsidies and their acquisitions are motivated strategically with the objective to get market dominance or to increase China’s political influence in the target countries. Chinese acquisitions also have adverse consequences for employees of target firms,” says an article titled ‘What drives Chinese overseas M&A (Mergers and Acquisitions) investment? Evidence from micro data,” in Review of International Economic in July 2021; quoting from a European Commission analysis of 2019 on challenges and prospects in relationship with China.

Economists from 74 percent of the countries surveyed are more critical of foreign investment from China than of that from other countries. Many Chinese investors have close government ties. Chinese state-owned enterprises follow a less cautious investment strategy and are less financially constrained; they go for full or majority acquisitions. The Chinese government provides subsidies to state-owned companies to acquire western manufacturing rivals, writes the Wall Street Journal.

Following the hostile takeover of Kuka by China’s home appliance manufacturer Midea, Germany has become aware of the danger of doing business with China. After the takeover, the German chief executive of the firm was shown the door. The acquisition of one of the most technologically advanced makers of industrial robots by a Chinese firm has caused much controversy due to national security concerns. Both Berlin and Brussels, the headquarter of the EU, have warned against letting cutting-edge technology fall into Chinese hands.

After the recent change in government in Germany, Berlin is revising its earlier accommodative policies towards China; making them more EU-centric. The text of the coalition treaty that the three ruling partners in Germany have signed will not be exactly music to the ears of Beijing: “Partnership, competition and system rivalry must shape our relations with China; human rights and applicability of international law, fair rules of the game in increasing international competition.” The ruling coalition would promote “Transatlantic co-operation in China policy and co-operation with like-minded countries to reduce strategic dependence.”

The coalition would be “committed to resolve territorial disputes in south and east China seas based on international laws of the sea. Any change in status quo in the Taiwan Strait must be peaceful and mutually agreed upon.” It would also support the participation of democratic Taiwan in international organizations. “We clearly address China’s human rights violations, especially in Xinxiang. The one country two systems in Hong Kong must be reasserted. We are committed to a free and open Indo – Pacific region, based on global norms and international law.” The three coalition partners are also firm on imposing restrictions on Chinese vendors for 5G telecommunication infrastructure.

Like other European countries, France, too, has hardened its position on China in recent years; due to the human rights abuses in Xinxiang, the threatening attitude Chinese diplomats have often adopted in France and the growing Chinese threat to maritime security across the Indo – Pacific. Human rights abuses in Xinxiang and Hong Kong have led to a negative image of China in France; unfavourable views of China have increased in France from 42 percent in 2002 to 70 percent in 2020, like in the USA from 35 percent to 73 percent in the same period. The Chinese embassy in Paris has publicly attacked the French government, independent researchers and members of French parliament.

France has overseas territories across the Indo – Pacific where more than 1.6 million French citizens reside. France also has a large exclusive economic zone in the area. To ensure their protection, Paris has deployed more than 8,000 French troops in the area permanently. The French navy is sending warships to South China Sea and Taiwan Strait, both of which Beijing claims as its backwater. The chief of the French navy has recently denounced Chinese ships following French vessels and manoeuvring dangerously.

Britain’s policy towards China has also undergone a sea change since the past few years, from being accommodative to adversarial. Its new policy “Global Britain in a Competitive Age” issued in March 2021 takes note of China’s increasing international assertiveness and the growing importance of the Indo – Pacific and resolves to invest in enhanced China – facing capabilities, ensuring that national security and values are protected. As a part of this, Chinese firm Huawei would be completely removed from the 5G network of the UK by 2027.

Beginning from January 2021, the purchase of new Huawei equipment has been banned. Politically victimized people in Hong Kong have been offered visas and work opportunities in the U. K.

Britain has taken a firm stand against the hegemonism of China in the Indo – Pacific by joining AUKUS, a military alliance between Australia, the U. K. and the US, participating in joint military exercises in the Indo – Pacific. Relations between London and Beijing have strained further after President of China Xi Jinping and the Argentine President Alberto Fernandez issued a joint statement during the Winter Olympics in Beijing affirming Beijing’s support for Argentina’s sovereignty over the Falkland Islands. Britain has “completely rejected” any question over sovereignty of the Falklands, which are a part of the British family. Britain would defend their right to self-determination, British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss has said.

Italy has been the only member of G – 7 to have signed the Belt and Road Initiative with China in 2019 to revive its economy. Two years down the line in the G – 7 summit in June 2021 Prime Minister of Italy Mario Draghi asserted that China’s expansionist BRI would be assessed carefully. He described China as “an autocracy that does not adhere to multilateral rules and does not share the same vision that democracies have.” In fact, none of the BRI projects has taken off in Italy. Rome has also prevented Italian telecom group Fastweb from signing a deal with Huawei to supply equipment for its 5G core network.

L'articolo Europe unites to oppose Chinese expansionism, human rights abuse proviene da InsideOver.

Albert Einstein, with respect to science, proclaimed that “The important thing is to never stop questioning”. Therefore, one has to ask pertinent questions and try to find their answers to follow the scientific way. However, this has been missing in the case of Traditional Chinese Medicines (TCM) and their unregulated penetration in the health systems of the various countries of the world.

The lack of scientific evidence about the efficacy of many TCM formulations, questionable clinical trials, ingredients including heavy metals and toxins are not mentioned on the packaging and numerous cases of adverse drug reactions especially in children have altogether pushed TCM into the bracket of pseudoscience or a science that needs rigorous and unbiased researches and clinical trials before any further use. The World Health Organization (WHO) is a United Nations (UN) agency that supports Universal Health Coverage (UHC). Sadly, ignoring science to achieve UHC is not the right step forward.

The WHO-China Alliance

On January 18, 2022, WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus tweeted that he met Huang Luqi, vice-commissioner of the Chinese National Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), to “discuss the role of traditional Chinese medicine in improving people’s health”. This linkage between WHO top officials and TCM proponents is very old and grew particularly strong during the tenure of a Chinese-Canadian physician, Margaret Chan, who served as the DG of the WHO for 2006–2017. Due to Chan’s efforts, China was able to include TCM in the crucial International Classification of Diseases, ICD-11, for the first time. The ICD is a highly influential document that categorises and assigns codes to medical conditions. The inclusion of TCM in the ICD11 has been criticised by the scientific community around the world.

An excerpt from the acknowledgment of “WHO traditional medicine strategy: 2014-2023”2 which talks highly of promoting the TCM reads as: “The government of the People’s Republic of China kindly provided financial support for the development of the document.” On top of it, most of the members of the drafting committee of the WHO strategy were Chinese. The promotion of Traditional Medicines by WHO is appreciable and can be seen as a progressive step to integrate health systems around the globe. However, such a promotion with inaccurate research and without unbiased participants is doing the damage.

Value of evidence based studies

TCM is a popular medicine system in African countries and countries under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) due to the rigorous promotion and wolf warrior diplomacy by China. Many people have benefited from these medicines as well, but there are a lot of cases of Adverse Drug Reactions (ADR), which are brushed under the carpet. Moreover, the pieces of evidence and clinical trial results provided for the efficacy of the TCM are paltry. Pakistan, which is battling the 5th wave of COVID-19, recently announced that trials of TCM COVID-19 drugs were successful. They reported that trials were conducted on 300 patients who were treated at home, and the TCM medicine would work on mild to moderate COVID-19 cases. The issue is that the sample size of the people chosen for the trial was too small, their detailed results are not being published on public platforms and the fact that Pakistan is chosen for the trials of Traditional Chinese Medicines raised many eyebrows. Ironically, in late April 2020, a senior doctor at a hospital in Hubei province was reprimanded and even demoted for posting online that TCM remedies for treating COVID-19 were not science-based. The disregard for science does not stop here. The 2nd Gen DNA sequencing studies have detected the presence of heavy metals and plant toxins in various TCM formulations, which have numerous adverse effects on human health. Presence of these toxins and chemicals is not indicated on the packaging of TCM products due to the lack of guidelines and required regulations. Arthur Grollman, a cancer researcher at Stony Brook University in New York, has published work showing how Aristolochic acid, an ingredient in many TCM remedies, can cause kidney failure and cancer.

Children and ADRs

TCM is particularly dangerous for children aged below 16. According to research titled “Safety Concerns of Traditional Chinese Medicine Injections Used in Chinese”, TCM injections pose serious risks to the pediatric population and produce ADRs like anaphylactic shock and fatal anaphylaxis. ADRs in children have been reported in most of the places where TCM is practiced, within China and other countries like Nigeria, Tanzania and South Africa. There are people who have reported being cured by such medicines. However, if ADRs are so severe that they can cause the death of a young person, shouldn’t this science/pseudoscience be researched thoroughly by independent researchers before claiming it as a panacea?

The Way Forward

In 2016, the death of a young Chinese actress Xu Ting, 26, from cancer who was only taking TCM-based treatment sparked a debate on the Chinese social media with the hashtag #XuTing’sDeathAndChineseMedicine trending on Weibo7 . This turned into a massive awareness drive on social media and calls for better clinical trials and research on TCM before any further use. But soon this drive was crushed and forgotten. The way forward is to reinitiate the discussions about the TCM. People-driven awareness campaigns should be initiated for the masses to understand the ADRs TCM is causing. The time is also ripe for the world to tell global bodies like the WHO to stop ignoring science and make way for unbiased and rational decision making while dealing with TCMs.

L'articolo Science of ignoring science: Case study of Chinese traditional medicines proviene da InsideOver.

Pakistan’s deteriorating economic situation and the growing global isolation due to fostering terrorism has made its Prime Minister Imran Khan swallow a bitter pill. Khan supported China on its policy regarding Xinjiang. Many countries have boycotted the Beijing Olympics as a mark of protest against the brutal suppression of Uyghur Muslims and other ethnic minorities by the Chinese government. This comes as a big embarrassment for Khan, who has long projected himself as a champion of Islamic causes. Observers feel the growing dependence on China for economic aid and diplomatic support is the major reason that Pakistani leadership is left with no option but to publicly commit to China’s policies even though they are responsible for the genocide of Uygur Muslims.

Many human rights groups had demanded the boycott of the Olympics event. United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Denmark, Belgium, Japan, Lithuania, Slovenia, New Zealand, Australia and a few other countries have announced the diplomatic boycott of the Beijing Olympics event citing “ongoing genocide and crimes against humanity” in Xinjiang and other parts of China. Uyghurs living outside China also sought support from the world against the ill-treatment of the ethnic minority. “China stop the genocide. Muslims don’t sleep, stand up for your brothers” chanted the protesters.

Even a Turkish ski jumper used the flag of the independence movement of East Turkestan (Xinjiang) on his skis during an Olympics game to speak out against the repression of Uyghur Muslims in China.

Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu expressed concerns about the treatment of the Uyghur during the meeting with his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi in Beijing. However, Imran Khan did the opposite. He welcomed Chinese policies of repression in Xinjiang. Every successive government in Pakistan has been vocal about the discrimination or suppression of Muslims anywhere in the world– be it Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians, the Rohingya crisis in Myanmar, French newspaper publishing caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad or alleged atrocities in Indian-administered Kashmir. However, Pakistan has always turned a blind eye to Uyghurs’ plight. Now, it is rather backing China, and even radical Muslim leaders in Pakistan are unwilling to speak out. If Pakistan were to criticise China, it would be very powerful and effective, considering its position of influence within the Muslim world. Pakistan is a major player in the Organisation for Islamic Cooperation (OIC), a powerful intergovernmental organisation representing 57 Muslim nations.

Pakistan’s economy is in shatters. The country’s external debt is increasing, foreign reserves are depleting, inflation is surging at an alarming level and the current account deficit is widening. It puts Pakistan at the risk of getting bankrupt. The US is distancing itself from Pakistan after it had to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan. Financial aid from the US to Pakistan has seen a sharp decline in the past few years, leaving Islamabad in the lurch. In such a scenario, Pakistan had to rely more on its all-weather friend China for financial and diplomatic help. However, it came at a great cost. Islamabad has to agree with Beijing on every matter, even if it is about the persecution of Muslims. During the recent visit to China, Imran Khan accepted that Pakistan would support Beijing’s every policy unconditionally. “The Pakistan side underscored that Pakistan-China relationship is the cornerstone of its foreign policy and that closest friendship with China enjoys the abiding support of the people of Pakistan. Both sides reiterated their support on issues concerning each other’s core interests,” read the joint statement by China and Pakistan.

A request for USD 3 billion loan was on Imran Khan’s agenda during his recent visit to China. Moreover, he sought more investment under the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which may help revive Pakistan’s economy and reduce the growing influence of India and the US. The conditions put forward by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank for loans are stringent while the Chinese loan terms are confidential and often leads to corruption. Since Chinese loans are out of public scrutiny, it is convenient for Pakistani leaders to easily get them. Pakistani economist Kaiser Bengali asserted that the Islamic country had become 100 percent dependent on China. “While the conditions of the IMF are made public, China keeps the terms and conditions of loans and projects secret, which leads to suspicions,” he said. Imran Khan has in the past too preferred the Chinese version to Uyghurs’ fight. Now, every major country is trying to hold China accountable for the documented oppression of Uyghurs, Khan’s deafening silence defies the principles of Muslim brotherhood.

L'articolo Pakistan supports Uyghur repression in China for economic aid proviene da InsideOver.

With the European Union (EU) delegation’s proposed visit to Islamabad this month for biennial review of its Generalized Schemes of Preference (GSP) Plus status drawing nearer, Pakistan’s worries are increasing. While its own efforts for progress in compliance are slow and inadequate, it would also need to comply with 27 UN Conventions to the full satisfaction of the EU for the retention of GSP+ facility, especially in the absence of political patronage from the UK post the Brexit. Further, the new revised GSP+ scheme of the EU, which would be operative with effect from 2024, stipulates 5 new pre-requisites along with the previous 27 UN conventions for availing GSP+ facility. The additional criteria under the new and revised scheme proposed in September 2021 by the EU, is expected to further reduce Pakistan’s chances for acquiring the EU facility.

On its part, Islamabad is lobbying intensively to retain its GSP+ status as this plays a crucial role in boosting its exports. As a result of GSP+, Pakistan’s exports to the EU increased from €4.538 billion in 2013-14 to €7.492 billion 2020-21, an increase of 65%. Owing to the concession, the EU is now Pakistan’s second most important trading partner, accounting for 14.3% of Pakistan’s total trade in 2020 and absorbing 28% of Pakistan’s total exports, which are primarily textiles and clothing.

But Pak has so far not been able to satisfy the EU about its seriousness with regard to compliance of GSP+ criteria. During the 6th round of the EU-Pakistan Strategic Dialogue (Brussels: December 7, 2021), the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice-President of the European Commission (HR/VP) Josep Borrell, expressed concern over the human rights situation in Pakistan, particularly over the alleged misuse of the death penalty and blasphemy laws. An EU team which visited Pakistan in November 2021 also found the ground situation unsatisfactory. The recent mob lynching of Sri Lankan factory manager Priyantha Kumara in Sialkot in December 2021 on the accusations of blasphemy has further dented Islamabad’s claims of improvement. The EU delegation would focus on the country’s real progress during the last two years in the state of human rights including those of women, minorities, labour and children, despite Islamabad’s claim regarding perceptible progress on these facets.

Earlier, Phil Hogan, the EU Commissioner of Trade, wrote to the Pak Advisor on Commerce and Investment stating that focus of the upcoming evaluation would be on implementing a comprehensive child labour law, definition of the most serious crimes for which death sentences are given. A non-comprehensive anti-torture law, prosecution for enforced disappearances & secret detentions and adoption/implementation of the Journalists Welfare and Protection Law, among others, according to international standards.
The EU missions have been continuously highlighting Pakistan’s labour rights violations in Export Promotion Zones, child protection, death penalty, international non-governmental organizations and media freedom. For instance, Luis Garicano, a Member of the European Parliament (MEP) from Spain specifically linked Islamabad’s respect for human rights, particularly on blasphemy laws, minority and women’s rights and press freedom, to a renewal of the GSP+.

Pak does not seem to have made much progress since EU’s 3rd Biennial review published in 2020. The EU had then observed that Pakistan had failed to make meaningful advances in protecting human rights, particularly in relation to the country’s controversial blasphemy laws. Those accused of blasphemy are subject to immediate incarceration, and most accused are denied bail. Many, even when acquitted or released from jail, have been murdered.

Islamabad’s worries are due to its failure in convincing the EU about progress with regard to the UN Conventions in the country. Notably, Islamabad remained under attack throughout 2021 by the European Parliament (EP) for human rights violations. In April 2021, the EP adopted a resolution on the blasphemy laws, in particular the case of Shagufta Kausar and Shafqat Emmanuel and to find out whether there is sufficient reason to initiate a procedure for the temporary withdrawal of this facility. It also expressed concern over the violent anti-France protests in the country and inflammatory statements made by the Pak authorities.

Islamabad had managed to get GSP+ status in the EU due to political patronage by the UK. Post Brexit, Pakistan has lost the support of 73 former British MEPs who used to vote for the country and promote its case. In the absence of political patronage from the UK, it would be increasingly hard for Pakistan to retain GSP+, especially if it fails to take measures for full compliance of the requisite criteria of the EU. Given the nature of rule of law in the country and its feudal and patriarchal nature of society, this remains a tall order.

L'articolo Pakistan’s worries regarding the European Union’s GSP+ status review proviene da InsideOver.