Tag Archives: Beijing

Australian Trade Minister Notifies Chinese Sovereignty Non-Negotiable | Instant News

Australian Trade Minister Dan Tehan said the government would protect the country’s sovereignty and national interests, in response to a warning from the Chinese ambassador that they would “respond in kind” if Canberra participated in sanctioning officials accused of human rights abuses.

“It’s something that we explained is non-negotiable,” Tehan said in an interview with Bloomberg Television on Thursday. “But that doesn’t mean we can’t have productive relationships. Good friends can always have very difficult conversations. “

Photographer: Sam Mooy / Getty Images

International tension has occurred flared up reports of forced labor being used to harvest cotton in China’s western province of Xinjiang, prompted several countries to sanction Communist Party officials. Beijing has dismissed accusations about its behavior against mostly Uyghur Muslims as politically motivated lies. At the end of last month retaliation was announced penalty on individuals in the US and Canada, plus those previously enforced in the UK and the European Union.

Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne, at the 23 March meeting statement with its New Zealand counterparts, said the government had “grave concern” over reports of human rights abuses against Uighurs and other Muslim minorities in Xinjiang, and welcomed actions taken by the US, Canada, Britain and the European Union.


image source

Silnov’s Russian Olympic champion, Antyukh was banned for doping | Instant News

LAUSANNE, Switzerland (AP) – Russian Olympic champions Andrei Silnov and Natalya Antyukh have each been banned for four years for doping offenses, the Court of Arbitration for Sports said Wednesday.

Silnov and Antyukh were both charged last year for using or attempting to use illegal substances or methods. The allegations stem from a World Anti-Doping Agency investigation into Russian doping in 2016.

Silnov won gold in high jump at the 2008 Beijing Olympics and Antyukh won the title in the 400 meter hurdles at the 2012 London Olympics. He also won bronze in 400 and silver in the 4×400 relay in 2004. They will defend their Olympic medals.

No athlete has competed since 2016, but Silnov was senior vice president of Russia’s track federation until June 2019, when he resigned citing an investigation by the Athletics Integrity Unit into his behavior.

The CAS did not immediately say when the verdicts were handed down or provide details on the cases. They are published in brief summaries of various cases and appeals regarding 12 Russians.

Yelena Soboleva, who won a world indoor championship silver medal in 2006, was banned for eight years and hammer thrower Oksana Kondratyeva, who was disqualified from fifth place at the 2013 world championships, was banned for four years.

The CAS also reduced the length of the ban on four Russians, including high jumper Ivan Ukhov. The ban was cut from four years to two years, nine months. The decision did not reverse an earlier decision in a doping case to remove Ukhov from the 2012 Olympics high jump gold medal.


Other AP sports: https://apnews.com/hub/apf-sports and https://twitter.com/AP_Sports


image source

Calls for a boycott are increasing, but China appears to be retaliating | Instant News

A journalist views an exhibition at the Beijing Winter Olympics 2022 exhibition center in Yaqing district on February 5, 2021 in Beijing, China.

Kevin Frayer | Getty Images

Countries and companies outside China face increasing pressure to boycott the Winter Olympics in Beijing next year, but China will not sit idly by in response, said political risk consultancy Eurasia Group.

“Western governments and companies are facing increasing pressure from human rights advocates and political criticism of China to boycott the Beijing 2022 Winter Olympics,” according to Eurasia Group analysts.

The Olympics will take place between February 4 and 20.

“China will punish countries that boycott the Olympics with political sanctions and commercial retaliation, but more severely under an athletic boycott scenario,” they said in a report published Thursday.

“If a company does not boycott the Olympics, it risks damaging the reputation of Western consumers. But if it does, it risks being shut out of the Chinese market.

“Activists have focused on Beijing’s targeted repression of Uighurs in Xinjiang, which some Western governments have called ‘genocide’,” the report said. “Calls to avoid so-called ‘Game of Genocide’ activists will grow as the opening ceremony draws near, increasing the risk for governments, companies and investors – whether they decide to boycott or not.”

Last month, the government Canada, Britain and the United States issued a joint statement accused the Chinese government of carrying out an “extensive program of persecution” on the Uyghur people including detention camps, forced labor and forced sterilization.

China has repeatedly denied allegations of forced labor and other abuses in Xinjiang. That The foreign ministry last month called the claim a “malicious lie” designed to “tarnish China” and “thwart China’s development.”

Businesses are also caught in the crossfire.

At the end of March, H&M faced backlash in China over a statement – reported from last year – in which the Swedish retailer said it was “very concerned” about reports of forced labor in Xinjiang.

Supporters of the Olympic boycott argue that “it is necessary to punish China for its systemic discrimination against ethnic minorities in Tibet and Xinjiang, crackdown on political freedom in Hong Kong, and hostility to self-rule in Taiwan,” said the Eurasia report.

Three types of boycotts

Eurasia outlines three possible scenarios: a diplomatic boycott, an athletic boycott, or the so-called “outlier scenario.”

1. Diplomatic boycott

The most likely scenario – with a probability of 60% – is for the US to join at least one other major Western nation in the so-called Olympic diplomatic boycott.

“A diplomatic boycott is defined here as removing or not sending government representatives to the Olympics and taking other important steps to deny Beijing the limelight as host,” the analysts explained.

Eurasia said possible participants in the diplomatic boycott would be the US, Canada, Britain and Australia, with the possibility of several European countries participating.

In Asia, however, US partners such as Japan, India and South Korea – which have “more complex political dynamics” or deeper economic ties with China – are not expected to join such a boycott.

A diplomatic approach is the least drastic scenario, according to Eurasia.

2. Athletics boycott

In this scenario, which has a 30% probability, one or more Western countries could stop their athletes from participating in the Olympics, perhaps by applying domestic political pressure. An economic boycott is defined as a ban on US viewers, broadcasters and sponsors.

“Athletic and economic boycotts, which are more difficult for audiences to ignore, will force stronger retaliation from Beijing, possibly involving a diplomatic freeze and a broader consumer boycott of Western brands,” said Eurasia analysts.

3.The ‘lite boycott’

This is a strange scenario in which tensions between the West and China ease, and there will be “light political statements about the Olympics” but no official boycott, analysts say, calling it a “light boycott.”

It’s the most unlikely scenario and only has a 10% chance of happening, they said, adding: “At the moment there is not much reason for optimism about the trajectory of Sino-Western relations.”

Here, the head of state may refuse to attend the Olympics and cite scheduling conflicts or other non-political reasons. “The rhetoric will be far from enthusiastic support of Beijing as host, but there will be no boycott declarations and no presentation of a unified Western position,” the report said.

A backlash from China?

The Olympics boycott would “take away the soft advantage” of the Chinese president Xi Jinping hopes to benefit from the event, which gives Beijing “a platform to promote its global status among domestic audiences and project a positive image to billions of foreign viewers around the world,” said Eurasia analysts.

“Beijing will almost certainly retaliate against the countries involved in the boycott,” said analysts. “Beijing’s immediate response to the diplomatic boycott will likely be a reciprocal boycott of Western events and sanctions against prominent boycott supporters.”

A growing number of consumer businesses based outside of China are trying to counteract the balancing act – projecting an image of human rights concerns on consumers outside China on the one hand, while trying to avoid shutting down from China’s large market on the other.

“If a company does not boycott the Olympics, it risks damaging the reputation of Western consumers. But if it does, it risks being shut out from the Chinese market,” analysts said.

Because of the Olympics’ high international profile, retaliation in China could be “worse” than eliminating H&M’s current commercial presence on the Chinese internet, they said.

However, analysts said that most businesses would likely choose to participate in the Olympics because “the potential costs of losing access to the Chinese market will probably outweigh concerns over the reaction of Western consumers,” which Eurasia predicts will likely be brief.

– Arjun Kharpal of CNBC contributed to this report.


image source

Dutton Australia Vows to Work with the US, China to Ensure Peace | Instant News

Photographer: Tracey Nearmy / Getty Images

Newly appointed Australian Defense Minister Peter Dutton said China’s Global Times newspaper was “half right” in describing him as a hawk, saying he intended to cooperate with the US and other allies in maintaining peace in the region.

“We don’t support the militarization of ports, we don’t support any foreign country trying to exert influence here through cyberspace or other means,” Dutton said Sky News in a television interview on Sunday. “We don’t want to see conflict in our region.”

Dutton first appointed defense minister last week in Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s Cabinet renovation, which added one additional woman to the bodies of 22 people. In a podcast released on Thursday, US Embassy attorney Michael Goldman told US on going “Strategic planning” with Australia to consider possible joint responses to war on Taiwan.

“We all want to see emerging superpowers like China and existing ones like the US work closely together,” Dutton said. “Obviously China already has long-term ambitions regarding Taiwan, and we want to make sure that there is peace in our region and that we can cooperate with the Chinese Communist Party.”

Over the past few years China has stepped up military exercises around Taiwan at the same time the US is strengthening diplomatic ties. Beijing claims Taiwan as part of its territory, even though the government in Taipei views Taiwan as a de facto sovereign state.

“We have worked very closely with United States of America because they are our most important allies, but we don’t do it in an antagonistic way, we do it in a way to protect our sovereignty and national interests, “said Dutton.


image source

Prime Minister Jacinda Arden’s government is in the spotlight for failing to mention Chinese interference | Instant News

Last week, 13 countries around the world voiced their concerns about China’s interference in the World Health Organization’s investigation into the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The members of the Five Eyes intelligence alliance, which includes Australia, Canada, the UK and the US, all signed the joint declaration.

Almost everything. One Five Eyes Nation, New Zealand, declined to be named in the communique.

This has raised lingering concerns that Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s government is weaker against Beijing. It is even dubbed the “soft belly” of the Five Eyes.

Wellington may have witnessed a diplomatic and trade dispute between the two China and Australia and have decided they don’t want to end up in the same position. But as New Zealand knows, even light criticism can anger China.

NZ failed to follow China’s Five Eyes’ statement

“New Zealand has been criticized for being reluctant to join forces with other states and to speak of concerning issues of concern with China,” wrote University of Canterbury China specialist Professor Anne-Marie Brady in the magazine. Diplomat last year.

“It practices deliberate ambiguity in its Chinese policies, and so far, seems to have gotten away with it.”

But New Zealand’s efforts to find a win-win way to deal with Beijing have caused its political will to be questioned by its allies.

In January last year, the British newspaper the Financial time declared that New Zealand was “on the verge of survival as a member” of the Five Eyes and had a “recumbent” attitude toward China.

A piece of evidence supporting that view occurred this week when even WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus called on China over its reluctance to provide WHO COVID-19 investigations with the raw data the scientists asked for.

That New Zealand doesn’t endorse the WHO, the Five Eyes, or the likes of Japan, South Korea and Israel in calling China China is shocking.

Ardern’s government said its reluctance to join the chorus disapproved because it had not fully read the report. That was despite everyone, including small Estonians, had enough time to study the contents.

“Our technical experts are analyzing the report,” said New Zealand Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta spokeswoman Australian.

“Since this is a scientific report, we wanted to make sure we understood science before commenting.”

RELATED: A chilling find in the disputed China Sea

Denial has happened before. In January, New Zealand failed to sign another official statement of the other Five Eyes condemned the arrests of pro-democracy politicians in Hong Kong.

Also in January, Trade Minister Kiwi Damien Cook said Australia should follow New Zealand and “Show respect” to China and “beware of words”.

The advice led former diplomat and Liberal MP Dave Sharma to say he “expects more from trans-Tasman solidarity”.

“It shows a lack of familiarity with basic facts that I would not expect from close friends and partners like New Zealand,” he told SMH.

A lot of eyebrows have been raised about New Zealand’s handling of its relationship with China.

Unlike Australia, Australia has signed up to one aspect of Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative. According to Financial time, Businessmen associated with the Chinese Communist Party are major donors to New Zealand’s main political party.

A New Zealand lawmaker recently admitted it teaching Chinese spies English to monitor other countries’ communications before emigrating. But he has denied passing information about his adoptive country back to Beijing, reports the Stuff website.

RELATED: Australian doctors reveal the WHO COVID report

NZ nicknamed Five Eyes ‘soft belly’

“Tiny New Zealand may seem like an odd target for Communist party infiltration, but the country appeals to Beijing as the soft belly of the Five Eyes,” wrote Jamil Anderlini in an opinion piece for Financial time last year.

The term “soft belly” haunts Mrs. Ardern. In 2018, the Canadian Government used it in official document to illustrate how China views New Zealand as a weak spot in security intelligence. It added that Beijing’s relationship with Wellington is a model for future Sino-Australian relations.

New Zealand exported $ 18 billion of product to China, double that of Australia.

“Perhaps fearing Beijing will respond with economic sanctions, Ms. Ardern has gone to great lengths to avoid mentioning the topic of Chinese political interference,” Anderlini added.

He only has to look across Tasman to see the trade pain China has inflicted on Australia after Canberra called for a WHO investigation, barred Chinese tech giant Huawei from sensitive infrastructure and continued to criticize Beijing’s human rights record.

In contrast, earlier this year, the free trade agreement between China and New Zealand was stepped up.

Funnel CCP Global Time praised Wellington, said it was “impartial” between the US and China and “has kept its own judgment on the main agenda regarding China”.

China’s constant call for western nations to take sides, which also has the useful side effect of undermining any impulse that may come.

Look for ‘safe ways’ to deal with China

Prof Brady said New Zealand was looking for a “safe way” to deal with China. But the country is actually more aggressive in fighting Beijing than ever before.

He dubbed it New Zealand’s “calm shift” from the previously adopted “blind eye”.

“New Zealand is … looking for a safe way to deal with China’s increasing political interference activity and aggressive foreign policy,” he said.

“The New Zealand government strictly avoids direct confrontation with China. Instead, the government is carefully managing a case-by-case recalibration of New Zealand-China relations, while claiming that any changes are ‘state agnostic’. “

In one piece Security, Prof Brady said New Zealand could learn from Australia’s “missteps” in China.

The danger for New Zealand, however, is that there may not be a safe way to manage China and its tiny glass jaws. Any criticism of Beijing is met with hostility.

In December, Ardern supported – in a somewhat muted manner – Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s disillusionment with a tweet from Beijing apparatchik depicting a digger slit the throat of an Afghan child.

That Global Time pointed the thorns towards Wellington. Maybe a warning shot.

“Kiwis bleat like Australian sheep but don’t condemn the killing in Afghanistan,” said the newspaper, who argued that Arden’s comments were something he “had to say” to safeguard trans-Tasman ties.

NZ is not silent on China, but perhaps more silent

New Zealand certainly doesn’t stay idle in China. It has expressed disappointment over the demise of Hong Kong’s already limited democracy. It has also barred Huawei from sensitive infrastructure. Last week, the foreign ministers of Australia and New Zealand said they had “grave concerns” about the treatment of the Uighurs.

Ms Ardern said New Zealand laws prevented sanctions from being imposed on China. That escape route means China is not levying sanctions in return, which is the case for the US, UK and Canada. Despite this, Beijing still rebukes him for meddling in the country’s “internal affairs”.

It’s a difficult balancing act for Ms. Ardern and the New Zealand government.

The aim might be not to poke the dragon. But as its allies routinely resent Beijing’s anger, there may be pressure for Wellington to give up its “calm change” and more firmly support Australia and the rest of the world’s democracies against China.


image source