China

The fightback
User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10774
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Sat Feb 03, 2024 2:45 pm

Image

Self-confidence and self-reliance, openness and inclusiveness, fairness and justice, and win-win cooperation
China’s top diplomat, Foreign Minister Wang Yi, who is also a Member of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) and Director of the Office of the Central Commission for Foreign Affairs, delivered an important and comprehensive speech at a Beijing Symposium on the International Situation and China’s Foreign Relations on January 9, 2024.

Saying that in the preceding year China had created a favourable environment for building a great modern socialist country and advancing the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, and had made new contributions to maintaining world peace and promoting common development, Wang Yi went on to identify six highlights:

Our head-of-state diplomacy has been immensely successful, achieving new milestones in major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics.

In 2023, President Xi Jinping was personally involved in the planning and execution of major diplomatic actions. He chaired two home-ground events, attended three multilateral summits, made four important overseas visits, and held more than 100 meetings and phone calls.

Solid progress has been made in building a community with a shared future for mankind, lending new impetus to the building of a brighter future for humanity.

During General Secretary Xi Jinping’s historic state visit to Vietnam in December 2023, the most important political outcome reached between the two sides was to upgrade the bilateral relationship to a community with a shared future that carries strategic significance. This characterisation has marked not only a new level in the “comradely and brotherly” relations between the two socialist neighbours but also a full commitment of the Indochina Peninsula to jointly building a community with a shared future. 

The inclusion of Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan has brought its coverage to the whole of Central Asia. China is working with Cambodia and Laos on a new, five-year action plan, and has reached agreement with Malaysia, in addition to Thailand and Indonesia, adding to the good momentum toward a closer China-ASEAN community with a shared future. In his visit to South Africa, President Xi Jinping announced with President Cyril Ramaphosa the decision to build a high-quality China-South Africa community with a shared future, taking China-Africa relations to a new stage.

The Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation was successfully held, taking BRI cooperation to a new stage of high-quality development.

Ten years on, Belt and Road cooperation has extended from the Eurasian continent to Africa and Latin America and expanded from physical connectivity to institutional connectivity and people-to-people bonds.

The BRICS mechanism achieved a historic expansion, adding new strength to unity and cooperation in the developing world.

BRICS countries have made dedicated efforts to promote global growth and improve global governance. Inspired by the vibrancy and appeal of the mechanism, dozens of developing countries have officially applied for its membership. The expansion marks a milestone in the development of the BRICS mechanism, and ushers in a new era of strength through unity for the Global South. The expanded “greater BRICS” will surely play a stronger role in shaping a more just and equitable global governance system and increasing the representation and voice of the Global South in international affairs.

A successful China-Central Asia Summit was held, creating a new platform for good-neighbourliness and friendly cooperation in the region.

China and the five Central Asian countries, connected by mountains and rivers, have always been friendly neighbours. China hopes to see, more than anyone, a stable, prosperous, harmonious, and interconnected Central Asia. At a key moment in the evolving international landscape, President Xi Jinping and the heads of state of the five Central Asian countries gathered in the historical city of Xi’an, the starting point of the ancient Silk Road, for the inaugural China-Central Asia Summit.

President Xi Jinping comprehensively elaborated on China’s foreign policy toward Central Asia, and decided, together with the heads of state of the five Central Asian countries, to build a closer China-Central Asia community with a shared future, formally establish the mechanism of meetings between the heads of state of China and Central Asian countries and set up a permanent secretariat for the China-Central Asia mechanism.

We facilitated the historic reconciliation between Saudi Arabia and Iran, setting a new example of political settlement of hotspot issues.

President Xi Jinping had in-depth communication with the leaders of Saudi Arabia and Iran, persuading the two countries to let go of past grievances and meet each other halfway. We are glad to see that Syria has rejoined the family of the League of Arab States; Qatar, Syria, Iran, and Türkiye have restored diplomatic ties or normalised their relations respectively with Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, with Tunisia and Saudi Arabia, with Sudan and with Egypt; and the people of regional countries are taking the future of the Middle East back into their own hands.

Wang Yi went on to say that over the past year, when faced with major issues concerning the future of humanity and the direction of world development, China has all along stood firmly on the right side of history and on the side of human progress in its diplomacy, and made decisions that can stand the test of practice and time, and gave a further six examples in this regard:

We firmly choose cooperation over confrontation.

China continued to deepen its comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination with Russia, with a view to boosting our respective development and revitalisation and promoting world multipolarity and greater democracy in international relations. Last year, President Xi Jinping chose Russia for his first overseas trip and held two meetings with President Vladimir Putin, showing a high level of mutual trust and providing strategic guidance for practicing true multilateralism, enhancing practical cooperation across the board, and upholding global strategic stability.

China-EU comprehensive strategic partnership entered its 20th year. The China-Europe relationship is not targeted at any third party, nor is it subjugated to or controlled by any third party. When China and Europe join hands, attempts to create bloc confrontation will not succeed and a new Cold War will not take place.

How China and the United States interact with each other affects the future of humanity and our planet. At the beginning of last year, when this relationship went through serious difficulties, China stated its solemn position, urging the US to change its wrong perception of China and reinstate a reasonable and pragmatic China policy. After painstaking efforts, the two sides managed to rebuild communication and dialogue and stabilised bilateral relations from further deterioration.

We firmly choose solidarity over division.

What concerns the international community the most today is: Will humanity head toward division? Will there be a new Cold War? We stand firmly against small circles that seek geopolitical purposes and small blocs that undermine stability. China is committed to building a new type of international relations and to consolidating and expanding the global network of partnerships. 

China stood firmly in solidarity with the Global South, going through thick and thin and heading toward a shared future with fellow developing countries. President Xi Jinping visited Africa, his first such visit in five years, and co-chaired the China-Africa Leaders’ Dialogue, drawing the blueprint for future China-Africa cooperation. We continued to strengthen strategic mutual trust with Arab countries, accelerated the implementation of the outcomes of the first China-Arab States Summit and the first China-Gulf Cooperation Council Summit. We received over 10 leaders from Latin American countries and attended the Group of 77 plus China Summit in Havana, speeding up the upgrading of China’s relations with Latin America. 

Around the world, we see reinvigoration of countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America, the collective rise of developing countries and a new awakening of the Global South. This has made us more confident about the future of the world and more hopeful of human solidarity. Modernisation should not be confined to a few. Rather, it should serve all countries and all people.

We firmly choose openness over isolation.

Over the past year, we have been working actively to provide platforms for opening up. We brought back face-to-face events, such as the China International Import Expo, the China International Consumer Products Expo, the China International Fair for Trade in Services, and the Canton Fair, to share our development opportunities with countries from around the world. We kept increasing investment in BRI partners and expanding cooperation in areas such as infrastructure, industries, economy and trade, and scientific and technological innovation with other countries, helping them generate more job opportunities and incomes.

We firmly choose peace over war.

Following the outbreak of the Ukraine crisis, President Xi Jinping put forward four points about what must be done, four things the international community must do together and three observations of the crisis. We released China’s Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis and engaged extensively with relevant parties through the special envoy of the Chinese government. We have remained unequivocal in advocating respect for the sovereignty of all countries and rejecting the Cold War mentality and made active efforts for resuming peace talks and restoring peace.

The Palestinian-Israeli conflict bears on the overall situation in the Middle East. President Xi Jinping presented China’s position on many occasions. He noted that the imperatives are to end hostilities, prevent the conflict from spilling over, effectively protect civilians and increase humanitarian assistance. He emphasised that the only viable way lies in implementing the two-state solution and pushing for a comprehensive, just and sustainable solution to the question of Palestine at an early date. Working in unity with Arab and Islamic countries, China held a high-level meeting on the Palestinian-Israeli issue at the UN Security Council, sent its special envoy to work on the ground and promote peace talks, and increased humanitarian assistance, extending a helping hand to the people in Gaza at a perilous time.

We support Afghanistan in building an inclusive political framework, adopting moderate policies, and pursuing peace and reconstruction. Through our mediation efforts, conflict is giving way to reconciliation in northern Myanmar, showcasing our firm commitment to maintaining peace and stability in border areas. We have consistently promoted the political settlement of the Korean Peninsula issue and the Iranian nuclear issue and have become a much-needed constructive force for safeguarding world peace and tranquillity. 

We firmly choose multilateralism over unilateralism.

We are committed to true multilateralism. We firmly uphold the UN-centred international system and the basic norms of international relations underpinned by the purposes and principles of the UN Charter.

Over the past year, we have delivered on the Global Development Initiative (GDI). Over 70 countries have joined the Group of Friends of the GDI. More than 200 cooperation projects have been implemented. The US$4 billion Global Development and South-South Cooperation Fund has been put into use.

Over the past year, the Global Security Initiative (GSI) has gained greater influence. It has garnered support from over 100 countries and international and regional organisations and is written into a host of bilateral and multilateral documents.

We firmly choose justice over power politics.

The world today is far from tranquil, and hegemonic and bullying acts are inflicting profound harm. China, as a responsible major country, has always upheld justice and stood up for fairness. We have resolutely opposed hegemonism and power politics, resolutely pushed back against a handful of countries’ attempt to dominate international affairs, demanded increased representation and say of developing countries in the global governance system, supported addressing the historical injustices done to African countries as a priority, and urged the lifting of all illegally imposed unilateral sanctions. With these efforts, we have firmly upheld the common and legitimate rights and interests of developing countries and made the international order more just and equitable.

Defending justice in defiance of hegemonic power is certainly also about safeguarding China’s sovereignty, national dignity, and territorial integrity. In the face of external interference and provocation, we fought back resolutely and forcefully. In response to various acts of unjustified suppression, we took legitimate and reasonable countermeasures. The international community’s commitment to the one-China principle has been further cemented and the 1.4 billion Chinese people’s resolution to advance national reunification remains rock-solid. No individual or force should ever attempt to challenge the Chinese people’s iron-clad will or undermine China’s core interests.

China’s diplomacy is the people’s diplomacy. Serving the people is the original aspiration and mission that we bear in mind all the time. We evacuated thousands of compatriots from war-torn regions around the globe. The long journey back home once again shows that, no matter where they are, our compatriots know that the motherland always has their back and the Chinese diplomatic missions are their home in distant lands.

Noting that this year sees the 75th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China and that it is also a key year in realising the goals and tasks of the 14th Five-Year Plan, Wang Yi made four pledges for 2024:

We will always commit to self-confidence and self-reliance and shoulder our due responsibility as a responsible major country.

We will give full play to the strategic guiding role of head-of-state diplomacy, ensure the success of the international events China is going to host, such as the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation meeting, the Boao Forum for Asia conference, the China International Import Expo and the Forum on Global Action for Shared Development, and demonstrate the distinctive style of major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics. We will stand up on major issues bearing on the solidarity, cooperation, and legitimate rights of developing countries, and take a clear stand on crucial issues concerning the future of humanity and the direction of world development. Upholding justice, we will stay firmly on the right track of history.

We will always commit to openness and inclusiveness and consolidate and expand our global network of partnerships.

We will take the 70th anniversary of the initiation of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence as an opportunity to promote a new type of international relations. We will actively implement the Global Civilisation Initiative (GCI) and advocate the common values of humanity. We will promote exchanges and mutual learning among civilisations, increase understanding and friendship among people of all countries, and join forces for the progress of human civilisation.

We will always commit to fairness and justice and promote an equal and orderly multipolar world.

We will practice true multilateralism and advance democracy in international relations. All countries, regardless of their size, should be treated as equals. Each and every country should have its place in the global multipolar system and can play its due role. We will fully implement the GSI, uphold fairness and justice, actively promote talks for peace, and play a constructive part in resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the Ukraine crisis, and other global and regional hotspots. We will put forward more Chinese proposals, contribute more Chinese wisdom, and provide more public goods that serve the interest of world peace and development.

We will always commit to win-win cooperation, and actively advance a universally beneficial and inclusive economic globalisation.

We will advance the implementation of the GDI, scale up input in global development cooperation, and help fellow developing countries build capacity for self-generated development.

In concluding, Wang Yi said that: “The future of humanity is bright, yet the road leading to this bright future is tortuous.” (Here he invokes a well-known formulation of Comrade Mao Zedong, one that he put forward, for example, in his October 1945 report, ‘On the Chungking Negotiations’. And Mao concluded his April 25, 1956 speech, ‘On the Ten Major Relationships’, by stating: “But as we have often said, while the road ahead is tortuous, the future is bright. We must do our best to mobilise all positive factors, both inside and outside the Party, both at home and abroad, both direct and indirect, and make China a powerful socialist country.”)

“Under the leadership of the CPC Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core, the diplomatic service will continue to pursue China’s development in the broader context of world development and advance the interests of the Chinese people while bearing in mind the interests of other people. Acting with vision and greater enterprise, we will work together with all countries to shoulder the responsibilities of our times, jointly rise to the challenges, and usher in an even better and brighter future for our world.”

We reprint the full text of Wang Yi’s speech below. It was originally published on the website of the Chinese Foreign Ministry.
Address by H.E. Wang Yi
At the Symposium on the International Situation and China’s Foreign Relations Beijing, January 9, 2024

Dear Experts and Friends, 

I am delighted to meet you at the start of the new year to take stock of the international situation and discuss China’s foreign relations. In this volatile era, we are facing global transformation not seen in a century, and reflecting on the way forward. I wish to thank you for your care and support over the past year and look forward to benefiting from your insights.  

The year 2023 witnessed major and profound evolution in international relations as well as solid progress in Chinese modernization. It was also a year of progress and harvest for China’s diplomacy.

Under the strong leadership of the Party Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core, we have upheld fundamental principles while breaking new ground and forged ahead in China’s external work. We have created a favorable environment for building a great modern socialist country and advancing the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. We have made new contribution to maintaining world peace and promoting common development. The following six highlights are particularly worth reviewing.

The first highlight: Our head-of-state diplomacy has been immensely successful, achieving new milestones in major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics.

In 2023, President Xi Jinping was personally involved in the planning and execution of major diplomatic actions. He chaired two home-ground events, attended three multilateral summits, made four important overseas visits and held more than 100 meetings and phone calls. With the vision of the leader of a big party and a big country, he advanced friendly cooperation and discussed global issues with his counterparts. From the extensive talks at the Kremlin to the summit in Guangzhou’s Songyuan, from the “Chang’an reunion” with the leaders of Central Asian countries, to the state visit to the “comradely and brotherly” neighbor, from the BRICS moment in the “rainbow nation” to the Asia-Pacific blueprint at Sunnylands, and from the FISU World University Games in Chengdu to the Asian Games in Hangzhou, the President showcased the spectacular achievements of China in the new era, strengthened the exchanges with the rest of the world, and opened up new prospects in China’s foreign relations.

Head-of-state diplomacy involves not only high-level dialogues of strategic significance but also heart-to-heart communication with the people. Last July, at the nearby Villa No.5 of the Diaoyutai State Guesthouse where Dr. Henry Kissinger stayed during his first visit to China more than five decades ago, President Xi Jinping met cordially with and held a luncheon for this century-old man who had paid more than 100 visits to China. This special arrangement reflected China’s fine tradition of never forgetting old friends. Over the past year, President Xi Jinping also delivered an important speech to the American people, had cordial exchanges with young Vietnamese, and wrote heart-warming and encouraging letters to many foreign friends including Greek scholars, a Bangladeshi kid, South African university students, and a Cuban scientist. These communications have sown the seeds of friendship and written a new chapter of interactions and mutual understanding.

The second highlight: Solid progress has been made in building a community with a shared future for mankind, lending new impetus to the building of a brighter future for humanity.

During General Secretary Xi Jinping’s historic state visit to Viet Nam last month, the most important political outcome reached between the two sides was to upgrade the bilateral relationship to a community with a shared future that carries strategic significance. This characterization has marked not only a new level in the “comradely and brotherly” relations between the two socialist neighbors but also a full commitment of the Indochina Peninsula to jointly building a community with a shared future. 

Over the past year, big strides have been made in building a community with a shared future. The inclusion of Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan has brought its coverage to the whole of Central Asia. China is working with Cambodia and Laos on a new, five-year action plan, and has reached agreement with Malaysia, in addition to Thailand and Indonesia, adding to the good momentum toward a closer China-ASEAN community with a shared future. In his visit to South Africa, President Xi Jinping announced with President Matamela Cyril Ramaphosa the decision to build a high-quality China-South Africa community with a shared future, taking China-Africa relations to a new stage of jointly building a high-quality community with a shared future. In Arab, Latin America and the Caribbean, and Pacific Island countries, regional-level efforts of building communities with a shared future are also making refreshing developments.

Last year marked the 10th anniversary of the vision of a community with a shared future for mankind put forth by President Xi Jinping. This is a decade of hard work and progress: Building a community with a shared future for mankind has developed from a conceptual proposition to a scientific system, from a Chinese initiative to an international consensus, and from a promising vision to substantive actions. It has been included in resolutions of the U.N. General Assembly for seven consecutive years. Extending to various regions and covering various areas, it has served as a glorious banner leading the progress of the times.

The third highlight: The Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation was successfully held, taking Belt and Road cooperation to a new stage of high-quality development.

The year 2023 marked the 10th anniversary of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) put forth by President Xi Jinping. Ten years on, Belt and Road cooperation has extended from the Eurasian continent to Africa and Latin America, and expanded from physical connectivity to institutional connectivity and people-to-people bonds. It has created the largest platform for international cooperation with the broadest coverage in the world. For participating countries pursuing development together, BRI sets them on a road to cooperation, a road to opportunity and a road to prosperity.

Last October, in the golden autumn season, the Third Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation (BRF) was held in Beijing. It was the most important diplomatic event hosted by China in 2023. In his keynote speech at the Forum, President Xi Jinping gave a summary of the experience drawn from BRI’s success over the past decade, reaffirmed China’s commitment with the announcement of eight major steps, declared a new stage of high-quality development for Belt and Road cooperation, and called on all countries to jointly pursue global modernization. Over 10,000 delegates representing 151 countries and 41 international organizations came to the BRF with the hope for friendship, cooperation and development, and returned with 458 important outcomes and US$97.2 billion worth of cooperation documents. As the saying goes, “The fire burns high when everyone adds wood to it.” Belt and Road cooperation will surely provide enduring impetus for world economic growth and common development across the globe.

The fourth highlight: The BRICS mechanism achieved a historic expansion, adding new strength to unity and cooperation in the developing world.

In the spirit of openness, inclusiveness and win-win cooperation, BRICS countries have made dedicated efforts to promote global growth and improve global governance. Inspired by the vibrancy and appeal of the mechanism, dozens of developing countries have officially applied for its membership.

During China’s chairmanship in 2022, President Xi Jinping called on fellow BRICS countries to pursue development with open doors and boost cooperation with open arms, and appealed for admitting new members to pool greater strengths. With the unanimous consent of all members, the BRICS expansion process was launched in the China Summit year. After a year of preparation and consultation, leaders of the five BRICS countries made a political decision on expansion at the Johannesburg Summit in 2023, and officially welcomed new members to the BRICS family.

The expansion marks a milestone in the development of the BRICS mechanism, and ushers in a new era of strength through unity for the Global South. The expanded “greater BRICS” will surely play a stronger role in shaping a more just and equitable global governance system, and increasing the representation and voice of the Global South in international affairs.

The fifth highlight: A successful China-Central Asia Summit was held, creating a new platform for good-neighbourliness and friendly cooperation in the region.

China and the five Central Asian countries, connected by mountains and rivers, have always been friendly neighbors. China hopes to see, more than anyone, a stable, prosperous, harmonious and interconnected Central Asia. At a key moment in the evolving international landscape, President Xi Jinping and the heads of state of the five Central Asian countries gathered in the historical city of Xi’an, the starting point of the ancient Silk Road, for the inaugural China-Central Asia Summit. This was an event that carries great historical significance and practical relevance.

President Xi Jinping comprehensively elaborated on China’s foreign policy toward Central Asia, and decided, together with the heads of state of the five Central Asian countries, to build a closer China-Central Asia community with a shared future, formally establish the mechanism of meetings between the heads of state of China and Central Asian countries, and set up a permanent secretariat for the China-Central Asia mechanism. During the summit, a number of multilateral and bilateral documents were signed, blueprints were drawn up for cooperation in various fields, and consensus was reached on key cooperation initiatives, including building a China-Central Asia energy development partnership and supporting the development of the trans-Caspian international transport corridor.

This historic summit completed the platform building and overall planning of China-Central Asia cooperation, and opened up a new channel for the cooperation to move to higher levels. It will be a new monument in the history of China-Central Asia relations. Cooperation between the two sides, which is based on equality, respect, openness, inclusiveness and mutual support, contributes positive energy and stability to the region and the world at large.

The sixth highlight: We facilitated the historic reconciliation between Saudi Arabia and Iran, setting a new example of political settlement of hotspot issues.

President Xi Jinping had in-depth communication with the leaders of Saudi Arabia and Iran, persuading the two countries to let go of past grievances and meet each other half way. With strong support from China, the trilateral Beijing Agreement was reached, and Saudi Arabia and Iran announced the restoration of their diplomatic ties, setting off a “wave of reconciliation” across the Middle East. We are glad to see that Syria has rejoined the family of the League of Arab States; Qatar, Syria, Iran and Türkiye have restored diplomatic ties or normalized their relations respectively with Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, with Tunisia and Saudi Arabia, with Sudan and with Egypt; and the people of regional countries are taking the future of the Middle East back into their own hands.

The Saudi Arabia-Iran reconciliation was a major victory for dialogue and peace, and a useful practice of the Chinese way of settling hotspot issues. China has always been an active, goodwill and reliable mediator. We do not believe in force being omnipotent, nor do we seek selfish geopolitical gains or impose our will on others. We have always supported the people of the Middle East in independently exploring their development paths, and supported the countries there in resolving differences through dialogue and consultation. I want to emphasize that China will continue to be a promoter of security and stability, a cooperation partner for development and prosperity, and a supporter for strength through unity in the Middle East, and will make greater contribution to reconciliation, peace and harmony in the region.

These six highlights encapsulate the unforgettable moments of China’s diplomacy in the past year and constitute the new chapters of China pursuing win-win cooperation with the rest of the world. They demonstrate distinct Chinese characteristics, style, and ethos, and speak to China’s enhanced international influence, stronger capacity to steer new endeavors, and greater moral appeal in the new era. 

Dear Friends,

Over the past year, when faced with major issues concerning the future of humanity and the direction of world development, China has all along stood firmly on the right side of history and on the side of human progress in its diplomacy, and made decisions that can stand the test of practice and time. 

First, we firmly choose cooperation over confrontation. Relations among major countries bear on the stability of the world. The Chinese side believes that major countries must have commensurate vision and shoulder due responsibilities. It is to this end that we are always ready to do more, and to strive for more positive results, to unequivocally oppose major-power competition and confrontation, and to unswervingly promote sound interactions with other major countries. 

China continued to deepen its comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination with Russia, with a view to boosting our respective development and revitalization, and promoting world multipolarity and greater democracy in international relations. Last year, President Xi Jinping chose Russia for his first overseas trip and held two meetings with President Vladimir Putin, showing a high level of mutual trust and providing strategic guidance for practicing true multilateralism, enhancing practical cooperation across the board and upholding global strategic stability.

China-EU comprehensive strategic partnership entered its 20th year. Last year, President Xi Jinping held in-depth exchanges on multiple occasions with leaders of European countries, such as France and Germany, and EU institutions. Fruitful results were achieved in high-level dialogues in strategic, economic and trade, green and digital areas. China-Europe relationship is not targeted at any third party, nor is it subjugated to or controlled by any third party. When China and Europe join hands, attempts to create bloc confrontation will not succeed and a new Cold War will not take place. China-Australia relations returned to the right track, enabling a fresh start of the comprehensive strategic partnership and a virtuous cycle of sound and stable development. Chinese and Japanese leaders reaffirmed their commitment to comprehensively promoting a strategic relationship of mutual benefit, and agreed to properly handle existing problems to build a constructive and stable China-Japan relationship fit for the new era. 

How China and the United States interact with each other affects the future of humanity and our planet. At the beginning of last year when this relationship went through serious difficulties, China stated its solemn position, urging the U.S. to change its wrong perception of China and reinstate a reasonable and pragmatic China policy. After painstaking efforts, the two sides managed to rebuild communication and dialogue and stabilized bilateral relations from further deterioration. Last November, President Xi Jinping accepted the invitation and held a historic meeting with President Joe Biden in San Francisco, during which they had a candid and in-depth exchange of views on issues of strategic and overarching importance and critical to the direction of China-U.S. relations. President Xi Jinping incisively pointed out that for China and the United States, turning one’s back on another is not an option; it is unrealistic for one side to remodel the other; and conflict and confrontation has unbearable consequences for both sides. The right way forward is to follow the principles of mutual respect, peaceful co-existence and win-win cooperation. President Biden reaffirmed the five commitments he made in Bali, stated that the United States is glad to see prosperity in China, and that the U.S. does not seek to contain or suppress China’s development or to decouple with China, and does not support “Taiwan independence”. The two sides reached more than 20 deliverables, restored and established a series of dialogue and communication mechanisms, and formed the future-oriented San Francisco vision.

Second, we firmly choose solidarity over division. What concerns the international community the most today is: Will humanity head toward division? Will there be a new Cold War? President Xi Jinping has given China’s answer: “Solidarity brings strength, and confidence is more precious than gold.” We stand firmly against small circles that seek geopolitical purposes and small blocs that undermine stability. China is committed to building a new type of international relations and to consolidating and expanding the global network of partnerships. 

On the occasion of the 10th anniversary of the principle of amity, sincerity, mutual benefit and inclusiveness, President Xi Jinping further elaborated on the Asian values featuring peace, cooperation, inclusiveness and integration, and set forth a new vision of building a peaceful, safe and secure, prosperous, beautiful, amicable and harmonious Asian home. Landmark achievements including the commissioning of the Jakarta-Bandung high-speed railway complemented China-Indonesia relations. China and Singapore elevated their relationship to an all-around high-quality future-oriented partnership. The Lancang-Mekong Cooperation made solid and rapid progress. And China-ASEAN comprehensive strategic partnership continued to be close and pioneering. We released the Outlook on China’s Foreign Policy on Its Neighborhood in the New Era, the first of its kind, showing China’s commitment and resolve in working together with neighboring countries to safeguard regional tranquility amid fluid international dynamics and promote development despite challenges and difficulties. 

China stood firmly in solidarity with the Global South, going through thick and thin and heading toward a shared future with fellow developing countries. President Xi Jinping visited Africa, first in five years, and co-chaired the China-Africa Leaders’ Dialogue, drawing the blueprint for future China-Africa cooperation. We continued to strengthen strategic mutual trust with Arab countries, accelerated the implementation of the outcomes of the first China-Arab States Summit and the first China-Gulf Cooperation Council Summit. We received over 10 leaders from Latin American countries and attended the Group of 77 plus China Summit in Havana, speeding up the upgrading of China’s relations with Latin America. 

Around the world, we see reinvigoration of countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America, the collective rise of developing countries and a new awakening of the Global South. This has made us more confident about the future of the world and more hopeful of human solidarity. Modernization should not be confined to a few. Rather, it should serve all countries and all people. We are convinced that as long as countries move beyond their differences of views, embrace solidarity and work with one another, difficulties of all sorts can be resolved and the vision of global modernization can become a reality.  

Third, we firmly choose openness over isolation. Global economic recovery remains sluggish, yet protectionist tendency is on the rise, fanned by rampant politicizing and stretching of national security concept and growing rhetorics on “building high fences around a small yard”, “decoupling and cutting off supply chains” and “de-risking”. These are against the trend of the times. They hold back a country’s own development and seriously weaken the drivers of global growth. China believes globalization is an irreversible trend. The world economy is like a big ocean that cannot be cut into isolated lakes. Only by increasing openness will we be able to tackle challenges; only by strengthening cooperation will we be able to achieve sustained development. 

Over the past year, we have been working actively to provide platforms for opening up. We brought back face-to-face events, such as the China International Import Expo, the China International Consumer Products Expo, the China International Fair for Trade in Services and the Canton Fair, to share our development opportunities with countries from around the world. We made robust efforts to enhance protection of foreign investment and intellectual property rights, and accelerated the development of a market-oriented, law-based and world-class business environment. We kept increasing investment in BRI partners and expanding cooperation in areas such as infrastructure, industries, economy and trade, and scientific and technological innovation with other countries, helping them generate more job opportunities and incomes. We took further measures to facilitate travels to and from China, applying unilateral visa-free policy to more countries, simplifying visa procedures, increasing international flights and providing more convenience to foreign tourists. China is taking real actions to open its door even wider to the world. 

Fourth, we firmly choose peace over war. Following the outbreak of the Ukraine crisis, President Xi Jinping put forward four points about what must be done, four things the international community must do together and three observations of the crisis. Last year, he personally engaged with leaders of various countries and multilateral institutions, including the U.N., in in-depth communication and made it clear that China is determined to facilitate peace talks and has no interests in seeing the crisis continue. We released China’s Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis, and engaged extensively with relevant parties through the special envoy of the Chinese government. We have remained unequivocal in advocating respect for the sovereignty of all countries and rejecting the Cold War mentality, and made active efforts for resuming peace talks and restoring peace as we built up the conditions for the cessation of hostilities and peace talks. 

The Palestinian-Israeli conflict bears on the overall situation in the Middle East. President Xi Jinping presented China’s position on many occasions. He noted that the imperatives are to end hostilities, prevent the conflict from spilling over, effectively protect civilians and increase humanitarian assistance. He emphasized that the only viable way lies in implementing the two-state solution and pushing for a comprehensive, just and sustainable solution to the question of Palestine at an early date. Working in unity with Arab and Islamic countries, China held a high-level meeting on the Palestinian-Israeli issue at the U.N. Security Council, sent its special envoy to work on the ground and promote peace talks, and increased humanitarian assistance and extend a helping hand to the people in Gaza at a perilous time. As the rotating president of the U.N. Security Council, China pushed the UNSC to adopt a resolution—the first of its kind since the conflict broke out. We also released China’s Position Paper on Resolving the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict. China’s contribution has been highly commended by the international community.

We support Afghanistan in building an inclusive political framework, adopting moderate policies, and pursuing peace and reconstruction. Through our mediation efforts, conflict is giving way to reconciliation in northern Myanmar, showcasing our firm commitment to maintaining peace and stability in border areas. We have consistently promoted the political settlement of the Korean Peninsula issue and the Iranian nuclear issue, and have become a much-needed constructive force for safeguarding world peace and tranquility. 

Fifth, we firmly choose multilateralism over unilateralism. In the world today, old and new issues are intertwined: Unilateralism is reasserting itself, with “us first” becoming a more noticeable tendency; the governance and trust deficit in the international community is decidedly widening. China holds that global governance is the way to surmount global challenges. We are committed to true multilateralism. We firmly uphold the U.N.-centered international system and the basic norms of international relations underpinned by the purposes and principles of the U.N. Charter. Championing the principle of planning together, building together, and benefiting together, China has actively provided global public goods and encouraged collective efforts by the international community to pursue development, security and vibrant civilizations. 

Over the past year, we have delivered on the Global Development Initiative (GDI). Over 70 countries have joined the Group of Friends of the GDI. More than 200 cooperation projects have been implemented. The US$4 billion Global Development and South-South Cooperation Fund has been put into use. The Global Development Promotion Center Network is bringing more members on board. In response to the growing impacts of climate change, China played a positive role in bringing about the UAE consensus at the U.N. Climate Change Conference and helping capacity-building in developing countries. 

Over the past year, the Global Security Initiative (GSI) has gained greater influence. It has garnered support from over 100 countries and international and regional organizations, and is written into a host of bilateral and multilateral documents. The Global Security Initiative Concept Paper identifies 20 priorities of international security cooperation. The vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security has taken deeper root. The Beijing Xiangshan Forum and the Global Public Security Cooperation Forum (Lianyungang) have strengthened cooperation consensus. China has also proposed the Global AI Governance Initiative for joint effort toward secure AI development.

Over the past year, the Global Civilization Initiative (GCI) has turned from vision to practice. The Center of Chinese and Greek Ancient Civilizations was launched in the University of Athens. The Understanding China Conference and the Liangzhu Forum were successfully held. The increased communication, mutual learning and appreciation between the Chinese and other civilizations have added new splendor to world civilizations.

Sixth, we firmly choose justice over power politics. The world today is far from tranquil, and hegemonic and bullying acts are inflicting profound harm. China, as a responsible major country, has always upheld justice and stood up for fairness. We have resolutely opposed hegemonism and power politics, resolutely pushed back against a handful of countries’ attempt to dominate international affairs, demanded increased representation and say of developing countries in the global governance system, supported addressing the historical injustices done to African countries as a priority, and urged the lifting of all illegally imposed unilateral sanctions. With these efforts, we have firmly upheld the common and legitimate rights and interests of developing countries, and made the international order more just and equitable.

Defending justice in defiance of hegemonic power is certainly also about safeguarding China’s sovereignty, national dignity and territorial integrity. In the face of external interference and provocation, we fought back resolutely and forcefully. In response to various acts of unjustified suppression, we took legitimate and reasonable countermeasures. The international community’s commitment to the one-China principle has been further cemented and the 1.4 billion Chinese people’s resolution to advance national reunification remains rock-solid. No individual or force should ever attempt to challenge the Chinese people’s iron-clad will or undermine China’s core interests.

Dear Friends,

China’s diplomacy is the people’s diplomacy. Serving the people is the original aspiration and mission that we bear in mind all the time. Over the past year, after the transition in China’s COVID-19 response measures, more Chinese people have traveled abroad. Our consular protection and services have been adapting to this development. In 2023, we started implementing the Regulations on Consular Protection and Assistance, made available the “China Consular Affairs” mini program, and handled over 530,000 calls for assistance and over 80,000 cases through the consular protection hotline 12308, providing round-the-clock services to overseas compatriots in all time zones. We evacuated thousands of compatriots from war-torn regions around the globe. The long journey back home once again shows that no matter where they are, our compatriots know that the motherland always has their back and the Chinese diplomatic missions are their home in distant lands.

Over the past year, the foreign service has kept in mind that China is still the biggest developing country and that realizing more adequate and balanced development remains the most pressing aspiration of the people. We acted in conformity with the central tasks of the Party and the country, committed ourselves to creating favorable conditions for domestic development, built bridges for international cooperation and worked relentlessly for people’s wellbeing.

Dear Friends,

Just a week ago, the Central Conference on Work Relating to Foreign Affairs was held successfully in Beijing. This is a conference of milestone significance. General Secretary Xi Jinping delivered an important address, in which he comprehensively summarized the historic achievements in ten aspects of major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics in the new era, presented a systematic review of six pieces of valuable experience, gave a profound exposition on the international environment and historical mission of China’s external work on the new journey and made comprehensive plans for China’s external work for the coming period. An important outcome of the conference is the identification of building a community with a shared future for mankind as the theme of our diplomatic work, setting a noble goal for major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics and holding a glorious banner for the development and progress of human society. It was made clear at the conference that guided by Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for the New Era and Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy in particular, we need to act with a stronger sense of historical responsibility and a more vibrant spirit of innovation to explore new frontiers in China’s diplomatic theory and practice, foster new dynamics in the relations between China and the world, and raise China’s international influence, appeal and power to shape events to a new level.

Dear Friends,

This year marks the 75th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China and a key year in realizing the goals and tasks of the 14th Five-Year Plan. President Xi Jinping pointed out at the Central Conference on Work Relating to Foreign Affairs that major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics has entered a new stage where much more can be accomplished. We will focus on the theme of building a community with a shared future for mankind and comprehensively serve Chinese modernization which is the top political priority of the new era, break new ground while upholding fundamental principles, bear in mind the big picture, and make new headway in major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics. 

We will always commit to self-confidence and self-reliance, and shoulder our due responsibility as a responsible major country. Our national development and rejuvenation will be based on our country’s own strength, and the future and destiny of the our people will be firmly kept in their own hands. Drawing on the continuity, creativity, unity, inclusiveness and peaceful nature of the Chinese civilization and with the  oriental wisdom, we will contribute our share to human progress. We will give full play to the strategic guiding role of the head-of-state diplomacy, ensure the success of the international events China is going to host, such as the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation meeting, the Boao Forum for Asia conference, the China International Import Expo and the Forum on Global Action for Shared Development, and demonstrate the distinctive style of major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics. We will address both the domestic and international imperatives, firmly safeguard our country’s sovereignty, security and development interests, and strive for a favorable external environment for domestic efforts of fostering a new development paradigm and achieving high-quality development. We will stand up on major issues bearing on the solidarity, cooperation and legitimate rights of developing countries, and take a clear stand on crucial issues concerning the future of humanity and the direction of world development. Upholding justice, we will stay firmly on the right track of history.

We will always commit to openness and inclusiveness, and consolidate and expand our global network of partnerships. We will follow through on the common understandings reached at the China-U.S. presidential meeting in San Francisco, and explore the right way for the two major countries to get along with each other. We will deepen the strategic mutual trust and mutually beneficial cooperation between China and Russia, and solidify our comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination for a new era. We will increase high-level exchanges and strategic communication with Europe to enable our relations to grow steadily and go a long way. We will enhance friendship, mutual trust and convergence of interests with neighboring countries according to the principle of amity, sincerity, mutual benefit and inclusiveness and the policy of forging friendship and partnership in our neighborhood. We will follow the principle of sincerity, real results, amity and good faith and the principle of pursuing the greater good and shared interests when forging ahead hand-in-hand with fellow developing countries and pursuing common revitalization in unity with BRICS countries. We will take the 70th anniversary of the initiation of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence as an opportunity to promote a new type of international relations. We will actively implement the GCI, and advocate the common values of humanity. We will promote exchanges and mutual learning among civilizations, increase understanding and friendship among people of all countries, and join forces for the progress of human civilization.

We will always commit to fairness and justice, and promote an equal and orderly multipolar world. We will practice true multilateralism and advance democracy in international relations. All countries, regardless of their size, should be treated as equals. Each and every country should have its place in the global multipolar system and can play its due role. All countries must uphold the purposes and principles of the U.N. Charter, jointly defend the universally recognized norms governing international relations, and jointly participate in the reform and development of the global governance system. We will fully implement the GSI, uphold fairness and justice, actively promote talks for peace, and play a constructive part in resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the Ukraine crisis and other global and regional hotspots. We will put forward more Chinese proposals, contribute more Chinese wisdom, and provide more public goods that serve the interest of world peace and development.

We will always commit to win-win cooperation, and actively advance a universally beneficial and inclusive economic globalization. We will firmly oppose all forms of unilateralism, protectionism and de-globalization, continue to promote trade and investment liberalization and facilitation, redouble efforts to overcome the structural problems hindering the healthy development of the world economy, and keep the global industrial and supply chains stable and unimpeded. We will advance the implementation of the GDI, scale up input in global development cooperation, and help fellow developing countries build capacity for self-generated development. We will jointly make the “pie” of economic globalization bigger and share it fairly, and pursue more adequate and balanced development. We will work for an economic globalization that is more open, inclusive, balanced and beneficial to all, so that people in all countries can embark on the path toward modernization together. We will fully deliver the outcomes of the Third Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation, enhance the quality and expand the scope of cooperation, and start a new stage of high-quality Belt and Road cooperation. We will always work to provide new opportunities for the world with China’s new development.

Dear Friends,

The future of humanity is bright, yet the road leading to this bright future is tortuous. To jointly build a community with a shared future for mankind, we need confidence and resolve, and we must have a vision and be broadminded; more importantly, we need to take actions and shoulder responsibilities. Under the leadership of the CPC Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core, the diplomatic service will continue to pursue China’s development in the broader context of world development, and advance the interests of the Chinese people while bearing in mind the interests of other people. Acting with vision and greater enterprise, we will work together with all countries to shoulder the responsibilities of our times, jointly rise to the challenges, and usher in an even better and brighter future for our world.

https://socialistchina.org/2024/01/31/s ... operation/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10774
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Sat Feb 17, 2024 2:58 pm

Image

Martin Jacques: China will reach climate goal while West falls short
In this concise opinion piece for the Global Times, Martin Jacques discusses the extraordinary progress made by China in recent years in green technology, in particular solar photovoltaics, wind energy and electric vehicles.

China is already “by far the biggest producer of green tech”, and the gap is widening. As such, “it looks as if China’s voice on global warming will carry an authority that no other nation will be able to compete with.”

Martin observes that China is becoming a major exporter of green technology, and that its investment and innovation has driven an unprecedented decrease in prices globally, most notably for renewable energy. “China’s dramatic breakthrough in new green technologies is offering hope not just to China, but to the whole world, because China will increasingly be able to supply both the developed and developing world with the green technology needed to meet their global targets.”

This should of course be a boon for the green transition in the West, but the author points out the contradiction between the goals of saving the planet and pursuing a New Cold War against China: “How can the West become dependent on China for the supply of these crucial elements of a carbon-free economy when it is seeking to de-risk (EU) or decouple (US) its supply chains from China?”

Martin describes the West’s protectionist response to China’s green tech as “a petty and narrow-minded response to the greatest crisis humanity has ever faced”, and urges politicians to cooperate with China on ecological issues and to embrace its contribution to the shared global project of protecting the planet.

Martin Jacques is a visiting professor at Tsinghua University, and the author of the best-selling book “When China Rules the World: The End of the Western World and the Birth of a New Global Order.”
There has been constant low-level sniping in the West against China’s record on climate change, in particular its expansion of coal mining, and its target of 2060 rather than 2050 for carbon zero. I have viewed this with mild if irritated amusement, because when it comes to results, then China, we can be sure, will deliver and most Western countries will fall short, probably well short. It is now becoming clear, however, that we will not have to wait much longer to judge their relative performances. The answer is already near at hand.

We now know that in 2023 China’s share of renewable energy capacity reached about 50 percent of its total energy capacity. China is on track to shatter its target of installing 1200GW of solar and wind energy capacity by 2030, five years ahead of schedule. And international experts are forecasting that China’s target of reaching peak CO2 emissions by 2030 will probably be achieved ahead of schedule, perhaps even by a matter of years.

Hitherto, China has advisedly spoken with a quiet voice about its climate targets, sensitive to the fact that it has become by far the world’s largest CO2 emitter and aware that its own targets constituted a huge challenge. Now, however, it looks as if China’s voice on global warming will carry an authority that no other nation will be able to compete with.

There is another angle to this. China is by far the biggest producer of green tech, notably EVs, and renewable energy, namely solar photovoltaics and wind energy. Increasingly China will be able to export these at steadily reducing prices to the rest of the world. The process has already begun. It leaves the West with what it already sees as a tricky problem. How can it become dependent on China for the supply of these crucial elements of a carbon-free economy when it is seeking to de-risk (EU) or decouple (US) its supply chains from China?

Climate change poses the greatest risk to humanity of all the issues we face today. There are growing fears that the 1.5-degree Celsius target for global warming will not be met. 2023 was the hottest year ever recorded. Few people are now unaware of the grave threat global warming poses to humanity. This requires the whole world to make common cause and accept this as our overarching priority.

Alas, the EU is already talking about introducing tariffs to make Chinese EVs more expensive. And it is making the same kind of noises about Chinese solar panels. The problem is this. Whether Europe likes it or not, it needs a plentiful supply of Chinese EVs and solar panels if it is to reduce its carbon emissions at the speed that the climate crisis requires. According to the International Energy Authority, China “deployed as much solar capacity last year as the entire world did in 2022 and is expected to add nearly four times more than the EU and five times more than the US from 2023-28.” The IEA adds, “two-thirds of global wind manufacturing expansion planned for 2025 will occur in China, primarily for its domestic market.” In other words, willy-nilly, the West desperately needs China’s green tech products.

Knee-jerk protectionism demeans Europe; it is a petty and narrow-minded response to the greatest crisis humanity has ever faced. Instead of seeking to resist or obstruct Chinese green imports, it should cooperate with China and eagerly embrace its products. As a recent Financial Times editorial stated: “Beijing’s green advances should be seen as positive for China, and for the world.”

The climate crisis is now in the process of transforming the global political debate. Hitherto it seemed relatively disconnected. That period is coming to an end. China’s dramatic breakthrough in new green technologies is offering hope not just to China, but to the whole world, because China will increasingly be able to supply both the developed and developing world with the green technology needed to meet their global targets. Or, to put it another way, it looks very much as if China’s economic and technological prowess will play a crucial role in the global fight against climate change.

We should not be under any illusion about the kind of challenge humanity faces. We are now required to change the source of energy that powers our societies and economies. This is not new. It has happened before. But previously it was always a consequence of scientific and technological discoveries. Never before has humanity been required to make a conscious decision that, to ensure its own survival, it must adopt new sources of energy.

Such an unprecedented challenge will fundamentally transform our economies, societies, cultures, technologies, and the way we live our lives. It will also change the nature of geopolitics. The latter will operate according to a different paradigm, different choices, and different priorities. The process may have barely started, but it is beginning with a vengeance. Can the world rise to the challenge, or will it prioritize petty bickering over the vision needed to save humanity? On the front line, mundane as it might sound, are EVs, wind power, and solar photovoltaics.

https://socialistchina.org/2024/02/13/m ... lls-short/

Image

Chip wars: breaking the siege
The following article by Bappa Sinha, originally published in People’s Democracy (the English-language weekly newspaper of the Communist Party of India (Marxist)) provides valuable insight into the US-initiated “chip wars” against China, which “show no signs of abating and have escalated further in 2023 with indications of more to come.”

Sinha describes the rationale for the chip wars as being essentially economic, with the US seeking to maintain its technological dominance. “Having already lost its manufacturing leadership due to outsourcing production, the US is critically dependent on its lead in advanced technologies to retain its global dominance. With China catching up and, in many cases, leapfrogging the US in frontier technologies, the US sees the denial of semiconductor technologies with its outsized impact on modern production and economy as an effective mechanism of keeping China down.”

The author details the numerous measures that have been taken by both the Trump and Biden administrations to restrict China’s access to advanced semiconductor technologies, including the imposition of export controls, the blacklisting of Chinese companies, and the imposition of sanctions.

However, “China has not been sitting on its hands waiting for its economic development to be choked.” China has been leveraging its particular advantages – its huge internal market, its dominant position in manufacturing, its education system, massive funding for research, and its “socialist economic planning which can set national industrial policy to undertake long term strategic initiatives” – in order to break the US’s technology siege.

In August 2023, Huawei released the Mate 60 pro, powered by a Chinese-manufactured 7nm chip – “precisely the kind of processor that the US sanctions had sought to prevent with their stated goal of denying China access to 14nm and below chip technology.” Industry insiders expect that China will soon be able to produce a 5nm chip. “These releases and announcements indicate China has weathered the storm and is poised to break through the siege that the US sanctions have sought to enforce.”

Sinha concludes that the US’s chip wars are destined for failure.

“Despite its head start in semiconductor technologies and massive financial resources at its disposal, the US, under neoliberal capitalism, is unlikely to be able to put policies in place to be able to remain ahead of China in the long run.”
The chip wars launched by the United States and its allies against China show no signs of abating and have escalated further in 2023 with indications of more to come. These wars are, in effect, a siege on China’s technological progress and economy. These across-the-board sanctions on leading-edge semiconductor chips, technology and equipment are a desperate attempt by the US to hold on to its geopolitical hegemony.

Background
While people are focused on the Ukraine war and Taiwan as frontiers of the geopolitical tussle between the US-led western alliance and the emerging powers of China and Russia, another front where the battle is being waged is in the tech domain – specifically, the semiconductor sanctions that the US is using to curtail China’s access to advance chips and technology to manufacture them. The US’s excuse for these measures is framed in military terms, saying that advanced semiconductors enable China to produce advanced military systems and improve the speed and accuracy of military decision-making. The tired western bogeyman of human rights violations is also cited as a reason for these sanctions. The sanctions are a naked attempt by the US to wage economic war against China. Having already lost its manufacturing leadership due to outsourcing production, the US is critically dependent on its lead in advanced technologies to retain its global dominance. With China catching up and, in many cases, leapfrogging the US in frontier technologies, the US sees the denial of semiconductor technologies with its outsized impact on modern production and economy as an effective mechanism of keeping China down. These actions are akin to technology denial regimes that the US, along with its allies, implemented during the Cold War.

The current round of technology sanctions by the US started in 2018 under the Trump administration. With the US increasingly getting concerned with China’s progress and leadership in telecommunications, especially in 5G, the US barred procurement of Huawei and ZTE equipment by all US federal government agencies, citing security concerns. This was especially ironic given the Snowden revelations about all leading US telecom equipment makers routinely having backdoors in their equipment for snooping purposes by the US intelligence agencies. The ban was preceded and followed by intense US lobbying worldwide, asking foreign governments to implement similar restrictions on Huawei. In December 2018, Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou was arrested in Canada on US request under the pretext of violating US sanctions against Iran. These actions wouldn’t suffice as Huawei was already the global leader in 5G technology, having become the world’s largest manufacturer of telecommunications equipment and the second largest manufacturer of mobile phones, supplanting Apple from that position. In May 2019, the US cut off Huawei from access to American technology. This not only cut off Huawei from procuring US chips but also from designing and getting the chips made from foundries such as TSMC, as those also depended on US technology. On the software side, Google announced that it would cut Huawei’s access to the Android platform. These moves were a fatal blow to Huawei’s phone business as Huawei had no short-term solutions for the loss of access to mobile chips. Their telecom equipment business (such as bay stations) survived as it didn’t depend on leading-edge chips and could be procured locally.

The tech sanctions wouldn’t stop at telecom equipment or Huawei but soon broadened to encompass China’s access to all leading chips and chip manufacturing technology. SMIC, China’s leading semiconductor foundry, was barred from purchasing the leading EUV lithography machine from a Dutch company called ASML in 2019. ASML is the only company producing these EUV lithography machines, each valued at more than 200 million dollars, which are required to manufacture the most advanced chips of 5nm or below (nm stands for nanometers and is a measure of transistor density with lower nm implying higher density and more advanced fabrication processes). ASML uses US technology, which allowed the US to deny ASML the right to sell the machines to SMIC. In 2020, SMIC like Huawei was put on the entity list, blocking its access to all US technology. The new Biden administration further expanded the tech sanctions, and by 2021, hundreds of Chinese companies were also added to the entity list. These actions targeted telecom, semiconductor, artificial intelligence, quantum and super computing companies. By 2022, across-the-board sanctions were placed on China to restrict its ability to import advanced computing chips, develop and maintain supercomputers, and manufacture advanced semiconductors. The sanctions would also include any company that uses US technology or products. They were effectively meant to decouple the supply chain of the US and its allies from China. The US managed to coax Japan, South Korea and the Netherlands into joining it in restricting exports of advanced semiconductor tools to China. Finally, in October 2023, the US further tightened the already draconian chip sanctions, restricting China’s ability even to acquire talent. This round was focused on AI chips and silicon wafer fabrication equipment, plugging any loopholes in the previous round of sanctions. They include a ban on ASML DUV lithography machines, one generation older than the already banned EUV machines. In late December 2023, the US announced it would launch a US semiconductor supply chain survey to identify how US companies are sourcing so-called legacy or mature chips (28nm and above) to “reduce national security risks posed by” China. Until this latest announcement, the US efforts targeted the denial of advanced chip (below 14nm) technology to China. The survey’s intention seems to be to deny China market access for the mature chips that China looks set to dominate, which would ensure complete decoupling between the western and Chinese semiconductor supply chains.

Breaking the siege
Meanwhile, China has not been sitting on its hands waiting for its economic development to be choked. China is the largest consumer of chips, consuming 40 per cent of chips produced globally and importing well over 400 billion dollars annually. China has long recognised semiconductors as a foundational technology, and achieving self-sufficiency in it is a strategic national priority critical to China’s sustained growth and competitiveness for the coming decades as it transitions into a developed economy.

While the sanctions regime has hit Chinese companies, especially Huawei, hard and exposed weak links in China’s chip supply chain, the last year has seen significant progress by Chinese companies. On the software side, Huawei announced breakthroughs in Electronic Design Automation (EDA) tools for designing chips at 14nm and above. Huawei also announced the launch of HarmonyOS for smartphones, replacing Google’s Android Platform from which it is banned.

In August 2023, Huawei released its new 5G phone, the Mate 60 pro. This satellite-capable phone stunned the US and the tech world as it was powered by a 7nm chip called the Kirin 9000s manufactured by SMIC. This 7nm chip was precisely the kind of processor that the US sanctions had sought to prevent with their stated goal of denying China access to 14nm and below chip technology. Further, there is speculation that Huawei is working on releasing a 5nm AI Chip as a successor to its Ascend 910B AI chip. Until now, it was assumed that China would be unable to mass produce 5nm chips without access to ASML’s EUV lithography machines. Huawei’s announcement was followed by Chinese carmaker NIO’s announcement of having developed a 5nm chip for autonomous driving.

YMTC surprised the tech world by releasing a 232-layer 3D NAND SSD chip – the most advanced in the world, dethroning memory chip giants like Samsung Electronics, SK Hynix, and Micron Technology. This is despite being put on the US Entity list in 2022.

Another Chinese chipmaker, CXMT, presented a paper showcasing the design of the most advanced DRAMs – indicating its design capabilities for 3nm gate-all-around (GAA) transistors.

These releases and announcements indicate China has weathered the storm and is poised to break through the siege that the US sanctions have sought to enforce. While the sanctions exposed weaknesses in China’s semiconductor supply chain, they galvanised renewed efforts to achieve self-sufficiency and provided a rare opportunity for domestic companies to sell to the large internal market, which has been dominated by foreign players until now. Despite these major advances, China remains far behind in the crucial area of Lithography machines, which are critical for making the most advanced sub-5nm chips. However, there are reports that Chinese firm SMEE has achieved a breakthrough and could start shipping China’s first indigenously produced 28 nm lithography machine – a huge leap over the 90nm machines that they are currently producing. While this would still be behind the EUV machines from ASML, they would catch up to ASML’s DUV machines.

Counterattack
China is not just content with trying to break the semiconductor siege but has now started hitting back. In May 2023, China took a page out of the US playbook and banned Micron chips from its critical domestic IT infrastructure sector, citing “security concerns”. Then, in July, China unveiled export control restrictions on gallium and germanium, which are critical raw materials for many types of semiconductors. China is the leading producer of these materials – producing 60 per cent of the world’s germanium and 80 per cent of the world’s gallium supplies. While these are found in other countries as well in abundance, starting mining operations takes time, which could result in disruptions in the global semiconductor supply chain. Additionally, China, the world’s top producer of rare earth metals, tightened control over their exports and banned the export of rare earth processing technology in December, which could hamper mining efforts in other countries as well

Following the release of Huawei’s Mate 60 pro smartphone, China banned employees of state firms and government departments from carrying Apple’s iphone to work. While these measures are not nearly as restrictive as the US sanctions, they are a shot across the bow that China can also play the same game.

Another front on which China can seriously hurt US interests is in the legacy (28nm and above) chip market. This is a huge market as the advanced 10nm and below chips comprise only 2 per cent of the market. In the legacy space, China already has the technology and is ramping up production capacity. By the end of 2024, the capacity for legacy chip production will be expanded to 32 fabs in China. Chinese companies could grab market share from entrenched western players such as Infineon, Analog Devices, Texas Instruments, ST Microelectronics and NXP Semiconductors, eating into their revenues and fat profit margins, which could then be reinvested in furthering R&D efforts in the advanced chips.

Future
The US chip containment policies on China don’t seem to be working, and China appears to be at the cusp of breaking out of this siege on multiple fronts. While in some areas, China’s progress will be hindered, in the long run, such policies will fail and come back to bite the US as their companies would lose the biggest market for such chips. The Semiconductor Industry Association argued this in their 2021 report, ‘Strengthening the Global Semiconductor Supply Chain in an Uncertain Era’. They had said that de-linking from the Chinese market would lead to China developing its indigenous manufacturing base and deny the US companies the large surplus they currently make from the Chinese market. CEOs of leading western semiconductor companies such as NVidia and ASML have been arguing similarly.

The current approach of packing more and more transistors into a silicon die is running into the limits of physics. As the industry has moved from 5nm to 3nm and, in the next couple of years, 2nm process technologies, we have hit the limits of how far we can go. Below 2nm, a phenomenon known as quantum tunnelling effect causes electrons to jump across barriers, resulting in unreliable transistor behaviour. Making further advances in computing would require alternate strategies. Research on advanced packaging techniques for building things called chiplets, which allow smaller chips to be combined into a larger processing unit, is promising. Further down the road, Quantum computers can provide a leap forward in computing power. China is investing heavily in these research areas as a path to leapfrog the west in computing technologies.

Even though the US and its allies – the EU, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan – are still ahead of China in semiconductor technology, China has some inherent advantages that will ensure that technology denial regimes will not work in the long run. These include China’s huge internal market – the largest in the world for semiconductors, its dominant position in manufacturing, education policy with some of the best technology institutes in the world, which churn out the largest number of STEM graduates, massive funding for science and technology research and its socialist economic planning which can set national industrial policy to undertake long term strategic initiatives. Despite its head start in semiconductor technologies and massive financial resources at its disposal, the US, under neoliberal capitalism, is unlikely to be able to put policies in place to be able to remain ahead of China in the long run.

https://socialistchina.org/2024/02/16/c ... the-siege/

Image

Tanzania’s ambassador to China refutes debt trap slander
This year sees the 60th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between Tanzania and China and, according to Khamis Omar, Tanzania’s Ambassador in Beijing, the enduring bilateral friendship is growing stronger and their mutually beneficial cooperation has great potential.

According to the Ambassador: “China and Tanzania have a lot in common. In the past both had a common kind of quest to fight against colonialism and oppression and to lift people’s human rights in a real sense. Now both sides share a common vision of advancing toward prosperity and have enjoyed a substantial and supportive relationship.”

In an interview with China Daily, he further recalled that China supported Tanzania even when the former was relatively poor itself. He specifically cited the1,860-kilometre Tazara Railway, which links landlocked Zambia with the Tanzanian port of Dar es Salaam, and which opened in 1976.

“It was the first regional project that happened in our region in Africa, so it was really appreciated because at that time China itself did not have much financial muscle… It was also a symbol of Chinese contribution to the liberation, freedom and independence of Africa.”

The railway allowed Zambia to export its copper without being reliant on countries then still under colonial and white racist rule. It was, by a considerable margin, China’s biggest foreign aid project at that time.

Now, Omar notes, China is the world’s second-largest economy and represents a vast market with immense possibilities for Tanzania. The prospects for collaboration are substantial, particularly in areas such as agriculture, textiles and apparel, beverages, laser items, livestock, and the maritime economy.

Refuting the ‘debt trap’ calumny levelled against China by western powers, Omar said: “African countries need to borrow money during the process of economic development. It is important for the country that borrowed money to make sure that it spends wisely and prudently. China provides loans at preferential interest rates. What is wrong with China doing that?”

Meanwhile, the South China Morning Post has reported that China plans to spend US$1 billion to refurbish the Tazara rail line. China’s Ambassador to Zambia Du Xiaohui handed the proposal to the country’s Transport Minister, Frank Tayali, saying that China wished to work together with “Zambian and Tanzanian brothers and sisters” on the project.

Minister Tayali said that he “was particularly excited that the Chinese experts will work alongside Zambian labour.”

The following article was originally published by China Daily.
The enduring friendship between China and Tanzania is growing stronger, and collaboration between the two benefits both and has great potential, says Tanzania’s Ambassador to China, Khamis Omar.

The 60th anniversary of diplomatic relations between China and Tanzania is being celebrated this year, and the friendship between the two continues to grow increasingly robust, Omar said.

“China and Tanzania have a lot in common. In the past both had a common kind of quest to fight against colonialism and oppression and to lift people’s human rights in a real sense. Now both sides share a common vision of advancing toward prosperity and have enjoyed a substantial and supportive relationship.”

China supported Tanzania even when the former was relatively poor itself, he said. The most notable venture the two sides have been involved in is the 1,860-kilometer Tazara Railway, which links landlocked Zambia with the Tanzanian port of Dar es Salaam, and which opened in 1976.

“It was the first regional project that happened in our region in Africa, so it was really appreciated because at that time China itself did not have much financial muscle,” Omar said. “It was also a symbol of Chinese contribution to the liberation, freedom and independence of Africa.”

China has played a substantial role in bolstering Tanzania’s economy by supporting plantations and industrial facilities and by deploying technicians, which has been instrumental in initiating economic modernization. Moreover, since 1964 China has been sending medical teams to help Tanzania.

Over time China and Tanzania have expanded and strengthened their collaboration. Beyond aiding Tanzania in certain areas, both countries have worked together in many fields, promoting prosperity.

“China emphasizes mutual gains in its foreign cooperation and ensures that the other side also benefits,” Omar said.

Largest trading partner

Last year China continued to be Tanzania’s largest trading partner and biggest investor. The value of trade between January and November was $7.96 billion, a year-on-year increase of 6.8 percent, according to official figures. Chinese companies made investments worth more than $11 billion in Tanzania.

China, the world’s second-largest economy, represents a vast market with immense possibilities for Tanzania, Omar said. The prospects for collaboration are substantial, particularly in areas such as agriculture, textiles and apparel, beverages, laser items, livestock and the maritime economy.

He is keen to see provinces in China and regions in Tanzania forge stronger connections and explore collaborative opportunities, he said.

Omar first came to China in 2005, and since then he has traveled extensively throughout the country, he said. He takes pleasure in exploring its impressive progress by visiting various places, particularly to gain insights into China’s development and governance.

In Shenzhen, a model city for China’s reform and opening-up, he discovered that the keys to its prosperity lie in being open, having a youthful work force, adopting innovative practices and policies that give priority to people, engaging in sustainable development and having robust manufacturing, he said.

“Socialism with Chinese characteristics is a different kind of governance that one has to know to unpack and try to understand the Chinese context. This is not one size fits all. It’s very important to understand the context of Chinese development and Chinese civilization with different dynasties… I’m learning about it.”

The Belt and Road Initiative has brought tremendous benefits to Africa over the past decade, he said. However, some countries have said the initiative is creating “debt traps”, which is “propaganda targeted at China”, Omar said.

“African countries need to borrow money during the process of economic development. It is important for the country that borrowed money to make sure that it spends wisely and prudently. China provides loans at preferential interest rates. What is wrong with China doing that?”

This year is the China-Tanzania Culture and Tourism Year, he said. Tanzania has more than 130 tribes with different kinds of cultures, music and social life, and it is endowed with rich tourism resources that he would like to tell Chinese people about this year.

https://socialistchina.org/2024/02/14/t ... p-slander/

*******

China in Congo
Ann Garrison, BAR Contributing Editor 14 Feb 2024

Image
Denise Nyakeru Tshisekedi, Congolese President Félix Tshisikedi, Chinese President Xi Jinping, and Peng Liyuan.

I spoke to Maurice Carney about the role of China in the Democratic Republic of the Congo’s mining industry.

Several weeks ago here I reviewed Siddharth Kara’s book “Cobalt Red, How the Blood of the Congo Powers Our Lives ,” which describes horrific working conditions of “artisanal miners” in the cobalt mining industry in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Black Agenda Report then received a response from American Canadian activist and writer Dee Knight, who thought I had been overly critical of China when I wrote, “Huge Chinese corporations so dominate Congolese cobalt mining, processing and battery manufacture that one has to ask why a communist government, however capitalist in fact, doesn’t at least somehow require more responsible sourcing of minerals processed and then advanced along the supply chain within its borders.”

This week we’re publishing Dee Knight’s response and my conversation with Maurice Carney, Executive Director of Friends of the Congo, about China in Congo.

ANN GARRISON: First I’d just like to review the conditions Siddharth Kara describes in his book.

“Artisanal miners” dig and bang on dirt and rock with shovels and picks or even their bare hands to extract mineral ore, then sell it to depots or to middlemen who sell it to depots, which in turn sell it to industrial mines. The artisanal miners often make as little as $1 a day and, as Kara writes, “Because ASM [artisanal mining] is almost entirely informal, artisanal miners rarely have formal agreements for wages and working conditions. There are usually no avenues to seek assistance for injuries or redress for abuse. Artisanal miners are almost always paid paltry wages on a piece-rate basis and must assume all risks of injury, illness, or death.” Children often work because parents don’t make enough to support a family, and schools are distant anyway.

Kara also writes, “Across 21 years of research into slavery and child labor, I have never seen more extreme predation for profit than I witnessed at the bottom of global cobalt supply chains.”

Although it may be true that, as Dee Knight writes, “80% of mining production is done industrially,” or that China has greatly increased the percentage of ore that is produced industrially, the vast majority of workers in the mining sector are still artisanal miners, and the industrial mines profit greatly by purchasing what they scrape out of the earth for next to nothing.

MAURICE CARNEY: Yes, it’s truly horrific, but what he describes is systemic. It’s not something that is particular to the Chinese. Chinese companies dominate Congo’s mining industry, but there are also Indian companies, European companies, South African companies, US companies, a range of companies from all over the world in the Congo, and they’re all working within an exploitative system, the old colonial system repackaged. The country was designed for extraction, not development. What he describes is something that hasn't fundamentally changed for the last 130 years.

So to describe what is actually there on the ground is not anti-Chinese. It's really just the nature of the capitalist system and its manifestation at the bottom of the global supply chain.

I'll give you an example. In 2001 to 2002, the United Nations published three studies that looked at the illicit exploitation of Congo's minerals, at companies that violated Organisation for Economic Cooperation Development (OECD) guidelines. They listed 85 companies in this study, and I think that only one company of these 85 was Chinese.

Fast-forward two decades. We now see that the majority of the companies in the Congo are Chinese, but that just means that Chinese have moved into a system that's already in place. They didn't create it. As their economy is growing, they need copper and cobalt and a wide range of minerals. Congo is an outpost for all those minerals, so they go and establish deals with the Congolese government.

And these deals, mind you, are better than what Western corporations have established and are offering because they include the minerals for infrastructure swaps and usually have a larger equity share. However, those deals don't negate the deep systemic nature of the extractive system for which the Congo itself was created. Congo is probably more emblematic of this extractive system than any other country on the African continent. It is an old colonial relic that hasn't gone away.

AG: So it’s just passed to local managers, right?

MC: In a lot of respects, yes, to the comprador class, I'd say, agents of neocolonialism who are primarily concerned about their own welfare, filling their own pockets. They’re not really concerned about the welfare of the Congolese people.

A member of Congo’s parliament makes about $20,000 a month in the Congo, right? This is in a country where of the 100 million people, 70 million live on less than $2.15 a day. So the interests of that Congolese politician are more in alignment with foreign interests, with foreign capital, which is in alignment with the status quo. If you make $20,000 a month in the Congo, where the per capita income is $500 a year, you know, then you're fine with that situation. Everybody calls you “Honorable” and “Excellency,” and you and your family members can own mines. You have status that's far above that of the average Congolese. The real issue is with the elite and the system that produces that kind of corrupt elite that works against the interests of the Congolese working class and the oppressed masses.

We know what it looks like when you have a progressive leader in place that is concerned about the welfare of the people and who uses a country’s resources to benefit the people. You can hardly think of a better example than Venezuela under Hugo Chavez, who leveraged the oil sector of Venezuela for the benefit of Venezuelans and, really, for the benefit of other poor countries in the Caribbean and other parts of Latin America.

The current leaders in the Congo, they're not really concerned about the welfare of the Congolese people. They're not concerned about upending the system of exploitation.

Even countries like Indonesia are trying to be more progressive by insisting that value be added locally to develop their country. They’re refusing to ship raw nickel out of Indonesia.

So we really have to put the onus on the Congolese leaders. They are the ones who should be leveraging Congo’s resources for the benefit of the people. The Chinese didn't create the system; they just became part of it.

It’s up to Congolese leaders to negotiate for a higher percentage of profits. They should also negotiate for transfer of skills, technology, and know-how from Chinese to Congolese, and pursue local processing of minerals in a way that value can be added locally. They should demand that the power plants and industrial infrastructure needed to do the final processing of minerals locally be part of the minerals for infrastructure swaps.

There's a lot the Congolese government can do that they're not doing.

AG: Well, I have to say, after reading the absolute horror stories in Kara’s book, I still don't see how the Chinese can be blameless in this situation, especially since they’re coming from a society that professes different ideals, at least historically. As you said, Hugo Chavez used Venezuela’s oil resources not only to the benefit of the Venezuelan people but to the benefit of Latin America in solidarity.

MC: I am not at all saying that they are blameless. I am merely pushing back against the propaganda that the exploitative system we see in the Congo is a product of the Chinese way of doing business. Now, I think that if you want to attribute blame, you have to say that there’s this capitalist system in place, that the Chinese are participating in it, and that the Congolese people are being devastated by the Chinese participation.

Again, take the Indonesian case. Indonesia said they want to add value locally, and they deal with the Chinese. So the Chinese are going in and working with the Indonesian government to add value locally by establishing industrial parks because that's what the Indonesian government is demanding. That’s why the onus has got to be put on the leaders of the Congo to negotiate in the best interest of their people.

AG: That’s the argument made in a piece titled “China Plunders Congo, Exploits Miners — ‘Anti-imperialists’ Approve ” published on the “In Defense of Communism, the Marxist Leninist Blog.”

MC: The fundamental issue is still capitalism, not China. I don't see China trying to upend capitalism as we know it, but if you look at the way China functions globally, China has a non-interventionist policy. They don’t try to overthrow or undermine governments, and they're not going around trying to tell countries and leaders what they ought to be doing. They work with the system as it is. That's a hallmark of Chinese foreign policy.

And what they’ve tried to do with the Belt and Road Initiative is to build infrastructure. They’re even offering better loan terms than the private firms in the West offer, but I don't see them going on a campaign to install, you know, socialism or communism outside of China. In the final analysis, the Congolese government has to prioritize the economic and social well-being of the Congolese people. Unfortunately, I do not see them doing that of their own volition. It is going to take the organized masses of Congolese to force the hands of its leaders to respond to the needs and aspirations of the Congolese people.

https://blackagendareport.com/china-congo
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10774
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Sat Feb 24, 2024 3:44 pm

Image

Tazara: Why China built a railway that many thought would fail
This short film made by CGTN documents the history, present situation and prospects of the Tazara Railway which links Zambia and Tanzania.

By far China’s largest foreign aid project at the time, it was built during the first half of the 1970s, when China was itself still a poor country and after the United States, Britain, Japan and even the Soviet Union had all refused to build it. It enabled landlocked Zambia to get its copper to port whilst avoiding countries then still under colonial and white racist rule.

The 1,800 km railway took five years to build, with 50,000 Chinese workers taking part in the project. 65 of them gave their lives.

In recent years, the railway has encountered problems, with freight traffic, not least due to the availability of other options since the liberation of all countries in southern Africa. Nevertheless, it still plays an important role in the lives of local people and communities. A joint statement adopted by China and Zambia in September last year, during the state visit of the Zambian president, saw China pledge support to the railway’s upgrading and renovation.


https://socialistchina.org/2024/02/20/t ... ould-fail/

Image

Dismantling Western hypocrisy on Xinjiang and Gaza
We are pleased to republish below a valuable article by Arjae Red, a union activist and Workers World Party leader, on the attempts by the imperialist media to misdirect pro-Palestinian sentiments on the left towards an anti-China narrative based on slanders about the treatment of Uyghurs in Xinjiang.

Arjae observes that Western propagandists are “making bogus comparisons between the Israeli settler regime’s treatment of Palestinians and the treatment of Uyghur people by the Chinese government and Communist Party.” He points out that, however, not a single government in a majority-Muslim country has backed these slanders against China, whereas they do unequivocally condemn Israel’s genocidal acts.

The article explores the national question as it relates to both situations. The US views Palestine as a “strategic staging ground for US military and economic domination of West Asia”, and the Palestinian people as “an obstacle in the way of the accumulation of superprofits”. This provides the clear context for the sustained national oppression of the Palestinians. The People’s Republic of China, on the other hand, was founded “as a multinational workers’ state, forged through the overthrow of feudal and capitalist ruling classes and by ousting parasitic forces, such as Japanese and British imperialism.” From the beginning, the PRC has promoted the rights and cultures of minority nationalities. Indeed, “the Chinese People’s Republic inscribed into its political framework regional autonomy for formerly oppressed nationalities, like the Uyghurs in Xinjiang.”

Comparing the Israeli state’s treatment of Palestinians with the Chinese state’s treatment of Uyghurs, the difference could hardly be starker. While Palestinians experience blockade, occupation, siege, apartheid, ethnic cleansing and bombardment, “Uyghur and other ethnic minorities enjoy government grants and other affirmative action programs in education and job opportunities… Rather than destruction and extraction in Xinjiang, Beijing’s policies promote development. Major infrastructure projects have built housing, schools, hospitals and high-speed public transport.”

Arjae further notes that the US-led sanctions over Xinjiang have a dual purpose: to disrupt Xinjiang’s integration into the Belt and Road Initiative; and to cause economic hardship and discontent among the local population.

The author concludes with two key slogans of our time: “Free Palestine from the river to the sea! US hands off China!”

This article was originally published in Workers World on 16 January 2024.
The movement in the U.S. supporting Palestinian national liberation has drawn truly massive numbers of people in action. On Jan. 13, for example, a reported 400,000 people marched on the White House, marking the largest pro-Palestine demonstration in U.S. history.

To counter this growing outpouring of support for Palestine in the center of world imperialism, Western propagandists are trying to misdirect the popular outrage towards People’s China. They are trying to revive the discredited “Uyghur genocide” narrative, making bogus comparisons between the Israeli settler regime’s treatment of Palestinians and the treatment of Uyghur people by the Chinese government and Communist Party. A closer look at each situation reveals enormous differences.

Who do we believe?
The intense propaganda charging “Uyghur genocide,” starting in 2016, saturated the U.S. corporate media, quoting statements by U.S.-funded NGOs and U.S. politicians. The statements aimed to slam through heavy sanctions against China.

Following a fact-finding trip to the region, however, a 2019 delegation from the Council of Foreign Ministers — a key decision-making body of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) — endorsed and commended China’s treatment of its Muslim citizens (hongkongfp.com, March 3, 2019). With 57 member states, the OIC is one of the largest intergovernmental bodies in the world.

A week after our trip to Xinjiang last year, a large delegation from the League of Arab States, including top official representatives from more than 16 Arab/Muslim countries, visited Xinjiang. In a June 2023 press statement, the delegation praised “the social harmony, economic development, people of all ethnic groups living in harmony in Xinjiang and accelerated progress.” They urged caution toward “international forces who smear and even demonize Xinjiang.”

No governments in majority-Muslim countries support the U.S. charge of “genocide” of a Muslim minority population in Xinjiang. Meanwhile, these governments publicly criticize U.S.-supported Israeli genocide in Gaza.

Multinational workers’ state vs. Zionist settler colony
Central to the comparison is a class analysis of the social foundation of the states of Israel and the People’s Republic of China. Like the United States, Israel was founded as a settler colony, built upon the slaughter and forced removal of Indigenous peoples, theft of their lands and the settlement of a majority European population.

U.S. strategists viewed the Israeli state on Palestine’s land mainly as a strategic staging ground for U.S. military and economic domination of West Asia, and thus as a major contributor to the profits of the world imperialist ruling class. They saw Palestinians as an obstacle in the way of their accumulation of these superprofits. To accomplish this conquest, the Israeli state has threatened to appropriate or erase every vestige of Palestinian culture, including Palestine’s history and food.

Israel as a state is thoroughly exploitative, extractive, and oppressive to the core. The state and the settler population, if it subscribes to Zionist ideology, serve the ends of the global imperialist ruling class.

The People’s Republic of China, on the other hand, was founded as a multinational workers’ state, forged through the overthrow of feudal and capitalist ruling classes and by ousting parasitic forces, such as Japanese and British imperialism. The Chinese Revolution established a state based on the political rule of an alliance between the workers, peasants and other progressive classes, led by the Communist Party.

The Chinese People’s Republic inscribed into its political framework regional autonomy for formerly oppressed nationalities, like the Uyghurs in Xinjiang. Historic Uyghur cities, such as Ürümqi, which had been renamed “Dihua” (meaning “to civilize”) following a 1755 Qing Dynasty invasion, regained their original Uyghur names.

Uyghur culture is widespread and celebrated in today’s China, which includes teaching the Uyghur language, as well as the languages of other ethnic populations in the region, in public schools. Before the Chinese Revolution, these languages were suppressed.

The People’s Republic is thoroughly multinational, based on the political rule of the working class and guided by the Communist Party. Its public goals involve developing a socialist economy and maintaining social harmony between ethnicities.

Israel destroys, China builds
Videos abound of the unmitigated destruction of Gaza by Israeli Occupation Forces. The IOF have bombed and bulldozed entire city blocks to dirt and rubble, razing homes, hospitals and schools.

Over decades, Israel has kept Gaza under a brutal blockade and crushed Palestinian businesses. Now the attacks have left the population without food, water, medicine and electricity.

Rather than destruction and extraction in Xinjiang, Beijing’s policies promote development. Major infrastructure projects have built housing, schools, hospitals and high-speed public transport. These projects outdo anything U.S. business or government projects have done on U.S. territory.

Uyghur and other ethnic minorities enjoy government grants and other affirmative action programs in education and job opportunities, which enable them to establish their own thriving businesses and fully participate in the vibrant Chinese economy. All of this has gradually reduced the wealth and development gap between the western Xinjiang region and the eastern coastal region of China, where, historically, all of the heavy industry was concentrated.

Xinjiang experiences no economic blockade except what U.S. policies impose. The Chinese government ensures that the basic needs of the people are met. During the COVID-19 outbreak, for example, Communist Party organizations delivered food and other supplies to Uyghur communities.

BDS against Israel vs. U.S. sanctions on Xinjiang
A global movement calling for boycotts, divestments, and sanctions against Israeli businesses complicit in the genocide of Palestinians emerged as a way to pressure Israel to stop. The BDS movement appeals to progressives around the world to cease financial support for the Zionist colonial project.

Washington has appropriated some of the progressive rhetoric used by the BDS campaign and weaponized it against China. U.S. officials claim its sanctions against Xinjiang punish China for the alleged genocide of the Uyghur people.

Yet the U.S. sanctions are based on the false assumption that all products exported from Xinjiang may be made with slave labor. This means that businesses in Xinjiang need to jump through hoops to prove they aren’t using slave labor. Only then can they bypass the sanctions and access the international market. The U.S. sanctions thus harm Xinjiang’s local economy, of which a large portion is Uyghur-owned businesses and farms, many of them small family businesses.

BDS targets the oppressor nation’s corporations. U.S. sanctions harm the Uyghur people themselves, with a twofold intent:

Disrupt the development of China’s Belt and Road Initiative. The BRI would integrate Xinjiang’s economy as a key region into the national and international market;
Cause economic hardship for the local population, which would further exacerbate inequality, ethnic and cultural divisions, and create political instability and lack of trust in the Chinese government to effectively develop the region.
Palestinian self-determination vs U.S.-promoted Uyghur separatism
The Palestinian movement for self-determination is a mass movement with broad support from people within historic Palestine and from the diaspora, originating organically as a response to Israeli colonial occupation.

The Uyghur separatist movement, on the other hand, is primarily pushed by U.S.-based anti-China think tanks and NGOs, usually with millions of dollars of U.S. funding and full support from the State Department and corporate media.

There is no evidence that the Uyghur separatist forces, represented mostly in the diaspora and many based in Washington D.C., represent the views of the millions of Uyghurs living in Xinjiang. Only a small minority of Uyghur people in Xinjiang have fought for separatism. And this has often manifested as a reactionary religious sect that utilizes tactics such as bombings in crowded public places and machete attacks at bus stops, marketplaces and airports.

Anti-imperialist forces can be in solidarity with the Palestinian struggle for sovereignty, while at the same time remaining skeptical of U.S. attempts to destabilize China with something that masquerades as a popular movement for self-determination. Anyone who still has questions, however, can compare the contrasting responses of the Israeli and Chinese governments to their respective situations.

Israel’s anti-popular response
In its announced efforts to destroy Hamas, Israel has made no attempt to differentiate between combatants and civilians. Every adult, every child in Gaza, is a target of Israel’s so-called “anti terror” massacres. Israel’s disregard for all Palestinian life is well known worldwide and deeply understood by Palestinians.

China’s approach to eliminating attacks by separatist forces that harm (mostly Uyghur) civilians has been different. It’s true that, during a period of time, increased police presence was necessary to prevent unpredictable public attacks. However, the government knows that people who have access to good education, job opportunities and have their basic needs met are less likely to commit crimes and less susceptible to being recruited by separatist extremist organizations.

Thus, the Chinese government took steps to create jobs, vocational training centers, and to develop the region through infrastructure projects and assistance for small businesses. Poverty alleviation is the number one method for solving violence in Xinjiang –– and it has worked. Over the last two decades, political and religious violence in Xinjiang has now been nearly eliminated, and Xinjiang is well on its way to being economically caught up with the rest of the country.

Drawing a line for the anti-imperialist movement
It is critical that organizers against imperialism and supporters of decolonial movements around the world have a clear and sober assessment of developments in each country and the forces behind them. We have a responsibility to engage with these struggles in a deeper way and not just take the narratives at face value.

The forces that accuse China of genocide against Uyghur people are the same that arm and fund Israel’s actual genocide of the Palestinian people, and who profit from it. We cannot separate this fact from reality, no matter how the corporate media and CIA/NED-funded “human rights” groups try to conflate the situations.

The U.S. empire, which, in its development, massacred and forcibly removed Indigenous peoples and enslaved Africans, and currently arms the Israeli genocide of Palestine, has absolutely no credibility to charge China with human rights abuses against Uyghurs. Washington has never been on the right side of history in an anti-colonial struggle.

We must continue to say: Free Palestine from the river to the sea! U.S. hands off China!

https://socialistchina.org/2024/02/23/d ... -and-gaza/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10774
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Sat Mar 02, 2024 3:21 pm

Image
Xi Jinping speaks at a news conference after the G-20 Summit in Hangzhou in 2016. He formed his faction in the city years earlier. (Photo: Reuters)

China’s economy is still far out growing the U.S. – contrary to Western media “fake news”
By John Ross (Posted Feb 27, 2024)

GDP data for China, the U.S., and the other G7 countries for the year 2023 has now been published. This makes possible an accurate assessment of China’s, the U.S., and major economies performance—both in terms of China’s domestic goals and international comparisons. There are two key reasons this is important.

First for China’s domestic reasons: to achieve a balanced estimate of China’s socialist economic situation and therefore the tasks it faces.
Second, because the U.S. has launched a quite extraordinary propaganda campaign, including numerous straightforward factual falsifications, to attempt to conceal the real international economic facts.
The factual situation is that China’s economy, as it heads into 2024, has far outgrown all other major comparable economies. This reality is in total contradiction to claims in the U.S. media. This in turn, therefore, demonstrates the extraordinary distortions and falsifications in the U.S. media about this situation. It confirms that, with a few honourable exceptions, Western economic journalism is primarily dominated by, in some cases quite extraordinary, “fake news” rather than any objective analysis. Both for understanding the economic situation, and the degree of distortion in the U.S. media, it is therefore necessary to establish the facts of current international developments.

China’s growth targets
Starting with China’s strategic domestic criteria, it has set clear goals for its economic development over the next period which will complete its transition from a “developing” to a “high-income” economy by World Bank international standards. In precise numbers, in 2020’s discussion around the 14th Five Year plan, it was concluded that for China by 2035: “It is entirely possible to double the total or per capita income”. Such a result would mean China decisively overcoming the alleged “middle income trap” and, as the 20th Party Congress stated, China reaching the level of a “medium-developed country by 2035”.

In contrast, a recent series of Western reports, widely used in anti-China propaganda, claim that China’s economy will experience sharp slowdown and will fail to reach its targets.

Self-evidently which of these outcomes is achieved is of fundamental importance for China’s entire national rejuvenation and construction of socialism—as Xi Jinping stated, China’s: “path takes economic development as the central task, and brings along economic, political, cultural, social, ecological and other forms of progress.” But the outcome also affects the entire global economy—for example, a recent article by the chair of Rockefeller International, published in the Financial Times, made the claim that what was occurring was China’s “economy… losing share to its peers”. The Wall Street journal asserted: “China’s economy limps into 2024” whereas in contrast the U.S. was marked by a “resilient domestic economy.” The British Daily Telegraph proclaimed China has a “stagnant economy”. The Washington Post headlined that: “Falling inflation, rising growth give U.S. the world’s best recovery” with the article claiming: “in the United States… the surprisingly strong economy is outperforming all of its major trading partners.” This is allegedly because: “Through the end of September, it was more than 7 percent larger than before the pandemic. That was more than twice Japan’s gain and far better than Germany’s anaemic 0.3 percent increase.” Numerous similar claims could be quoted from the U.S. media.

U.S. use of “fake news”
Reading U.S. media claims on these issues, and comparing them to the facts. it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that what is involved is deliberate “fake news” for propaganda purposes—as will be seen, the only alternative explanation is that it is disgracefully sloppy journalism that should not appear in supposedly “quality” media. For example, it is simply absurdly untrue, genuinely “fake news”, that the U.S. is “outperforming all of its major trading partners”, or that China has a “stagnant economy”. Anyone who bothers to consult the facts, an elementary requirement for a journalist, can easily find out that such claims are entirely false—as will be shown in detail below.

To first give an example regarding U.S. domestic reports, before dealing with international aspects, a distortion of U.S. economic growth in 2023 was so widely reported in the U.S. media that it is again hard to avoid the conclusion that this was a deliberate misrepresentation to present an exaggerated view of U.S. economic performance. Factually, the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, the U.S. official statistics agency for economic growth, reported that U.S. GDP in 2023 rose by 2.5%—for comparison China’s GDP increased by 5.2%. But a series of U.S. media outlets, starting with the Wall Street Journal, instead proclaimed that the “U.S. economy grew 3.1% over the last year”.

This “fake news” on U.S. growth was created by statistical “cherry picking”. In this case comparing only the last quarter of 2023 with the last quarter of 2022, which was an increase of 3.1%, but not by taking GDP growth in the year as a whole “last year”. But U.S. growth in the earlier part of 2023 was far weaker than in the 4th quarter—year on year growth in the 1st quarter was only 1.7% and in the 2nd quarter only 2.4%. Taking into account this weak growth in the first part of the year, and stronger growth in the second, U.S. growth for the year as a whole was only 2.5%—not 3.1%. As it is perfectly easy to look up the actual annual figure, which was precisely published by the U.S. statistical authorities, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that this was a deliberate distortion in the U.S. media to falsely present a higher U.S. growth rate in 2023 than the reality.

It may be noted that even if U.S. GDP growth had been 3.1% then China’s was much higher at 5.2%. But the real data makes it transparently clear that China’s economy grew more than twice as fast as the U.S. in 2023—showing at a glance that claims that the U.S. is “outperforming all of its major trading partners”, or that China has a “stagnant economy” were entirely “fake news”.

Many more examples of U.S. media false claims could be given, but the best way to see the overall situation is to systematically present the overall facts of growth in the major economies.

What China has to do to achieve its 2035 goals
Turning first to assessing China’s economic performance, compared to its own strategic goals of doubling GDP and per capita GDP between 2020 and 2035, it should be noted that in 2022 China’s population declined by 0.1% and this fall is expected to continue—the UN projects China’s population will decline by an average 0.1% a year between 2020 and 2035. Therefore, in economic growth terms, the goal of doubling GDP growth to 2035 is slightly more challenging than the per capita target and will be concentrated on here—if China’stotal GDP goal is achieved then the per capita GDP one will necessarily be exceeded.

To make an international comparison of China’s growth projections compared with the U.S., the U.S. Congressional Budget Office (CBO), responsible for the official growth projections for the U.S. economy on which its government’s policies rely, estimates there will be 1.8% annual average U.S. GDP growth between 2023 and 2023—with this falling to 1.6% from 2034 onwards. This figure is slightly below the current U.S. 12-year long term annual average GDP growth of 2.3%—12 being the number of years from 2023 to 2035. To avoid any suggestion of bias against the U.S., and in favour of China, in international comparisons here the higher U.S. number of 2.3% will be used.

The results of such figures are that if China hits its growth target for 2035, and the U.S. continues to grow at 2.3%, then between 2020 and 2035 China’s economy will grow by 100% and the U.S. by 41%—see Figure 1. Therefore, from 2020 to 2035, China’s economy would grow slightly more than two and a half times as fast as the U.S.

Image
FIgure 1

The strategic consequences of China’s economic growth rate
The international implications of any such growth outcomes were succinctly summarised by Martin Wolf, chief economics commentator of the Financial Times. If China’s economy continues to grow substantially faster than Western ones, and it achieves the status of a “medium-developed country by 2035”, then, in addition to achieving high domestic living standards, China’s will become by far the world’s largest economy. As Wolf put it: “The implications can be seen in quite a simple way. According to the IMF, China’s gross domestic product per head (measured at purchasing power) was 28 per cent of U.S. levels in 2022. This is almost exactly half of Poland’s relative GDP per head… Now, suppose its [China’s] relative GDP per head doubled, to match Poland’s. Then its GDP would be more than double that of the U.S. and bigger than that of the U.S. and EU together.” By 2035 such a process would not be completed on the growth rates already given, and measuring by Wolf’s chosen measure of purchasing power parities (PPPs) China’s economy by 2035 would be 60% bigger than that of the U.S. But even that would make China by far the world’s largest economy.

Wolf equally accurately notes that the only way that such an outcome would be prevented from occurring is if China’s economy slows down to the growth rate of a Western economy such as the U.S. Clearly, if China’s economic growth slows to that of a Western economy, then, naturally, China will never catch up with the West—it will necessarily simply stay the same distance behind. Therefore. as Wolf accurately puts it the outcomes are:

What is the economic future of China? Will it become a high-income economy and so, inevitably, the largest in the world for an extended period, or will it be stuck in the ‘middle income’ trap, with growth comparable to that of the U.S.?

The progress in achieving China’s strategic economic goals
Turning to the precise figure required to achieve China’s 2035 target, China’s goal of doubling GDP required average annual growth of at least 4.7% a year between 2020 and 2035. So far China, as Figure 1 shows, is ahead of this goal—annual average growth in 2020-2022 was 5.7%, meaning that from 2023-2035 annual average 4.6% growth is now required.

China’ 5.2% GDP increase in 2023 therefore once again exceeded the required 4.6% growth rate to achieve its 2035 goal—as shown in Figure 1. From 2020 to 2023 the required total increase in China’s GDP to hit its 2035 target was 14.9%, whereas in fact its growth was 17.5%. This is in line with the 45-year record since 1978’s Reform and Opening Up, during which entire period the medium/long term targets set by China have always been exceeded.

Therefore. to summarise, there is no sign whatever in 2023, or indeed in the period since 2020, that China will fail to meet its target of doubling GDP between 2020 and 2035—China is ahead of this target. Such a 4.6% growth rate would easily ensure China becomes a high-income economy by World Bank criteria well before 2035—the present criteria for this being per capita income of $13,846.

It should be noted, as discussed in in detail below, that a clear international conclusion flows from this necessary 4.6% annual average growth rate for China to achieve its strategic goals. It means that China must continue to grow much faster than the Western economies throughout this period to 2035—that is in line with China’s current trend. However, if China were to slow down to the growth rate of a Western economy, then it will fail to achieve its strategic goals to 2035, may not succeed in becoming a high income economy, and will necessarily remain the same distance behind the West as now. The implications of this will be considered below.

Systematic comparisons not “cherry picking”
Having considered China’s performance in 2023 terms of achieving its own domestic strategic goals we will now turn to actual results and a comparison of China with other international economies. This immediately shows the factual absurdity, the pure “fake news” of claims such as that the U.S. has “the world’s best recovery“ and “the United States… is outperforming all of its major trading partners.” On the contrary China has continued to far outgrow the U.S. economy not only in 2023 but in the entire last period. China’s outperformance of the other major Western economies, the G7, is even greater that of the U.S.

Entirely misleading claims regarding such international comparisons, used for propaganda as opposed to serious analysis, are sometimes made because data is taken from extremely short periods of time which are taken out of context—unrepresentative statistical “cherry picking” or, as Lenin put it, a statistical “dirty business”. Such a method is always erroneous, but it is particularly so during periods which were affected by the impact of the Covid pandemic as these caused extremely violent short-term economic fluctuations related to lock downs and similar measures. China’s assertion of superior growth is based on its overall performance, not an absurd claim that it outperforms every other economy, on every single measure, in every single period! Therefore, in making international comparisons, the most suitable period to take is that for since the beginning of the pandemic up to the latest available GDP data. As comparison of China with the U.S. is the most commonly made one, and particularly concentrated on by the U.S. media campaign, this will be considered first.

China’s and the U.S.’s growth in 2023
It was already noted that in 2023 China’s GDP grew by 5.2% and the U.S. by 2.5%—China’s economy growing more than twice as fast as the U.S. But it should also be observed that 2023 was an above trend growth year for the U.S.—U.S. annual average growth over a 12-year period is only 2.3% and over a 20-year period it is only 2.1%. Therefore, although in 2023 China’s economy grew more than twice as fast as the U.S., that figure is actually somewhat flattering for the U.S. Figure 2shows that in the overall period since the beginning of the pandemic China’s economy has grown by 20.1% and the U.S. by 8.1%—that is China’s total GDP growth since the beginning of the pandemic was two and half times greater than the U.S. China’s annual average growth rate was 4.7% compared to the US’s 2.0%.

Image
Figure 2

Economic performance of China and the three major global economic centres
Turning to wider international comparisons than the U.S. such data immediately shows the extremely negative situation in most “Global North” economies and China’s great outperformance of them. To start by analysing this in the broadest terms, Figure 3 shows the developments in the world’s three largest economic centres—China, the U.S., and the Eurozone. These three together account for 57% of world GDP at current exchange rates and 46% in purchasing power parities (PPPs). No other economic centre comes close to matching their weight in the world economy.

Regarding the relative performance of these three major economic centres, at the time of writing data has not been published for the Euro Area for the whole year of 2023 —which would be the ideal comparison. However, it has been published for the the Euro area for the four quarters of 2023 individually and trends can be calculated on that basis. These show that In the four years to the 4th quarter of 2023, covering the period since the beginning of the pandemic, China’s economy has grown by 20.1%, the U.S. by 8.2%, and the Eurozone by 3.0%. China’s economy therefore grew by two and a half times as fast as the U.S. while the situation of the Eurozone could accurately be described as extremely negative with annual average GDP growth in the last four years of only 0.7%.

Such data again makes it immediately obvious that claims in the Western media that China faces economic crisis, and the Western economies are doing well is entirely absurd—pure fantasy propaganda disconnected from reality.

Image
Figure 3

Relative performance of China and the G7
Turning to analysing individual countries, then comparing China to all G7 states, i.e. the major advanced economies, shows the situation equally clearly—see Figure 4. Data for China and all G7 economies has now been published for the whole of 2023. The huge outperformance by China of all the major advanced economies is again evident.

Over the four years since the beginning of the pandemic China’s economy grew by 20.1%, the U.S. by 8.1%, Canada by 5.4%, Italy by 3.1%, the UK by 1.8%, France by 1.7%, Japan by 1.1% and Germany by 0.7%.

In the same period China’s economy therefore grew two and a half times as fast as the U.S., almost four times as fast as Canada, almost seven times as fast as Italy, 11 times as fast as the UK, 12 times as fast as France, 18 times as fast as Japan and almost 29 times as fast as Germany.

In terms of annual average GDP growth during this period China’s was 4.7%, the U.S. 2.0%, Canada 1.3%, Italy 0.8%, the UK 0.4%, France 0.4%, Japan 0.3% and Germany 0.2%.

It may therefore be seen that China’s economy far outperformed the U.S., while the performance of all other major G7 economies may be quite reasonably described as extremely negative—all having annual average economic growth rates of around or even under 1%.

Image
Figure 4

Comparison of China to developing economies
A comparison using the IMF’s January 2024 projections can also be made to the major developing economies—the BRICS. Figure 5 shows this, using the factual result for China and the IMF projections for the other countries. Over the period since the start of the pandemic, from 2019-2023, China’s GDP grew by 20.1%, India by 17.5%, Brazil by 7.7%, Russia by 3.7% and South Africa by 0.9%.

This data confirms that the major Global South economies are growing faster than most of the major Global North economies, which is part of the rise of the Global South and draws attention to the good performance of India. But China grew more than two and half times more than all the BRICS economies except India—China’s growth was 15% greater than India’s. It should be noted that India is at a far lower stage of development than the other BRICS economies—all the others fall in the World Bank classification of upper middle-income economies whereas India falls into the lower middle income group.

Image
Figure 5

Comparison of China’s growth to Western economies
Finally, this outperformance by China casts light on what is necessary to achieve its own 2035 strategic targets. China’s 4.6% growth rate necessary to meet these goals means that it must continue to maintain a growth rate far higher than Western economies—Figure 6 shows this in overall terms in addition to individual comparisons given to major economies above. Whereas China must achieve an annual average 4.6% growth rate the median growth rate of high income “Western” economies is only 1.9%, the U.S. is 2.3%, and the median for developing economies is 3.0%.That is, to achieve its 2035 goals China must grow twice as fast as the long term trend of the U.S., almost two and a half times as fast as the median for high income economies, and more than 50% faster than the median for developing economies. As already seen, China is more than achieving this.

But such facts immediately show why it is an extremely misleading when proposals are made that China should move towards the macro-economic structure of a Western economy. If China adopts the structure of a Western economy then, of course, China will slow down to the same growth rate as Western economies—and therefore fail to achieve its 2035 economic goals. China will be precisely stuck in the negative outcome of the situation accurately diagnosed by Martin Wolf.

What is the economic future of China? Will it become a high-income economy and so, inevitably, the largest in the world for an extended period, or will it be stuck in the ‘middle income’ trap, with growth comparable to that of the U.S.?

Image
Figure 6

Conclusion
In conclusion, it addition to objectively analysing 2023’s economic results, it is also necessary in the light of this factual situation to make a remark regarding Western, in particular U.S. “journalism”.

None of the data given above is secret, all is available from public readily accessible sources. In many cases it does not even require any calculations and simply published data can be used. But the U.S. media and journalists report information that is systematically misleading and in many cases simply untrue. While it lagged China in creating economic growth the U.S. was certainly the world leader in creating “fake economic news”! What was the reason, what attitude should be taken to it?

First, to avoid accusations of distortion, it should be stated that there were a small handful of Western journalists who refused to go along with this type of distortion and fake news. For example Chris Giles, the Financial Times economics commentator, in December, sharply attacked “an absurd way to compare economies… among people who should know better.” Giles did not do this because of support for China but because, quite rightly, he warned that spreading false or distorted information led to serious errors by countries doing so: “Coming from the UK, which lost its top economic dog status in the late 19th century but still has some delusions of grandeur, I can understand American denialism… But ultimately, bad comparisons foster bad decisions.” But the overwhelming majority of U.S. and Western journalists continued to spread fake news. Why?

First, the fact that identical distortions and false information appeared absolutely simultaneously across a very wide range of media makes it clear that undoubtedly U.S. intelligence services were involved in creating it—i.e. part of the misrepresentation and distortions were entirely deliberate and conscious, aimed at disguising the real situation.

Second, another part was merely sloppy journalism—that is journalists who could not be bothered to check facts.

Third, supporting both of these factors was “white Western arrogance”—an arrogant assumption, rooted in centuries of European and European descended countries dominating the world, that the West must be right. Therefore, such arrogance made it impossible to acknowledge or report the clear facts that China’s economy is far outperforming the West.

But whether it was conscious distortion, sloppy journalism, or conscious or unconscious arrogance, in all these cases no respect should be given to the Western “quality” media. It is not trying to find out the truth, which is the job of journalism, it is simply spreading false propaganda.

It remains a truth that if a theory and the real world don’t coincide there are only two courses that can be taken. The first, that of a sane person, is to abandon the theory. The second, that of a dangerous one, is to abandon the real world—precisely the danger that Chris Giles pointed to. What has been appearing in the Western media about international economic comparisons regarding China is precisely abandonment of the real world in favour of systematic fake news.

This is a shortened version of an article that originally appeared in Chinese at Guancha.cn.

https://mronline.org/2024/02/27/chinas- ... fake-news/

******

MARCH 1, 2024 BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR
China resumes shuttle diplomacy as Ukraine war drums get louder

Image
French President Emmanuel Macron assertively stands by his remarks on February 25, 2024 about sending troops to Ukraine

The Chinese Foreign Ministry announcement on Wednesday that Beijing’s Special Representative on Eurasian Affairs Li Hui will set out from home on March 2 on a “second round of shuttle diplomacy on seeking a political settlement of the Ukraine crisis” may seem a mismatch.

Just two days earlier, French President Emmanuel Macron spoke up that he wouldn’t rule out the possibility of putting Western boots on the ground in Ukraine in order to prevent a Russian victory. Li Hui is expected to visit Russia, the EU headquarters in Brussels, Poland, Ukraine, Germany and France.

The Chinese spokesperson Mao Ning kept the expectations low by adding that “Behind this, there is only one goal that China hopes to achieve, that is, to build consensus for ending the conflict and pave the way for peace talks. China will continue to play its role, carry out shuttle diplomacy, pool consensus and contribute China’s wisdom for the political settlement of the Ukraine crisis.”

Macron spoke up after a summit of European leaders in Paris on Monday. But in diplomacy, there is always something more than what meets the eye. Macron later insisted that he had spoken quite deliberately: “These are rather serious topics. My every word on this issue is weighted, thought through and calculated.” Nonetheless, representatives of most of the 20 participating countries at the Paris conclave, especially Germany, later took a public position that they had no intention to send troops to Ukraine and were strongly opposed to participation in military operations against Russia.

The French Foreign Minister Stephane Sejourne since explained that the presence of Western military in Ukraine might be necessary to provide some types of assistance, including de-mining operations and instruction of Ukrainian soldiers, but that did not imply their participation in the conflict.

The White House reaction has been a reaffirmation that the US would not send troops to Ukraine. The National Security Council spokeswoman Adrienne Watson said in a statement that Biden “has been clear that the US will not send troops to fight in Ukraine.” The NSC spokesman John Kirby also denied that US troops could be sent for de-mining, arms production or cyber operations. However, Kirby underscored that it would be a “sovereign decision” for France or any other NATO country whether to send troops to Ukraine.

Interestingly, though, two days after the White House reacted, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin added a caveat during a hearing at the House Armed Services Committee that if Ukraine falls, Russia and NATO could come into a direct military conflict, as the Russian leadership “won’t stop there” if Ukraine is defeated. “Quite frankly, if Ukraine falls, I really believe that NATO will be in a fight with Russia,” Austin said.

What emerges out of this cacophony is that quite possibly, the ground is being prepared for a soft landing for the idea of western military deployment in Ukraine in some form going forward. Within hours of Austin’s testimony on Thursday, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova wrote on the Telegram channel, “Is this an overt threat to Russia or an attempt to cook up an excuse for Zelensky? Both are insane. However, everyone can see who the aggressor is — it is Washington.”

The NATO has been steadily climbing the escalation ladder while the Russian reaction has been by and large to rev up the “meat grinder” in the war of attrition. But then, it is the Ukrainian carcass being ground and that doesn’t seem to matter to the Brits or Americans.

There was a time when attack on Crimea was deemed to have been a “red line.” Then came the October 2022 Crimean Bridge explosion — on the day after the 70th birthday of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Well, Russia successfully repaired the bridge and reopened it to traffic. An emboldened West thereupon began a string of attacks against Russia’s Black Sea Fleet.

Russia repeatedly alleged that the British, along with the US, acted as spotters, supplying the Kiev regime with coordinates of targets and that the attacks against the Black Sea Fleet were actually literally conducted under the direction of British special services. The Russian MFA spokesperson Maria Zakharova said yesterday, “In general, the question that should be asked is not about Britain’s involvement in separate episodes of the conflict in Ukraine, but about the unleashing and participation of London in the anti-Russian hybrid war.” Indeed, recent reports mentioned that none other than the UK’s Chief of the Defense Staff Admiral Tony Radakin played a significant role in developing Ukraine’s military strategy in the Black Sea.

In retrospect, a NATO roadmap exists to bring the war home to Russia, the latest phase being a new air strike campaign against the Russian oil and gas industry. The escalation on such scale and sophistication is possible only with the direct or indirect participation of NATO personnel and real-time intelligence provided by the US satellites or ground stations. Equally, there is no more any taboo about what Ukraine can do with the weapons the NATO countries have provided.

Lately, the CIA began to brazenly speak about all that, too. The New York Times featured an exclusive news article Monday that a CIA—supported network of spy bases constructed in the past eight years going back to the coup in Kiev in 2014, that includes 12 secret locations along the Russian border.

Suffice to say, while on the diplomatic track, Russia’s repeated attempts to halt the fighting have been ignored by the West — the Istanbul negotiations in late March 2022; Putin’s proposal for a freeze on frontline movements and a ceasefire as early as autumn 2022, and then again in September 2023 — the CIA and Pentagon have been working hard to achieve victory at all costs.

Even after September 2023, Putin signalled willingness to freeze the current frontline and move to a ceasefire and even communicated this through a number of channels, including through foreign governments that have good relations with both Russia and the US. But the faction that wants to crush Russia militarily at all costs has prevailed. Austin’s remark on Friday suggests that this passion seems to be impervious to facts on the ground.

Make no mistake, on February 24, Canada and Italy joined the UK, Germany, France and Denmark to sign 10-year security agreements with Kiev. These agreements underscore a collective commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and its aspirations to join the NATO military alliance, implying that their aim is a long-term confrontation with Russia. And Europe is now discussing the deployment of boots on the ground in Ukraine.

In this foreboding backdrop, what is it that Li Hui can hope to achieve as he meets up with the deputy head of the department Mikhail Galuzin, a middle ranking Russian diplomat in the foreign ministry, on March 3? Succinctly put, while China’s interest in resolving the Ukrainian crisis is not in doubt, Li Hui’s “shuttle diplomacy” can only be seen as an effort to understand the current positions of the parties, as the situation has changed since May 2023 when he last touched base — and the fact remains that there are active discussions about further steps regarding the conflict in the West after the failure of the Ukrainian counteroffensive.

Conceivably, this upgrade of the opinions of the parties will enable Beijing to make decisions about its actions. A potential Europe trip by President Xi Jinping is also being talked about that may include France.

China is painstakingly rebuilding trust with the European powers and both sides eye pragmatic cooperation despite geopolitical frictions. China remains intrigued by Macron’s advocacy of Europe’s “strategic autonomy.” Meanwhile, the spectre of Donald Trump haunts both Europe and China, which, hopefully, may boost the latter’s chances at winning Europe’s trust.

https://www.indianpunchline.com/china-r ... et-louder/

******

Image

Peace delegates report back from China
Although the Biden administration has made some small gestures towards improving US-China relations, the US continues to escalate its campaign of encirclement and containment. The US has ramped up its military aid to Taiwan; it is attempting to strengthen the AUKUS nuclear alliance; it is doing everything it can to prevent China’s emergence as a major computing power; it is imposing sanctions and tariffs on China; and it is relentlessly spreading lurid anti-China slander.

Recognising the terrible dangers posed by the New Cold War (and its potential degeneration into a hot war), a number of peace activists from the US have recently taken part in delegations to China, in order to build understanding and solidarity, and to see China’s reality with their own eyes.

On Sunday 18 February 2024, we heard back from these peace delegates and discussed ways to continue building people-to-people links between the West and China, and to develop a powerful movement for peace and cooperation.

Embedded below are the videos from the event.
Full event stream


Lee Siu Hin: building US-China relations at the grassroots


Charles Xu (Qiao Collective): reflections on a trip to China
[youtube]

Sara Flounders: Organize collectively to demand hands off China and show solidarity with Palestine


Danny Haiphong: telling the truth about China and being an ambassador for peace


Dee Knight: If we want to make peace, more of us should visit China


Bahman Azad: debunk lies about China in order to advance the cause of peace


CPUSA: By developing people-to-people relations, we can all build a bedrock for peace


https://socialistchina.org/2024/02/27/p ... rom-china/

Image

Africa, China and the Rise of the Global South
Date Saturday 17 March
Time 6pm Britain / 1pm US Eastern / 10am US Pacific
Venue Marx Memorial Library
London EC1R 0DU
And Zoom
REGISTER ON EVENTBRITE https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/africa-c ... 1323229697
Speakers
Booker Ngesa Omole – National Vice-Chairperson and National Organising Secretary of the Communist Party of Kenya (CPK)
Roger McKenzie – Foreign Editor, Morning Star
Fiona Sim – Black Liberation Alliance
Cecil Guzmore – veteran Pan-African community activist and historian
Alex Gordon – RMT President
Frank Murray – Caribbean Labour Solidarity
Radhika Desai – Convenor, International Manifesto Group
Information
The geopolitical map of the world is changing at a rapid pace and in profound ways, with the dominant characteristic being the rise of the Global South, with the rise of socialist China at its heart.

Two years ago, the imperialist powers, led by the United States, were shocked when, almost in its entirety, the Global South, repulsed by the hypocrisy and double standards, refused to follow in imposing sanctions on Russia following the launch of its Special Military Operation.

Now, that hypocrisy and double standards are on unprecedented and shameless display, with the United States having so far used its veto three times in the United Nations Security Council to block calls for a ceasefire in Israel’s genocidal war against the Palestinian people.

As Chinese President Xi Jinping often says, the world is currently witnessing changes unseen in a century, a timeframe that links to the creation of the world’s first workers’ state in the Soviet Union. Today, President Xi has noted, socialism with Chinese characteristics offers a new option for countries that wish to rapidly develop their economies while maintaining their independence. The expansion of the BRICS grouping, whose GDP has surpassed that of the G7, and the admission of the African Union to the G-20, both of which were championed by China, are important reflections of this.

In his February 17th message to the 37th Summit of the African Union, Xi said that the Global South, represented by China and Africa, is booming and this has a profound impact on the course of world history.

Our meeting provides a rare chance to hear a first-hand perspective from the frontline of this anti-imperialist struggle in Africa.


Booker Ngesa Omole is the National Vice-Chairperson and National Organising Secretary of the Communist Party of Kenya (CPK). He also serves as the President of the Marxist-Leninist Institute, responsible for training party cadres, and is the editor of the party’s official quarterly publication, “Itikadi – Socialism Theory and Practice,” which reflects the CPK’s unwavering commitment to the principles of Marxism-Leninism as its guiding ideology.

The CPK is at the heart of an emerging new wave of Marxist-Leninist parties across Africa. Their website explains:

“CPK is conscious of Kenya’s noble history of struggle against foreign domination and imperialism. Our Party is the continuation of the social and national liberation struggle of the Kenyan patriots that ultimately brought about independence from British colonialism in 1963. We remember those elders who died or survived with great suffering in the struggles for national freedom. They sacrificed their lives and blood to give us self-respect in the period and aftermath of colonial domination… However, these noble wishes and aspirations will only be realised when Kenya replaces the capitalist system with the socialist system… CPK is a vanguard Party, as well as a mass organisation guided by the ideology of Marxism-Leninism and its application based on the historical and material conditions of Kenya and the world around us. The Party is a people’s organisation, its paramount interests are the interests of the broadest masses of the people.”

Image


The CPK is building unity and solidarity with the socialist countries, with Comrade Booker having visited China twice in 2023, the second time for the World Socialism Forum, which was also attended by Friends of Socialist China.

We hope as many comrades and friends as possible will take the opportunity to hear him during his brief visit to London.

Organisers
This event is organised by Friends of Socialist China and supported by the Morning Star, Caribbean Labour Solidarity, the Black Liberation Alliance and the International Manifesto Group.

https://socialistchina.org/2024/02/27/a ... bal-south/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10774
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Sat Mar 09, 2024 3:59 pm

Image
Picture of the “Northeast China Group of the Commission for Investigating the Crime of Bacteriological Warfare Committed by the American Imperialists,” taken at Shenyang, April 1, 1952. From 1952 pamphlet, “Exhibition on Bacteriological War Crimes Committed by the Government of the United States,” pg. 13, published by The Chinese People’s Committee for World Peace (author’s private collection)

[UPDATED] Another lost Cold War document: Zhou Enlai’s March 8, 1952 denunciation of U.S. germ warfare
Originally published: Hidden Histories on February 13, 2024 by Jeffrey S. Kaye (more by Hidden Histories) (Posted Mar 07, 2024)

This is an updated version of the original post. The update is necessary, in my opinion, because claims as to the availability of the materials described in the bulk of the post must be amended. While the “lost” statement of Zhou Enlai has in fact been nearly unobtainable in the U.S. for decades, in January 2024, a pamphlet containing Zhou’s statement, and other important material, was posted for viewing and download at The Internet Archive. A description of this, and links to the material are included in the updated post below.

— Jeff Kaye

Introduction

Image
Photo from booklet, “Exhibition on Bacteriological War Crimes Committed by the Government of the United States of America,” (Chinese People’s Committee for World Peace, 1952) in author’s private collection

In February 2018 I published online the full 669-page Report of International Scientific Commission for the Investigation of the Facts Concerning Bacterial Warfare in Korea and China (ISC Report), which corroborated the Chinese and North Korean claims that the U.S. had used biological weapons in an experimental fashion on civilian populations. I described it as a “lost document” from the Cold War.

As I discovered later, the difficulty in tracking down a copy of the ISC Report was due to the fact that the U.S. government, utilizing a bogus interpretation of the 1938 Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) had likely destroyed almost every copy entering the U.S. via shipment from abroad. The FARA law initially was passed on the eve of World War II, and was initially meant to stop the importation of Nazi propaganda. But with the onset of the Cold War, and with the beginning of the Korean War, the U.S. Attorney General interpreted FARA to claim that any foreign entity sending materials from “Iron Curtain” countries–books, pamphlets, magazines, recordings, etc.–were in effect acting as “foreign agents.”

Accordingly, the U.S. Postal Service and Customs agency, as well as the FBI, were authorized to seize all third class mail from Communist countries and destroy it. Literally hundreds of thousands of pieces of mails were duly confiscated and destroyed monthly for years!

In my article on the subject, I noted that this is why we did not have many materials from that period in our libraries or archives, including the ISC report, or printed materials that included, for instance, statements from North Korean and Chinese leaders about the biological warfare (BW) attacks then taking place. Later historians often cited these BW statements, but they were rarely quoted verbatim, possibly because the historians in question were working off secondary accounts and not the actual statements.

Hence, along with the article on FARA censorship (which was ended by Supreme Court decision in 1965), I posted online for the first time ever, in English, a copy of then-Foreign Minister of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Bak Hon Yong’s, statement accusing the United States of using germ warfare attacks, while “openly collaborating with the Japanese bacteriological war criminals” of Unit 731.

Bak’s statement, originally issued on February 22, 1952, was published in a 1952 pamphlet published by The Chinese People’s Committee for World Peace, which I privately obtained. Luckily, this copy of the document, “Exhibition on Bacteriological War Crimes Committed by the Government of the United States of America,” was somehow spared the wholesale destruction of such documents that occurred in the 1950s and 1960s. If I had not found this document, then Bak’s statement would still be unobtainable, so far as I can tell. Perhaps it exists in UN archives somewhere. (Sadly, the format of the Exhibition on Bacteriological War Crimes document is too large for easy reproduction, but researcher Alice Atlas has written to tell me she succeeded in doing so.)

A week after Bak’s statement, Zhou En-Lai (publishing as Chou En-Lai in the translation style then used for Chinese) issued his own statement on the U.S. warfare attacks. He was quite precise about the number of attacks and the kinds of pathogens dropped by the United States. Interestingly, his statement never mentions Unit 731 collaboration, although later Chinese statements and propaganda would.

[Update: researcher Alice Atlas has informed me that a pamphlet of speeches, including Zhou’s March 8 statement, has been posted at Internet Archive. In an earlier February 24 statement of support for North Korean protests around U.S. germ warfare attacks, Zhou did specifically single out Unit 731’s “Shiro Ishii, Jiro Wakamatsu, Masajo Kitano and other Japanese bacteriological war criminals,” who have “carr[ied] out on the Korean battlefield experiments and manufacture of various types of lethal bacteria” (pg. 6).]
Zhou’s document, like Bak’s, is not obtainable, so far as I can tell, in any online resource that I know of. [Except see paragraph above!—JK] Nor am I sure where one would find it in a library. As a service to the public, to historians more specifically, and for the readers of Hidden Histories, I’ve transcribed Zhou’s statement and am posting it here for what I believe is the first time online. So, hopefully, here is yet another “lost” document rescued from the U.S. censorship and book-burning campaign that lasted fifteen years of the early Cold War, as well as from the ongoing censorship that continues to suppress recognition of the U.S. war crimes described therein.

Statement by Chou En-Lai [Zhou Enlai], Minister for Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China, March 8, 1952

Image
Chou En-Lai [Zhou Enlai] during the period of the Korean War, picture via Wikipedia, which linked to source at news.cctv.com (Public Domain)

After launching large-scale, bacteriological warfare in Korea on January 28, 1952, the American aggressive forces, between February 29 and March 5, sent 68 formations of military aircraft, making a total of 448 sorties to invade China’s territorial air in the Northeast, and scatter large quantities of germ-carrying insects at Fushun, Hsinmin, Antung, Kuantien, Linkiang and other areas, and to bomb and strafe the Linkiang and Changtienhokow areas. The details of these incidents are as follows:
(1) On February 29, American aircraft, in 14 formations, flew a total of 148 sorties over Antung, Fushun, Fengcheng and other areas and scattered insects over Fushun. An investigation on the spot showed that insects of a black colour were found within an area of 15-20 kilometers in Fushun County covering Takow, Lijen, and Fangsiao Villages and Lientaowan.

(2) On March 1, American aircraft, in 14 formations, flew a total of 86 sorties to intrude over Fushun, Changtienhokow, Kuantien and Chian and scatter insects of a black colour resembling fleas over Makinchwang and other places in Fushun County.

(3) On March 2, American aircraft, in 12 formations, flew a total of 72 sorties over Funshun, Antung, Tatungkow, Changtienhokow, Kiuliencheng, Chian, Kuantien and Changpai. They dropped large quantities of flies, mosquitoes, fleas and other types of insects over Takow and other parts of Fushun County and areas between Fushun and Shenyang.

(4) On March 3, five formations of American aircraft, flying a total of 23 sorties, intruded and scattered insects over Antung, Langtou and Chian.

(5) On March 4, thirteen formations of American aircraft flew a total of 72 sorties, to intrude and scatter insects over Antung, Langtou, Tatunkow, Kiuliencheng, Changtienhokow, Hsinmin, Chian, Hunkiangkow and Kuantien. At 11 a.m. of the same morning, six American aircraft were observed above Langtou. They dropped from a height of 5,000 meters two cloth receptacles which burst open some 2,000 meters from the ground; and then a swarm of flies was found near the highway. At 2 p.m., an American aircraft was observed over Paikipao and Jaoyangho in Hsinmin County. It dropped a load of flies. On the same day, American aircraft were active over Kuantien, and afterwards flies, mosquitoes, crickets and fleas dropped by American aircraft were immediately found east of Kuantien City and at Hunshihlatze and other places.

(6) On March 5, ten formations of American aircraft flew a total of 38 sorties to intrude over Antung, Anpingho, Changtienhokow, Hunkiangkow, Tunghua and Linkiang. Of these, one group of 8 planes at about 8 a.m. indiscriminately bombed and strafed Linkiang, wounding 2 people and destroying 5 houses.

In view of the fact that the United States government has dared repeatedly and openly to make air intrusions over China’s territory, spread germ-bearing insects and indiscriminately bomb, strafe and kill Chinese people at the same time as it is delaying the Korean armistice negotiations and obstructing a peaceful settlement of the Korean question in an attempt to prolong and extend the Korean war, I am authorised by the Central People’s Government of the People’s Government of China to protest solemnly against these most savage and brutal acts of aggression and provocation by the United States government.

The open and direct acts of aggression of the United States government against the People’s Republic of China date from June 27, 1950 when U.S. President Truman announced the despatch of its navy to invade and occupy China’s territory of Taiwan. On August 27, 1950 the American aggressor troops in Korea began to send their military aircraft to intrude into the territorial air of Northeast China. From then on, the military aircraft of the United States government have many times intruded over Northeast China and carried out reconnaissance, strafing and bombing. Now, on the heels of its large-scale bacteriological warfare in Korea, the United States government is adding to its open violation of international law and all laws of humanity by scattering large quantities of bacteria-laden insects over Northeast China. This is an attempt by the criminal and vicious device of mass slaughter of peaceful people to further its aims of invading China and threatening the security of the Chinese people.

These brutal crimes of the United States government will never be tolerated by the Chinese people. The opposition of the Chinese people in their wrath will assure the ignominious failure of these crimes.

It is the view of the Central People’s Government of the People’s Republic of China that the United States government, pursuing its objectives of extending the Korean war and undermining peace in the Far East and other parts of the world, has employed bacteriological weapons, strictly prohibited by humanity and international conventions, against the peaceful population and armed forces of the Korean and Chinese peoples in Korea, and is even extending such crimes against the peaceful population in Northeast China by employing these unlawful bacteriological weapons in a brutal provocation.

In its statement on February 24 [see pg. 5 at link], the Central People’s Government of the People’s Republic of China pointed out: “If the people of the world do not resolutely curb this crime, then the calamities befalling the peaceful people of Korea today will befall the peaceful people of the world tomorrow.” Now is the time for the peace-loving people of the world to rise and put an end to the maniacal crimes of the United States government. We are confident that human justice and peace will triumph.

The Central People’s Government of the People’s Republic of China hereby makes it known that members of the American air force who invade China’s territorial air and use bacteriological weapons will be dealt with as war criminals upon capture.

The Central People’s Government of the People’s Republic of China at the same time declares that the United States government must bear the full responsibility for all the consequences arising from air intrusions over China’s territory, the use of bacteriological weapons and the murder of the Chinese people by indiscriminate bombing and strafing.

https://mronline.org/2024/03/07/updated ... -document/

After Ukraine, US Readies ‘Transnational Kill Chain’ for Taiwan Proxy War
MARCH 8, 2024

Image

By K.J. Noh – Mar 1, 204

Washington approved the dangerous sale of the Link 16 communications system to Taiwan. This is the final link of what the US military calls a “transnational coalition kill chain” against China, and signals a commitment to kinetic war.

In many traditions, when you paint or sculpt a Buddha, the eyes are the very last to be painted. It’s only after the eyes have been completed that the sculpture is fully alive and empowered.

The United States has approved a $75 million weapons package to Taiwan province, involving the sale of the Link 16 communications system.

The acquisition of Link 16 is analogous to “painting the eyes on the Buddha”: a last touch, it makes Taiwan’s military systems and weapons platforms live and far-seeing.

It confers deadly powers, or more prosaically, in the words of the US military, it completes Taiwan as the final, lethal link of what the US Naval Institute calls a “transnational coalition kill chain”, for war against China.

What exactly is Link 16? It is a key system in the US military communications arsenal. Specifically, it’s the jam-resistant tactical data network for coordinating NATO weapons systems for joint operations in war.

If this sale is completed, it signals serious, granular, and single-minded commitment to kinetic war. It would signal that the Biden administration is as serious and unwavering in its desire to provoke and wage large-scale war with China over Taiwan as it was with Russia over Ukraine, which also saw the implementation of this system.

More important than any single weapons platform, this system allows the Taiwan/ROC military to integrate and coordinate all its warfighting platforms with US, NATO, Japanese, Korean, Australian militaries in combined arms warfare.

The deadliest link
Link 16 would be the deadliest piece of technology yet to be transferred, because it allows sea, air, and land forces to be coordinated with others for lethal effect.

It permits, for example, strategic nuclear/stealth bombers (US B-1B Lancers, B-2 Spirits) to coordinate with electronic warfare and surveillance platforms (EA Growlers, Prowlers, EP-3s), fighters and bombers (F-16,F-22, F-35s) as well as conduct joint arms warfare with US, French, British carrier battle groups, Japanese SDF destroyers, and South Korean Hyun Moo missile destroyers, as well as THAAD and Patriot radars and missile batteries.

It also allows coordination with low-earth orbit satellites and other Space Force assets.

In other words, Link 16 supplies a brain and nervous system to the various deadly limbs and arms that the Taiwan authorities have been acquiring and preparing on the prompting of the US. It ensures interoperability and US control.

It effectively prepares Taiwan to be used as the spear tip and trigger of a multinational war offensive against China.

To give a shoe-on-the-other-foot analogy, this would be like China giving separatists in a US territory or state (e.g. Hawaii, Guam, Puerto Rico, Texas) not just arms and training – already a belligerent act of war, which the US is currently doing – but connecting insurgent militaries directly to the PLA’s surveillance, reconnaissance, and command/control systems.

This coordinates and completes, to borrow the words of the US Naval Institute (USNI), the final link in a “transnational coalition kill chain” for war.

Offsetting peace, sowing dragon’s teeth
The current US doctrine of war against China is based on distributed, dispersed, diffused, network-centric warfare to be conducted along the myriad islands of the archipelagic states encircling China in the Pacific.

These are the “island chains” upon which the US has encircled and sown dragon’s teeth: tens of thousands of troops armed with mobile attack platforms and missiles.

This is to be coordinated with subsurface warfare, automated/autonomous warfare, and longer-range stand-off weapons and attacks.

Powerful think tanks like CSBA, CNAS, CSIS, RAND and the Pentagon have been working out the doctrine, details, logistics, and appropriations for this concept intensively for over a decade while advocating intensely for it.

The sale of link 16 to Taiwan realizes and completes a key portion of this, binding the Chinese island as the keystone of this “multinational kill chain”.

This doctrine of dispersion is based on a “rock-paper-scissors” concept that networked diffusion “offsets” (Chinese) precision.

China’s capacity to defend itself and its littoral perimeter with precision missiles can be undermined with diffuse, distributed attacks from all across the island chains.

Note that this diffusion and dispersion of attack platforms across the entire Pacific gives the lie to the claim that this is some inherently deterrent strategy to defend Taiwan island. Diffusion is clearly offensive, designed to overrun and overwhelm defenses: like Ukraine, this is not to deter war, but to enable it.

This thus signals that aggressive total war against China is being prepared, in granular, lethal fashion on tactical and operational levels.

On the strategic level, currently, at the CFR, CNAS, and other influential think tanks in Washington, the talk is all about “protracted warfare” with China, about pre-positioning systems and munitions for war, about ramping up to an industrial war footing for the inescapable necessity of war with China.

This discussion includes preparations for a nuclear first strike on China.

The US senses that the clock is running rapidly down on its power. If war is inevitable, then it is anxious to start war sooner rather than later.

RAND warned in 2016 that 2025 was the outside window for the US to prevail in war with China. The “Minihan window” also hints at 2025. The “Davidson window” is 2027.

The question in Washington regarding war with China is not if, but when–and how.

Link 16 makes “how” easier, and brings “when” closer.

But the US is still engaged in Ukraine. Can it wage a two-front war?
The current administration has hardline Russophobes who want to continue to bleed Russia out in Ukraine. It wants protracted war with Russia. It firmly believes it can wage ambidextrous, multi-front war.

Many US officials also believe that war with Ukraine and war with China are connected. They see Russia and China as a single axis of “revisionist powers” (i.e., official enemies) conspiring against the US to undermine its so-called “rules-based order” (i.e., US hegemony).

Furthermore, if the US abandons Ukraine, this could weaken the Taiwan authorities’ resolve and willingness to wage war on behalf of Washington.

Earlier in the war, when Russian gains in Ukraine were uncertain, Bi-khim Louise Hsiao (Taiwan’s current vice-president elect) gloated publicly and prominently that Ukraine’s victories were a message to China, as well as proof-of-concept of an effective doctrine for waging and winning war against China. As such, the Taiwan authorities were and are a major supporter of the Ukraine proxy war.



But the converse also holds true. Based on the same premise, if the US abandons and loses Ukraine, it sends a clear message to the people on Taiwan island that they will be the next to be used and abandoned; that their US-imposed war and war doctrine (light, distributed, asymmetrical combined arms warfare) for fighting China is a recipe for catastrophic loss.

The US plans on using proxies for war against China: Taiwan, Korea, Japan (JAKUS), Philippines, and Australia (AUKUS). Thus it cannot signal too overtly its perfidious, unreliable, and instrumental mindset.

Washington has to keep up the pretense. It cannot be seen to overtly lose in or abandon Ukraine. It needs a “decent interval”, or a plausible pretext to cut and run.

Still, the US is stretched thin. For example, it is relying on Korean munitions to Ukraine, and South Korea has provided more munitions than all of the EU combined.

Moreover, the US is currently at war with itself. The fracturing of its body politic can only be unified with a common war against a common enemy. Russia is not that enemy for the US. China is. The Republicans want war with China now.

Eli Ratner and Elbridge Colby have been fretting for years about the need to husband weaponry, arms, and munitions in order to wage war against China.

Since the outbreak of Ukraine, Ratner has been working hard to pull India into the US defense industry’s supply chain, and claims to have been successful.

South Korea’s considerable military-industrial complex is being pulled into sub-contracting for US war with China.

Since many of its major Chaebol corporations got their start as subcontractors for the war in Vietnam (for example, Hyundai was a subcontractor for Halliburton/Brown & Root), the Korean economy is simply reverting back to its corporate-martial roots.

South Korea’s economy is currently tanking due to US-forced sanctions on China. Major Korean electronic firms have lost 60 to 80% of their profits due to US-imposed chip sanctions.

Under those conditions, military manufacturing and/or subcontracting looks to be the only way forward.

In this way, the US is forcing a war economy onto its vassals.

The business of the US is war
Furthermore, US aid to Ukraine benefits its own arms industry.

The business of the US is war. Not only do existing US arms companies gain, but also the entire tech industry and supply chain benefits, and is currently re-orienting around this.

Much of the US tech industry is seeking to suckle from the government teat, now flowing copiously in preparation for war.

On the other hand, the general US economy is not doing well, with massive layoffs, especially in the consumer and business tech sector.

The backstop of military Keynesianism, with the integration of think-tank lobbying groups funded by the arms industry with close ties to the administration (such as CNAS, West Exec Advisors, and CSIS) ensure that war is always the closest ready-to-hand resort for tough economic times.

The US is simultaneously trying to decouple supply chains, which creates opportunities for US firms (both domestically and subcontracting with US vassals).

Automated, AI-enabled warfare will be a key part of this development, as will be dispersed, distributed warfare platforms using proxies such as South Korea and Japan.

This fits the existing historical pattern: the history of Western technology shows that technology and machinery have always been developed first for war.

Afterwards, they become tools of entertainment and distraction, and later productive tools for general industrial use.

The machinery of war, mystification, and repression
This pattern goes back to the earliest machines and inventions of the West: the crane, the pulley, the lever, were all military technologies – machines of war (used in sieges).

Later they became machines of illusion and distraction (used as stage machinery in Greek theater).

Only much later were they applied for general use – and exploitation – in manufacture and production.

This holds true for many other technologies, including:

• the internet, originally designed to create redundant military communications in case of nuclear strike;
• GPS, for precision bombing;
• integrated circuit computer chips, a miniaturization of electronic circuits to fit inside the cone of missile guidance systems;
• digital computers, conceived by Alan Turing while trying to break military encryption;
• microwave ovens, originally radar technology, initially marketed as the “Radar-range”;
• analog computers, invented for military calculations; and
• feedback systems, for guidance systems.

Nuclear power obviously derives from nuclear weapons.

AI, too, from its inception, was conceived for automated battle management, especially to enable second strike after human life had been destroyed.

An AI war is already in the works, with US sanctions on AI-related chips and computing, along with an algorithmic race to suppress dissent and critique in the information domain.

War and business are intricately related in the west, and war is the first lever pulled when the economy stagnates critically or needs a boost.

Is there any possibility of peace?
The US needs to abandon its neoconservative fantasies of hegemonic global empire and retreat gently into that good night, for there to be peace.

Washington needs to negotiate in good faith with Russia, and begin the process of de-escalating its proxies in Ukraine, as well as in Palestine, and the Pacific.

It needs to seek win-win cooperation in a multilateral order based on international law and mutual co-existence, not its own top-down “rules-based order”.

It needs to respect the One China principle, end its interference in China’s affairs, and stop preparing and provoking war with China.

However, the US ruling class is unwilling to do so. And it has only a few levers left to pull. The military one is the closest and most ready to hand.

As Martin Luther King Jr. said, “The US is the greatest purveyor of violence in the world”.

Like a drunk at the bar after the final call – drunk with power – Washington is determined to go out with a fight.

That fight could involve a nuclear first strike. Palestine has shown what it will try to get away with: brazen genocide with the whole world watching.

The issue is no longer war or peace in Ukraine. Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell sees Ukraine as a “unified field” of war with China. He revels in the possibility of a “magnificent symphony of death” in Asia.

The coda, of course, will be a deafening fermata of silence across the entire planet. Unless we stop this insane march to war.

(Geopolitical Economy)

https://orinocotribune.com/after-ukrain ... proxy-war/

******

Image

Xi Jinping: Chinese modernisation is unprecedented in both scale and difficulty
The following is a partial text of a speech given by Xi Jinping, General Secretary of the Central Committee (CC) of the Communist Party of China (CPC), on February 7, 2023, to newly-elected members and alternate members of the CPC CC and other senior party officials following the 20th party congress, held in October 2022, in which he expounds on the significance of the five distinctive features of Chinese modernisation put forward by the Congress.

As Xi Jinping notes, the path to modernisation a country chooses is determined by its historical traditions, social system, developmental conditions, and external environment, among other factors. To achieve modernisation, a country needs not only to follow the general laws governing this pursuit; more importantly, it needs to keep in mind its own realities and distinctive features.

Moreover, a sure path does not mean that there will be no challenges along the way to modernisation. To fully leverage the following five distinctive features of Chinese modernisation and turn them into unique strengths calls for arduous efforts.

Dealing with these five distinctive features in turn, Xi notes first that China’s is a modernisation of a huge population. Today, only more than 20 countries around the world, with a combined population of around one billion, have achieved modernisation. China is working to achieve modernisation for more than 1.4 billion people, more than the combined population of the world’s developed countries. This will largely reshape the landscape of global modernisation. Chinese modernisation is unprecedented in human history in terms of both scale and difficulty.

Second, it is the modernistion of common prosperity. “This is a defining feature of Chinese modernisation, and what distinguishes it from Western modernisation. The biggest problems with Western modernisation are that it is capital-centred rather than people-centred and that it seeks to maximise capital gains rather than serve the interests of the vast majority of the people. This has created a huge gap between the rich and the poor and led to severe polarisation.”

He also relates this to the so-called ‘middle-income trap’ that has plagued and derailed many developing countries:

“In their efforts to achieve modernisation, some developing countries once approached the developed country threshold only to fall into the ‘middle-income trap’ and become mired in prolonged stagnation, or even experience severe regression. A major cause for this is that these countries failed to solve the problems of polarisation and solidification of social strata.”

Third, it is the modernisation of material and cultural-ethical advancement. Material poverty is not socialism, nor is cultural impoverishment. An important cause of Western countries’ predicaments today is their failure to check greed, which is the nature of capital.

Fourth, is the modernisation of the harmony between humanity and nature. Western modernisation has typically involved a stage of wanton plundering of natural resources and destruction of the environment. While creating enormous material wealth, it has often caused serious problems such as environmental pollution and resource depletion. Whereas, in pursuing modernisation, China is committed to sustainable development.

Finally, it is the modernisation of peaceful development.

“Western modernisation was fraught with sanguineous crimes such as war, slave trade, colonisation, and plunder, which inflicted untold misery on developing countries. Having suffered from aggression, bullying, and humiliation by Western powers, we Chinese are keenly aware of the value of peace and will never follow the beaten path of the West… We should never oppress other nations or loot the wealth and resources of other countries in any form. Rather, we should provide support and assistance to other developing countries to the best of our ability.”

This speech extract was originally published in the Chinese language edition of the CPC theoretical journal, Qiushi (No. 16, 2023). This English language version is reproduced from Qiushi English Edition, No. 6, November-December 2023.
The path to modernization a country chooses is determined by its historical traditions, social systems, developmental conditions, and external environment, among other factors. As countries differ in their conditions, they may take different paths to modernization. As we have seen, to achieve modernization, a country needs not only to follow the general laws governing this pursuit; more importantly, it needs to keep in mind its own realities and distinctive features. Chinese modernization has features that are common to the modernization processes of all countries as well as features that are unique to the Chinese context. The Report to the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC) articulated the five distinctive features of Chinese modernization, profoundly capturing the essence of the concept. Both a theoretical summary and a guide to action, this offers a sure path for China to build itself into a great modern socialist country and achieve the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.

A sure path does not mean that there will be no challenges along the way to modernization. To fully leverage the following five distinctive features of Chinese modernization and turn them into unique strengths calls for arduous efforts.

First, the modernization of a huge population

This is a salient feature of Chinese modernization. As countries differ in population size, they face different tasks which vary in magnitude and complexity, and their paths of development and ways of advancement are necessarily different. Today, only more than 20 countries around the world, with a combined population of around one billion, have achieved modernization. China is working to achieve modernization for more than 1.4 billion people, more than the combined population of the world’s developed countries. This will largely reshape the landscape of global modernization. Chinese modernization is unprecedented in human history in terms of both scale and difficulty.

A huge population provides ample human resources and a vast market, but it also poses many problems and challenges. Ensuring that our more than 1.4 billion people are fed is a tough challenge to begin with, and there are other issues to be resolved, such as employment, income distribution, education, health care, housing, eldercare, and childcare. None of these issues can be easily solved and each of them involves an enormous number of people. When we are considering problems, making decisions, and taking actions, we need to keep in mind our population size as well as the gaps in development between urban and rural areas and between different regions. We should neither pursue grandiose goals nor stick to old ways. We need to be patient in advancing our course and take steady and incremental steps to sustain progress.

Second, the modernization of common prosperity

This is a defining feature of Chinese modernization, and what distinguishes it from Western modernization. The biggest problems with Western modernization are that it is capital-centered rather than people-centered and that it seeks to maximize capital gains rather than serve the interests of the vast majority of the people. This has created a huge gap between the rich and the poor and led to severe polarization. In their efforts to achieve modernization, some developing countries once approached the developed country threshold only to fall into the “middle-income trap” and become mired in prolonged stagnation, or even experience severe regression. A major cause for this is that these countries failed to solve the problems of polarization and solidification of social strata.

Chinese modernization aims to ensure that development is for the people and by the people and that its fruits are shared by the people. China has made important progress in promoting prosperity for all. Since the 18th CPC National Congress in 2012, we have won the critical battle against poverty and lifted close to 100 million rural people out of poverty. We have now developed a complete set of guidelines, principles, institutions, policies, and measures to deliver prosperity for all.

As we work to pursue high-quality development and strive to make the economic “pie” bigger, we need to make it better and share it more fairly, solving problems that affect people’s wellbeing in areas such as employment, income distribution, education, health care, housing, eldercare, and childcare. We need to create a complete system of institutions in which primary, secondary, and tertiary distribution is conducted in a mutually complementary way. We need to take more effective measures to regulate income distribution and wealth accumulation and conduct law-based regulation and guidance to promote the healthy development of capital. With these efforts, we can expand the middle-income group over time, narrow income disparities, and see that the benefits of modernization are shared equitably among all our people so that no polarization will occur. Achieving prosperity for all is a long-term mission, so we must make persistent efforts to deliver continued progress, and we must not stop until we reach our goal.

Third, the modernization of material and cultural-ethical advancement

Both material abundance and cultural-ethical enrichment are lofty features of Chinese modernization. Material poverty is not socialism, nor is cultural impoverishment. Western countries’ early pursuit of modernization only led to the accumulation of wealth, crises of faith, and insatiable material desires. An important cause of Western countries’ predicaments today is their failure to check greed, which is the nature of capital, and to resolve their deep-seated problems of rampant materialism and spiritual impoverishment.

Chinese modernization, in addition to creating abundant material wealth, also strives for cultural-ethical enrichment to boost our people’s confidence in Chinese values and culture. We must attach equal importance to material progress and cultural-ethical progress and ensure that the two reinforce each other and advance together. This will give our people an intellectual foundation to strive together in unity, initiative to break new ground, and values to pursue a healthier life. In response to the people’s growing cultural needs, we must develop socialist values that have the power to rally and inspire the people; foster ideals and convictions; heighten public understanding of the history of the CPC, the People’s Republic of China, reform and opening up, and the development of socialism; nurture and promote the core socialist values; and develop advanced socialist culture. We should encourage the creation of outstanding literary and artistic works, enrich people’s cultural lives, enhance public civility, and promote well-rounded personal development.

Fourth, the modernization of harmony between humanity and nature

Respecting, adapting to, and protecting nature and promoting harmony between humans and nature are distinctive features of Chinese modernization. Since the advent of modern times, Western modernization has typically involved a stage of wanton plundering of natural resources and destruction of the environment. While creating enormous material wealth, it has often caused serious problems such as environmental pollution and resource depletion. Because of its severe dearth of per capita share of energy and resources, China will face growing energy, resources, and environmental constraints as its development accelerates. This means that China cannot follow the beaten path of Western modernization.

In pursuing modernization, China is committed to sustainable development. Guided by the policy of giving priority to resource conservation, environmental protection, and letting nature restore itself, China consistently pursues sound development featuring improved production, higher living standards, and healthy ecosystems, thus opening up broad prospects for realizing the sustained development of the Chinese nation. We should embrace and act on the principle that lucid waters and lush mountains are invaluable assets and take well-coordinated steps to preserve and improve mountains, waters, forests, farmlands, grasslands, and deserts. We should prioritize ecological protection, conserve resources and use them efficiently, and pursue green and low-carbon development. We should accelerate the transition to a green development model, enhance the diversity, stability, and sustainability of our ecosystems, and work both actively and prudently toward the goals of achieving peak carbon emissions and carbon neutrality. We should enable high-quality development with high-quality ecosystems.

Fifth, the modernization of peaceful development

Adhering to the path of peaceful development, pursuing our own development as we safeguard world peace and development, better safeguarding world peace and development through our own development, and promoting the building of a global community of shared future are prominent features of Chinese modernization. Western modernization was fraught with sanguineous crimes such as war, slave trade, colonization, and plunder, which inflicted untold misery on developing countries. Having suffered from aggression, bullying, and humiliation by Western powers, we Chinese are keenly aware of the value of peace and will never follow the beaten path of the West.

In advancing Chinese modernization, we should maintain independence and rely on our own efforts. We should strengthen ourselves with the hard work and creativity of all our people and pursue development by boosting internal drivers and making peaceful use of external resources. We should never oppress other nations or loot the wealth and resources of other countries in any form. Rather, we should provide support and assistance to other developing countries to the best of our ability. We will always uphold peace, development, cooperation, and mutual benefit, follow a mutually beneficial strategy of opening up, and continue to create new opportunities for the world through China’s development. We should get actively involved in the reform and development of the global governance system, practice true multilateralism, champion the common values of humanity, pursue the Global Development Initiative and the Global Security Initiative, and endeavor to make greater contributions to world peace and development.

Since the founding of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, and particularly since the launch of reform and opening up in 1978, we have completed in a few decades the process of industrialization that took developed Western countries centuries to complete. We have achieved the miracles of rapid economic growth and enduring social stability, thus opening up bright prospects for the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. This shows that Chinese modernization works and that it is the only correct path to building a great country and rejuvenating the Chinese nation.

https://socialistchina.org/2024/03/08/x ... ifficulty/

Image

Understanding the role of the private sector in the Chinese economy
We are pleased to publish below the text of a speech by Dr Jenny Clegg at a public meeting in Manchester, Britain, organised by the Greater Manchester Morning Star Readers and Supporters Group. The title of the event was China and the Western Left, and it aimed to uncover the nature of China’s political economy and its role in the world. The other guest speaker was Friends of Socialist China co-editor Carlos Martinez.

Jenny’s speech seeks to explain the role of the private sector in the current phase of China’s development. Jenny lays the ground for understanding today’s domestic capitalist class by uncovering the role of the national bourgeoisie in the history of the Chinese Revolution, including in the massive strike wave of the 1920s, the United Front to resist Japanese invasion, and the period of rebuilding during the New Democracy phase between 1949 and 1956. Jenny posits that this group, while not always reliable, “had an anti-imperialist side” and furthermore “was prepared to accept CPC leadership in the right circumstances – something still influencing the CPC’s attitude to today’s private entrepreneurs.”

The speech explains the unusual nature of China’s socialist market economy, in which the public and private sectors have an essentially symbiotic relationship, and where the state maintains overall control.

“The majority of large-scale private enterprises are linked into the state through mixed-ownership arrangements, with the state investing and divesting to shape industrial growth according to overall plans… Around 40 percent of private entrepreneurs are Party members and around half of private enterprises have CPC cells organised within them. Over 40 percent of workplaces so far are unionised, more than twice the rate here in Britain.”

As such, “the relationship then between the socialist state and the private sector is one of unity in developing the economy as well as struggle to ensure public benefit.”

A member of our advisory group, Jenny is a retired academic and an activist in the anti-nuclear, peace and friendship movements. She is the author of China’s Global Strategy: Towards a Multipolar World, published by Pluto Press.
The major stumbling point for the Western Left in understanding China as a socialist country is the question of the growth in recent decades of market relations and the private sector. This question requires in the first place a consideration of the contribution that the domestic capitalist class made in China’s revolutionary process before getting some measure of the private economy in China today.

The historical role of the national bourgeoisie in the Chinese revolution
One hundred years ago – minus one year – in 1925, on May 30, a British officer ordered the police in the Shanghai British concession to open fire on Chinese protestors, killing at least nine of them. The protests were part of a mounting strike wave in which the Communist Party of China (CPC) – founded in 1921 – was very active, and the incident sparked some momentous developments as anti-imperialist feelings surged.

Ayear-long strike in Hong Kong, starting in 1925, dealt a great blow to British imperialism, which from its island base had extended its influence, becoming the leading imperialist power not only in China but across Southeast Asia. The fact that Chinese capitalists supported and funded the strike, showing they too had an anti-imperialist side, was a particular lesson for the CPC.

The Kuomintang (KMT), supported by the CPC in the first United Front, began to prepare its army for the Northern Expeditionwhich set off in 1926to overthrow the feudal warlords and imperialist rule. As it advanced, peasant associations spread like wildfire.

The British Tory government launched a 20,000 strong expeditionary force; and in due course cities along the Yangtze came under British bombardment.

And in Britain, Hands off China became the largest anti-imperialist movement during the General Strike.

The situation in China became highly radicalised as peasants’ moderate demands for rent reductions gave way to land seizures and workers took over the British concession in Wuhan. These developments caused KMT Nationalist army officers to take fright, and what followed was a brutal massacre of communists in Shanghai, ordered by KMT head Chiang Kai-shek. Too late, the remaining CPC activists formed their own Red Army but, failing to capture an urban base, retreated to the mountains to set up worker-peasant soviets.

Over the next ten years, the CPC carried out various land reform policies with limited success. It was Mao who recognised the Leftist errors thatfailed to take capital into account in implementing reforms to eradicate feudal relations. Taking corrective measures, following the Long March (1934-35), by the time the Japanese escalated its occupation of China in 1937, the CPC was ready to meet the new anti-imperialist upsurge by entering a second United Front of resistance with the KMT.

In the red base areas under its control, the CPC moderated its land reform policies, and the two-class Soviet strategy was replaced with a New Democratic alliance including the national bourgeoisie as well as the petty bourgeoisie.

These adjustment proved a great success: in the eight years to the defeat of Japan in 1945, the red bases grew from a population of one million to nearly 100 million people, almost a quarter of China, and the Red Army from 30,000 to 900,000.

New Democracy was to continue through the ensuing years of civil war (1945-49), the founding of the People’s Republic (1949), up to the 1956 transition to socialism.

In 1949, whilst others fled, some capitalists stayed on to make valuable contributions to China’s recovery. The fact that China was able to stabilise within three years to 1952 after a century of wars and economic ruin was truly remarkable.

Then in 1956, when private enterprises were nationalised, these former owners stayed on as managers, as Mao declared the contradiction with the national bourgeoisie, now antagonistic under socialism, was to be handled in non-antagonistic ways, that is by ideological struggle.

History thus shows the important role the nationalist capitalist class played in the Chinese revolution: if not always reliable, not only did it have an anti-imperialist side but it was prepared to accept CPC leadership in the right circumstances – something still influencing the CPC’s attitude to today’s private entrepreneurs.

Private sector growth under state sector predominance
Under Mao, and especially during the Cultural Revolution, capital was suppressed: resources had to be pooled to feedand clothe the impoverished population and to develop the industrial base.

By the 1970s, China was basically able to feed its people and had a more-or-less complete set of industries under state ownership. When normalisation with the US finally came in the late 1970s, China was able to move to a new stage of reform and opening up, proceeding not as in Russia with a big bang but step by step.

What Deng Xiaoping recognised was that socialism had to advance through stages, and that China was just at the primary stage in which markets and private ownership could play a positive role in socialising the productive forces, something that Engels stressed in distinguishing scientific from utopian socialism.

Over the last 40 years, millions of people have migrated from the countryside seeking jobs in the cities – and 80 percent of these jobs are provided by the private sector. The rural population has fallen from 80 percent to around 40 percent, whilst China’s working class has grown to 700 million. Over this period, China has been able to complete its goal of eradicating extreme poverty; life expectancy has increased 10 years; years of schooling have doubled; enrolment in higher education has shot up; and wages have doubled and doubled again.

In the last 20 years, private enterprises have quadrupled in number from 10 million to 40 million. These enterprises are dependent on the government for land, access to electricity and water, for contracts, subsidies, tax relief and above all finance from state-owned banks. Only 10 percent of business funds are raised on the stock market. Private enterprises then need the support of the state to succeed.

The vast majority of the 40 million private enterprises are small, medium-sized and household enterprises. Meanwhile state-owned enterprises make up nearly 80 percent of all large-scale enterprises. Defence, traditional energy, telecoms, aviation and railways are state-owned.

The majority of large-scale private enterprises are linked into the state through mixed-ownership arrangements, with the state investing and divesting to shape industrial growth according to overall plans.

Many private entrepreneurs have come up through the CPC. For example the managing director of Huawei started out in the Peoples Liberation Army and is on record as saying that if there were to be a conflict of interest, he would prioritise the Party before his business.

Around 40 percent of private entrepreneurs are Party members and around half of private enterprises have CPC cells organised within them. Over 40 percent of workplaces so far are unionised, more than twice the rate here in Britain.

There are around 600 billionaires – slightly fewer than the US. But in the showdown between Jack Ma of Alibaba and Xi Jinping in 2020, it was Xi who won with ease.

The private sector has grown exponentially and in growing the economy has also stimulated the strengthening of the state sector: the two have grown side by side, with public ownership remaining predominant. In 2017,this stood, relative to GDP, at around three times greater than any other country; last year the state sector produced 66 percent of GDP.

Looking to the future
When Deng Xiaoping called on some to get rich first he added “so that they can helpothers to catch up”. Now the richer coastal provinces are linking with poorer provinces to help them develop.

The new goal of common prosperity is to lift up to 400 million low-income people tomiddle income levels by 2035.

China is at a critical period in shifting from one set of economic pillars – cheap exports and iron and steel for urban construction – to a new set of economic pillars. All the talk now is about a new development phase featuring innovation, sustainability and high technologies, with rising skills and wages.

Critical to this upgrading is the question of finance: to tackle the buildup of debt in the system plus the fact that new innovating enterprises require large injections of capital to scale quickly.

China is aiming to build itself up as a financial power. This means reforms to financial markets, balancing between state and market through the use of state investment funds – like Blackrock but owned by the state.

Finance is to serve the real economy looking to the long term, unlike the short-termism of the speculative financial markets of the West. Deepening the financial sector will further assist in the gradual internationalisation of the RMB as part of the de-dollarisation trend.

On new technologies like AI and quantum computing, these clearly have huge potential, for example in improving health as well as tackling climate change, given the ability to crunch vast amounts of data. A core component of this issue is a race between the US and China to attain a military edge in the Taiwan Straits.

So finally, to address the Western Left I’d say:

First, understand that China is still a developing country. Average per capita income is a quarter of that of the UK and one sixth that of the US. Development problems, especially rural-urban inequality, are the underlying determinant in Chinese policy-making.

Second, Chinese socialism is still a work in progress. It’s not about changing everything all at once, it’s about working through stages in an ongoing process. Engels, contrasting scientific with utopian socialism, talks about subjugating the anarchic laws of capitalism to the social regulation of production according to a plan. This is what China is doing.

Thirdly, on the capitalist class, we need to understand that this is not an independent class but has been created by the state in such a way as to benefit public interests; and that it is not the leading class but is led – it accepts CPC direction under the primary stage of socialism insofar as this develops the national economy against imperialist monopolies.

The relationship then between the socialist state and the private sector is one of unity in developing the economy as well as struggle to ensure public benefit. As the CPC learnt from its own historical experience, when the interests of capital were not taken into consideration, when things got too radical under Leftist policies, things got in a mess; but when these interests were taken into account in fact the CPC made remarkable gains.

Lastly I’d say we cannot understand the world without understanding China’s rise. Consider the past: the four great inventions of paper, gunpowder, the compass and printing came from China and helped to lay the foundation for the industrial revolution in the 19th century; in the 20th century China’s revolution was to inspire other anti-colonial struggles around the world, laying the basis in principle of a completely new order of equal states; and in our lifetime consumer and electronic goods assembled in China have transformed the way we live.

As China becomes an advanced socialist state over the next 25 years, let’s think what impact this will have on us and the world.

https://socialistchina.org/2024/03/03/u ... e-economy/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10774
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Tue Mar 12, 2024 3:09 pm

Confident Dragon Lays Out Modernization Roadmap

Pepe Escobar

March 12, 2024

As Project Ukraine goes down the drain of history, Project Taiwan will go on overdrive. Forever Wars never die.

This is the Year of the Wooden Dragon, according to China’s classic wuxing (“five elements”) culture. The dragon, one of the 12 signs of the Chinese zodiac, is a symbol of power, nobility and intelligence. Wood adds growth, development and prosperity.

Call it a summary of where China is heading in 2024.

The second session of the 14th National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) was finalized on Sunday in Beijing.

The wider world should know that within the framework of grassroots democracy with Chinese characteristics, an extremely complex – and fascinating – phenomenon, the importance of the CPPCC is paramount.

The CPPCC channels wide-ranging expectations of the average Chinese to the decision level, and actually advises the central government on a vast range of issues – from everyday living to high-quality development strategies.

This year, most of the discussion focused on how to drive

China’s modernization even faster. This being China, concepts – like flowers – were blooming all around the spectrum, such as “new quality productive forces, “deepening reform,” “high-standard opening-up,” and a fabulous new one, “major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics.”

As the Global Times emphasized, “2024 is not only a critical year for achieving the goals of the ‘14th Five-Year Plan’ but also a key year for achieving the transition to high-quality development of the economy.”

Betting on strategic investment

So let’s start with Chinese Premier Li Qiang’s first “work report” delivered a week ago, which opened the annual session of the National People’s Congress. The key takeaway: Beijing will be pursuing the same economic targets as in 2023. That translates as 5% annual growth.

Of course deflationary risks, a downturn in the real estate market and somewhat shaky business confidence simply won’t vanish. Li was quite realistic, emphasizing Beijing is “keenly aware” of the challenges ahead: “Achieving this year’s targets will not be easy.” And he added: “Global economic growth lacks steam and the regional hotspot issues keep erupting. This has made China’s external environment more complex, severe and uncertain.”

Beijing’s strategy remains focused on a “proactive fiscal policy and prudent monetary policy”. In a nutshell: the song remains the same. There won’t be a “stimulus” of any kind.

Deeper answers should be found in the work report/budget released by the National Development and Reform Commission: the focus will be on structural change, via extra funds to science, technology, education, national defense, agriculture. Translation: China bets on strategic investment, the key for a high-quality economic transition.

In practice, Beijing will be heavily invested in modernizing industry and developing “new quality productive forces” such as new-energy vehicles, biomanufacturing and commercial space flight.

Science Minister Yin Hejun made it clear: there was an 8.1% increase in national investment in research and development in 2023. He wants more – and he will get it: R&D spending will grow by 10% to a total of 370.8 billion yuan.

The mantra is “self-reliance”. On all fronts – from chipmaking to AI. A no holds barred tech war is on – and China is totally focused to counter “tech containment” from the Hegemon as much as its ultimate goal is to wrest tech supremacy from its prime competitor. Beijing simply cannot allow itself to be vulnerable to U.S.-imposed tech choke points and supply chain disruptions.

So short-term economic problems will not be causing sleepless nights. The Beijing leadership is always looking ahead – focusing on long-term challenges.

Learning lessons from the Donbass battlefield

Beijing will continue to steer the economic development of Hong Kong and Macau, and invest even more in the crucial Greater Bay Area, which is the premier southern China high tech, services and finance hub.

Taiwan of course was central to the work report; Beijing fiercely opposes “external interference” – code for Hegemon tactics. That will become even trickier in May, when William Lai Ching-te, who flirts with independence, becomes president.

On defense, there will be only a 7.2% increase in 2024, which is peanuts compared to the Hegemon’s defense budget now approaching $900 billion: China’s stands as $238 billion, even as China’s nominal GDP is approaching the U.S.

A great deal of China’s defense budget will go for emerging tech – considering the immensely valuables lessons the PLA is learning out of the Donbass battlefield, as well as the deep interactions part of the Russia-China strategic partnership.

And that brings us to diplomacy. China will continue to be firmly positioned as a champion of the Global South. That was made explicit by Foreign Minister Wang Yi in a press conference on the sidelines of the National People’s Congress.

Wang Yi’s priorities: to “maintain stable relations with major powers; join hands with its neighbouring countries for progress; and strive for revitalisation with the Global South”.

Wang Yi once again stressed that Beijing favors an “equal and orderly” multipolar world and “inclusive economic globalization”.

And of course he could not allow U.S. Secretary of State Little Blinken – always out of his depth – to get away with his latest “recipe”: “It is impermissible that those with the bigger fist have the final say, and it is definitely unacceptable that certain countries must be at the table while others can only be on the menu.”

BRI as a global accelerator

Crucially, Wang Yi re-emphasized the drive for “high-quality” cooperation within the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) framework. He defined BRI as “an engine for the common development of all countries and an accelerator for the modernisation of the whole world”. Wang Yi actually said he’s hopeful about the emergence of a “Global South moment in global governance” – in which China and BRI play an essential part.

Li Qiang’s work report, incidentally, had only one paragraph on BRI. But then we find this nugget as Li refers to the New International Land-Sea Trade Corridor – which links China’s landlocked southwest with the eastern seaboard, via Guangxi province.

Translation: BRI will be focusing on opening new economic roads for China’s less developed regions, diversifying from the previous emphasis on Xinjiang.

Dr Wei Yuansong is a member of the CPPCC and also the Chinese Peasants’ and Workers’ Democratic Party – which happens to be one of the eight non-CCP parties in Chinese politics (very few outside of China know about this).

He offered some fascinating comments on BRI to Fengmian News and also stressed the need to “tell China’s story well” to avoid “conflict and incidents” along the BRI road. For that, Wei suggests the need to use an “international language” in telling these stories; that implies using English.

As for what Wang Yi said in his press conference, in fact that was discussed in detail at the closed-door Central Conference on Foreign Affairs Work in late 2023, where it was established that China faced “strategic opportunities” to raise its “international influence, appeal and power” despite “high winds and choppy waters”.

The key takeaway: the narrative war between China and the Hegemon will be pitiless. Beijing is confident it’s capable of offering stability, investment, connectivity and sound diplomacy to the whole Global South, instead of Forever Wars.

That is reflected, for instance, by Ma Xinmin, the Chinese Foreign Ministry’s legal advisor, telling the International Court of Justice that the Palestinians have the right to armed resistance when it comes to fighting the colonialist, racist, apartheid state of Israel. Therefore, Hamas cannot be defined as a terrorist organization.

This is the overwhelming position across the lands of Islam and across the majority of the Global South – linking Beijing with fellow BRICS member Brazil and President Lula, who compared the genocide in Gaza to the Nazi genocide in WWII.

How to resist collective West sanctions

The Two Sessions did reflect Beijing’s full understanding that Hegemon containment and destabilization tactics remain the biggest challenge to China’s peaceful rise. But simultaneously it reflected Chinese confidence on its global diplomatic clout as a force for peace, stability and economic development. It’s an extremely sensitive balance that only the Middle Kingdom seems capable of pulling off.

Then there’s the Trump factor.

Economist Ding Yifan, a former deputy director of the World Development Institute, part of the State Council’s Development Research Centre, is one among those who’s aware China is learning key lessons from Russia on how to resist collective West sanctions – which will be inevitable against China especially if Trump is back at the White House.

And that brings us to the absolute key issue being currently discussed in Moscow, within the Russia-China partnership, and soon among the BRICS: alternative settlement payments to the U.S. dollar, increasing trade among “friendly nations”, and controls on capital flight.

Nearly all Russia-China trade is now in yuan and rubles. As much as Russian trade with the EU fell by 68% in 2023, trade with Asia rose by 5.6% – with new landmarks reached with China ($240 billion) and India ($65 billion) – and 84% of

Russia’s total energy exports going to “friendly countries”.

The Two Sessions did not get into detail on some extremely thorny geopolitical issues. For instance, India’s version of multipolarity – considering New Delhi’s unresolved love affair with Washington – is quite different from China’s. Everyone knows – and no one more than the Russians – that within BRICS 10 the biggest strategic issue is how to accommodate the perpetual tension between India and China.

What’s clear even behind the fog of goodwill enveloping the Two Sessions is that Beijing is fully aware of how the Hegemon is – deliberately – already crossing a key Chinese red line, officially stationing “permanent troops” in Taiwan.

Since last year U.S. Special Forces have been training Taiwanese in operating Black Hornet nano microdrones. In 2024 U.S. military advisers are deployed full time at army bases on Kinmen and Penghu islands.

Those actually driving U.S. foreign policy behind the Crash Test Dummy at the White House believe that even as they are powerless to handle the Houthi Ansarallah in the Red Sea, they are capable of poking the Dragon.

No posturing will alter the Dragon’s roadmap. The CPPCC’s political resolution on Taiwan calls for uniting “all patriotic forces”, “deepen integration and development in various fields across the Taiwan Straits”, and go all out on “peaceful reunification”. That will translate in practice into increased economic/trade cooperation, more direct flights, more cargo ports and logistics bases.

As Project Ukraine goes down the drain of history, Project Taiwan will go on overdrive. Forever Wars never die. Bring it on. The Dragon is ready.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2024/ ... n-roadmap/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10774
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Mon Mar 18, 2024 6:16 pm

What Is China’s Future? Economic Decline, or the Next Industrial Revolution?
Posted on March 16, 2024 by Yves Smith

Yves here. As readers know well, there is a big industry of China economic prospect-doubters and worry warts. Even though a China crisis or very protracted rough patch has been vastly over-predicted, it is still true that China’s growth has been overly dependent on a simply stunning level of real estate investment, and that can’t continue. There has already been a significant correction in values with is alleged to be dinging consumer demand (negative wealth effect) and had the potential to become deflationary.

Radhika Desai, Michael Hudson and Richard Dunford give their views of China’s economic prospects.

Originally published at Geopolitical Economy Report



Please see Geopolitical Economy for a version of the transcript with the charts from the talk embedded.

Political economists Radhika Desai and Michael Hudson are joined by Beijing-based scholar Mick Dunford to discuss what is actually happening in China’s economy, explaining its technological development and transition toward a new industrial revolution.

RADHIKA DESAI: Hello and welcome to the 24th Geopolitical Economy Hour, the show that examines the fast-changing political and geopolitical economy of our time. I’m Radhika Desai.

MICHAEL HUDSON: I’m Michael Hudson.

RADHIKA DESAI: And working behind the scenes to bring you our show every fortnight are our host, Ben Norton, our videographer, Paul Graham, and our transcriber, Zach Weiser.

And with us today, we have, once again, Professor Mick Dunford, Professor Emeritus of Geography at Sussex University and now working at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, keeping a close watch, among other things, on China’s economy. So, welcome, Mick.

MICK DUNFORD: Thank you very much.

RADHIKA DESAI: So, China’s economy is what we’re going to talk about today. Where is it at after decades of breakneck growth, after executing the greatest industrial revolution ever? Where is it headed?

Trying to understand this is not easy. The disinformation that is fake news and even what I often call fake scholarship that distorts the view that any honest person may be trying to take on China’s economy is simply overwhelming. It’s absolutely wall-to-wall propaganda, no matter which Western publication or website you open.

If we are to believe the Western press and the leading scholarly lights of the West, who are the major generators of the Western discourse on China, we are at peak China. That is to say, they claim that China has reached a point, reached the highest point, that is, that it ever can. And from here on, it’s only going to be downhill, more or less rapidly. They say that China has, in recent years, inflated a huge property bubble to compensate for the West’s inability to keep up imports. And this bubble is about to burst. And when it does, it will subject China to a 1980s and 1990s Japan-style long-term deflation or secular stagnation. They have even invented a word to talk about this, Japanification. We are told that the Japanification of China’s economy is impending.

They say that the U.S.’s trade and technology wars are hitting China where it hurts the most, at its export and its reliance on inward foreign investment. They are saying that China has grown only by stealing technology. And now that the U.S. is making it harder for it to do so, its technological development can only stall. They are saying that China followed disastrous COVID-19 policies, leading to mass death, draconian lockdowns, and economic disaster. They are saying that China over-invests, and its growth will not pick up unless China now permits higher consumption levels. They are saying that China has a serious unemployment crisis, that the CPC, the Communist Party of China, is losing legitimacy, because it is failing to deliver ever-higher living standards. And they are saying that Xi Jinping’s authoritarian leadership is ensuring that the private sector will stall, and with it, so will China’s growth.

All this, they say, before even beginning to talk about China’s foreign policy. And there, of course, lie another long litany of alleged disasters and misdemeanors that China is responsible for, beginning with debt-trap diplomacy and China’s allegedly voracious appetite for the world’s resources. The only reason why Western experts ever stress the strength of China’s economy is when they want to argue that the West must redouble its efforts to contain China and to stall its rise.

So today, we’re going to take a closer look at China’s economy, and in doing so, we’re going to bust a lot of these myths. We’re going to show you that, sadly, for the purveyors of the fake news and fake scholarship about China, no amount of their huffing and puffing has been able to blow down China’s house, because, like the good, the smart little pig, China is actually building its house with bricks. So, we have a number of topics to discuss in this show. Here they are. Sorry, let me just share my screen. So, these are the topics that we hope to discuss. We want to begin by talking about how to characterize China’s economy. Is it capitalist? Is it socialist? Then we will do the most important and primary basic thing. We will look at the growth story with some statistics. We will then look at China’s COVID response. We will look at the alleged debt and property bubble and whether China is being Japanified. Then we will look at the issue of whether China is overinvesting and neglecting consumption and living standards, etc. How reliant is China on exports? What is China’s growth strategy? And what is China’s foreign policy? And are those myths about it true? So, this is what we hope to discuss.

So, Mick, why don’t you start us off with your thoughts on exactly how to characterize China’s economy?

MICK DUNFORD: Okay. I mean, the way I would characterize China is as a planned rational state. I mean, right the way through, it has maintained a system of national five-year planning and it also produces longer-term plans. But it’s a planned rational state that uses market instruments.

China has a very large state sector. And of course, some people have claimed that this state sector is, in a sense, an impediment to growth. And we’ve seen a resurrection of this idea, guo jin min tui (国进民退), which is used to refer to the idea that the state sector is advancing and the private sector is retreating. It’s a very, very strange concept, in fact, because the third word is min (民), and min refers to people. So, what they are actually, in a sense, saying – these ideas were invented by neoliberal economists in 2002 – the private sector is equated with the people, which I find absolutely astonishing. But, I mean, the country does have a very significant public sector.

What I find striking is that one can actually turn it around and say, what is it that these Western economists seem to think China should do? And they seem to think that China should privatize all assets into the hands of domestic and foreign capitalists. It should remove capital controls. It should open the door to foreign finance capital. It should transfer governance to liberal capitalist political parties that are actually controlled by capital.

I think one of the most fundamental features of the China system is actually that it’s the state that controls capital rather than capital that controls the state. And it’s, in fact, this aspect of the Chinese model, and in particular, the rule of the Chinese Communist Party that has basically transformed China from what was, effectively one of the poorest countries in the world into one of its largest industrial powers. So, in a way, it’s a planned rational state in which the CPC has played an absolutely fundamental role. And without it, I mean, China would never have established the national sovereignty that permitted it to choose a path that suited its conditions and to radically transform the lives and livelihoods of its people.

RADHIKA DESAI: Michael, do you want to?

MICHAEL HUDSON: The question is, what is the state? There are two aspects of the state with China. One is public infrastructure. And the purpose of China’s public infrastructure is to lower the cost of doing business because infrastructure is a monopoly. That’s what really upsets the American investors. They wanted to buy the phone system, the transportation system, so that they could benefit from charging monopoly rents, just like under Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.

The most important sector that China’s treated in the public is money creation and banks. Americans hope that American banks would come over and they would be making all the loans in China and benefiting from China’s growth and turning it into interest. And instead, the government’s doing that. And the government is deciding what to lend to.

And there’s a third aspect of what people think of when they say state. That’s a centralized economy, centralized planning, Soviet style. China is one of the least centralized economies in the world because the central government has left the localities to go their own way. That’s part of the Hundred Flowers Bloom. Let’s see how each locality is going to maneuver on a pragmatic, ad hoc basis. Well, the pragmatic ad hoc basis meant how are localities, villages, and small towns going to finance their budgets? Well, they financed it by real estate sales, and that’s going to be what we’re discussing later. But once you realize that the state sector is so different from what a state sector is in America, centralized planning and the control of Wall Street for financial purposes, finance capitalism, hyper-centralized planning, you realize that China is the antithesis of what the usual view is.

RADHIKA DESAI: Absolutely. And I’d just like to add a few points, which dovetail very nicely with what both of you have said. I mean, the fact of the matter is that this was also true of the Soviet Union and the Eastern European countries when they were still ruled by communist parties. We generally refer to them as socialist or communist, but in reality, they themselves never claimed to be socialist or communist. They only said they were building socialism, especially in a country that was as poor as China was in 1949. The leadership of the Chinese Communist Party has always understood that there has to be a long period of transition in which there will be a complex set of compromises that will have to be made in order to steer the economy in the direction of socialism, in order to build socialism. So, from its beginnings, the revolutionary state in China was a multi-class state and a multi-party state. People don’t realize very often that while the Chinese Communist Party is the overwhelmingly most powerful party in China, there are other parties that exist as well, which reflect the originally multi-class character of China.

Now, it’s true that since 1978, the government has loosened much of its control over the economy. But the important thing here is that the Communist Party retains control of the Chinese state. The way I like to put it is, yes, there are lots of capitalists in China. Yes, those capitalists are very powerful. They are at the head of some of the biggest corporations in the world, and they are quite influential within the Communist Party. But what makes China meaningfully socialist or meaningfully treading the path to socialism, let’s put it that way, is the fact that ultimately the reins of power are held in the hands of the Communist Party of China leadership, which owes its legitimacy to the people of China rather than to the… So, the reigns of power, the reigns of state power are not held by the capitalists, they are held by the Communist Party leadership.

So, in that sense, I would say that China is meaningfully socialist, although, as Mick pointed out, there is a fairly large private sector in China, but so is the state sector very large. And the extent of state ownership means that even though the private sector is very large, the state retains control over the overall pace and pattern of growth and development in the country.

And I just add one final thing here, which is going to become quite important as we discuss the various other points, and that is that the financial sector in China remains very heavily controlled by the state. China has capital controls, China practices a fair degree of financial repression, and China’s financial system is geared to providing money for long-term investments that improve the productive capacities of the economy and the material welfare of the people. And this is completely different from the kind of financial sector we have today.

So, Mick or Michael, did you want to add anything?

MICHAEL HUDSON: No, no.

MICK DUNFORD: I mean, just to reiterate, I mean, the point is, the government sets strategic targets that relate to raising the quality of the life of all the Chinese people. And it has strategic autonomy, which gives China the opportunity or the possibility of actually choosing its own development path. And I think that’s something that very strikingly marks China out from other parts of the Global South that have had much greater difficulty, in a sense, in accelerating their growth, partly because of debt and their subordination, to the Washington financial institutions. So I think that is critically important, the role of sovereignty and autonomy in enabling China to make choices that suited its conditions, and at the same time making choices that are driven by a long-term strategic goal to transform the quality of the lives of all Chinese people.

MICHAEL HUDSON: I want to put in one word about sovereignty. You put your finger on it. That’s really what makes it different. What makes other countries lose their sovereignty is when they let go, how are they going to finance their investment? If they let foreign banks come in to finance their investment, if they let American and European banks come in, what do they do? They fund a real estate bubble, a different kind of a real estate bubble. They fund takeover loans. They fund privatization. Banks don’t make loans for new investment. China makes great money to finance new tangible investment. Banks make money so you can buy a public utility or a railroad and then just load it down with debt, and you can borrow and borrow and use the money that you borrow to pay a special dividend if you’re a private capital company. Pretty soon, the country that follows this dependency on foreign credit ends up losing its sovereignty. The way in which China has protected its sovereignty is to keep money in the public domain and to create money for actual tangible capital investment, not to take your property into a property-owning rentier class, largely foreign-owned.

RADHIKA DESAI: Thank you. Those are very important points. Thank you.

I’d just like to add one final point on the matter of how to characterize the Chinese economy and the Chinese state. At the end of the day, it’s not just important to say that the state controls the economy, but whose state is it? The way to look at it as well is that in the United States, essentially we have a state that is controlled by the big corporations, which in our time have become exceedingly financialized corporations, so that they are directing the United States economy essentially towards ever more debt and ever less production, whereas that is not the case in China.

And the question of whose state it is makes use of the word autonomy. The autonomy refers to the fact that it is not subservient to any one section of society, but seeks to achieve the welfare of society as a whole and increase its productive capacity.

MICK DUNFORD: If I may just add, I think also it’s important that you pay attention to the policy-making process in China. It’s an example of what one might call substantive democracy. It delivers substantive results for the whole of the Chinese population. In that sense, it delivers improvements in the quality of the lives of all the people, and therefore, in a sense, it’s a democratic system. But it’s also a country that actually has procedures of policy-making, experimentation, design, and choice and so on that are extremely important and that have fundamental aspects of democracy about them.

When Western countries characterize China as authoritarian, they’re actually fundamentally misrepresenting the character of the Chinese system and the way in which it works, because they, in a sense, merely equate democracy with a system, whereas China, of course, does have multiple political parties, but a system with competitive elections between different political parties. There are other models of democracy, and China is another model of democracy.

(More at link. Very good)

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2024/03 ... ution.html
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10774
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Sat Mar 30, 2024 2:49 pm

Image

Cyberattack allegations: smoke and mirrors instead of truth
In the following brief article for the Morning Star, Carlos Martinez scrutinises the British government’s recent claim that China is engaged in “malicious” cyber activities directed against the UK.

While these allegations are being led by fanatically anti-China Tory MPs such as Iain Duncan Smith, the article notes that Starmer’s Labour Party has also been quick to jump on the bandwagon, with shadow foreign secretary David Lammy promising that a Labour government would put a stop to Chinese cyberattacks by “working with Nato allies to develop new measures designed to protect our democratic values, institutions and open societies”. Carlos comments: “Lammy perhaps missed the irony of lauding Nato’s ‘democratic values’ on the 25th anniversary of that organisation’s criminal bombing campaign against Yugoslavia.”

The slanders about Chinese cyberattacks “contribute to anti-China hysteria, thereby building public support for Britain’s role in a reckless US-led new cold war.” Carlos concludes:

There is no benefit to the British working class of joining in with the new cold war. China does not pose a threat to us. China’s proposal is for mutual respect and non-interference; an economic relationship based on mutual benefit; and for close co-operation on the central issues of our era: climate change, pandemics, peace and development. This is a vision worthy of our support.
On Monday March 25 2024, in an obviously co-ordinated move, the US, UK, New Zealand and Australia accused the Chinese government of backing cyberattacks in order to gather data and undermine Western democracy. On top of their unproven allegations, these countries announced the introduction of new sanctions against China.

Claiming that China was engaged in “malicious” cyber campaigns against MPs, and that it was responsible for a cyberattack on the UK Electoral Commission between August 2021 and October 2022, Deputy PM Oliver Dowden announced: “The UK will not tolerate malicious cyber activity. It is an absolute priority for the UK government to protect our democratic system and values.”

The accusations were led by members of the viscerally anti-China Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC), the ostensible purpose of which is to “counter the threats posed by the Chinese Communist Party to democratic principles.”

IPAC lists its funding sources as the Open Society Foundations, the National Endowment for Democracy and the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy, which should give readers some idea as to its ideological orientation.

Its most prominent British member is Tory MP Iain Duncan Smith, a notoriously fanatical China hawk, who talks often about the “terrible genocide in Xinjiang,” while simultaneously defending Israel’s actual genocide in Gaza. In short, he is an utter reactionary, albeit not a terribly bright one — his rambling utterances bring to mind Marx’s quip about the “British Parliament, which no one will reproach with being excessively endowed with genius.”

His Majesty’s Loyal Opposition was eager to show the ruling class that its foreign policy is every bit as absurd as that of the Tories. Writing in the Mirror on Monday, shadow foreign secretary David Lammy stated: “The wave of cyber-attacks against British politicians and the hack of 40 million voters’ data is chilling. One country, China, is responsible.”

He promised that, if elected, “Labour will work with Nato allies to develop new measures designed to protect our democratic values, institutions and open societies.”

Lammy perhaps missed the irony of lauding Nato’s “democratic values” on the 25th anniversary of that organisation’s criminal bombing campaign against Yugoslavia.

Needless to say, the government singularly failed to back up its accusations with meaningful evidence. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian commented quite reasonably that “there should be comprehensive and objective evidence, rather than slandering other countries without any factual support.”

He added: “China firmly opposes and combats all kinds of cyberattacks, and is committed to working with all countries, on the basis of mutual respect, equality and mutual benefit, to strengthen co-operation and jointly deal with the threats of cybersecurity through channels such as bilateral dialogue or judicial assistance.”

He further affirmed that “the evidence provided by the British side was inadequate and relevant conclusions lack professionalism,” and noted that the US, Britain and their allies themselves have a long history of cyberattacks and espionage against China.

He called on the US and Britain to “stop politicising cybersecurity issues, stop smearing China and imposing unilateral sanctions on China, and stop cyberattacks against China.”

A statement issued by the Chinese embassy in London branded Britain’s accusations “completely unfounded and malicious slander,” adding that “China has always adhered to the principle of non-interference in each other’s internal affairs.”

The embassy statement observed drily that: “whether the British government is good or bad, the British people will come to a conclusion sooner or later.”

Of course, the key purpose of these latest slanders is to contribute to anti-China hysteria, thereby building public support for Britain’s role in a reckless US-led new cold war.

An editorial in the Global Times pointed out that Britain’s shift away from a “golden era” of relations with China towards a position of hostility coincides with an increased economic and political dependence on the US in the aftermath of Brexit.

“It seems that the only way for Britain to secure its position in the ‘co-pilot’ seat is by closely aligning with the US and causing trouble for China.” Issuing slanders against China is simply an example of “deliberately stoking fear to advance their political agendas and achieve their political goals.”

An additional incentive for Britain in painting China as a security threat is to promote protectionism, for example in relation to Chinese-made electric vehicles — which are well known to be both cheaper and better than their European and North American counterparts, and could help meet Britain’s stated environmental objectives.

There is no benefit to the British working class of joining in with the new cold war. China does not pose a threat to us. China’s proposal is for mutual respect and non-interference; an economic relationship based on mutual benefit; and for close co-operation on the central issues of our era: climate change, pandemics, peace and development.

This is a vision worthy of our support.

https://socialistchina.org/2024/03/29/c ... -of-truth/

Image

Britain issues malicious and groundless accusations about Chinese cyberattacks
On Monday 25 March 2024, in an obviously coordinated move, the US, UK, New Zealand and Australia expressed concerns over Chinese cyber-hacking, which they claim is being leveraged by the PRC government to gather data and undermine Western democracy. On top of their unproven allegations, these countries announced the introduction of new unilateral sanctions against China.

In Britain, the charges were led by members of the viscerally anti-China Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC), the ostensible purpose of which is to “counter the threats posed by the Chinese Communist Party to democratic principles”. IPAC lists its funding sources as the Open Society Foundations, the National Endowment for Democracy and the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy, which should give readers some idea as to its ideological orientation.

Unfortunately the two major British political parties are equally enthusiastic about waging a propaganda war against China. Writing in the Mirror of 25 March 2024, shadow foreign secretary David Lammy stated: “The wave of cyber-attacks against British politicians and the hack of 40 million voters’ data is chilling. One country, China, is responsible.” He promised that, if elected, “Labour will work with NATO allies to develop new measures designed to protect our democratic values, institutions and open societies.”

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian responded that “China firmly opposes and combats all kinds of cyberattacks, and is committed to working with all countries, on the basis of mutual respect, equality and mutual benefit, to strengthen cooperation and jointly deal with the threats of cybersecurity through channels such as bilateral dialogue or judicial assistance.”

He further affirmed that “the evidence provided by the British side was inadequate and relevant conclusions lack professionalism”, and noted that the US, Britain and their allies have a long history of cyberattacks and espionage against China. He called on the US and Britain to “stop politicising cybersecurity issues, stop smearing China and imposing unilateral sanctions on China, and stop cyberattacks against China.”

A statement issued by the Chinese Embassy in the UK noted that “China has always adhered to the principle of non-interference in each other’s internal affairs”, adding drily that “whether the British government is good or bad, the British people will come to a conclusion sooner or later.”

An editorial in the Global Times pointed out that Britain’s shift away from a ‘golden era’ of relations with China towards a position of hostility coincides with a post-Brexit economic decline and corresponding increased dependence on the US. “It seems that the only way for Britain to secure its position in the ‘co-pilot’ seat is by closely aligning with the US and causing trouble for China.” Issuing slanders against China is simply an example of “deliberately stoking fear to advance their political agendas and achieve their political goals.”

A further Global Times report points to another incentive for Britain in painting China as a security threat: it paves the way for protectionism, for example in relation to Chinese-made electric vehicles and telecommunications infrastructure.

The Chinese Embassy statement and the two Global Times reports are reproduced below.
The Chinese Embassy in the UK issues statement to strongly condemn the UK side’s groundless accusation

On 25 March, the UK government made the groundless accusation that China had carried out cyberattacks against the UK, and announced sanctions on two Chinese individuals and one Chinese entity. In response to this, the Chinese Embassy in the UK issued a statement, strongly condemning the UK’s sinister action. The statement reads as follows:

The UK’s claim that China was responsible for malicious cyber campaigns targeting the UK is completely unfounded and constitutes malicious slander. We firmly oppose and strongly condemn this and have made a serious démarche to the UK side.

China is a major victim of cyberattacks. We have firmly fought and stopped all kinds of malicious cyber activities in accordance with the law, and have never encouraged, supported or condoned cyberattacks. The UK’s hype-up of the so-called “Chinese cyber attacks” without basis and the announcement of sanctions is outright political manipulation and malicious slander.

China has always adhered to the principle of non-interference in each other’s internal affairs. We have no interest or need to meddle in the UK’s internal affairs. Whether the British government is good or bad, the British people will come to a conclusion sooner or later.

The UK falsely accused China of attempting to interfere with UK democracy. This is nothing more than a publicity stunt. This is also a typical example of a thief crying “catch thief”.

China has always stood against illegal unilateral sanctions and will make a justified and necessary response to this.

We strongly urge the UK to immediately stop spreading false information about China, stop such self-staged, anti-China farces, and refrain from going further down the wrong path that leads only to failure.

The UK has scripted a big ‘China threat’ farce this time
London’s concerns about the “China threat” are increasingly veering toward absurdity. On Monday, British Deputy Prime Minister Oliver Dowden publicly accused China in parliament, alleging that “China state-affiliated actors” were involved in two cyberattacks targeting British democratic institutions and lawmakers. He also announced sanctions on two individuals and one company. Some British media outlets claimed that China obtained personal details of 40 million voters. Dowden also mentioned that statements of support from the US and other allies were expected later in the day. This may be the start of yet another collective attempt by the West to smear China.

Previously, in reports by British media, the widespread attention to “the disappearance of Kate Middleton” globally has also been linked to China. An article in The Telegraph, a British newspaper, without providing any evidence, claimed that “China and Russia are fueling disinformation to destabilize the nation” by spreading negative information about the British royal family. From stealing personal information of 40 million voters and deliberately undermining British democracy, to sensationalizing news about Kate Middleton and affecting the reputation of the British royal family and national security, it seems as though China has endless designs on the UK, doing nothing else all day but targeting the UK. This symptom of paranoia deserves a severe diagnosis.

In recent years, the UK has become one of the most enthusiastic countries in the West to hype up the “Chinese spies” and “China threat.” Chinese-made cameras have been banned under suspicion of being “spy cameras,” Chinese-made electric cars are labeled as “four-wheeled Trojan horses” monitoring British citizens for Beijing, and even Hong Kong laundry workers with a long hiring history in the British navy have been dismissed due to alleged “spy risks.” The bizarre accusations from the UK about “Chinese spies” and “China threats” are sufficient to compile into a comprehensive “paranoia casebook.”

From what we can see now, London seems somewhat intoxicated with this absurd farce and delusion, even embracing it, charging headlong into absurdity, and even treating it as a lever to enhance its “global influence.” As is well-known, post-Brexit Britain has stumbled economically and lost some visibility in diplomacy. In order to assert its position as a core member within the Western camp, it seems that the only way to secure its position in the “co-pilot” seat is by closely aligning with the US and causing trouble for China.

In fact, it is not China but the UK that is focused on causing disruption and infiltration. China has previously reported a case where the British Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) used the head of a foreign consulting firm to gather intelligence related to China for the British side and look for individuals to be recruited by the MI6. British media have also reported that agencies like MI6 have advertised to recruit Chinese-speaking individuals for intelligence activities. This is why some British politicians are so sensitive and fearful of so-called Chinese infiltration and influence; it’s a projection of their own thoughts and actions.

Regarding cyberattacks and cyber espionage, as the spokesperson of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs has stated, the issue of tracing the origins of cyberattacks is highly complex and sensitive. When investigating and determining cyber events, there should be sufficient objective evidence rather than baselessly smearing other countries, and cybersecurity issues should not be politicized. British politicians and media have repeatedly thrown out unverified or even deliberately distorted information, clearly not aiming to seek the truth.

The so-called “Chinese spies” and “China threat” are nothing but the paranoia of some anti-China extremist politicians hijacking the entire country. They deliberately stoke fear of China to advance their political agendas and achieve their political goals. On one hand, by hyping up the idea of “Chinese spies” and “China threat,” they cover up their failures in addressing domestic issues in the UK and divert public attention. On the other hand, there are those who simply do not want good relations between China and the UK. Just as China-UK relations were beginning to show signs of dialogue last year, suddenly there emerged a groundless case of the arrest of a parliamentary researcher as a spy, intentionally causing trouble for bilateral relations.

Regarding the recent British hype about Chinese “cyberattacks” affecting 40 million voters, an important background highlighted in British media reports is the upcoming general election in the UK later this year. By using such attention-grabbing numbers to stir up fear of foreign interference, it’s essentially scaring themselves, showing a lack of confidence in their democratic system. A previous poll showed that 43 percent of respondents believed that the UK was “in decline,” with only 6 percent believing that the UK’s political system was functioning well. If they are genuinely concerned about their democratic system being undermined, what Britain should do is not to go around with a loudspeaker looking for enemies but to earnestly search for and address their own problems. The enemy is not outside, and certainly not China.

UK hypes ‘China’s cyber-attacks,’ as electoral politics drives blame shifting
The recent briefings run British politicians have started a new round of “China threat” hype with the focus on cybersecurity, a smear campaign not deviant from their long-term anti-China stance but intensified by the upcoming general election

, Chinese observers said on Monday. Deputy Prime Minister Oliver Dowden is set to inform parliament on Monday that Beijing is behind a wave of cyber attacks against members of parliament (MPs) and peers, as well as accessing the personal details of 40 million voters in a hack on the Electoral Commission last year, Sky News reported.Parliament’s director of security Alison Giles has convened a briefing with the attendance of a small group of China hawks, including former Conservative leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith, the former minister Tim Loughton, the crossbench peer Lord Alton and the SNP MP Stewart McDonald, the Times reported.The four are members of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC), a cross-country anti-China coalition formed in 2020 that was derided as a

contemporary era “Eight-Nation Alliance” invasion force. https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202006/1190730.shtml

Foreign Secretary Lord Cameron is also set to brief the 1922 Committee of backbench Conservative MPs on Monday evening, and the topic of China and security will likely be raised.

In response to those accusations against China, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian said on Monday’s routine press briefing that tracing cyberattacks is highly complex and sensitive. There should be sufficient, objective evidence when investigating and characterizing cyber incidents, rather than smear other countries without facts, let alone politicizing cyber security issues. Cybersecurity is a global challenge and China is one of the major victims of cyber-attacks. China always resolutely resists all types of malicious online activities in accordance with the law, and advocates that all countries jointly respond through dialogue and cooperation, Lin said, “We hope that all parties will stop spreading false information, take a responsible attitude and jointly maintain the peace and security of cyberspace.”

Hyping “cyber attacks from China” continues on the anti-China path of Conservatives and is not very different from the UK’s past smear campaigns against Chinese firms or products. Basically their argument is “anything from China can constitute a threat,” Li Guanjie, a research fellow with the Shanghai Academy of Global Governance and Area Studies under the Shanghai International Studies University, told the Global Times on Monday. But intensifying such hypes at the moment is related to the general election to be held later this year, Li believes.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has declined to brand China a threat, despite pressure from some wings of the party, and as the election approaches, harden tone against China is an easy campaign method, analysts said.

Hao Min, dean of the Department of Law of the University of International Relations, told the Global Times on Monday that blame shifting is also an easy approach to divert domestic anxiety and discontent on sluggish economy and social issues. Painting China as a security threat also paves to protectionist policies in economic realm, Hao said, citing the latest British media reports that Chinese-made electric cars in UK could be jammed remotely by Beijing

. Hao noticed the UK’s hardline stance on China has become more prominent after the Brexit, as London aligned with Washington closer in foreign policy. The attacks on Chinese EVs came on heels of the US’ similar smears.

As global geopolitics becomes “Cold War-alike,” such camp-based rather than fact-based rows will continue, analysts said, but China will firmly reject such smear campaigns and defend its own interests in line with the law.

According to Guardian, the UK could impose sanctions on individuals believed to be involved in acts of state-backed interference. If the UK takes any concrete actions, they will be responded by countermeasures from China, analysts said.

https://socialistchina.org/2024/03/26/b ... erattacks/

******

Tough stance urged against corruption

Political Bureau reviews report on the second round of disciplinary inspections
By CAO DESHENG | CHINA DAILY | Updated: 2024-03-30 06:52

Image
[Photo/VCG]

The central leadership of the Communist Party of China reviewed a report on the second round of disciplinary inspection missions of the 20th CPC Central Committee on Friday, and called for maintaining a high-pressure stance against corruption.

The report was discussed at a meeting of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, which was presided over by Xi Jinping, general secretary of the CPC Central Committee.

Since the 20th CPC National Congress in 2022, the CPC Central Committee has deployed two rounds of disciplinary inspections, fully covering centrally administered State-owned enterprises.

It was noted at the meeting that through these inspections, Party building within the centrally administered State-owned enterprises and related departments has been strengthened, and exercising comprehensive and rigorous governance of the Party has made new achievements, according to a statement released after the meeting.

However, it was also acknowledged that there are some existing issues that still need to be addressed with great attention and in a serious manner. It was emphasized at the meeting that rectifications following the inspections should serve as a powerful means to promote high-quality development and comprehensively strengthen the Party.

Efforts should be made to make clear who should be held accountable, and establish lists of problems, tasks and responsibilities to ensure that every issue is addressed, the statement said.

The meeting's participants urged efforts to strengthen supervision of rectifications, focusing on key individuals and matters, checking off each issue one by one, establishing a mechanism for rectifications and accountability, and holding those responsible for perfunctory or false rectifications accountable.

Noting that State-owned enterprises are an important material and political foundation of socialism with Chinese characteristics, the meeting's participants underlined the need for these enterprises to uphold and strengthen the Party's leadership and fulfill their responsibilities and missions effectively.

The State-owned enterprises should coordinate development and security, enhance awareness of potential risks, keep the worst-case scenario in mind, and resolutely prevent and defuse risks to ensure high-quality development with high-level security, the statement said.

While highlighting the importance of continuing to exercise strict governance of the Party, the meeting's participants called for strengthening supervision over leading officials and key leadership teams, maintaining a high-pressure stance against corruption and decisively eradicating the breeding ground and conditions for corruption.

It was highlighted at the meeting that the results of the inspections should be utilized to address similar and underlying issues, and systems and mechanisms should be established to resolve existing problems.

The second round of disciplinary inspections launched by the 20th CPC Central Committee started in October, targeting 26 centrally administered State-owned enterprises as well as some governmental departments, including the Ministry of Science and Technology, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council, the State Administration for Science, Technology and Industry for National Defense and the State Tobacco Monopoly Administration.

https://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/2024 ... bf833.html
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10774
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Sat Apr 06, 2024 1:59 pm

Image

Wang Huning: China always regards the DPRK as a good comrade, good friend and good neighbour
In an important initiative highlighting the steadily growing solidarity, cooperation and coordination among the socialist countries in Asia, a delegation of the Workers’ Party of Korea (WPK), headed by Kim Song Nam, alternate member of the Politburo and Director of the International Department of the WPK Central Committee recently led a delegation to pay fraternal visits to China, Vietnam and Laos.

Leaving Pyongyang on March 21, Kim met the same day with Wang Huning, Chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), who is also a member of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee.

Wang said that that under the guidance of the top leaders of the two sides, China and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) have witnessed constant consolidation and development of their traditional friendship.

Noting that this year marks the 75th anniversary of diplomatic ties and is designated as the China-DPRK Friendship Year, Wang said China is willing to work with the DPRK to turn the important consensus reached by the top leaders into concrete actions advancing the friendship between the two sides, deepen collaboration, strengthen strategic communication, and jointly work for a peaceful and stable external environment.

Kim Song Nam referred to the fact that the DPRK-China relations have been steadily developing into genuine and solid comradely relations with socialism as their core under the direct concern of the leaders of the two parties of the DPRK and China.

He appreciated the epoch-making progress made by the CPC and the Chinese people in their efforts to implement the decisions of the 20th Party Congress under the leadership of General Secretary Xi Jinping this year, marking the 75th founding anniversary of the People’s Republic of China.

Wang Huning said that no matter how the international situation may change, the China-DPRK friendship, a strategic choice of both sides, will never waver, adding that China, which always regards the DPRK as a good comrade, good friend and good neighbour, will translate the important agreements of the top leaders of the two parties into substantial practice and thus provide greater happiness to the peoples of the two countries and contribute to the regional peace and stability.

The Chinese side will further preserve the true colours of the China-DPRK relations with socialism as their core by promoting mutual exchange, swapping experience and boosting unity and cooperation with the DPRK side, add vitality to the development of the China-DPRK relations and open up a new chapter this year, the year of friendship marking the 75th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries, he stressed.

He expressed the Chinese side’s willingness to promote justice in the international community by jointly responding to the international and regional situation through strengthened strategic communication and tactical cooperation with the DPRK side.

Also on March 21, Kim met with Liu Jianchao, Minister of the International Department of the CPC Central Committee (IDCPC), who said that the Chinese side is ready to work with the DPRK side to resolutely implement the important consensus of the top leaders of the two Parties and the two countries, take the 75th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries and the China-DPRK Friendship Year as an opportunity to strengthen inter-party exchanges, carry forward traditional friendship, deepen strategic communication, and strengthen exchanges and mutual learning.

The next day, Kim met with Cai Qi, a member of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee and of the Secretariat of the CPC Central Committee. He said the CPC is willing to work with the WPK to implement the important consensus reached by the top leaders of the two parties and countries, make good use of the opportunity of the 75th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic ties and the China-DPRK Friendship Year, strengthen strategic communication, deepen exchanges and mutual learning on party and state governance, push for more substantive results in practical cooperation, promote greater development of bilateral relations, and jointly safeguard regional peace and stability. He added that the China-DPRK friendship formed in blood has greeted a brighter future under the strategic guidance of General Secretary Xi Jinping and General Secretary Kim Jong Un.

On March 23, the Korean comrades met with China’s top diplomat, Wang Yi, Member of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee and Director of the Office of the Central Commission for Foreign Affairs, who is also Foreign Minister.

Wang Yi said that it is the steadfast stand and will of the Chinese party, government and people to creditably defend, excellently consolidate and successfully develop the China-DPRK friendship formed in blood, a common precious wealth of the two countries, and expressed his belief that the friendly relations between the two countries would unshakably advance under the strategic guidance of General Secretary Xi Jinping and General Secretary Kim Jong Un, despite all challenges and difficulties.

He affirmed that China would as ever steadily boost strategic communication and tactical cooperation with the DPRK in the international arena to firmly champion the common interests of the two parties and peoples of the two countries and further the China-DPRK friendship.

Having concluded its China visit in Chengdu, the WPK delegation continued on to Vietnam. Particularly as the two countries have declared 2024 the year of China-DPRK Friendship, marking the 75th anniversary of their diplomatic relations, established just days after the founding of the People’s Republic, a number of reports have suggested that this visit was preparatory to a top-level summit. This prospect was reinforced by a further event in Beijing on March 26 and a significant article published by the DPRK’s Foreign Ministry the same day.

In Beijing, Li Hongzhong, member of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee and Vice Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPC), attended a friendly gathering together with DPRK Ambassador Ri Yong Nam.

Li Hongzhong said that in recent years, General Secretary Xi Jinping and General Secretary Kim Jong Un have met many times and maintained close communication through various forms to point out the direction for the development of China-DPRK relations. China is ready to work with the DPRK side to take the 75th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations and the China-DPRK Friendship Year as an opportunity to implement the important consensus reached by the top leaders of the two parties and two countries, strengthen exchanges and cooperation between the parties as well as in other fields, bring benefits to the two peoples, and make positive contributions to regional peace, stability, development and prosperity.

Over the past 75 years, the leaders of the two parties and the two countries made concerted efforts to successfully defend, firmly consolidate and creditably develop the traditional China-DPRK friendship with shared ideal, faith and deep revolutionary friendship through generations, thus providing the people of the two countries with wellbeing, safeguarding the regional peace and leaving a notable trace in the history of international relations.

Ri Ryong Nam said that the two countries have further refined and developed the DPRK-China friendship sealed in blood, sharing weal and woe despite the complicated changes of history. The cornerstone of the DPRK-China friendship cherished in the minds of the peoples of the two countries is the deep personal relations that the top leaders of the two parties and two countries have established as the most friendly and genuine comrades, generation after generation.

The article from the DPRK’s Foreign Ministry noted that this day saw the sixth anniversary of the first meeting between Kim Jong Un and Xi Jinping, which had “laid down a new marker of friendship”:

“It was a momentous occasion of an epoch-making significance in carrying forward and developing the traditional relations of friendship between the DPRK and China to the next generation.

“During his stay, respected Comrade Kim Jong Un had talks with Comrade Xi Jinping where he exchanged in-depth views on important issues such as the development of the friendly DPRK-China relations. He also affirmed the common will of the two countries to firmly defend the socialist system and provide happiness and a promising future for the two peoples.

“Each page of the history of the DPRK-China friendship is clearly marked with the world of comradely friendship between the preceding leaders of the two countries who worked hand-in-hand on the road to achieve a common cause.

“President Kim Il Sung established the historic root of DPRK-China friendship with Comrades Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai, and they, together, shattered the aggression and anti-socialist manoeuvres of the imperialists. And through the exchange of visits with the preceding leaders of China, he firmed up the friendly and cooperative relations between the two countries and bequeathed it to the two peoples of the DPRK and China.

“Chairman Kim Jong Il carried forward the historic tradition of DPRK-China friendship established by President Kim Il Sung. Until the last days of his lifetime, he devoted all his heart and soul to developing the friendly and cooperative relations between the two countries.”

Meanwhile in the Vietnamese capital Hanoi, Kim Song Nam met on March 26 with Truong Thi Mai, member of the Political Bureau, Permanent Secretary of the Secretariat and Chairperson of the Organisational Commission of the Communist Party of Vietnam (CPV) Central Committee.

Kim Song Nam said that the friendly and cooperative relations between the two parties and the two countries, provided by the preceding leaders of the two countries and firmly consolidated on the road of the anti-imperialist joint struggle, are developing onto a new high level under the deep care of Kim Jong Un and Nguyen Phu Trong.

He called for boosting friendship and solidarity and strengthening mutual support and cooperation in the international arena on the road of dynamically advancing the socialist cause in the future, too.

Truong Thi Mai, on behalf of the CPV, warmly welcomed the visit of the WPK delegation made at a significant time of marking the fifth anniversary of General Secretary Kim Jong Un’s visit to Vietnam.

The Vietnamese people are always grateful to the Korean people for their support and encouragement to the national liberation struggle, the cause of national reunification and socialist construction of Vietnam, she said, expressing the stand of the Vietnamese side to promote understanding between the two countries and ramp up cooperation through exchange in all fields so as to further develop the bilateral relations.

For his part, Kim expressed his pleasure to witness Vietnam’s great socio-economic development achievements under the leadership of the CPV, with General Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong at the helm.

He affirmed that the party and government of the DPRK always value and aspire to further develop the traditional friendship with Vietnam, which was founded and nurtured by Presidents Ho Chi Minh and Kim Il Sung, and leaders of the two countries.

The previous day, the Korean delegation had met with Le Hoai Trung, Secretary of the Secretariat and Chairman of the External Affairs Commission of the CPV CC.

Le Hoai Trung said that the relations between the two parties and the two countries of Vietnam and the DPRK are solid ones based on the socialist idea, expressing the steadfast stand of the CPV and the government and people of Vietnam to boost the traditional Vietnam-DPRK friendly relations. He went on to recommend that the two countries effectively implement existing cooperation mechanisms, expand their cultural, art, sports, people-to-people, and locality-to-locality exchanges, and strengthen their coordination at multilateral forums.

On March 27, Kim met with Nguyen Van Nen, member of the Political Bureau of the CPV Central Committee and Secretary of the Ho Chi Minh Municipal Committee of the CPV, in Ho Chi Minh City.

Nguyen Van Nen said the Vietnamese party are rejoiced over the fact that the WPK and the DPRK government and people have made signal successes in socialist construction through an indomitable struggle under the leadership of Comrade Kim Jong Un , adding that the Vietnamese people have always remembered the DPRK’s sincere support to their anti-US national salvation struggle and cause of national reunification.

Together with other localities in Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh City has been implementing the cooperation agreements reached between Nguyen Phu Trong and Kim Jong Un during the latter’s visit to Vietnam in 2019.

Briefing his guest on Ho Chi Minh City’s socio-economic situation, he said the city plans to send a delegation on a working visit to the DPRK in June.

After arriving in the Laotian capital Vientiane on March 28, the next day the WPK delegation paid a courtesy call on Thongloun Sisoulith, General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Lao People’s Revolutionary Party (LPRP) and President of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic (LPDR).

Kim Song Nam said that the DPRK-Laos friendly relations are ceaselessly developing under the deep care of Kim Jong Un and Thongloun Sisoulith, expressing the stand of the WPK to hasten the victory of the socialist cause and ramp up the comradely and strategic cooperation and joint struggle with Laos on the road of achieving genuine international justice.

Thongloun Sisoulith stressed that the LPRP and the government and people of Laos attach great importance to the development of bilateral relations and are grateful to the WPK and the government and people of the DPRK for their warm support and encouragement to Laos in its efforts to save the nation, defend the country and accomplish the cause of nation building.

Expressing belief that the Korean people would attain the goal of building a powerful socialist country, true to the will of Comrade Kim Il Sung and Comrade Kim Jong Il , under the guidance of the WPK headed by Comrade Kim Jong Un, holding high the banner of the Juche idea, he heartily wished Comrade Kim Jong Un good health and bigger success in his work for leading the party, the government and the people.

The same day, talks were held with Thongsavanh Phomvihane, Chairman of the Committee for External Affairs of the LPRP CC.

Expressing the belief that the Korean people would achieve rapid progress in the struggle to boost the economy, improve the people’s living standards and bolster up the defence capability under the guidance of the WPK headed by General Secretary Kim Jong Un , Thongsavanh Phomvihane declared that the LPRP and the Lao government fully support the policy of the WPK and the DPRK government for defending peace and security on the Korean peninsula.

The WPK delegation returned home on April 2. While in Vietnam it paid respects to President Ho Chi Minh at his mausoleum and in Laos visited the Kaysone Phomvihane Museum, which was built by the DPRK as an act of fraternal solidarity.

The following articles were originally published by the Xinhua News Agency, the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA), the websites of the International Department of the CPC Central Committee (IDCPC), the Chinese Foreign Ministry, and the Foreign Ministry of the DPRK, and by Nhân Dân. The second report from the IDCPC was published in Chinese and was machine translated by us.
(Very long, go to link.)

https://socialistchina.org/2024/04/03/w ... neighbour/

Image

China and the struggle for peace
The following text is based on presentations given by Friends of Socialist China co-editor Carlos Martinez at Morning Star Readers and Supporters meetings in Manchester (19 February), Leeds (13 March) and Brighton 24 March), on the subject of China’s global strategy.

Carlos responds to the assertion by Western politicians and media that China is an aggressive and expansionist power, comparing China’s foreign policy record with that of the United States. He shows that China’s foreign policy is based on the principles of peace, development and win-win cooperation, and explains how this approach is rooted in China’s history and ideology, and is consistent with China’s overall strategic goals.

Carlos also takes note of China’s contribution to the global struggle for multipolarity and to the project of global development. He highlights the Belt and Road Initiative and China’s role in the struggle against climate catastrophe.

The text concludes:

On questions of peace, of development, of protecting the planet, China is on the right side of history. It’s a force for good. As socialists, as progressives, as anti-war activists, as anti-imperialists, we should consider China to be on our side… Those of us who seek a sustainable future of peace and prosperity, of friendship and cooperation between peoples, have a responsibility to oppose this New Cold War, to oppose containment and encirclement, to demand peace, to promote cooperation with China, to promote understanding of China, to build people-to-people links with China, and to make this a significant stream of a powerful mass anti-war movement that our governments can’t ignore.

The Manchester event was also addressed by Jenny Clegg; the Leeds event by Kevan Nelson; and the Brighton event by Keith Bennett.
I’m going to focus my remarks on China’s international relations and its global strategy. This is a subject about which there’s a great deal of misunderstanding and obfuscation, particularly in the context of an escalating New Cold War that’s being led by Washington and that the British ruling class is only too happy to go along with.

The mainstream media is full of hysteria about China’s “aggression” or “assertiveness”. When China reiterates its position on Taiwan – a position which in fact has not meaningfully changed in the last seven decades, and which is completely in line with international law – it’s accused of ramping up the threat of war.

When China refuses to go along with the US’s illegal, unilateral sanctions (for example on Russia, Iran, Syria, Nicaragua, Cuba, Venezuela, Eritrea and Zimbabwe), it’s accused of “subverting the international rules-based order”.

When China establishes bilateral relations and trade agreements with Solomon Islands, Honduras, Nicaragua and Nauru, it’s accused of engaging in colonial domination.

When Chinese companies invest in Africa, Latin America, the Caribbean and the Pacific, they’re accused of imposing debt traps.

And unfortunately much of the left takes a fairly similar position to the ruling class on these issues, considering that China’s an imperialist power, that it’s engaged in a project of expansionism.

This sort of analysis on the left leads inexorably to a position of “Neither Washington Nor Beijing”, putting an equals sign between the US and China; putting China in the same category as the imperialist powers. According to this analysis, the basic dynamic of global politics is today that of inter-imperialist rivalry between the US and China.

And of course if that’s the case, if China’s just another imperialist power, and its only interest is growing its own profit margins and competing with the US, Britain, the EU, Canada and Japan for control of the world’s resources, labour, land and markets, it goes without saying that the global working class and oppressed – the vast majority of the population of the world – cannot possibly consider China to be a strategic ally in the pursuit of a better, fairer, more peaceful, more equal, more prosperous, more sustainable world.

China’s view of international relations
How does China consider its role in the world? What does the Communist Party of China propose regarding China’s foreign relations?

What the Chinese leadership calls for is “building a global community of shared future, with the goal of creating an open, inclusive, clean and beautiful world that enjoys lasting peace, universal security, and common prosperity.”

China consistently expresses its commitment to multipolarity; to peace; to maximum and mutually beneficial cooperation around economic development and tackling climate change, pandemics, and the threat of nuclear war; to working within the context of the UN Charter and international law in support of peaceful coexistence.

Foreign Minister Wang Yi, at his recent Meet the Press session, talked of China “advocating vigorously for peace, development, cooperation and mutual benefit”, and urged that “countries should rise above their differences in history, culture, geography and system, and work together to protect the Earth, the only inhabitable planet for us all, and make it a better place.”

Xi Jinping often talks about China’s orientation towards peace: “Without peace, nothing is possible. Maintaining peace is our greatest common interest and the most cherished aspiration of people of all countries.”

All of this is of course a pretty beautiful and compelling vision. But to what extent does it line up with reality? To what extent is China actually working towards peace, development and sustainability? To what extent does China diverge from the model of international relations pursued by the US and its imperialist allies?

Comparison of China and the US
Let’s compare the US and China in the realms of war, militarism and coercion.

The US is waging a permanent war – a war against multipolarity, a war against sovereignty, a war against socialism. A war to protect and expand its domination of the world’s markets, natural resources, land and labour. The Korean War, the Vietnam War, the carpet bombing of Laos and Cambodia, the Iraq War, the Afghanistan War, the regime change wars in Yugoslavia, Libya and Syria. These are all part of the same project of imperialism, of domination, of hegemonism.

It’s pretty widely understood now that the US is the driving force behind the war in Ukraine. People increasingly understand that the Western powers, led by the US, identified Russia as an impediment to their global strategy, and have for many years been attempting to turn Ukraine into a launching pad for the weakening and destabilisation of Russia.

Over 32,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza in the last four months, the majority of them women and children. The UN has referred to Gaza a “children’s graveyard”. That Israel is engaged in a genocide is implicitly recognised by the International Court of Justice, thanks to the brilliant and courageous case brought by South Africa. And this genocide is being supported, defended, financed and armed by the US and its allies. Britain sponsored the creation of Israel specifically as a colonial outpost in the Middle East, and Israel continues to play that role for the US today. Israeli militarism remains the cornerstone of imperialist strategy in the region.

Meanwhile the US is escalating its long-running campaign of encirclement and containment against China. The US has over 800 overseas military bases, positioned all over the world, including in Britain, incidentally.

The US stations nuclear-enabled missiles and warplanes in Japan, Okinawa, Guam and South Korea, as well as tens of thousands of troops. The US has announced that it’s planning to deploy five of its 11 aircraft carriers to the Western Pacific this year, in a “show of strength to China”.

The US actually has wartime operational control of the South Korean armed forces – an arrangement that has been in place for more than seven decades.

With the announcement of the AUKUS trilateral nuclear pact between the US, UK and Australia, and the attempts to revive the ‘Quad’ – Quadrilateral Security Dialogue – between the US, Australia, India and Japan, the US is clearly driving towards the establishment of some kind of Asian NATO.

China on the other hasn’t waged war for over four decades. China’s armed forces haven’t dropped a single bomb in that time. And the record of the People’s Republic in general has been remarkably peaceful.

The contrast between the US and China is particularly stark if we take the case of Iraq. The US and its allies – including Britain (under a Labour government) – waged an illegal war on Iraq in which hundreds of thousands of civilians were killed and the country was flattened. The country’s development was set back by decades. The use of such weapons as white phosphorus and depleted uranium led to a horrific increase in birth defects, infant mortality and cases of leukaemia.

China’s relationship with Iraq is very different. Iraq is one of the top recipients of infrastructure investment under the Belt and Road Initiative. China’s building 7,000 schools in Iraq, alongside huge numbers of bridges, roads, railways. China is even leading the investment in Iraq’s solar energy industry – a significant development in a country whose abundance of oil has made it such a popular destination for Western interference over the course of a century.

There’s a popular saying in Baghdad that sums up the differences between the US and China: “America bombs, China builds.”

Since the escalation of the war in Ukraine, China has been among the countries pushing for a peaceful resolution of the conflict. The US and Britain on the other hand, determined to weaken Russia and insistent on “fighting Russia to the last Ukrainian”, has added huge quantities of fuel to the fire, and has deliberately stood in the way of negotiations.

Since the launch of Israel’s brutal offensive against Gaza, China has been among the countries calling loudly for a ceasefire and for the establishment of a lasting peace, based on – in the words of the Chinese peace proposal – “realising the dream of an independent state of Palestine” and “redressing the historical injustice suffered by the Palestinian people”. Wang Yi recently reiterated China’s support Palestine’s full membership in the UN. And in its deposition to the ICJ, China acknowledged the legal legitimacy of the Palestinian people’s right to armed resistance against colonial occupation.

The US and Britain provided weapons, advice, financial support and diplomatic cover for Saudi Arabia’s proxy war against Iran in Yemen, creating an extraordinarily severe humanitarian crisis, with millions on the verge of famine. China in contrast, by mediating a rapprochement between Iran and Saudi Arabia, has facilitated a significant step towards peace in Yemen.

How are we to understand these differences? Why does China build where the US bombs? It’s not simply that the Chinese drink more jasmine tea and practise more qi gong. It’s that China’s economic success is built on a framework of socialism, of public ownership, and of meeting the needs of the people rather than being directed exclusively towards increasing the profit margins of big business.

If you look at the rise of Britain, or France, or Germany, or the US, you’ll see that they were based on colonialism and imperialism; on the extraction of superprofits from the exploitation of the oppressed countries. And this domination remains core to the economic model of the imperialist countries. The US doesn’t spend a trillion dollars a year on its military just because it likes to feel powerful. When it wages wars of regime change, carries out coups and assassinations, destabilises governments and imposes crippling sanctions, this is all directed at ensuring that a “business-friendly environment” prevails throughout the world.

In the shockingly honest words of right-wing journalist Thomas Friedman, “the hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist – McDonald’s cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas”.

Because China’s a major economic power now, it’s tempting to assume that it will follow the trajectory of the other major economic powers, but China’s history is different, and its development is driven by a socialist dynamic, not by a capitalist dynamic. China’s rise wasn’t built on the basis of colonialism or imperialism, but is based on the hard work of the Chinese people and an extraordinarily far-sighted economic policy, itself a product of communist leadership and the fact that the capitalist class doesn’t hold the reins of power in China.

Uniting the Global South in the struggle against imperialism
China opposes imperialism, because China has suffered under imperialism. China doesn’t want war and has nothing to gain from war. China’s per capita military spending is around 20 times smaller than that of the US. And although China is also a nuclear power, China has around 350 nuclear warheads, in comparison to the US’s five and a half thousand.

As Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi pointed out in a recent speech, China is “the only country that has incorporated peaceful development in its Constitution, and the only country among the nuclear-weapon states to pledge no first use of nuclear weapons.”

China is very consistent in advocating peaceful resolution to international disputes, and is very careful not to exacerbate existing conflicts.

Ultimately, whereas the West thrives on war, China thrives on peace. At a day-to-day practical level, China prefers other countries to be stable and prosperous, because that provides a better environment for trade, investment and all forms of mutually-beneficial cooperation. As Deng Xiaoping put it back in 1984: “The last thing China wants is war. China wants to develop; it can’t do that without a peaceful environment.”

At a higher strategic level, China recognises that the countries of the Global South in particular have a shared interest in opposing imperialism, defending sovereignty and pursuing peaceful development. As such, China stands at the centre of this process of uniting the countries of the Global South in promoting a multipolar system of international relations. This has a crucial role in the overall struggle against imperialism and indeed towards socialism.

In China’s vision, multipolarity will allow the nations of the world to defend their sovereignty. And sovereignty will create space for different peoples to explore their own paths towards socialism. After all, how many roads towards socialism have been blocked, impeded or diverted by the imperialists? Chile, Indonesia, Grenada, Angola, Iran, Nicaragua, Congo, Guatemala, the list goes on.

In the words of the Marxist theoretician Samir Amin, multipolarity “provides the framework for the possible and necessary overcoming of capitalism”.

Global development
China is making an important contribution to global development.

The Belt and Road Initiative, announced by Xi Jinping a decade ago, is already playing a hugely significant role. It’s providing the countries of Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Caribbean and the Pacific with the opportunity to modernise; to break the chains of underdevelopment – chains that were imposed during the colonial era and that have been maintained in various forms in the era of modern imperialism.

The BRI has become the world’s largest platform for international cooperation, with more than 150 countries and 30 international organisations participating across five continents. A trillion dollars have been spent or committed on major infrastructure projects. A huge number of roads, railways, bridges, factories and ports have been built, along with energy and telecommunications infrastructure.

The Mombasa-Nairobi Railway is the largest infrastructure project carried out in Kenya since independence.

The China-Laos Railway, which was completed just three years ago, has provided a huge economic boost to Laos – a poor and land-locked country.

And the BRI is becoming increasingly green. In many cases it’s providing the technology and investment for underdeveloped countries to leapfrog fossil fuel-based development and go directly to solar, wind, hydroelectric and geothermal energy. Erik Solheim, the former Norwegian minister and UN Environment Programme Executive Director, describes the BRI as the most important global project in history when it comes to green, sustainable development.

Ecological civilisation
On which note, it’s worth mentioning China’s contribution to the project of preventing climate catastrophe.

Much is made of the fact that China has become the world’s largest emitter of carbon dioxide. Of course the context for this is that China has experienced very rapid development, and the increase in emissions has been accompanied by an extraordinary decrease in poverty. Furthermore China has become “the workshop of the world”, with the wealthy countries essentially exporting their emissions to the East. On which basis we might ask why per capita carbon emissions in the US are still twice as high as they are in China, when it’s in China that all the industrial activity takes place.

Anyway, over the last decade, China has emerged as the undisputed global leader in renewable energy, biodiversity protection, forestation and green transport systems.

China accounted for 55 percent of all renewable energy investment last year.

Its solar power capacity is now greater than that of the rest of the world combined.

Coal has gone from 80 percent of its power mix two decades ago to around 50 percent now, and continues to decline fast.

Around 99 percent of the world’s electric buses are made in China.

Around 70 percent of the world’s high-speed rail can be found in China.

Forest coverage has doubled from 12 percent in 1980 to 24 percent today.

It’s looking likely that China will reach its target of peaking carbon emissions by 2030 several years early.

China takes ecological issues more seriously than any other major country. Whereas a Green New Deal is a radical, pie-in-the-sky, eco-socialist demand in Britain or the US, China’s program of ‘ecological civilisation’ is essentially a Green New Deal on an enormous scale.

China is our ally
So on questions of peace, of development, of protecting the planet, it seems clear to me that China is on the right side of history. It’s a force for good. As socialists, as progressives, as anti-war activists, as anti-imperialists, we should consider China to be on our side.

Which of course means that it’s not on the side of our class enemies, of the imperialist ruling classes, which are waging an increasingly vicious New Cold War against it.

The political classes in the West are still in a state of shock in relation to China’s rise. They really thought that, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, so-called liberal capitalism had won the day, that the ‘end of history’ had arrived. They assumed China would follow the trajectory of the Soviet Union, or would quietly accept a position of permanent subordination in the US-led imperialist system.

Now all of a sudden China’s the largest economy in the world by any sensible measure; it’s the biggest trading partner of two-thirds of the world’s countries; its people live increasingly well; its life expectancy has overtaken that of the US; and it’s become a leading force towards establishing a fairer, more equal, more democratic system of international relations.

That’s the fundamental reason for the New Cold War; for the trade war; for the sanctions; for the relentless anti-China propaganda; for the establishment of AUKUS; for the attempts to stir up conflict in relation to Taiwan; and so on. They’re ramping up their campaign of encirclement and containment of China, so that they can prevent its further rise and thereby protect US hegemony.

Those of us who seek a sustainable future of peace and prosperity, of friendship and cooperation between peoples, have a responsibility to oppose this New Cold War, to oppose containment and encirclement, to demand peace, to promote cooperation with China, to promote understanding of China, to build people-to-people links with China, and to make this a significant stream of a powerful mass anti-war movement that our governments can’t ignore.

https://socialistchina.org/2024/03/31/c ... for-peace/

******

APRIL 5, 2024 BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR
Biden reaches out to Xi Jinping with eye on financial stability

Image
The US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen arrived in Guangzhou on the first leg of a six-day visit to China, April 4, 2024

The salience of the phone call from the US President Joe Biden to Chinese President Xi Jinping on Tuesday is their consensus that during the period since their summit meeting in Woodside, California, in November 2023, the US-China relationship “is beginning to stabilise”.

Both sides agreed that their discussion was “candid and constructive.” The Chinese analysts estimate that there is a common will in Beijing and Washington “to prevent negative factors from influencing the general stability of bilateral ties.”

Xi proposed three “overarching principles” to navigate 2024 — “peace must be valued”; “stability must be prioritised”; and, commitments should be followed up with action.

In general, the phone call can be viewed in positive terms. Both Xi and Biden expressed the wish for stabilising bilateral relations, managing differences, expanding cooperation, and concurred that a stable and predictable China-US relationship is in their interests.

Washington announced after the phone call that Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen will be travelling to China on an extended visit through April 3-9. The US Treasury Department stated that she “will build on the intensive diplomacy she has engaged in to responsibly manage the bilateral economic relationship and advance American interests.”

Earlier, during a press call at the White House, a senior administration official stressed that the Biden Administration has not changed its approach to China, “which remains one focused on the framework of invest, align, and compete. Intense competition requires intense diplomacy to manage tensions, address misperceptions, and prevent unintended conflict. And this call is one way to do that.”

That said, she also listed areas of cooperation in important areas “where our interests align” — counternarcotics, AI, military-to-military communication channels and climate issues. She anticipated that “depending what happens in the coming year, there would be — we would hope there would be a chance for another in-person (summit) meeting, but don’t have anything even to speculate on when that might be. But certainly, value in that in-person meeting and the calls in the interim.”

Yellen’s six-day visit will be followed by a trip to Beijing by Secretary of State Antony Blinken “in the coming weeks.” A call between the defence ministers is also expected “soon.” Indeed, a steady build-up is under way.

Biden initiated the call. Conceivably, Washington, faced with multiple problems at home and abroad, needs China more than the other way around. Bogged down in the conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine, it can ill afford a confrontation in the Taiwan Straits. Again, the US needs China’s cooperation in important areas such as fentanyl control, climate change, Artificial Intelligence, green-energy transition, etc. — and, most important, financial stability.

Financial stability is a core issue. Yellen’s itinerary is anchored on her extended meetings with Vice Premier He Lifeng spread over two days. He Lifeng was appointed last November as head of office of the Central Financial Commission and has become the helmsman of the core financial and economic staff of the Chinese communist party.

Yellen is due to meet Finance Minister Lan Fo’an, Premier Li Qiang, Beijing Mayor Yin Yong, People’s Bank of China Governor Pan Gongsheng, and leading Chinese economists. Clearly, Yellen’s focus will be on financial stability, a crucial template of the US-China relationship.

The US monetary policy is at an inflection point. Financial risks have risen and there is rising uncertainty in the global market. The anxiety shared by investors is evident in the surge in gold’s appeal as a safe haven asset.

The global financial system is buffeted by multiple factors, such as unsustainable levels of debt, geopolitical confrontation, and a new era of low growth, low global investment and de-globalisation. But a major factor affecting the resilience of the global financial system is the current speculation regarding a US interest rate cut, which would have a ripple effect on the world economy.

Historically, US monetary easing has been the harbinger of global financial crises. As the world’s first and second economies, the US and China will be in the cockpit to navigate any global financial crisis, of which the run on gold as safe haven asset by investors is an early warning signal.

The rise of gold prices reflects as much a panic toward the risks surrounding the global financial system as a lack of confidence in US dollar-denominated assets. The point is, the US’ irresponsible monetary policy has greatly affected the international demand for dollars and dollar-denominated assets.

The enormity of the crisis in the US economy cannot be shoved under the carpet much longer. The US national debt today, estimated at $34 trillion, is almost equal to the combined value of the economies of China, Germany, Japan, India and the UK.

Enter China. China’s steady monetary policy has created policy space and tools in reserve for Beijing to cope with any new challenges lying ahead in the global financial system, while its foreign exchange market has become more resilient.

Thus, while a rate cut by the Fed raises fears of continued capital outflows from the US (as lower interest rates mean a lower return rate on investment in US dollar-denominated assets), there is every likelihood that it would make China the preferred destination for international capital inflows.

Belying Western media hype that China is losing attractiveness to foreign investors, top US firms began flocking to China last month, pledging commitment to the Chinese market, announcing new investment deals and setting up new shop or factory floors.

China can become a safe haven for international capital. Its economy is on an upward trend and given the tools at its disposal to ensure financial stability, China’s foreign exchange market is expected to maintain a relatively stable performance at a time of increasing uncertainty in the global financial market.

Why is this a big deal? The heart of the matter is that as the global price of gold soars, a rate cut cycle begins and financial risks deepen, China gets more options in the management of its assets portfolios and this could affect Beijing’s holding of US Treasury bonds.

Beijing’s huge stimulus program helped the West to recover from the 2008 financial crisis. As the rest of the world teeters on the brink of recession, the last thing Western policymakers want is to ruffle China, the biggest driver of global economic growth. Their expectation is that China would help offset an expected slowdown in other parts of the world.

But geopolitical issues come into play. The Taiwan question and Beijing’s friendly ties with Moscow top the list of contentious issues. Biden raised with Xi concerns over China’s “support for Russia’s defence industrial base and its impact on European and transatlantic security.”

The Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin promptly pushed back that “Other countries should not smear and attack normal relations between China and Russia, should not undermine the legitimate rights of China and Chinese companies, and should not shift blame to China wantonly and provoke camp confrontation.”

Beijing wouldn’t have forgotten that the Obama administration showed its “gratitude” within a couple of years after the 2008 financial crisis by unveiling the “pivot to Asia” strategy to clip China’s wings and contain its rise — a mindset that still defines Biden administration’s flight path.

Xi was upfront warning Biden that “China is not going to sit on its hands” faced with external encouragement and support for Taiwan’s independence. Nor, he said, is China “going to sit back and watch” if the US remains “adamant on containing China’s hi-tech development and depriving China of its legitimate right to development.”

Biden’s response was that “It is in the interest of the world for China to succeed.”

https://www.indianpunchline.com/biden-r ... stability/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10774
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Tue Apr 09, 2024 2:32 pm

Yellen Dispatched to Beg China for Face-Saving Slowdown

SIMPLICIUS
APR 09, 2024
The U.S.’ growing urgency in ‘containing’ China’s development was thrown in sharp relief this week as Janet Yellen arrived in Beijing for what turned out to be an execrable beggar’s tour. Just days prior to her arrival, she had buzzed the punditry with her historically memorable exclamation that China was now operating at “overcapacity”(!!).

What is overcapacity, you ask? It’s a new word for me, too—so let’s consult the dictionary together:

overcapacity
noun
o·​ver·​ca·​pac·​i·​ty: ō′vər-kə-ˈpa-sə-tē
1: When an insolent upstart nation’s surging economic activity totally humiliates the reigning hegemon’s own faltering economy, causing the many expensive dentures and porcelain veneers of the ruling class gerontocracy to rattle and grate with moral outrage and jealousy.

1b: An undesirable situation causing Janet Yellen and Nancy Pelosi’s stock portfolio to droop like a pair of botox-sapped jowls.


Granted…my dictionary might be slightly different to yours, I have a rare edition. That said, are we on the same page? Good.

The above definition may be missing in the new official regime argot pamphlet, but it’s safe to say the inept leaders of the U.S. are down to making up creative new euphemisms for describing China’s total undressing and upending of the economic order.

But if you were skeptical about the meaning behind Yellen’s risible “overcapacity” solecism, her speech from inside of China confirms precisely what’s on the regime’s mind: (Video at link.)

“China is now simply too large for the rest of the world to absorb this enormous capacity. Actions taken by the PRC today can shift world prices….”

And the bombshell:

“When the global market is flooded with cheap Chinese goods, the viability of American firms is put into question.”

Well, I’ll say.

The important distinction to note in the above statement is that for a long time the ‘cheap’ moniker used to describe Chinese goods often underhandedly referred to their quality, in the secondary definitional sense. Here, Yellen is referring to cheap as in price: the distinction is significant because it’s referential to the fact that Chinese manufacturing processes have simply far exceeded the efficiency in the West, as recently highlighted by videos of the Xiaomi e-car factory with its own native Giga Press that’s claimed to be able to pump out a car every 17 seconds.

(Video at link)

The fact of the matter is, China is simply leaping ahead of the decrepit, deteriorating U.S. by every measure and the panicked elites have sent Yellen to beg China to “slow down” and not embarrass them on the world stage.

How is China doing this? Let’s run through a few of the most poignant ways:

[1]
First and foremost, it’s become almost a passe bromide to observe: “The U.S. funds wars, while China funds development.” But it really is true. Think about this for a moment:

Image

The above is factual: Esquire reported that a Brown University investigation found the U.S. has spent an ineffable $14T on wars since 9/11:

Image
https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a ... r-project/

And yes, the current U.S. debt is a massive $34T. That means quite literally almost half of the entire current U.S. debt was blown on endless, mindless, genocidal wars in the Middle East.

The U.S. has wasted its entire blood and treasure on war. Imagine what the U.S. could have built with $14 trillion dollars? Where the U.S. could have been in relation to China for that amount? As someone else noted, the U.S. could have very well built its own “one belt and road” project for that money, connecting the world and reaping untold benefits.

China hasn’t spent a cent on war, and puts everything right back into economic development and wellbeing for its own people.

China is winning lion’s share of construction projects in Africa

Chinese companies accounted for 31% of African infrastructure contracts valued at US$50 million or more in 2022, compared with 12% for Western firms, according to a new study.

It is worth to be noted that in the 1990s, about eight out of 10 contracts to build infrastructure in Africa were won by Western companies.


The illustrative statistics for this are endless:

Image

What makes this historic malappropriation of American funds most tragic is that none of it came at the benefit of American people. The entire operation was carried out by an ethnic cabal within the U.S. government with loyalties only to Israel, and no one else. I’m speaking of course of the PNAC clan, who masterminded the entire breadth of the 21st century wars which have engulfed America in wretched shame and misery, irreversibly gutting the country and squandering its global standing. These wars had nothing whatsoever to do with America’s national interests or security, and have done naught but make Americans less safe and the entire world more dangerous and unstable.

China doesn’t have this problem: there is no inimical ‘out’ group parasitizing their country’s leadership, literally assassinating (JFK) and blackmailing their presidents (Clinton). China is therefore able to focus on the interests of its own people.

<snip>

As a corollary of the above, beyond just the simple kinetic nature of the profligately wasteful wars, America wastes an exorbitant amount of money just on maintenance and upkeep of its global hegemony. The reason is, it costs a lot of ‘enforcement’ money to strongarm vassals who hate you into compliance.

China doesn’t form vassals, it forms partners. That means it spends comparatively far less spreading its influence because that influence has compounding abilities owing to the fair bilateral nature of China’s arrangements. The U.S. has to spend comparatively inordinate amounts of blood and treasure to maintain the same level of ‘influence’ because that ‘influence’ is totally artificial, confected out of a poisonous mixture of fear, strong-arming tactics, economic terrorism that leads to blowback which hurts the U.S. economy, etc. In short, it is mafia tactics versus real business partnerships.

One big difference between China and the U.S. is that China is open to sharing the earth, willing to co-prosper with the U.S. Conversely, the U.S. is unwilling to abdicate its global domination:

Image

The above was highlighted by Graham Allison, coiner of the Thucydides Trap idiom in relation to U.S./China. The Thucydides Trap, as some may know, describes a situation where an emerging power begins to displace the incumbent global power, and how historically this almost always leads to major war. To popularize the theory apropos U.S./China, Graham Allison used the historical example of the Peloponnesian war, where a cagey Sparta was forced to take on the rising power of Athens.

Allison was recently invited by President Xi to a forum for U.S. business leaders where Xi told him directly:

Image

Contrast President Xi’s magnanimous statements with those of the seething, guilt-wracked, bloodthirstily conniving Western ‘executives’. In fact, Xi called for more exchanges between China and the U.S. in order to entwine the two countries in mutual understanding, to avoid the Thucydides Trap:
(Video at link.)

This is the enduring image of what global leadership truly looks like, and the principles it embodies.

<snip>

Image
https://archive.is/316HN
Read that last part: “…set pure profit-making aside.”

Pay attention to this big kicker:

Beijing is powering ahead with the epic project.

“China’s 461-trillion-yuan (US$63.7 trillion) financial industry and its regulatory regime will be heavily prioritised in a broad economic reshuffle engendered by the country’s top leadership, with the sector remoulded to serve national objectives like sustainable growth and advancement in the global tech race.


Are you beginning to get it yet? If not, here’s the crowning finial:

Specifically, it vowed to rein in Wall Street-style practices seen as unsustainable and crisis-prone, and move toward functionality as an overriding value for the financial system rather than profitability.

It also mandated that Chinese financial institutions have “higher efficiency” than their peers in the capitalist world and provide inclusive, accessible services in the pursuit of common prosperity.

“Like it or not, banks and other institutions on the supply side should expect top-down directives and overhauls cued by the CFC,” said Zhu Tian, a professor with the China Europe International Business School (CEIBS).


Image

And there it is. In essence: China is creating a revolution, striking out a new path of finance which steers away from the wild excesses of the West into a bold new direction. Finance to benefit the real economy, the common man, the people. This is what the fig leaf of Rothschild-pushed ‘stakeholder capitalism’ is meant to be, or better yet: pretends to be.

It’s hard not to wax poetic on these developments, because they are truly groundbreaking. China is paving a new path forward for the entire world. The Chinese banking industry is now by far the largest on earth and President Xi has wisely put his foot down with a bold edict: we will not follow the path of destruction chosen by the West, but rather will set our own new path.

This is an iconoclastic, paradigm-breaking revolution which ends six centuries of Old Nobility world finance dominion, traced from the Spanish-Crown-allied Genoese bankers, to the Dutch then English banking system which now continues to enslave the world, and is referred to by a variety of names in the dissident sphere: from Hydra, to Leviathan, to Cthulu, to simply: the Cabal.

All those 600 years are going up in smoke with China’s repudiation of the ‘old standards’, which privilege predatory, deceptive, extractive terms and practices meant to benefit only the Old Nobility elite class. China’s system is true stakeholder finance: the government will forcibly bend the bankers to its will, making sure that finance serves the common good and the people first, rather than speculation, financialization, capitalization, and all the other wicked inventions of the Western Old Nobility class.

It begins like so:

Image

Image

Image

“…bringing greed is good era to an end.”

The big one:

“Government has called for banks to abandon a Western-style ethos and adopt an outlook in line with broader economic priorities.”

It’s a revolution in the making.

But if you’re thinking my dramatic flights above verge a touch on hyperbole or idealism, you could be right. I, of course, still proceed with caution; we can’t be sure that China will succeed in its grand demolishment of the age-old paradigm. But all signals point to early success thus far, and more importantly, it’s clear that China has a leader that fundamentally understands these things at the most rooted level. Western leaders not only are incapable of even grasping the complexities involved of reining in capital, they are unable to do so for the mere fact that they’re totally bought and paid for by the representatives of that very capital class. The cabal of Capital is so deeply and institutionally entrenched in Western governmental systems that it’s simply impossible to imagine them being able to see ‘the forest for the trees’ from within the forest itself.

By the way, in light of the above, here’s the West’s truly desperate, pathetically envious, face-saving attempt to tarnish and mischaracterize China’s new direction:

Image

As well as:

Image

https://www.rt.com/business/595434-us-e ... economies/

The above is particularly astounding in its admissions. Read carefully:

Market-based US and European economies are struggling to survive against China’s “very effective” alternative economic model, a top US trade representative has warned, according to Euractiv.

Katherine Tai told a briefing in Brussels on Thursday that Beijing’s “non-market” policies will cause severe economic and political damage, unless they are tackled through appropriate “countermeasures.” Tai’s remarks came as the EU-US Trade and Technology Council (TTC) kicked off in Leuven, Belgium.

“I think what we see in terms of the challenge that we have from China is… the ability for our firms to be able to survive in competition with a very effective economic system,” Tai said in response to a question from Euractiv.


In short: China isn’t playing fair—they’re actually privileging their people and economy over financial speculation, and this is causing their firms to outcompete ours!

But what she’s really talking about gets to the essence of the difference in the two systems:

The trade official described China as a system “that we’ve articulated as being not market-based, as being fundamentally nurtured differently, against which a market-based system like ours is going to have trouble competing against and surviving.”

These are code words: what she means by “market based” is free market capitalism, while China uses more of a centrally-planned directive system, as outlined earlier. Recall just recently I posted complaints from Western officials that their companies are not able to compete with Russian defense manufacturers due to their ‘unfairly’ efficient ‘central planning’ style.

Here too, what they mean is that the Chinese government creates directives that spurn ‘market logics’ and are aimed at direct improvements to the lives of ordinary citizens. In the West there’s no such thing: all market decisions are based merely on the totally detached financial firms’ speculations and are exclusively at the behest of a tiny claque of finance and banking elite at the top of the pyramid.

You see, the U.S. is threatened because it knows it can never compete with China fairly, by squelching or containing its own gluttonous financial elite—so that leaves only one avenue for keeping up: sabotage and war.

This is the real reason the U.S. is desperate to stoke a Chinese invasion of Taiwan by various provocations, including weapons shipments. Just like the U.S. used Ukraine as the battering ram to bleed and weaken Russia economically, disconnecting it from Europe, U.S. hopes to use Taiwan as the Ukraine against China. It would love to foment a bloody war that would leave China battered and economically set back to give the failing and greed-suffocated U.S. economy some breathing room.

But it’s unlikely to work—China is too sagacious to take the bait and fall for the trap. It will patiently wait things out, allowing the U.S. to drown in its own endless poison and treachery.

No, there will be no Thucydides Trap—it’s already too late for that. The Trap worked for Sparta because it was still at its peak and able to thwart Athens. The U.S. is in terminal decline and would lose a war against China, which is why they hope to stage a proxy war instead, cowardly using Taiwan as the battering ram. But China can read these desperate motives with the clarity of finely glazed porcelain.

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/yel ... -china-for

More at link, including some unacceptable crap.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply