Share This

Showing posts with label Russia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Russia. Show all posts

Tuesday 7 December 2021

Democracy summit will dodge questions on governance gap between China and US: Martin Jacques

Supporters of US President Donald Trump protest outside the US Capitol on Wednesday, in Washington, DC. Demonstrators breached security and entered the Capitol as Congress debated the 2020 presidential election Electoral Vote Certification. Photo: AFP 


Martin Jacques: Western concept of democracy lacks historical context


There is something more than a little ironic about President Biden's Summit for Democracy this week. The intention is blindingly obvious: to rally the troops in favour of Western-style democracy and draw a line in the sand between "democracy" (ie, the West) and "autocracy" (ie, China and Russia). In this Biden faces two huge problems, which will get little or no airing at the Summit. First, the Western democracies are in serious difficulties. And second, that China, in terms of governance, has been seriously out-performing the West.

The US talks about democracy in the manner of a slick TV advert. It is all good and no bad. It is timeless. It has long reigned and will reign forever. It cannot be improved upon. This, of course, is nonsense. No form of governance has, or will, last indefinitely. There are multiple signs that Western democracy is losing its popularity. Numerous Western polls have indicated growing disillusionment in their political systems.

Ultimately, any form of governance depends upon its ability to deliver. Whatever the fancy words, this is the bottom line. If it fails to deliver, then people will look for alternative forms of governance. Western governance was at its most successful during the long boom between 1945 and the mid-1970s. It delivered rapid economic growth, full employment, generous welfare reforms and prosperity. In the 1959 general election, the British Conservative Prime Minister ran on the slogan "You've never had it so good." He was right. And the Conservatives won big time. Even during the following rather less successful period between 1980 and 2007, Western governance still worked after a fashion. The turning-point was the Western financial crisis in 2008, the worst since 1931.

Ever since then, living standards in the West have struggled to return to even where they were in 2007. All the Western economies have remained on life-support, with zero or near zero interest rates, following the financial crisis. Their economic woes had political consequences, with growing disillusionment in the mainstream political parties and their leaders and, more seriously, in societal elites and governing institutions. The most dramatic case was the United States, the citadel of Western democracy. The reasons for the disaffection go back long before 2008: nearly half of all Americans have experienced static or falling living standards since 1980. Trump gave voice to the anti-establishment anger. His attitude towards democracy is, to put it mildly, unclear, as his covert support for the Insurrection at Capitol Hill last January well illustrates. Biden won the 2020 presidential election, but what will happen in 2024 is anyone's guess. The country is deeply divided and polarised to the point where there are almost two Americas. For the first time since the Civil War, there are serious doubts among Americans as to whether their democracy can survive.

Democracy works in good times but not so well in bad times. Between 1918 and 1939, a large majority of European states lived under various forms of dictatorship for part of, or most of, that period. Democracies were, for the most part, few and far between. The overriding reason was the Great Depression, with falling living standards, huge unemployment, impoverishment, racism, nationalism, and acute political polarisation.

Even if Western-style democracy survives, and it likely will in most Western countries, such are its deep roots, it will enjoy nothing of the elan and prestige it possessed during its heyday in the long boom, or even between 1980 and 2007. The reason is simple. Between 1945 and 2000, the West dominated the world. In 1970 it accounted for two-thirds of global GDP. The United States was by far the dominant country. Now the West accounts for rather less than half of global GDP while China, in terms of size, is on a par with America. We are in the process of transitioning to a post-Western world. Domestically and internationally, Western leaders enjoy much less prestige and authority than they did during the second half of the 20th century. Compare the regard in which Roosevelt, Eisenhower and Kennedy were held with that for George W Bush, Trump and Biden. And the same can be said of the declining respect for the US political system. The allure of democracy has greatly diminished.

The rise of China since 1978 has become a new measure of the performance of the United States and the West. Over this period China has out-performed the West in terms of delivery: the supercharged growth rate, the transformation in living standards, the huge reduction in poverty, the increase in life expectation, the long run social stability and the very high approval ratings. The way in which China has handled the pandemic, with just 4,636 deaths compared with 787,695 deaths in the US, is a powerful endorsement of Chinese governance and a shameful exposure of that in the US. Western democracy is under huge pressure both internally and externally. And the gulf between the relative performance between the US and China is set to grow ever wider.

These are the questions that should be discussed at the Summit for Democracy. But they won't be.
 

By Martin Jacques@martjacques
Martin Jacques was until recently a Senior Fellow at the Department of Politics and International Studies at Cambridge University. He is a Visiting Professor at the Institute of Modern International Relations at Tsinghua University and a Senior Fellow at the China Institute, Fudan University. He is the author of When China Rules the World.

Source link

RELATED ARTICLES
 

Thursday 13 August 2020

Health experts doubt Russia vaccine, as China likely to take lead along Russia in accelerated global vaccine race: experts

https://youtu.be/SHi2RjWP_zo

https://youtu.be/-XW9_1fXmKE

A handout photo provided by the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) shows samples of a vaccine against the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) developed by the Gamaleya Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology, in Moscow, Russia August 6, 2020. Picture taken August 6, 2020.

PETALING JAYA: The announcement of a Covid-19 vaccine in Russia – dubbed Sputnik V – that will help end the pandemic soon is still a “distant reality”, say local public health experts.

Russia announced on Tuesday it will approve a Covid-19 vaccine after less than two months of human testing and hopes to begin production in September with plans to vaccinate its medical staff immediately afterwards.

The approval was made before a phase three trial which would involve thousands of participants and considered essential before regulatory approval is made.

Public health expert Datuk Dr Zainal Ariffin Omar criticised the approval of the Covid-19 vaccine in Russia as non-ethical for its lack of full clinical trials and scientific data.

“The scientific community is worried as basically, a vaccine will need to undergo full clinical trials to identify its efficacy and side effects.

“So, it is premature for Russia to be releasing the vaccine now without conducting large-scale trials that would produce data to show whether it works, ” he said.

Public health medicine specialist of Universiti Malaya Medical Centre, Associate Professor Dr Rafdzah Ahmad Zaki said for any available vaccines, the effectiveness of the vaccine needs to be evaluated before it can be considered.

“With any new vaccine, there will be a committee to discuss and decide on the evidence of whether the vaccine works or not, ” she said.

The head of the Centre for Epidemiology and Evidence-Based Practice noted that any risk or benefit will be balanced before a vaccine is approved, such as whether the tested population is similar to Malaysia’s community and the kind of resources needed to implement the vaccine.

Dr Zainal, who is Malaysian Public Health Physicians’ Association president, cited an example of a dengue vaccination which was approved by the World Health Organisation (WHO). But even then, it was later found to have caused a lot of deaths and />complications.

“Luckily after evaluation, we did not implement the use of the dengue vaccination for our country.

“That is why the scientific and medical community is very cautious of approving a vaccine for the community because we don’t want to be wrong for using a premature product, ” he said.

Dr Zainal expects a vaccine to be made available in the country only by the middle or end of 2021.

“Any vaccine will help the situation later on. But at the moment, we don’t have the capability of developing new vaccines. But we can be involved in any trials or collaborate with international agencies for trial purposes, ” he said.

Indonesia said on Tuesday it would launch a Phase 3 human trials of a vaccine candidate from China’s Sinovac Biotech.

According to the WHO, there are currently 139 vaccines in development and 26 have been undergoing human trials since July 31. Out of the 165 vaccines, six are reaching Phase 3, which is the last step before regulatory approval and will involve large numbers of human testing.

Sinovac’s vaccine, named CoronaVac, is already being tested on 9,000 Brazilian health workers.

Malaysian Medical Association president Dr N. Ganabaskaran said the Covid-19 pandemic will go on for years even if vaccines are readily available.

“Even if vaccines are available, what about poor countries? Not all countries can afford the vaccine.

“There are vaccines being developed, but available vaccines will go to the rich countries first and it may take many years before we can overcome Covid-19, ” he said.

Source link

 Related:


China likely to take lead along Russia in accelerated global vaccine race: experts

The battlefield of a global vaccine race has seemingly transferred from research and development to the market after Russia announced its approval of the world's first COVID-19 vaccine on Tuesday, soon after which the US announced to purchase another 100 million doses of a domestic candidate, revealing the Trump administration's anxiety over Russia's move.

Covid'19 Vaccine for the world started mass produced in China on 8/8/20

8月8日!中国传来大喜讯!疫苗开始大规模生产,准备9月份分发全世界,拟定第一批名单,不是开玩笑,特朗普最怕的事发生!

https://youtu.be/JoXhQIGmtBs


Putin hails 'Sputnik vaccine'

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday that Russia had become the first country to grant regulatory approval to a COVID-19 vaccine after less than two months of human testing, a move Moscow likened to its success in the Cold War-era space race.

Related posts:

 China's Covid-19 vaccine will be available for all, could be ready for public use early next year

China will make its Covid-19 vaccine a global public good when it is ready for application after successful research and clinical trials, a senior Chinese official said.

 

China leads in coronavirus vaccine clinicals to combat Covid-19

Friday 21 February 2020

Chinese varsities hold seven top spots in world ranking

Beijing: Universities from the Chinese mainland have secured seven of the top 10 positions in the Times Higher Education’s Emerging Economies University Rankings 2020 for the third straight year.

Tsinghua University maintained its position at the top in the listing of institutions from emerging economies.

Peking University was in second place for the second year running.

Zhejiang University and the University of Science and Technology of China remain in third and fourth place, while Shanghai Jiao Tong University climbed from eighth to sixth. Fudan University was listed in seventh place, while Nanjing University was ninth.

Other institutions in the top 10 include Moscow State University (fifth), National Taiwan University (eighth), and The University of Cape Town (10th).

Phil Baty, chief knowledge officer at Times Higher Education, said: “China’s success in our Emerging Economies University Rankings reflects its rapid rise on the world higher education stage. With the Double First Class Initiative driving improvements across participant universities, we expect it to continue to establish itself as a major global player in providing world-class higher education over the coming years.”

The Double First-Class Initiative refers to fostering “world-class universities” and “world-class discipline”. — China Daily/ANN

 Source link


Read more:


Seven Chinese universities in top 10 in QS Asia rankings ...


Top Universities in China 2019 | Top Universities


Meet Mainland China's Top 10 Universities 2019

https://youtu.be/VqHtvCOrkmg

New ranking — get to know the top 10 universities in Mainland China for 2019! Get the full results: http://bit.ly/MainlandChina19Y #QSWUR


Related post:


  Recent discourses about revamping our higher education system have included the following: critical thinking, empowerment, humanistic v...

Meritocracy Vs. Mediocrity Education system must champion meritocracy THE country is facing yet another controversy of its own .

The pump-prime our financial situation, we need a massive investment to revamp and rebuild our education    https://youtu.be/FVnBpckzi...
New decade, new Malaysian education: For the sake of our children and our future, Mazlee’s replacement should be a qualified and capable ..


 China, next global hub for higher education

With its varsities gaining better rankings, the most populous nation is set to become the world’s leading learning destination.



Friday 21 June 2019

US hypocritical in accusing China of tech theft

Photo: IC
https://youtu.be/tGD072hQGP8

 

The US has no lack of a “criminal record” in terms of technology theft.


 The US has repeatedly ignored China's innovative breakthroughs through self-reliance and hard work but accuses China of "stealing" US technology and intellectual property rights. These arguments do not hold water.

These absurd accusations imply that the US must be the absolute leader in technological innovation - only the US is qualified to make major breakthroughs while others should merely follow its lead and import its technology, otherwise they are "stealing." Such logic is ridiculous.

A country's technological innovation capability is closely related to its scientific research resources, such as talents, capital, and scientific experimental devices. Leading scientific research resources have determined the US leading position in various science and technology fields. Nonetheless, economies including the EU, China, Japan, Russia and India have also mastered considerable scientific research resources and developed technological innovation capabilities with their own characteristics and advantages.

It is due to such relatively scattered distribution of global research resources that the US can never be an "all-round champion" of technological innovation. It is natural that other countries will catch up with the US in certain fields.

Historically, the US made a great fortune during WWII, and out-competed the Soviet Union in terms of comprehensive national strength during the Cold War. Even so, the US failed to gain absolute dominance over the Soviet Union in technological innovation.

As a major technological innovator keeping pace with the US, the Soviet Union set multiple world records in its golden age. The world's first nuclear power plant, artificial earth satellite, manned spacecraft, space station and intercontinental missiles were all built by the Soviet Union. As far as weapons and equipment are concerned, both the Soviet Union and the US had something in which they excelled. Even now, Russia, the successor state to the Soviet Union, surpasses the US in some respects.

The US made its first nuclear power plant, artificial satellite, manned spacecraft, and intercontinental missiles after the Soviet Union's success. Based on its current logic, should these US cutting-edge technologies be regarded as something stolen from the Soviet Union?

There are more examples. China led the US in the processing power of supercomputers for many years. In June 2018, the US retook the world's lead thanks to its machine "Summit" which could process 200,000 trillion calculations per second. By following US logic, should we say the US surpassed China by stealing China's supercomputing technology?

Some have already noted that the US is actually the guilty party that files the suit first. The country has no lack of a "criminal record" in terms of technology theft. In the first decades after its founding, the US tried hard to "steal" advanced industrial technology from the UK to develop its own industries.

During WWII, prior to Germany's surrender, the US established the Alsos Mission. The team was sent to Germany not to fight, but to capture top German scientists and their technologies ahead of the Soviet Union. It is said that Wernher von Braun, one of the founders of the US space program, was a leading figure in Nazi Germany's rocket development program.

When the Soviet Union collapsed, the US took the opportunity to obtain advanced military technology that the Soviet Union had accumulated for years and to lure away many top technical talents.

After that, plenty of US weapons benefited from the Soviet Union's technology to varying degrees, which saved the US time and money. The US technology theft from the Soviet Union has produced generous returns.

However, the US is not ashamed of such records. Many Hollywood blockbusters have molded American spies conducting such theft into the embodiment of justice, and molded theft into a just act. Perhaps it is precisely because of this that the US is now judging others by itself.

In recent years, China has continued to increase investment in science and technology. In 2018, the country's research and development funds amounted to nearly 2 trillion yuan ($290 billion), second only to the US. The efforts will naturally pay off.

Nevertheless, the US deliberately turned a blind eye to China's efforts to promote independent innovation and contain China's development. The past actions and current absurd logic of the US are being seen through.

Source link 


Innovation is a driving force within China's economy today. Yet behind that innovation, what's the role of research and development?


https://youtu.be/xo_OLlL7XqI
https://youtu.be/xo_OLlL7XqI?t=199



Related posts:


The Sino-US trade dispute is not only a game between representatives of the two countries at the negotiating table, but also a cont...

https://youtu.be/7_kKAiHjJyY They say a good conversation could be just like drinking a cup of black coffee and as stimulating as it is...

Sunday 10 June 2018

SCO submit, non-Western Eurasia rises

https://youtu.be/tUCzHV3Vfe4 https://youtu.be/Hpw5ZMIo8NI https://youtu.be/2jLWJWNtJro https://youtu.be/WyL3x6eUKtI https://youtu.be/1nRtQ8vFC0Q https://youtu.be/y4CZ6FQHcVM

First among equals: Putin and Xi had an official meeting before the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit in Qingdao. Sloppy US policies have helped to build a growing China-Russia alliance for a full decade now.- AFP

THE week that was ended with a significant non-Western event often ignored or misunderstood by the West: the latest Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit.

The 18th annual SCO summit in the Chinese port city of Qingdao this weekend is only the fourth held in China. Beijing is relaxed about its role in a growing organisation of eight member countries, six Dialogue Partners and four observer nations – a confidence that suggests considerable clout.

China and Russia are the two hulking members of a group that boasts formal parity, being the conspicuous “firsts among equals.” And as two consecutive US administrations unwittingly drive these giants closer than ever before strategically, Western attention is led astray.

Western reports track President Putin’s travel to Qingdao and the diplomatic niceties exchanged there. At the same time, Western commentators are tempted to dismiss the summit as yet another futile talkfest.

Both approaches are wrong or misplaced. While Xi-Putin exchanges may not be the highlight of this year’s SCO summit, neither are they insignificant.

Sloppy US policies helped to build a growing China-Russia alliance for a full decade now. This is evident enough from the meeting rooms of the UN Security Council to the battlefields of Syria to the South China Sea and the Baltics.

The latest SCO summit reaffirms the trend but adds only marginally to it by way of atmospherics. There are more important developments visible at, if not represented by, the Qingdao summit.

It is the first SCO summit at which both India and Pakistan arrive as full members.

Beginning as the Shanghai Five in the mid-1990s, the SCO has grown steadily and now incorporates three giants – China, Russia and India – in the great Eurasian land mass where both the US and the EU have scant inputs.

With Pakistan coming in at the same time as India as an equal partner, the SCO should be free from any sub-regional turbulence within South Asia.

Turkey is also an SCO Dialogue Partner whose interest in full membership is not without broader implications for the West.

Turkey has considerable military strength and is also a member of Nato, hosting its Allied Land Command and a US air base in Izmir. However, Ankara’s years-long effort to join the EU has been snubbed by Brussels.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has famously mulled over choosing between the EU and the SCO, reportedly preferring the latter. How would the West find a Nato member joining a non-Western group led by Russia and China?

Deep-seated discomfort would be a mild way to put a reaction in Brussels and Washington. To US policymakers, Turkey is a strategic country because of its location as well as its status as a prominent Muslim country.

Both China and Russia have sounded positive about Turkey’s prospective membership of the SCO. Nonetheless, SCO members share an understanding of sorts that Turkey may have to forego its Nato membership before SCO membership can be entertained.

However, Beijing and Moscow may be less concerned than Washington and Brussels about Turkey’s SCO membership with its Nato credentials intact. That immediately makes Turkey more comfortable to be in SCO company.

Turkey has already received what amounts to special treatment within the SCO that no other Dialogue Partner has enjoyed. Last year it was elected as Chair of the SCO’s Energy Club, a position previously enjoyed only by full members.

Erdogan has called the SCO “more powerful” than the EU, particularly in a time of Brexit. Bahrain and Qatar seek full SCO membership; Iraq, Israel, Maldives, Ukraine and Vietnam want to be Dialogue Partners; and Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Egypt, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Syria want Observer status.

Iran already has SCO Observer status and had applied for full membership in 2008. Following the easing of UN sanctions on Tehran, China declared its support for Iran’s membership bid in 2016.

The recent US pullout from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (“Iran nuclear deal”) has further prodded Tehran to “look East.” These days that means China and a China-led SCO.

Iran already trades heavily with China with myriad deals in multiple sectors. Mutual interests abound, far exceeding the basic relationship of oil and gas sales to China.

As Europe treads carefully, mindful of possible new sanctions on Iran following the US cop out, cash-rich Chinese firms take up the slack. US policy is also pushing Iran, among others, closer to China.

In preparing for Prime Minister Modi’s arrival in Qingdao on Friday, Indian Ambassador Gautam Bambawale said both countries were determined to work in close partnership and would never be split apart.

This echoed two main points already shared by Indian and Chinese leaders – that their countries are partners in development and progress, and what they have in common are greater than their differences.

All of this seems set to undo the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) that groups the US with Japan, Australia and India, all boasting a democratic system in common in a joint strategic encirclement of China. But India’s relations with China have been on the upswing for half a year now.

The day before Modi arrived in Qingdao, a Quad meeting in Singapore closed on Friday with India expressing differences with the other members. Its Ambassador to Russia Pankaj Saran said the Quad was not the same as its hopes for an inclusive “Indo-Pacific region” (IPR) that did not target any country.

He added that India wanted closer ties with Russia as well in an IPR. Just a fortnight before, Russia’s recent Ambassador to the US Sergei Kislyak said President Trump also wanted closer ties with Russia.

That was only a small part of the roller-coaster ride of international diplomacy in the first half of 2018.

In January Trump condemned the Taliban for a spate of attacks in Afghanistan, vowing that all talks with them were off. Until then, top US diplomats were carefully planning negotiations with the Taliban.

In March, US officials blasted Russia for allegedly arming the Taliban, which Moscow denied. The following month Nato voiced support for Afghan President Ashraf Ghani’s efforts to talk with the Taliban to “save the country.”

Meanwhile Trump’s ramparts of trade barriers in the direction of a trade war would decimate allies from East Asia to Europe. French President Emmanuel Macron expressed a European position in reaching out to China on climate and security issues.

By March the EU had dug in, preparing for the worst of US trade barriers while vowing retaliation. The WTO also warned Washington that it was veering towards a trade war with tariffs on steel and aluminium.

In April, China’s new Defence Minister Gen. Wei Fenghe arrived in Moscow for talks with his Russian counterpart Sergei Shoigu. Wei rubbed it in for Washington, publicly announcing that his visit was to show the US the high level of strategic cooperation between China and Russia.

Two days later the Foreign Ministers of China and Russia expressed similar sentiments. They championed negotiations and sticking to pledges while weighing in against the unilateralism of a unipolar power.

Where China has the SCO, Russia has the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU).

If any discomfort is felt in Washington, it is from acting as a unipolar power in an increasingly multipolar world.

Source: Behind the headlines by Bunn Nagara is a Senior Fellow at the Institute of Strategic and International Studies (ISIS) Malaysia.



Related:

SCO momentum defies pessimistic predictions

Blaming China won't heal G7 internal woes

One 'rant,' rough talks sour G7 mood in confrontations with Trump

Related posts:


BRICS and SCO: Seizing the Eruasian moment

Thursday 3 November 2016

We need to come out against a third world war

https://youtu.be/EpF0U7lUVdk

IS A WAR in the making – a third world war? If there is much talk about such a possibility, it is mainly because of the tensions between the United States and Russia.

Tensions between the two most powerful nuclear states in the world have never been this high since the end of the Cold War in 1989 and the demise of the Soviet Union in 1991.

There are at least two flash points, one more dangerous than the other. In Eastern Ukraine, Russian backed rebels will not surrender to the US supported regime in Kiev because they see US control over Ukraine as part of a much larger agenda to expand Nato power to the very borders of Russia. This has been happening for some years now.

But it is the Washington-Moscow confrontation in Allepo, Syria which portends to a huge conflagration. The US is protective of major militant groups such as Al-Nusra which has besieged Eastern Allepo and is seeking to overthrow the Bashar al-Assad government.

Washington has also set its sight on "regime change" in Damascus ever since the latter's determined resistance to Israeli occupation of the strategic Golan Heights in Syria from 1967.

The drive for regime change intensified with the US-Israeli quest for a "new Middle East" following the Anglo-American invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003. It became more pronounced in 2009 when Bashar al-Assad rejected a proposal to allow a gas pipe-line from Qatar to Europe to pass through his country, a pipe-line which would have reduced Europe's dependence upon Russia for gas.

Russia of course has been a long-standing ally of Syria. Together with Iran and the Lebanese Hezbollah, it is helping the Syrian government to break the siege of Eastern Allepo and to defeat militants in other parts of Syria.

It is obvious that in both instances, in Ukraine and Syria, the US has not been able to achieve what it wants. The US has also been stymied in Southeast Asia where its attempt to re-assert its power through its 2010 Pivot to Asia policy has suffered a serious setback as a result of the decision of the new president of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, to pursue an independent foreign policy that no longer adheres blindly to US interests.

At the same time, China continues to expand and enhance its economic strength in Asia and the world through its One Belt One Road projects and the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank and via its leadership of BRICS.

China's regional and global economic role is leading to its pronounced presence in security and military matters. As a result of all this, the US's imperial power has clearly diminished. It is a hegemon in decline.

It is because it is not prepared to accept its decline that some US generals are threatening to demonstrate US's military might. If a hegemon is a danger to humankind when it is at its pinnacle, it becomes an even greater threat to peace when its power is diminishing.

Like a wounded tiger, it becomes even more furious and ferocious. A new US president may be inclined to give vent to this frustration through an arrogant display of military power.

How can we check such wanton arrogance? There will be elements in the elite stratum of US society itself who would be opposed to the US going to war.

We saw a bit of this in 2013 when those who were itching to launch military strikes against Syria based upon dubious "evidence" of the government's use of chemical weapons were thwarted by others with a saner view of the consequences of war. It is also important to observe that none of the US's major allies in Europe wants a war.

Burdened by severe challenges related to the economy and migration, the governments know that their citizens will reject any move towards war either on the borders of Russia or in Syria and West Asia.

This also suggests that a self-absorbed European citizenry may not have the enthusiasm to mobilise against an imminent war. Let us not forget that it was in European cities from London to Berlin that the biggest demonstrations against the war in Iraq took place in 2003.

Anti-war protests will have to be initiated elsewhere this time.

Governments in Moscow and Beijing, in Teheran and Jakarta, in Pretoria and La Paz, should come out openly against war. They should encourage other governments in the Global South and the Global North to denounce any move towards a war that will engulf the whole of humanity.

Citizens all over the world should condemn war through a variety of strategies ranging from signature campaigns and letters to the media to public rallies and street demonstrations.

In this campaign against an imminent war, the media, both conventional and alternative, will have a huge role to play.

It is unfortunate that well-known media outlets in the West have supported war in the past. It is time that they atone for their sins!

By Chandra Muzaffar

Dr Chandra Muzaffar is the president of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST). Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Related articles
https://youtu.be/5iWUSTPeKQA J-20 stealth fighter makes public debut The 11th China International Aviation & Aerospace Exhibi...

 
World doubts the leadership of Uncle Sam: expert
The culture of guns As the US has lost more international status and influence since the global financial crisis in 2008, the inter...


 Philippine President Duterte in China for "Historic" Visit ; US Media Churlish!
  Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte arrives in Beijing on October 18, 2016, beginning his state visit to China. [Photo: Chinanews.co..

Tuesday 20 September 2016

People's Daily criticizes USA as " source of turnmoi in the world "

霸气!党报狠批美国为世界“动荡之源”


导读:尽管和平与发展是当今世界的主题,但是局部冲突依旧不断,而这背后,或多或少都有美国在插手。


党报狠批美国_英语新闻网

The People’s Daily, the official newspaper of the Communist Party of China, has criticized the United States as the "source of turmoil in the world."

北京9月18日电 中国共产党官方报纸《人民日报》批评美国为“世界动荡之源”。

The newspaper on Sunday published three articles by Chinese scholars to analyze the causes of expansive and hegemonic moves by the United States from systemic, ideological and strategic perspectives.

《人民日报》于周日发表了三篇由中国学者撰写的文章,从内在体制、意识形态、国家战略方面分析美国的扩张和霸权主义运动。

An editor’s note on the page said that U.S. interventions are behind unrest and disputes in many places, including the Middle East, Eastern Europe and the South China Sea.

报纸上一位编者的卷首语写道,多地的动荡和纷争背后都有美国的插手,包括中东、东欧和南海。

"The United States is keen to make messes in the world, cast shadows on order and stability in multiple regions and jeopardize peace and development in relevant countries," the note said.

“美国热衷于在世界制造混乱,给多个地区的秩序与稳定投下阴影,对相关国家的和平与发展构成威胁。”卷首语写道。

An article by Yang Guangbin, a professor of politics at Renmin University, pointed out that the "military-industrial complex," which former U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned against, is "kidnapping U.S. domestic and diplomatic policy."

杨光斌,人民大学政治学教授在文中指出,美国前总统艾森豪威尔曾警告说,“军事工业复合体”正“绑架着美国的国内和外交政策”。

The "military-industrial complex" naturally demands war and military expansion, resulting in the Iraq war, "Arab Spring" uprisings and growing tensions with Russia and China, Yang said.

“军事工业复合体”自然是要求战争和军事扩张,这就导致了伊拉克战争、“阿拉伯之春”起义以及与俄罗斯和中国关系的不断紧张。

Yang also criticized the United States for selling its ideology, which has brainwashed the elite in some non-Western countries.

杨光斌还批评了美国推广其意识形态,这洗脑了一些非西方国家的精英分子。

"Countries that have followed American-style ’liberty and democracy’ are not turning into American-style states. Instead, their lives remain the same, or even become worse," the article said.

文章写道,“信奉美国‘自由民主’的国家并没有因此而变成美国式国家,依然过着自己固有的日子,甚至境况更差。”

Another article by Li Wen, a researcher at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, noted that the United States’ eagerness to make trouble around the world is due to its "hegemonic anxiety."

另外一篇由中国社科院的一位研究人员撰写的文章写道,由于“霸权焦虑症”,美国急切地想要煽风点火。

It is "to a large degree, a reflection of a twisted mentality of an empire moving downhill," according to the article.

文章写道,这“很大程度上是一个衰落中的帝国特有的心理扭曲在行为上的反映。”

The scholar also denounced the United States’ measures to contain China by causing trouble in East Asia.

这位学者还谴责了美国通过在东亚制造事端包围中国的措施。

A third article by Lin Hongyu, a professor at Huaqiao University, said U.S. maneuvers in the Asia-Pacific region are just part of its overseas expansion and interventionist diplomacy to maintain its leading international role.

第三篇文章由华侨大学教授林宏宇写道,他表示,美国在亚太地区的军事演习只是其海洋扩张和干预外交的一部分,目的是为了维持主导的国际地位。

The article called on Chinese authorities to manage disputes between China and the United States in a constructive way and to build a new type of major-country relationship together.

这篇文章呼吁中国政府以建设性的方式处理中美之间的争端,共同建立一种新型的大国关系。

Source: 编辑:David Yang (人民网) 双语
http://news.iyuba.com/m/essay/2016/09/19/49492.html

Related posts:


Jul 20, 2016 ... Dao inhabits people's hearts: Tribunal's dangerous precedent in ... On the premise of peaceful settlement, international law provides the right of ...


Jun 13, 2016 ... Dialogue 06/05/2016 South China Sea & Sino-US ties - CCTV News - CCTV.com ... If yes, why is the Malaysia-China and Philippines-China relations poles apart? ...... This is a dilemma facing China, the US and South Korea.

Sep 10, 2016 ... North Korea should bear in mind that nuclear weapons are only a strategic deterrent tool and cannot be resorted to. North Korea has scarce ...


Aug 24, 2016 ... At a time when Beijing and Seoul are in a tug of war on the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) anti-missile ...

Aug 11, 2016 ... The deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile defense system will not neutralize the threat of North Korea's ...


Jul 22, 2016 ... More than 2,000 people from Seongju county, where one THAAD battery will be deployed, gathered at a square in Seoul for a rally on ...

Friday 22 July 2016

South Koreans protest US Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile deployment


https://youtu.be/knkmDTsGTYA
  • South Koreans protest US missile deployment
    People from Seongju county hold the national flags of South Korea and banners to protest against the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), during a rally in Seoul, capital of South Korea, on July 21, 2016. More than 2,000 people from Seongju county, where one THAAD battery will be deployed, gathered at a square in Seoul for a rally on Thursday, to protest against the deployment of THAAD. (Xinhua/Yao Qilin)

    South Koreans protest US missile deployment

  • South Koreans protest US missile deployment. Thousands of South Koreans from Seongju county gathered in Seoul to protest against the government’s decision to deploy a U.S.-built THAAD missile defense unit in their home town. People from Seongju county hold the national flags of South Korea and banners...

"Stop the deployment! NO THAAD! NO THAAD! NO THAAD!" Protesters said.

"The way that the government made the decision completely on their own, without talking to residents first, is completely wrong. We are here to express the people's anger living in Seongju," Protest organiser Seok Hyeon-Cheol said.

"The missile deployment site is right in the middle of a city that has around 20,000 people. I can see it when I open the door of my house, the door of my house! And I can see it from my living room. That is why we strongly oppose the THAAD deployment. We oppose it for our children, and their children -- for the future of our county, for our health, and our right to live," Protester form Seongju County Kim An-Su said.

The protest follows a raucous standoff last week between residents and the country's prime minister, Hwang Kyo-ahn, who was pelted with eggs and plastic bottles and trapped inside a bus for several hours when he visited the county to explain his decision to deploy the missile system there.

South Korea's President Park Geun Hye has called for people to support the government's plans. She said the move was "inevitable" because of a growing threat from the DPRK. South Korea's defense ministry says the country's THAAD missile system will become operational before the end of 2017.


A senior official of Seongju county (2nd L, front) attends a rally to protest against the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) in Seoul, capital of South Korea, on July 21, 2016. More than 2,000 people from Seongju county, where one THAAD battery will be deployed, gathered at a square in Seoul for a rally on Thursday, to protest against the deployment of THAAD. (Xinhua/Yao Qilin)

People from Seongju county hold the national flags of South Korea and banners to protest against the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), during a rally in Seoul, capital of South Korea, on July 21, 2016.


People from Seongju county hold the national flags of South Korea and banners to protest against the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), during a rally in Seoul, capital of South Korea, on July 21, 2016. (Xinhua/Yao Qilin)


People from Seongju county hold banners to protest against the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), during a rally in Seoul, capital of South Korea, on July 21, 2016. More than 2,000 people from Seongju county, where one THAAD battery will be deployed, gathered at a square in Seoul for a rally on Thursday, to protest against the deployment of THAAD. (Xinhua/Yao Qilin)

HAAD poses real threat to security of China


https://youtu.be/rhlxr6BRv4E

A Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) interceptor is launched during a successful intercept test, in this undated handout photo provided by the US Department of Defense, Missile Defense Agency. [Photo/Agencies]

What has historically been ours is ours. Even if others say it is not. That is why, annoying as it is, the Philippines-initiated South China Sea arbitration is actually not worth the limelight it is being given.

It is time for Beijing to get down to real, serious business. It has bigger issues to attend to, the most imperative of which is the anti-missile system being deployed on its doorsteps. Because, while it was coping with the worthless arbitral award from The Hague, Washington and Seoul finalized their plan for the deployment of the US' Terminal High Altitude Area Defense missile system in the Republic of Korea.

The arbitral ruling, which is null and non-executable, will have little effect on China's interests and security in the South China Sea. But not THAAD, which is a clear, present, substantive threat to China's security interests.

The installment of the US system in the ROK should be of far greater concern to Beijing, and warrants a far stronger reaction. Or should we say retaliation? The ROK has legitimate security concerns, especially with Pyongyang constantly threatening nuclear bombing. With that in mind, Beijing has been adamant about de-nuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, and worked closely with Seoul and Washington in implementing and upgrading United Nations sanctions, and appealed tirelessly for restarting the Six-Party Talks.

But Seoul has brushed aside Beijing's security interests while pursuing those of its own.

Washington and Seoul did claim that THAAD would be focused "solely" on nuclear/missile threats from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, and would not be directed toward any third-party nation. But THAAD far exceeds such a need. Besides the far more credible threat from Pyongyang's artillery, short-range and lower-altitude missiles is simply beyond the system's reach.

While it will deliver a limited security guarantee to the ROK, THAAD's X-band radar will substantially compromise the security interests of China and Russia, no matter how the United States shrouds its purpose.

Yet having made such a beggar-thy-neighbor choice, Seoul has in effect turned its back on China. By hosting THAAD, it has presented itself as Washington's cat's-paw in the latter's strategic containment of China. All rhetoric about friendship is meaningless lip service with the deployment of THAAD.

Beijing must review and readjust its Korean Peninsula strategies in accordance with the latest threat from the peninsula, including its ROK policies.

That does not mean forsaking its commitment to de-nuclearization, or UN resolutions. But Beijing must concentrate more on safeguarding its own interests, both immediate and long-term.

Source: China Daily Updated: 2016-07-15

China can counter THAAD deployment


https://youtu.be/QTVgIJT1DaY

The US and South Korea on Friday announced their decision to deploy the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile system on the Korean Peninsula.

Apart from monitoring missiles from North Korea, THAAD could expand South Korea's surveillance range to China and Russia and pose serious threat to the two countries.

Though South Korea claims it can reduce the surveillance range, the country cannot make the call as the system will be controlled by US forces in South Korea, and such cheap promises mean nothing in international politics.

We recommend China to take the following countermeasures.

China should cut off economic ties with companies involved with the system and ban their products from entering the Chinese market.

It could also implement sanctions on politicians who advocated the deployment, ban their entry into China as well as their family business. In addition, the Chinese military could come up with a solution that minimizes the threat posed by the system, such as technical disturbances and targeting missiles toward the THAAD system.

Meanwhile, China should also re-evaluate the long-term impact in Northeast Asia of the sanctions on North Korea, concerning the link between the sanctions and the imbalance after the THAAD system is deployed.

China can also consider the possibility of joint actions with Russia with countermeasures.

The deployment of THAAD will surely have a long-term and significant influence. South Korea will be further tied by its alliance with the US and lose more independence in national strategy.

North Korea's nuclear issue has further complicated the situation on the Korean Peninsula, but the country's possession of nuclear weapons also results from outside factors.

The biggest problem of the peninsula's messy situation lies in US' Cold-War strategy in Northeast Asia, and its mind-set of balancing China in the region. Neither Pyongyang nor Seoul could make their own decisions independently, as the region's stability and development are highly related to China and the US.

The whole picture of the situation on the Korean Peninsula could not been seen merely from the view of Pyongyang and Seoul. China's relationship with North Korea has already been affected, and ties with South Korea are unlikely to remain untouched.

China is experiencing the pains of growing up. We have to accept the status quo of "being caught in the middle."

China should neither be too harsh on itself, nor be self-indulgent. Being true to itself, China will fear no challenges

Source: Global Times Published: 2016-7-9

Saturday 25 June 2016

Britain steps backward as EU faces decline: chaos but no negative impact, a windfall for children studying in UK



Britain steps backward as EU faces decline


The UK voted to leave the EU, with the Leave supporters beating Remain by 51.9 percent to 48.1 percent. The slight victory is likely to have opened a Pandora's box in Europe, pushing the continent into chaos.

A lose-lose situation is already emerging. The British pound fell 10 percent at one stage on Friday. The euro fell 3 percent.

David Cameron announced he would quit as British prime minister. Scotland may start a new independence referendum.

There are also calls in the Netherlands and France for a similar exit referendum.

The UK is just over 300 years old. In its heyday it was known as an empire on which the sun never set, with colonies all over the world (Britain was the former imperial power - whose military forces repeatedly invaded China in the 19th century - and the rising Asian giant, now the world's second-largest economy)

Now it is stepping back to where it was.

Britons are already showing a losing mind-set. They may become citizens of a nation that prefers to shut itself from the outside world.

The Leave advocates had been calculating whether their pensions were guaranteed or migrants were encroaching on their neighborhood. Bigger topics such as the country's aspirations or its global strategy were overlooked.

Britain has been a special member of the EU. It has not joined the eurozone, nor adopted the Schengen agreement. France and Germany have been resentful of Britain's half-hearted presence in the EU. In a sense, Britain's exit may be a relief for both sides.

However, such relief is in effect a major setback for European integration. Such setbacks don't happen in good times. Britain's exit reflects the general decline of Europe.

The world's center used to lie on the two sides of the Atlantic. Now the focus has shifted to the Pacific. East Asia has witnessed decades of high-speed growth and prosperity. Europe stays where it was, becoming the world's center of museums and tourist destinations. Unfortunately, Europe is also close to the chaotic Middle East. Waves of refugees flood into Europe, coinciding with increasing terrorist attacks.

Europe is not able to resolve the problems it is facing. The public are confused and disappointed and extremism is steading.

The Leave grouping beat out the Remain supporters by only 4 percentage points, which could have resulted from some temporary reasons. Is it really fair to decide Britain's future this way?

Such changes will benefit the US, which will lose a strong rival in terms of the dominance of its currency. Politically it will be easier for the US to influence Europe.

There is no direct political impact on Russia and China. For the Chinese people, who are at a critical time to learn about globalization and democracy, they will continue to watch the consequence of Britain's embracing of a "democratic" referendum. - Global Times.

No negative impact from UK vote for Malaysia



Britain is still a hugely important economy in Europe, says Liew

KUALA LUMPUR : Malaysian property firms with developments in the United Kingdom say that their ventures will not be negatively impacted as a result of the June 23 referendum whereby British citizens voted to exit the European Union.

Eco World International Bhd executive vice-chairman Tan Sri Liew Kee Sin said that while the decisive win by the Brexit camp was unexpected, the group is optimistic that the results hold a silver lining going forward.

“Now that the results of the EU referendum are known, the long uncertainty which has caused many investors to hold back on decision making is finally over. Britain is still a hugely important economy in Europe with highly principled, professional and competent leaders,” he said in a statement.

Liew added that he has every confidence that the British government will do their utmost to take proactive measures to assuage post-Brexit concerns and move the UK forward on every front.

London’s position as a prime destination for global real estate investment is unlikely to change given that many of the fundamental drivers of demand are still intact. Chief among them are transparency of laws, sesurity and ease of ownership, and shortage of supply, among others, Liew noted.

EWI, which is en route to listing on Bursa Malaysia, has three projects in London, namely the London City Island Phase 2 in East London, Embassy Gardens in Nine Elms, and Wardian London facing the Canary Wharf. All three were launched last year.

“For EWI specifically, it should be noted that through our proposed initial public offering we will be raising equity in ringgit. Now that the sterling has dropped it means that the cost we have to inject into the UK to pay for the developments there will be lower,” he points out.

Meanwhile, in a statement reacting to the results of the UK referendum, Sime Darby Bhd, which is undertaking the Battersea Power Station project has reiterated its long term commitment to the venture.

“The results of the referendum is not expected to impact the viability of the project.

“We are confident the iconic development will continue to generate interest in the longer term and that London will continue to remain a key investment destination and financial centre,” it said.

Sime Darby has a 40% stake in Battersea. The other joint venture partners are SP Setia Bhd and the Employees Provident Fund with 40% and 20% respectively.

A research note by MIDF Research said global capital markets may take some time to adjust to the Brexit vote which could have adverse repercussions on businesses.

Its group managing director Datuk Mohd Najib Abdullah said that as a result of Brexit, the world is moving into a period of elevated uncertainty, with risk appetite plunging in a flight to safety and security.

As the UK is an important market for Malaysian exporters and an important source of foreign direct investments, any economic malaise from Europe will inevitably affect Malaysia in the longer term, Aboth directly and indirectly, MIDF said. - By afiq Isa The Star

Windfall for Malaysian parents of children studying in Britain 


Parents with children studying in Britain are heaving a sigh of relief because the pound has weakened following Brexit.

The ringgit closed at RM5.66 to the pound yesterday, a drop of 4.67% compared to a month ago when it was RM6.03.

Parent Action Group for Education Malaysia chairman Datin Noor Azimah Abdul Rahman said tuition fees would be more affordable.

“For parents who couldn’t afford it initially, they may change their minds now,” she said when contacted.

She added that one should look at the positive instead of focusing on the negative implications.

A parent, who asked to be identified only as Auntie Chris, has a son studying biotechnology at Imperial College London, and said: “We are liquidating our accounts to take advantage of the drop in the pound, which is great news.”

She said her son, who is in his second year, planned to pursue his master’s in Britain after graduation but had put his plan on hold due to the strong pound.

“We asked him to work first, after graduating, due to the financial constraints but with the pound dropping significantly, going for his master’s may be back on the table,” she said.

Another parent, Azura Abdullah, said she did not expect her son’s tuition fees to increase any time soon.

Her son is a second-year law student at University of Exeter.

Some parents were fearful of Britain’s exit from the European Union.

Despite the weakened pound, Azura felt the price of goods may increase in the short term because Britain could no longer leverage on EU trade deals, which could increase the cost of living there for her son.

“But we hope to offset this with the lower currency rate as the pound will devalue in the short to middle term,” Azura added.

Auntie Chris said she was worried that Britain’s decision may affect job prospects for Malaysians over there.

“If Britain goes into recession, it will affect job prospects for new graduates,” she said, adding that immigration controls may also be tightened following Brexit.

Chief executive officer and provost of the University of Nottingham Malaysia campus Prof Christine Ennew said parents should expect cheaper education.

“Students should be able to do more with their money in the UK, at least in the short term, say over the next couple of years,” she said.

Prof Ennew admitted that there could be some concerns over the issuing of student visas.

“However, Boris Johnson, one of the leading figures in the Brexit camp, has always been very supportive of international students and this should give some reassurance that the visa regime will not necessarily become harder for students from outside the EU,” she said.

She added that it was likely that EU students would be more affected than those from outside the union. - The Star

Related post:

2016年5月13日 ... Chinese-language editorial (see below) published earlier today, the Global Times said that "barbarians" in the British media had blown the ...



Related:

Brexit reminds EU to heed the voice of people

In spite of earnest pleas for the United Kingdom to remain, and warnings of dire economic, political consequences of Brexit (or Britain's exit from the EU), the referendum was a matter of popular choice, not a process dictated by reason and cool-headed analysis.

UK-M’sian partnership remains unchanged
Pound’s sudden dip a headache
Cameron out of No. 10 by October
Our students an anxious lot
M’sian developers unfazed by EU withdrawal
UK’s departure drives KLCI down
Stunned EU tells Britain to go quickly
Impact on Malaysia minimal in the long run, says Mustapa
Britain votes to leave EU

UK walks a tightrope in Brexit poll

If the UK votes to leave, it will become an Atlantic orphan and lose its special relationship with the EU.