• ijrepjournalism@gmail.com
  • contact@ij-reportika.com
Ij reportika Logo

Category: Australia

Henan court jails dissident for nearly three years after Jiang Tianyong visit

Editor09 mins

Authorities in the central Chinese province of Henan have handed down a two-year, 11-month jail term to dissident Xing Wangli, after he visited a prominent rights attorney. Xing was sentenced by the Xi County District People’s Court, which found him guilty of “defamation,” following a trial by video link to the Xi County Detention Center earlier this month. His attorney received the sentencing decision on April 25. The case against Xing rested on an open letter he wrote laying responsibility for serious head injuries he received in the detention center at the door of three local government officials. The letter, dated March 5, 2021 and titled “To netizens and people from all walks of life,” accused local officials of attacking and retaliating against him for standing up for his family’s rights and interests. It accuses local officials and law enforcement of covering up after his son suffered massive injuries in a traffic accident at the age of 5, requiring treatment in intensive care and details a self-immolation attempt by his wife Xu Jincui on Tiananmen Square, after which Xu was jailed for three years and Wang sent to labor camp for one year. “During my detention in the Xi County Detention Center, I was subjected to inhuman treatment, hunger strike, shackles, handcuffs, and physical and mental torture,” the letter reads. Xi’s mother-in-law He Zeying and his mother Xing Jiaying were jailed for three years for “picking quarrels and stirring up trouble,” it said. “While I was detained in the Xixian Detention Center, the deputy county magistrate of Xi county, Li Xuechao, came up with a plan and the county party secretary Jin Ping nodded along, so police chief Liu Yang arranged for the detention center to carry it out,” the letter said. “I was beaten with blunt instruments, and was later diagnosed by Xinyang Central Hospital with comminuted fracture of the brain, contusion of the lower lobes of both lungs, and bilateral pleural effusion,” it said. “I was illegally detained, sent to illegal re-education through labor, and sentenced to jail for a total of nine years and nine months,” the letter said. ‘Rotten apples’ Xing’s wife, mother-in-law and mother and other family members have served a total of 26 years behind bars, it said, calling on CCP leader Xi Jinping to “investigate these rotten apples.” The letter said some of the retaliation was linked to Xing’s refusal to stay quiet about the deaths of two petitioners in suspicious circumstances. The court decided that the letter had been commissioned by Xing’s son Xing Jian, while the officials named in it took the witness stand to say it wasn’t true. It accuses Xing of instructing his son to post the letter “containing fabricated claims” to WeChat groups, after which it garnered more than 12,000 page views. It said Xing’s “defamation of public officials” had violated the officials rights and affected their mental health. Xing Jian, now living in New Zealand, said the trial was entirely biased in favor of the officials. “The witnesses they found were all public officials, and they all had a relationship to the [case],” he said, adding that what his father posted was in the public interest. “Government officials are public figures, and they need to be supervised under the law and by the public,” Xing Jian said. “Yet, if a member of the public questions, criticizes, or makes accusations against them, they put them in jail.” Canada-based dissident artist Hua Yong said Xing Wangli and his family had tried to take on the government and lost. “This kind of thing happens so often in China,” Hua said. “The lower rungs of government are willing to kill [to prevent criticism].” “If attempts to call them out get a lot of public attention, they may get out of the starting gate, but if there is no-one paying attention, they will be attacked in retaliation … it’s all a power game,” he said. Xing Wang Li’s son Xing Jian. Credit: Xing Jian. Tortured by cellmates Xing’s sentence was just one month below the maximum of three years for “defamation,” and commentators have said this is likely because he tried to visit prominent rights attorney Jiang Tianyong, who is under house arrest at his Henan home after serving a jail term during a nationwide crackdown on rights lawyers. Xing was originally detained on suspicion of “picking quarrels and stirring up trouble” in May 2021 after he tried to visit Jiang, who remains under house arrest, in April 2021. He was formally arrested in June 2021, but for “defamation,” and indicted by the county prosecutor in January 2022. While defamation cases in China have previously been private prosecution cases, new guidelines issued in 2013 paved the way for it to be brought as a criminal charge against people accused of “spreading disinformation or false accusations online can constitute criminal acts. If a post deemed to contain disinformation or false accusations accrues more than 5,000 views or 500 reposts, then it is considered a “serious circumstance,” according to the U.S.-based rights group, the Duihua Foundation. Jiang was “released” from prison in February 2019 at the end of a two-year jail term for “incitement to subvert state power,” a charge often used to imprison peaceful critics of the government. He was allowed to return to his parents’ home in Luoyang, but remains under close surveillance and heavy restrictions. Jiang’s U.S.-based wife Jin Bianling has repeatedly expressed concern for her husband’s health after he was tortured by cellmates during his time in detention. Translated and edited by Luisetta Mudie.

Read More

US vows to respond to any Chinese military base in Solomons

Editor012 mins

The United States voiced concerns Tuesday over a “complete lack of transparency” surrounding a new security deal between the Solomon Islands and China and vowed to respond to any attempt to establish a Chinese military base in the island nation. A draft copy of the security pact leaked onto social media in late March but neither party has made public the deal, reportedly signed by Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and his Solomon Islands counterpart Jeremiah Manele. The deal has drawn expressions of deep concern from U.S. allies Australia and New Zealand that it could enable China to extend its military reach in the Pacific. It also prompted a hasty visit to the Pacific by two top U.S. diplomats. U.S. National Security Council Indo-Pacific Coordinator Kurt Campbell and Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Daniel Kritenbrink led a U.S. delegation to Honiara late last week where they held a 90-minute “constructive and candid meeting” with Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare. Kritenbrink told journalists at a teleconference on Tuesday that the lack of transparency of the security agreement was “our fundamental concern.” “I think it’s clear that only a handful of people in a very small circle have seen this agreement, and the prime minister himself has been quoted publicly as saying he would only share the details with China’s permission, which I think is a source of concern as well,” the U.S senior diplomat said. “Of course we have respect for the Solomon Islands’ sovereignty, but we also wanted to let them know that if steps were taken to establish a de facto permanent military presence, power-projection capabilities, or a military installation, then we would have significant concerns and we would very naturally respond to those concerns,” Kritenbrink said. A file photo showing Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare, Solomon Islands Foreign Minister Jeremiah Manele, Chinese Premier Li Keqiang and Chinese State Councillor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi at a signing ceremony at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, China Oct. 9, 2019. Credit: Reuters. ‘Red line’ The assistant secretary of state declined to elaborate on possible responses to security implications caused by the new agreement but said that Prime Minister Sogavare gave the U.S. three specific assurances that “there would be no military base, no long-term presence, no power-projection capability.” In Washington, during a Tuesday hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Republican Sen. Mitt Romney called the agreement “alarming.”  In response, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said he shared the senator’s concern. He reiterated the assurances the U.S. delegation had gotten from Sogavare, adding: “We will be watching that very, very closely in the weeks and months ahead.” Sogavare’s words have done little to calm Solomon Islands’ neighbors. Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison said that a military base would be a “red line” for Canberra. The Solomons occupies a remote but strategic location in the western Pacific, about 1,700 kilometers (1,050 miles) from the northeastern coast of Australia. Malcolm Davis, a senior analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), said: “I think now that the security agreement has been officially signed, there is little the U.S. or Australia can do to reverse it. The key question now is how fast will China move to establish a permanent presence, leading to a base, in the Solomon Islands.” “Australia and the U.S. can try to use diplomacy to convince the Sogavare government to not allow this base to be established quickly, or to constrain its size and function, but there is little chance that these efforts will succeed, as it’s clear that Sogavare has aligned with China,” Davis said. “They can also try to contain Chinese influence in the region further by ‘stepping up’ the ‘Pacific Step Up’ and making it more effective,” he said, referring to the Biden administration’s push to increase U.S. engagement in the region. He added: “This has greater chance of success given the regional concern about the agreement signed between Solomon Islands and China.” Norah Huang, associate research fellow at Prospect Foundation, a Taiwanese think tank, described the deal as “opportunism” by the Solomons prime minister. She said the best response might be “candid talks with the governing parties in private to walk it back or at least neutralize the deal.” “But Australia, the U.S. and New Zealand should be careful not to reward those who play opportunism,” Huang said. A file photo showing Australian Navy officers from the HMAS Canberra arriving at the Tanjung Priok port, as part of the military exercise Indo-Pacific Endeavour 2021, in Jakarta, Indonesia, Oct. 25, 2021. Credit: Reuters. Regional efforts Japan became the latest regional power to send a representative to the Solomon Islands to express concern over the security pact. According to Japanese Foreign Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi, the Solomons prime minister repeated assurances to Japanese officials on Tuesday that he had no intention of allowing China to build military bases in his country, Reuters reported. Davis at ASPI said the China-Solomons deal could presage a move by Beijing to extend its reach in the South Pacific. “I think the greatest risk is that China would choose to extend its influence into Papua New Guinea, where it already has substantial investment, and is openly talking about a ‘fishing facility’ at Daru Island, which could ultimately be the basis for a port that could support Chinese Coast Guard vessels,” he said. “The U.S. and Australia, as well as New Zealand, will now need to adjust their defense policies with the prospect of a forward Chinese military presence in the Southwest Pacific that certainly dramatically increases the military threat to the Australian eastern seaboard, but also severs the sea lane of communication between Australia and the United States,” the defense analyst said. ‘Too little, too late’ There have been calls in Australia’s political and defense circles to “prepare for war,” and Davis said there should be some review of Australian defense force posture, and greater investment into air, sea, and space capabilities across…

Read More

Cambodian activist safe in Thailand after 6-day flight through jungle

Editor09 mins

A prominent Cambodian activist who fled her country in a six-day journey through the jungle safely arrived in Thailand, where she plans to seek asylum with the U.N. In Cambodia, meanwhile, government officials said they would not call foreign officials as witnesses in a “treason” case against another critic of the country’s ruling party. Sat Pha, who has supported the now-banned Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP), told RFA that she fled after a hand-written threat, which she believed was from the government of Prime Minister Hun Sen, saying she could be “disappeared” was tacked to her door. “Authorities know how to assault, arrest and imprison [activists],” she told RFA’s Khmer Service. Opponents of the ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) have been targeted in a 5-year-old crackdown that has sent leaders of the CNRP into exile and landed scores of its supporters in prison. Cambodia’s Supreme Court dissolved the CNRP in November 2017 in a move that allowed the CPP to win all 125 seats in Parliament in a July 2018 election. Sat Pha is one of the many Cambodians who has become disenfranchised in land disputes with the government or developers. She has also protested the detention of former CNRP politicians, and, she says, been beaten by governmental officials. “The authorities attacked me until my legs were injured. Has the govt. arrested any authorities? As a leader [Hun Sen] he doesn’t protect citizens. He knows how to assault, arrest and imprison. Killers are never brought to justice,” she said. Sat Pha said she became ill in her journey but is now in a safe location in Thailand. She said she is in the country illegally and is running low on food. She plans to request asylum from the U.N. Refugee Agency (UNHCR) office in Thailand. Sat Pha was released from prison in Cambodia six months ago after serving a year in detention for inciting social unrest during a peaceful protest in front of Chinese Embassy in Phnom Penh.  RFA was unable to contact Phnom Penh Municipal Police spokesman San Sok Seiha for comment.  However, Cambodian People Party spokesman and lawmaker Sok Ey San told RFA that he believes Sat Pha fabricated her story to earn sympathy. “Police have a duty to look for the suspects. There is a need for cooperation between the victim and the police. It might be a personal dispute,” he said. Sok Ey San previously denied that the threat came from CPP leadership. Sat Pha has the right to ask NGOs for help when she doesn’t have any confidence in the authorities, Soeung Seng Karuna, spokesperson for the Cambodian Human Rights and Development Association told RFA. “It is normal for a victim who is threatened to seek asylum,” he said. Kem Sokha Trial In the treason trial of CNRP former leader Kem Sokha in Phnom Penh, prosecutors on Wednesday refused to summon representatives of any foreign governments that he is accused of colluding with.  The prosecution citied the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, an international agreement that codifies diplomatic immunity. Defense lawyer Ang Odom told RFA after Wednesday’s session that the convention does not forbid representatives of foreign governments from testifying, adding that the prosecution told the defense they could ask the foreign governments to testify. “They need to do it, but they asked us to instead,” he said, adding that the defense plans to officially request that the prosecution summon foreign government representatives to testify in next week’s session, scheduled for April 27. “All relevant parties will help the court seek the truth. They need to speak the truth about the alleged collusion to commit treason,” he said. The government claims Kem Sokha was in league with Indonesia, Yugoslavia, Serbia, Australia, the United States, Canada, the European Union, Taiwan and India in plots to commit treason against Cambodia. The government may have a legitimate point regarding the Vienna Convention, Cambodian American legal analyst Theary Seng, who is herself on trial in Phnom Penh for treason and incitement, told RFA. “Rarely do I have the opportunity to agree with this regime’s political tool [the court], but in this instance it is right to deny the defense’s request. First, there is clear international custom and provision enshrined in Article 31 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations that gives diplomats immunity from criminal proceedings as a charged person or a witness,” she said. “Second, it is not politically feasible that any country, especially a superpower, would give way to an incendiary charge as ‘treason’ in another country’s court system, as that carries countless criminal and political implications,” she said. Theary Seng said that putting a diplomat on trial would be a loss of face for the country he or she represents. “It is understandable that Kem Sokha’s lawyers will look to influential figures or countries to come their client’s defense in denying this most serious charge of treason. But it is a dead-end road. Rather, the defense lawyers should place the onus on the prosecutors and court in demanding why the regime did not expel the diplomats or close down the embassy, making the diplomat persona non grata or communicating to the sending state the extremely serious nature of the change,” she said. Translated by Samean Yun. Written in English by Eugene Whong.

Read More

Concerns remain over pro-CCP stance of U.K.-based Chinese community organizations

Editor010 mins

Hong Kong activists based in the U.K. have repeated warnings that community groups in the county may have been infiltrated by people loyal to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), posing potential threats to incoming migrants from Hong Kong under the British National Overseas (BNO) visa scheme. Former Hong Kong lawmaker Nathan Law said via his Twitter account on April 19 that most the of 100,000 people who have left the city following the imposition of the draconian national security law to make new lives in the  U.K. support the 2019 mass protest movement, which called for fully democratic elections and greater official accountability. “HKers are anxious and insecure. Most of them are in support of the pro-democracy movement, therefore they left Hong Kong with trauma and worries of persecution,” Law wrote. “They fear that Chinese agents in the UK would send their activity records back to Hong Kong, thus endangering them.” Law voiced his concerns as The Times reported that pro-CCP figures appeared to have infiltrated large Chinese community organizations in Southampton and Birmingham, both of which have received tens of thousands of pounds in government funding to help newly arrived Hongkongers integrate into British society. Law added: “The Chinese govt is a dictatorial regime that destroyed our home. Many Chinese community organizations in the UK support the political lines of CCP. More than 200 of them endorsed the National Security Law,” he said, adding that Hongkongers would feel “scared and unwelcome” if government funds were awarded to such groups. According to The Times, two of the Birmingham center’s directors worked with the British Chinese Project, a scheme founded by Christine Lee, a lawyer who MI5 warned was trying to influence parliamentarians on behalf of Beijing in January 2022. A patron of the center, James Wong, has visited China on a trip sponsored by the Overseas Chinese Affairs Office, part of the CCP’s outreach and influence operation known as the United Front Work Department. The Birmingham Chinese Community Center denied it was under CCP influence, saying it had no wish to be drawn into the politics of the Hong Kong protest movement, and had no wish to become involved with such “toxicity.” A screenshot of former Hong Kong lawmaker Nathan Law’s Twitter account where he raises concerns that Chinese agents in the UK have infiltrated large Chinese community organizations in British cities. Allegiances hard to trace Meanwhile, U.K.-based activist Ping Hua, who has termed reports of the mass incarceration of Uyghurs in Xinjiang “appalling lies and fabrication,” founded the Southampton group, which told the paper she is no longer part of the organization. Law tweeted a day after being quoted in the article: “We must know more about the infiltration activities of the Chinese govt and prevent these mistakes from happening. The best way is to engage with the UK-based Hong Kong community and conduct thorough background checks on the org’s connection to the Chinese embassy.” U.K. activist and former consular worker Simon Cheng said that while the links between Wong and Ping and the CCP were fairly clear, many other Chinese community organizations have made statements that suggest where their allegiances lie, even if connections with the CCP are harder to trace. “They want to carefully blunt our democratic consciousness and fighting spirit,” Cheng said. “For example, they could, once people have settled in, encourage them to move on from the past.” “If they really have a pro-CCP agenda, or are United Front, the most important concern is that they could report people’s personal information to the national security police [in Hong Kong],” he said. “Then, you could run into problems if you go back to Hong Kong, or to any country that has a current extradition treaty with either China or Hong Kong.” According to a 2017 report by New Zealand political science professor Anne-Marie Brady, Chinese leader Xi Jinping is leading an accelerated expansion of political influence activities worldwide, much of which rely on overseas community and business groups, under the aegis of the United Front Work Department. Some 100,000 Hongkongers have emigrated to the U.K. under a pathway-to-citizenship visa scheme aimed at around three million people eligible for the BNO passport. Overseas properties Community groups have sprung into action to offer career, job-hunting and taxation workshops to new arrivals, provide entertainment and social opportunities and to offer advice on education, mental health and starting a new business. Meanwhile, the U.K.-based rights group Hong Kong Watch said nine high-ranking Hong Kong officials and 12 lawmakers elected under Beijing’s approval to the city’s legislature hold property overseas, including in the U.K., Canada, the U.S., Australia, Japan, and France. In a new report, the group lists health secretary Sophia Chan as owning or co-owning three properties in London, civil service secretary Patrick Nip as owning a flat in Islington, and former University of Hong Kong senior leader Arthur Li as owning two west London properties. All are members of chief executive Carrie Lam’s cabinet, the Executive Council, and are collectively responsible for implementing the national security law, which bans public criticism of the government and criminalizes acts of political opposition, journalism and online dissent. All of the officials and lawmakers in question have pledged allegiance to Beijing and expressed their public support for the national security law, the report said. “The report recommends that like-minded countries consider auditing the assets of Hong Kong officials and introducing a Hong Kong specific sanctions list covering those named,” it said. The group’s senior policy adviser Sam Goodman said: “The Hong Kong officials and lawmakers who are complicit in the ongoing human rights crackdown in Hong Kong are more than happy to continue to use the West as a safe haven for their hidden wealth.” Translated and edited by Luisetta Mudie.

Read More

China, Solomon Islands confirm they have signed security pact

Editor09 mins

China and the Solomon Islands have both confirmed they signed a controversial security pact that has sparked concerns about China’s rising influence in the Pacific region. The confirmation came as a U.S. delegation led by the National Security Council Indo-Pacific coordinator Kurt Campbell was heading to Honiara to discuss regional security issues. Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare told parliament on Wednesday that the agreement with China was to help with the country’s “internal security situation,” referring to recent unrest that saw businesses and buildings burned and looted. The prime minister said the decision “will not adversely impact or undermine the peace and harmony of our region.” Hours before that, a Chinese government spokesman said that the pact is “part of normal exchanges and cooperation between two sovereign and independent countries” and does not target any third party. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin told reporters in Beijing that Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and his Solomon Islands counterpart Jeremiah Manele officially signed the document “the other day.” China did not offer an explanation about whether the signed document is the final agreement. Neither party has revealed any details of the deal, with Sogavare saying it would be disclosed after a “process.” Kurt M. Campbell, the Biden administration’s coordinator for the Indo-Pacific, pictured official at the China Development Forum in Beijing, China March 23, 2019. At the time, Campbell was chairman and CEO of a consultancy, the Asia Group. Credit: Reuters. Lack of transparency Solomon Islands’ neighbors Australia and New Zealand have repeatedly voiced concerns since a copy of the draft agreement was leaked online in March. On Tuesday, Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne and Pacific Minister Zed Seselja issued a joint statement saying “Australia is deeply disappointed by the signing” of the pact. “We are concerned about the lack of transparency with which this agreement has been developed, noting its potential to undermine stability in our region,” the statement reads. Seselja traveled to Honiara last week to urge the Solomon Islands prime Mminister not to sign the deal with Beijing, without success.  New Zealand’s Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta said her country was “saddened” that the Solomon Islands had made the pact. The U.S. also expressed concern over “the lack of transparency” in China’s security pact with the Solomon Islands, calling it part of a pattern of Beijing offering “shadowy” deals to countries, Reuters news agency reported. Two top U.S. officials for the Indo-Pacific region – Kurt Campbell and Daniel Kritenbrink, the assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs – are currently in Fiji before traveling to Honiara to meet with the island nation’s leaders. Campbell said in January that the U.S. has “enormous moral, strategic, historical interests” in the Pacific but had not done enough to assist the region. Their trip has been criticized by China as having “ulterior motives.” “Several senior U.S. officials now fancy a visit to some Pacific island countries all of a sudden after all these years,” said Chinese Foreign Ministry’s Wang Wenbin, pointing out that the U.S. Embassy in Solomon Islands has been closed for 29 years. This February, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken traveled to Fiji to meet with Pacific island leaders, and announced that the embassy in Honiara would be reopened. The Chinese national flag flies outside the Chinese Embassy in Honiara, Solomon Islands, April 1, 2022. Credit: AP. Military presence China has maintained that Pacific island countries need to diversify their cooperation with other countries and “have the right to independently choose their cooperation partners.” “China is always a builder of peace and a promoter of stability in the South Pacific region,” Wang said. A draft copy of the security pact leaked onto social media in late March suggested there would be Chinese logistical hubs or bases in the island nation. One of the clauses says: “China may, according to its own needs and with the consent of Solomon Islands, make ship visits to, carry out logistical replenishment in, and have stopover and transition in Solomon Islands.” David Capie, director of the Centre for Strategic Studies at the Victoria University of Wellington in New Zealand, told RFA that the security pact would allow Beijing to set up military bases and deploy troops in the Pacific island nation, “marking the start of a much sharper military competition than anything we’ve seen in the region for decades.” Capie said that the agreement “would allow the People’s Republic of China to deploy police and military personnel to Solomon Islands with the consent of the host government, and potentially provide for refueling and support of Chinese ships.” U.S. State Department Spokesperson Ned Price said earlier this week that the U.S. is concerned that the agreement “leaves the door open for the deployment of Chinese forces on the Solomon Islands.” “We believe that signing such an agreement could increase destabilization within the Solomon Islands and will set a concerning precedent for the wider Pacific island region,” Price added. Analysts say a presence of Chinese troops in the Solomon Islands could raise the risk of confrontation between China and the U.S. and its allies, as well as challenge the U.S.-led vision of a “Free and Open Indo-Pacific.”

Read More

Russia says military drills planned with Vietnam

Editor09 mins

As fighting rages across Ukraine, Russia and Vietnam are planning to hold a joint military training exercise, Russian state media reported Tuesday, a move that analysts described as “inappropriate” and likely to “raise eyebrows” in the rest of the region. It comes amid international outrage over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the mounting civilian death toll there. It also coincides with U.S. preparations to host a May 12-13 summit in Washington with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, including Vietnam. Russian state-run news agency RIA Novosti said the initial planning meeting for the military training exercise was held virtually between the leaders of Russia’s Eastern Military District and the Vietnamese army. The two sides “agreed on the subject of the upcoming drills, specified the dates and venue for them” and “discussed issues of medical and logistic support, cultural and sports programs,” the news agency reported without giving further details. Col. Ivan Taraev, head of the International Military Cooperation Department at the Eastern Military District, was quoted as saying that the joint exercise aims “to improve practical skills of commanders and staffs in organizing combat training operations and managing units in a difficult tactical situation, as well as developing unconventional solutions when performing tasks.”  The two sides also discussed what to call the joint exercise. One of the proposed names is “Continental Alliance – 2022.” Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu, right, and his then-Vietnamese counterpart Ngo Xuan Lich, left, reviewing an honor guard in Hanoi, Vietnam, Tuesday, Jan. 23, 2018. Shoigu was on a visit to Vietnam to boost military ties between the two countries. Credit: AP ‘Inappropriate decision’ Vietnamese media haven’t reported on the meeting, nor the proposed exercise. Vietnamese officials were not available for comment. “This is a totally inappropriate decision on Vietnam’s part,” said Carlyle Thayer, professor emeritus at the New South Wales University in Australia and a veteran Vietnam watcher. “The U.S. is hosting a special summit with Southeast Asian leaders in May,” Thayer said. “How will the Vietnamese leader be able to look Biden in the eye given the U.S. clear stance on the Ukrainian war and the Russian invasion?” “This is not how you deal with the world’s superpower,” he said. Earlier this month, Vietnam voted against a U.S.-led resolution to remove Russia from the U.N. Human Rights Council. Before that, Hanoi abstained from voting to condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine at the U.N. General Assembly. “As Russia’s closest partner in the region, Vietnam wants to demonstrate that it still has a firm friend in Southeast Asia,” said Ian Storey, senior fellow at the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute in Singapore. “But this joint exercise is likely to raise eyebrows in the rest of the region,” Storey said. Vietnam and Russia have a long-established historical relationship that goes back to the Soviet era. Russia is Vietnam’s first strategic partner, and one of its three so-called “comprehensive strategic partners,” alongside China and India. Moscow was also Hanoi’s biggest donor until the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc. “Vietnam’s nuanced approach to the Russia-Ukraine war and its refusal to single out Russia’s invasion suggest introspection in Hanoi over its foreign and defense policy calculations,” wrote Hoang Thi Ha, a Vietnamese scholar at the ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute. The Russia-led war in Ukraine “presented a hard choice for Hanoi between preserving the fundamental principle of respect for a sovereign nation’s independence and territorial integrity and maintaining its good relations with Russia — a key arms supplier and a major oil and gas exploration partner in the South China Sea,” Ha said. Political message That explains Vietnam’s moves but there are distinctions between casting votes at the U.N. and holding joint military activities. The latter would send a wrong message about Vietnam’s intention to work with the West and raise its profile among the international community, analysts said. In particular, the past decade or more has seen a notable growth in ties between the U.S. and Vietnam, which share a concern over China’s assertive behavior in the South China Sea. Details of the proposed Russia-Vietnam exercise have yet to be made public, and already some observers are expressing doubts that it would take place. A Vietnamese analyst who wished to stay anonymous as he is not authorized to speak to foreign media said the Russian side announced similar exercises in the past which didn’t materialize. The Press Service of Russia’s Eastern Military District also said back in 2015 that the first bilateral military drill between Russia and Vietnam would take place in 2016 in Vietnamese territory. The supposed drill was rescheduled to 2017 but in the end didn’t happen at all. Vietnam has, however, taken part in a number of multilateral military exercises with Russia. The latest was the first joint naval exercise between Russia and countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations last December. The Eastern Military District, headquartered in Khabarovsk, is one of the five operational strategic commands of the Russian Armed Forces, responsible for the Far East region of the country. The district was formed by a presidential decree, signed by the then-President Dmitry Medvedev in September 2010.

Read More

Japan PM set to visit SE Asia in late April

Editor06 mins

Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida is planning a visit to Southeast Asia later this month to counter China’s growing assertiveness in the region, according to news reports and a government official. Kyodo, a Japanese news agency, said Kishida’s trip would take place during the so-called Golden Week holidays and includes stops in Thailand, Indonesia and Vietnam. The report cited unnamed diplomatic sources. Golden Week 2022 runs from April 29 to May 5. It starts with Showa Day and ends on Children’s Day, with a five-day consecutive holiday between May 1–5. It also reported that Kishida may consider a visit to Europe during the holiday period. A previously proposed meeting between ministers of defense and foreign affairs from Japan and India in mid- to late-April may therefore have been postponed as usually foreign ministers accompany the prime minister on his foreign trips. RFA has approached the Japanese Foreign Ministry for confirmation. In Jakarta, the Foreign Ministry spokesman Teuku Faizasyah on Thursday confirmed to BenarNews, an RFA-affiliated news agency, that Kishida would visit Indonesia “at the end of April.” He said the exact date would be announced later. Kyodo reported that in Southeast Asia, the Japanese prime minister is expected to “underscore cooperation toward realizing the vision of a free and open Indo-Pacific amid China’s rise.” Thailand and Indonesia are this year’s chairs of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC) and the Group of 20 respectively. Vietnam meanwhile shares interest with Japan in safeguarding maritime security in the South China Sea where China holds expansive claims and has been militarizing reclaimed islands. Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force personnel on the destroyers JS Suzutsuki (L) and JS Inazuma (R) after arriving as part of an Indo-Pacific tour at Tanjung Priok Port in Jakarta, Indonesia, in a file photo. Credit: Reuters Free and open Indo-Pacific “China is the principal geopolitical threat, be it for India, Japan or Southeast Asian countries,” said Pratnashree Basu, associate fellow at the Observer Research Foundation, an Indian think tank. “Pooling resources and strengthening capacities is therefore an ongoing process for almost all countries in the Indo-Pacific in order to be in positions of stronger pushback in the face of China’s aggression,” she said. Japan last year joined a growing list of countries that are challenging China’s maritime claims in the South China Sea. Tokyo sent a diplomatic note to the United Nations rejecting China’s baseline claims and denouncing what it described as efforts to limit the freedom of navigation and overflight. Japan is not a South China Sea claimant, but Tokyo has deepened security ties with several Southeast Asia nations with claims or interests there. The Japanese Navy and Coastguard have conducted joint exercises with Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam. Stephen Nagy, senior associate professor at the Department of Politics and International Studies, International Christian University in Tokyo, said that Japan prioritizes maintaining stability and a rules-based approach to governing the South China Sea as its sea lanes are critical arteries for the Japanese economy. Tokyo has also been playing an important role in supporting the U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy. Leaders of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, or Quad, including Japan, the U.S., Australia and India are meeting in person later in May in Tokyo for a summit. The Quad is widely seen as countering China’s weight in the region. Kishida visited India and Cambodia in March, his first bilateral trips since taking office in October 2021. Cambodia is the current chair of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

Read More

Emigration inquiries spike in China amid grueling COVID-19 lockdowns, restrictions

Editor012 mins

As a citywide lockdown continued in Shanghai and around 100 cities imposed more limited COVID-19 curbs, immigration consultancies said they are receiving a record number of inquiries from people hoping to get out of China for good. Keyword searches relating to emigration spiked more than 100-fold in recent days, according to publicly available data from the Baidu search engine for the week from March 28 to April 3. Canada, the United States and Australia were the top three countries shown in such searches, with searches for immigration to Canada showing a 28-fold increase compared with the previous week. “The number of immigration consultations has skyrocketed in the past few days,” an employee who answered the phone at the Beijing-based immigration consultancy Qiaowai told RFA on Wednesday.  “We are very busy every day, and waiting times are relatively long, because we don’t have enough consultants.” “This is likely the case for every other company [in the sector],” the employee said. “There are more coming from Shanghai because the pandemic is pretty bad in Shanghai right now.” An employee who answered the phone at the Immigration 11 agency gave a similar response. “There are quite a lot of people inquiring,” the employee said. “I need to hurry up [with this call].” “Is it the pandemic? We’ve had a lot of people consulting us from Shanghai in Guangdong, and also a lot from Beijing,” the employee said. Senior journalist Chen Hongtao said the figures could be an indication that high-ranking officials in the ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and their families are voting with their feet. “Anyone who has the option to leave may be thinking about how to get out,” Chen said. “Those who work for the regime don’t believe [propaganda], and they have access to a lot more information [than regular people].” “Most middle and working-class people don’t have the wherewithal to get hold of comprehensive information,” he said. “They’re the ones who believe what the little pinks [pro-CCP commentators] tell them.” A woman who identified herself by the pseudonym Zhang Li said she and her friends are in the process of trying to leave China. “I don’t think this is weird at all,” Zhang said. “It’s normal … because the pandemic disease control measures aren’t based on scientific decisions.” “I know a woman, a medical student, who is currently submitting her application to emigrate to the U.S.,” she said. “She plans to study [English] first, then become a nurse.” However, it looks likely that the majority of people will have trouble leaving, in the absence of political clout or existing immigration channels. An employee who answered the phone at the Shanghai police department’s exit and entry administration said the office, which issues passports and exit permits, is currently closed. “You can’t apply for passports, and entry-exit offices are all closed around here because of the pandemic,” the employee said. “There are some cases where on-site review of materials is happening for emergency circumstances, for example, to visit the critically ill overseas, or to go and study overseas,” they said. Meanwhile, residents of Shanghai said they are still struggling to source enough food and other daily necessities, with strict stay-at-home orders still in place across the city. “I went to the neighborhood committee to order food,” a resident surnamed Xu told RFA. “It’s been 20 days, and I still haven’t gotten the rice I ordered. I am out of oil and soy sauce for cooking at home, and I haven’t been able to buy more.” “I have to try to get food sent from online… we have been locked down here since March 8,” she said. A resident of Baoshan district surnamed Zheng said people who test positive are now being “sealed” inside their own apartments or buildings, as isolation and quarantine facilities are full. “If you test positive, the entire building will be sealed off with barbed wire, and nobody will be allowed in or out,” Zheng told RFA. “The disease control people set up a hut outside to guard it.” “Last week, they would take you away in a vehicle immediately if you tested positive,” he said. “That’s not the way they’re doing it now.” A resident of Xuhui district surnamed Liu said the supplies delivered to people’s homes during the lockdown were nowhere near enough to last the entire length of lockdown. “In the first stage, some people had no food,” she said. “In the second stage, Pudong was closed for four days, and then Puxi was closed for another four days, but I didn’t expect the city to be locked down forever.” “They government sent a batch of groceries, but … the food they have distributed was far from enough,” Liu said. A resident surnamed Zhao gave a similar account. “We have been locked down for more than a month, and we had food for four days,” he said. “There’s not enough for such a long time… all the stores are closed.” The Shanghai municipal health commission reported a total of 27,719 newly confirmed cases on Thursday, with rapidly constructed and converted field hospitals and quarantine facilities unable to meet demand for beds. “You can’t get into the Fangcang cabin hospitals, and a lot of people can’t even get an ambulance if they call 120,” Zheng said. “We have no idea how many people have died of COVID-19.” However, reports have also emerged of people being forcibly dragged from their homes to isolation facilities, even with a negative PCR test. One audio recording features a young couple who have tested negative arguing with enforcement personnel. “Our tests were negative,” one person says, while a police officer answers: “The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says you are positive.” “No way,” the person replies. “I have a negative test result. If I go to the cabin hospital I will wind up positive.” The ongoing lockdown comes after CCP leader Xi Jinping urged local governments on Wednesday to stick to his zero-COVID policy, with a slew of reports and commentaries in state media defending the…

Read More

Manila eyes broader ties with Indo-Pacific nations looking to counter Beijing

Editor09 mins

The Philippines is broadening its relationship with countries that are trying to counter Beijing’s growing assertiveness in the region, while it maintains friendly ties with China despite the Asian superpower’s incursions into Manila’s waters in the South China Sea. Nurtured by President Rodrigo Duterte to much criticism at home, Manila is keeping its relationship with Beijing on an even keel, ostensibly demonstrating, according to political analyst Rommel Banlaoi, a “pragmatic independent foreign policy” in a polarized world. For instance, the Filipino foreign secretary is in Tokyo this weekend to take part in the first ever bilateral two-plus-two talks involving the foreign and defense ministers of the Philippines and Japan. This visit follows a meeting between China’s Xi Jinping and Duterte on Friday, where they “committed to broaden the space for positive engagements” on the South China Sea issue. And on the same day, the Philippines concluded one of its largest military exercises with the United States, its longtime defense ally. Banlaoi, president of the Philippine Association for Chinese Studies (PACS), said Manila is demonstrating its independence by maintaining its longstanding security alliance with the U.S, strengthening is strategic partnerships with Japan, Australia, South Korea, and the European Union, and maintaining friendly relations with China despite tensions over the waterway. Still, disputes to do with the South China Sea, part of which is called the West Philippine Sea by the Filipinos, are the main reason behind for broadened security cooperation between the Philippines and other countries in the region, analysts said. Celia Lamkin, Founder of the National Youth Movement for the West Philippine Sea “The foreign and defense talks between Japan and the Philippines in Tokyo [on Saturday] are significant because of the non-stop aggression and militarization by China in our West Philippine Sea,” Celia Lamkin, Founder of the National Youth Movement for the West Philippine Sea, told BenarNews, using the Philippine term for the South China Sea. On Thursday, the Philippine Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana met with his Japanese counterpart, Nobuo Kishi, in Tokyo to discuss “ways to further enhance bilateral and multilateral cooperation,” according to the official Philippine News Agency. The two defense ministers agreed to bolster security cooperation and expand bilateral and multilateral exercises, according to a statement from the Japanese Ministry of National Defense. “They shared their intent that they will not tolerate any unilateral change of the status quo by force in the Indo-Pacific, particularly in East Asia and Southeast Asia,” the statement said. China is involved in maritime disputes with Japan over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands in the East China Sea. The inaugural two-plus-two meeting on Saturday will continue to “promote bilateral defense cooperation and exchanges to uphold and strengthen the Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP),” Japan Defense Ministry said. “We need allies like Japan and the U.S. to show China to respect international law in our West Philippine Sea and the rest of the South China Sea,” said Lamkin from the National Youth Movement for the West Philippine Sea. China claims nearly the entire South China Sea, including waters within the exclusive economic zones of Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Vietnam and Taiwan. While Indonesia does not regard itself as party to the South China Sea dispute, Beijing claims historic rights to parts of that sea overlapping Indonesia’s exclusive economic zone as well. ‘Open, warm, and positive’ A day before this two-plus-two meeting, Duterte, who is due to leave office after the Philippine general election in May and who has consistently called China’s Xi a friend, had a telephone meeting with the Chinese leader. During the call, the two said they work towards maintaining peace and stability in the South China Sea by exercising restraint, a statement from Duterte’s office said. A Chinese statement, meanwhile, said Xi had expressed his approval for how the two nations have dealt with the issue of the disputed South China Sea. Beijing, however, has consistently ignored a 2016 decision by an international arbitration court in The Hague that rejected China’s expansive claims in the contested waterway. Meanwhile, news emerged on Thursday that, for days, a Chinese coastguard ship had followed a research vessel deployed by Philippine and Taiwanese scientists in waters in off the northern Philippines, sparking concerns. Still, the statement from Duterte’s office described the hour-long telephone conversation as “open, warm and positive.” Then again, Manila surprised many a day earlier by voting against Beijing’s ally Moscow, and in favor of a resolution to suspend Russia from the United Nations Human Rights Council. It was the only ASEAN Nation to vote in favor of the resolution, apart from the Myanmar government in exile. Also, last September, when Australia, the United Kingdom and the U.S. announced the establishment of a trilateral security pact, AUKUS, the Philippines was the first country in Southeast Asia to endorse it despite concerns from regional players including Malaysia and Indonesia. With the Philippine presidential election looming in May, all eyes are on who will win the race, said Lamkin from the National Youth Movement for the West Philippine Sea. She added: “Our struggle for sovereign rights in the West Philippine Sea depend very much on who will be the next president.” Jason Gutierrez of BenarNews, an RFA-affiliated on-line news outlet, contributed to this report from Manila.

Read More

Vietnam’s vote for Russia on UN council could damage campaign to lead it

Editor09 mins

Vietnam’s vote against a U.S.-led resolution to remove Russia from the U.N. Human Rights Council on Thursday likely ends any hope Hanoi had to lead the body, one analyst told RFA. Cambodia’s abstention from voting, meanwhile, drew criticism from local rights groups who accused Phnom Penh of flip-flopping its position on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. In all, 24 countries voted against booting Russia from the council, including Russia, China, North Korea, Iran and Syria. But after 93 countries voted yes, Moscow resigned its seat. Vietnam’s ambassador to the U.N., Dang Hoang Giang, said in remarks prior to the vote that Hanoi was concerned about the impact of the war on civilians. He said that the country was “against all attacks on civilians that were in violation of international laws on humanitarianism and human rights.” He also said that it was important “to examine and crosscheck recent information publicly, with transparency and objectivity and with the cooperation of relevant parties.” Vietnamplus was the only Vietnamese outlet that reported Giang’s comments. Vietnamese state media made no mention of Vietnam’s vote in coverage of the resolution. Alienating vote Vietnam has publicly voiced its intention to run for chairmanship of the council for the 2023-2025 term, but experts told RFA’s Vietnamese Service that Hanoi will now find it difficult to gain support from Western countries. “I should say that Vietnam has shot itself in the foot,” Carl Thayer of New South Wales University in Australia told RFA. “Vietnam has always been proud of its prestige in the international circles as a commodity that made it important. Any country in the world that is now opposing Russian action are not going to support Vietnam,” he said. Thayer noted that Vietnam’s profile among the international community had been on the rise, as it had twice been elected as a non-permanent member of the U.N. Security Council. “Now that smooth sailing is going to hit headwinds and if it continues to support boats like [Russia], Vietnam is going to find increasingly there will be a drop-off in support,” Thayer said. He said that Hanoi may have been trying to demonstrate that dialogue and negotiation are more effective than measures to isolate Russia. But it would have been better to abstain from the vote, because now Vietnam has alienated the West and has little to gain by casting its lot with Russia. “That country is never going to play a major role with Vietnam in coming years. In my opinion, it is going to be weakened and economically isolated as long as Putin remains in power.” Isolation ineffective Cambodia did abstain from Thursday’s vote with Ambassador Ke Sovann saying in a statement that Russia’s isolation will not help resolve the conflict in Ukraine, but will only make a bad situation worse. “At a fragile time for world peace, security and stability, the engagement among the member states in all relevant United Nations bodies including the Human Rights Council is very important,” he said.  Phay Siphan, a spokesman for the Cambodian government, told RFA’s Khmer Service that kicking Moscow out of the council will “only allow the country to avoid its responsibility.” But Ny Sokha, president of The Cambodian Human Rights and Development Association, said the vote to remove Russia from the council is a stand against the death and destruction the country’s invasion of Ukraine has caused. “We should not allow the country that abuses human rights in the U.N. Human Rights Council. As a member it needs to respect human rights,” he said. Cambodia’s abstention from Thursday’s vote is an example of flip-flopping in its response to the situation in Ukraine, said Ny Sokha, an apparent reference to Cambodia’s vote last month at the U.N. condemning the invasion. Political analyst Kim Sok said Cambodia voted for a resolution last month to condemn Russia as part of its efforts to convince the U.S. to attend a special summit with ASEAN while Phnom Penh chairs the regional bloc. Thursday’s vote, in contrast, was an effort to appease China, he said. “When China opposes, Hun Sen dares not to vote in favor,” he said.   Russian Threats Prior to Thursday’s vote, Russia warned that votes in favor or abstentions would be seen as an “unfriendly gesture” and would have consequences in bilateral relations. Despite voting to remove Russia, the U.N. Human Rights Council remains an organization with a shaky reputation likened to an old boys club for dictators. Of its 47 member nations, only 15 are classified as “free” societies by rights watchdog Freedom House. The rest are either only “partly free” or “not free,” and include countries with poor human rights records like China, Eritrea, Somalia and Cuba. The U.S. left the council temporarily in 2018, calling the organization a mockery of human rights for not punishing rights abusers and for what then-ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley called bias against Israel. After Tuesday’s vote, the Russian representative announced Russia’s decision to withdraw its membership from the council before the 2021-2023 term ends, and called the resolution “an illegal and politically motivated move to punish a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council who was pursuing an independent domestic and foreign policy.” Translated by Anna Vu and Samean Yun. Written in English by Eugene Whong.

Read More

Investigative Journalism Reportika © March 2022 by Ij-Reportika is licensed under CC BY 4.0