Ardern takes tougher stance on China

 New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern took a tougher stance on China's human rights record Monday by saying it was getting harder to reconcile differences ...

NICK PERRY

Mon, May 3, 2021, 12:37 PM·3 min read

FILE - In this Dec. 16, 2020, file photo, New Zealand's Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern speaks during an interviewed in her office at the parliament in Wellington, New Zealand. Ardern took a tougher stance on China's human rights record Monday, May 3, 2021, by saying it was getting harder to reconcile differences as China's role in the world grows. (AP Photo/Sam James, File)

WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) — New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern took a tougher stance on China's human rights record Monday by saying it was getting harder to reconcile differences as China's role in the world grows.

While Ardern's language remained moderate when compared with that of many other leaders, it still marked a significant shift for a country which relies on China as its largest trading partner. Ardern in past speeches has often avoided direct criticism of China.

New Zealand has been trying to strike the right tone on China in recent weeks after finding itself on the defensive with its Five Eyes security allies by resisting speaking out in unison with them against China on certain human rights issues.

New Zealand Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta caused a diplomatic stir last month when she discussed her reluctance to expand the role of the Five Eyes to include joint positions on human rights. The alliance among New Zealand, the U.S., the U.K, Australia and Canada has its origins in World War II cooperation.

In her speech to the China Business Summit in Auckland on Monday, Ardern said New Zealand has raised “grave” concerns with China on human rights issues, including the situation of Uyghurs in the Xinjiang region and people who live in Hong Kong.

“And it will not have escaped the attention of anyone here that as China’s role in the world grows and changes, the differences between our systems – and the interests and values that shape those systems – are becoming harder to reconcile,” Ardern told the audience.

Stephen Noakes, the director of the China Studies Centre at the University of Auckland, said he wouldn't have expected to hear such language from New Zealand even a couple of years ago. He said some of it sounded like a wink to the Five Eyes to let them know that although New Zealand might have economic dependencies on China, it wasn't being soft.

Noakes said that because China's relationships with both Australia and Canada have deteriorated so rapidly in the last few years, it has made New Zealand's rosier relationship stick out like a sore thumb.

Still, Noakes said, he didn't expect the change in New Zealand's rhetoric to have any negative impact on its trade with China. And he said New Zealand's relatively moderate stance could make it a useful go-between in the future between China and other Five Eyes members.

New Zealand has stopped short of calling the Uyghur abuses genocide, language that the U.S. and some other countries have used.

New Zealand's cultural and economic ties to China are particularly strong among the Five Eyes allies. New Zealand was the first developed nation to sign a free trade deal with China in 2008, leading to a boom in exports of New Zealand milk powder and other products. China now buys twice as much from New Zealand as New Zealand's next biggest market, Australia.

https://news.yahoo.com/zealand-leader-ardern-takes-tougher-043732587.html

• 

  Reuters Videos

  Differences with China becoming 'harder to reconcile': New Zealand PM

  The comments come as New Zealand faces pressure from some elements among Western allies over its reluctance to use the Five Eyes intelligence and security alliance to criticize Beijing.In a speech at the China Business Summit in Auckland, Ardern said there are things on which China and New Zealand "do not, cannot, and will not agree", but added these differences need not define their relationship.In comments that sparked some reaction among Western allies, Foreign Affairs Minister Nanaia Mahuta said last month she was uncomfortable expanding the role of Five Eyes, which includes Australia, Britain, Canada and the United States. China, which takes almost one-third of New Zealand's exports, has accused the Five Eyes of ganging up on it by issuing statements on Hong Kong and the treatment of ethnic Muslim Uyhgurs in Xinjiang.

  11h ago
• 

  The Telegraph

  Jacinda Ardern insists New Zealand will not compromise on human rights to please China

  New Zealand leader Jacinda Ardern said Monday that differences between her country and China are becoming “harder to reconcile” after her government faced accusations it was being too soft on Beijing. While New Zealand and China continue to work together, there are things on which China and New Zealand “do not, cannot, and will not agree”, Mrs Ardern said in a speech to an annual China Business Summit in Auckland. New Zealand has faced criticism as a weak link in the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing network after it expressed reluctance to use the alliance to criticize Beijing. But on Monday Prime Minister Ardern said her government had raised “grave concerns” with Beijing about the treatment of Uighurs in Xinjiang province and spoken out about “continued negative developments with regard to the rights, freedoms and autonomy of the people of Hong Kong”. She said New Zealand has an independent foreign policy and chooses whether to raise rights issues publicly together with other countries or privately in talks with Chinese officials. “It will not have escaped the attention of anyone here that as China’s role in the world grows and changes, the differences between our systems – and the interests and values that shape those systems – are becoming harder to reconcile,” Ardern said. “This is a challenge that we, and many other countries across the Indo Pacific region, but also in Europe and other regions, are also grappling with,” she added. Although Ardern’s comments were fairly moderate, she has in the past tended to avoid direct criticism of China – New Zealand’s largest trading partner. Her speech comes two weeks after her foreign minister, Nanaia Mahuta, caused consternation within Western allies when she said New Zealand was uncomfortable with expanding the remit of the 70-year-old Five Eyes network to include joint positions on human rights. Her comments led to criticism that Wellington was setting aside its principles to avoid possible economic retaliation from China. Beijing reacted angrily when the grouping – comprised of Britain, the United States, Australia, Canada and New Zealand – issued a joint statement in November calling on it to reinstate Hong Kong pro-democracy legislators. “No matter how many eyes they have, five or 10 or whatever, should anyone dare to undermine China’s sovereignty, security and development interests, be careful not to get poked in the eye,” Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said at the time. Australia and Canada’s relations with Beijing have plummeted in recent years, and so far there appears to be little prospect of any significant improvement in US-China relations under President Biden. On Sunday, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said China is acting "more aggressively abroad" and behaving "increasingly in adversarial ways”. Australia, who angered Beijing by calling for an international inquiry into the origins of Covid-19, has been on the receiving end of Chinese trade restrictions, affecting billions of dollars’ worth of its exports. Asked whether New Zealand would risk trade punishment in order to stick to its values, Ardern replied: “It would be a concern to anyone in New Zealand if the consideration was ‘Do we speak on this or are we too worried of economic impacts?’”

  2h ago
• 

  Business Insider

  Fears of a Chinese attack on Taiwan are growing, and Taiwan isn't sure who would help if it happened

  "This problem is much closer to us than most think," the new head of US Indo-Pacific Command said in March.

  4h ago
• 

  Associated Press

  Philippines protests `blocking' of its patrol ships by China

  The Philippine government has protested the Chinese coast guard's harassment of Philippine coast guard ships patrolling a disputed shoal in the South China Sea, the Department of Foreign Affairs said Monday. It was the latest of dozens of recent protests by Manila’s foreign affairs department, along with increasingly acerbic remarks by the country’s top diplomat and defense chief about Chinese actions in the disputed waters. The high-profile feud has escalated despite President Rodrigo Duterte’s friendly stance toward China.

  8h ago
• 

  Associated Press

  Russia turns to China to make Sputnik shots to meet demand

  Russia is turning to multiple Chinese firms to manufacture the Sputnik V coronavirus vaccine in an effort to speed up production as demand soars for its shot. Russia has announced three deals totaling 260 million doses with Chinese vaccine companies in recent weeks. It's a decision that could mean quicker access to a shot for countries in Latin America, the Middle East, and Africa that have ordered Russia's vaccine, as the U.S. and the European Union focus mainly on domestic vaccination needs.

  13h ago

UK-China row escalates as Johnson pledges asylum for Hong Kongers

Britain will not walk away from the people of Hong Kong if China imposes a national security law that would conflict with its international obligations, Prime Minister Boris Johnson said on Wednesday – after pledging to give Hong Kong citizens asylum if need be. Intensifying the diplomatic spat between the two countries, China responded by saying the UK had “grossly interfered” in its territory.

FRANCE 24

 

5 hrs ago  3 June 2020

Johnson's remarks followed a warning to China on Tuesday to step back from the brink over the national security legislation for Hong Kong, saying it risked destroying one of the jewels of Asia's economy while ruining the reputation of China.

"Hong Kong succeeds because its people are free," Johnson wrote in The Times and the South China Morning Post. "If China proceeds, this would be in direct conflict with its obligations under the joint declaration, a legally binding treaty registered with the United Nations."

China’s legislature approved last week a decision to create laws for Hong Kong to curb sedition, secession, terrorism and foreign interference.

Mainland security and intelligence agents may, for the first time, be stationed in the city, a former British colony that returned to Chinese rule in 1997.

‘Way of life under threat’

The plan for the legislation follows months of often violent pro-democracy protests in last year that plunged Hong Kong into its biggest crisis since the handover.

"Many people in Hong Kong fear that their way of life — which China pledged to uphold — is under threat," Johnson said.

"If China proceeds to justify their fears, then Britain could not in good conscience shrug our shoulders and walk away; instead we will honour our obligations and provide an alternative."

Johnson repeated Britain's pledge to give British National Overseas passport-holders in Hong Kong a path to British citizenship, allowing them to settle in the United Kingdom.

There are about 350,000 holders of BNO passports in Hong Kong and another 2.5 million are eligible for them, Johnson said.

China's decision to impose the national security law on Hong Kong would "curtail its freedoms and dramatically erode its autonomy", Johnson wrote.

"Since the handover in 1997, the key has been the precious concept of 'one country, two systems', enshrined in Hong Kong's Basic Law and underpinned by the Joint Declaration signed by Britain and China," Johnson wrote.

The Basic law is Hong Kong's mini constitution while the Sino-British Joint Declaration set out the arrangements for Hong Kong's return to China.

Addressing the House of Commons on Tuesday, British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said he had reached out to Australia, New Zealand, the United States and Canada about contingency plans if the law creates a deluge of Hong Kongers looking to leave.

"I raised it on the Five Eyes call yesterday — the possibility of burden sharing if we see a mass exodus from Hong Kong," Raab told MPs, referencing the intelligence-sharing alliance between the five powers.

Political liberalism

China said its decisions on national security in Hong Kong were its own affair.

"The UK's irresponsible remarks and accusations ... have grossly interfered in China’s internal affairs including Hong Kong affairs," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said. "We advise the UK side to step back from the brink."

"The UK said the legislation is authoritarian, but this word is the exact characterisation of the UK's former rule over HK," the spokesman said.

Under British rule democratic reforms were not introduced until Chris Patten’s tenure as governor in the 1990s. But colonial Hong Kong enjoyed political liberalism – with freedom of expression, the rule of law and an impartial justice system.

Protesters have frequently waved the flag of British Hong Kong at demonstrations, and even draped it over a podium in the territory’s Legislative Council on the 2019 anniversary of the handover to China, as a symbol of prized values.

In light of the impending expiration of Britain’s lease of the New Territories (the largest part of Hong Kong) in 1997, then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher signed the Sino-British Joint Declaration with Chinese leader Deng Xiapeng in 1984.

Despite Britain’s relatively weak hand – with little ability to defend a territory located right next to mainland China – Thatcher secured China’s agreement to a “high degree of autonomy” for Hong Kong after the handover, with its “social and economic systems” remaining “unchanged” and its laws “basically unchanged”.

Under the Basic Law created by China in 1990, this continuity would remain in place until 2047.

Protests planned for Tiananmen anniversary

Johnson’s comments come after US President Donald Trump, responding to Beijing's plan to impose the security legislation, ordered his administration to begin the process of eliminating special US treatment for Hong Kong to punish China.

A survey of US businesses revealed deep fears for the future of their operations in Hong Kong, with 30% of respondents "moderately" concerned and 53.3% "very concerned" about it.

The survey, on June 1-2 for the American Chamber of Commerce (Amcham), drew responses from 180, or 15%, of its members.

About 60% thought the legislation would harm their business operations, while a third said they were considering moving capital, assets or operations out of the semi-autonomous city, with 38% personally considering moving out.

Contributing to simmering anti-government tension, Hong Kong lawmakers are set to resume debate on a bill that would criminalise disrespect of China's national anthem, following scuffles in the legislature in recent weeks.

Hong Kong activists plan to take their movement forward with demonstrations to mark the June 4, 1989 anniversary of Chinese troops opening fire on pro-democracy students in and around Tiananmen Square, even though for the first time, an annual vigil for the anniversary has been cancelled over coronavirus concerns.

Demonstrations are also planned for the June 9 anniversary of last year's million-strong march against a now-withdrawn bill to allow for the extradition of offenders to mainland China, and protests three days later that police tackled with tear gas and rubber bullets.

(FRANCE 24 with REUTERS and AP)

https://www.msn.com/en-my/news/world/uk-china-row-escalates-as-johnson-pledges-asylum-for-hong-kongers/ar-BB14Yc0j

Escaping the runaway horse of EU integration

The fact of the Brexit vote, as well as the decision of the UK Government to finally implement it, has ...

March 17, 2020
written by Lee Rotherham 

The fact of the Brexit vote, as well as the decision of the UK Government to finally implement it, has generated a geopolitical event of immense consequence.

For the continent of Europe, it breaks the design monopoly that the EU institutionally held over how the format of cooperation would develop. Previously, there used to be three competing models. The COMECON one, which thankfully broke with the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Free Trade-only (EFTA) one was almost fatally fractured by Ted Heath’s Government taking the UK into the EEC (and two other EFTA states trailing in its immediate wake). However, the Brexit idea of being physically “in Europe without being run by it” finally delivers on the pledge made by William Hague, even if he didn’t turn out to be the cheerleader of the rational prerequisites to make that happen.

For the UK, Brexit generates not so much a window but a patio door of opportunities. Not the least of these is a break with the EU’s ever-closer union, which London was only ever placed to act as a slow brake on. Being on the losing side of a tug of war was not a viable long-term strategic option, even in areas such as defence, where the ground had been stubbornly fought but where the mud under foot had become increasingly slippery. The fact that the treaties themselves expressly stated a potential end state of a Defence Union was not lost on senior Defence professionals who united during the referendum to form Veterans for Britain. The accelerated EU ambition since then is merely evidence of a previously denied and still under-appreciated trend.

So, what lies in store for the UK in this field now? Firstly, Brexit means the UK is able to avoid the pitfalls of centralised EU procurement, intended to ‘rationalise’ defence industries in the name of competitiveness but coming at the cost of national capabilities – a perfect end state of course if you are a federalist. The UK can still state its intention to cooperate with the EU on projects on an ad hoc basis, shifting away from the European Defence Agency (increasingly looking like the EU’s Ministry of Defence) and focusing on procurement cooperation via the far more intergovernmental OCCAR. This also reduces the risk of (literally) compromising future kit by farming construction out through political barter rather than construction prowess and generating products that are less tailored to any given nation’s specific tactical needs.

Stepping away from the European Commission’s very particular ambitions cannot have come at a timelier moment. The UK is able to shift its weight into supporting the critical alliance of NATO. Removing one of the stool legs from EU defence ambitions provides an overdue jolt for a number of EU NATO states – some were already alert to the problems and the stakes, but the absence of the UK from EU defence structures means that the European Council will have to spend more time trying to consciously factor in NATO rather than grandstanding and trying to feebly supplant it. A good starting point for the UK would be to demonstrate intent by gradually increasing GDP share in defence spending up to 3%, while completely overhauling the damaging and myopic way the MoD itself mismanages its procurement budget.

At the same time, London is well placed to reassure Washington of the value it places in its unique security relationships. The UK is the only European state that is party to the Five Eyes arrangements. EU ambitions over developing its own, inevitably flawed, intelligence structures are equivalent to a paddling pool doomed to be either unimpressively shallow or leaky, and quite possibly both. The UK government’s peculiar policy towards Huawei and 5G access – perhaps a legacy from earlier Whitehall bad decision making – will not have endeared the UK to Capitol Hill. But at least an independent UK government can still correct this.

More widely, fresh and inventive minds should be brought into government to rethink the nature of the AUSCANZUK relationship, and more broadly the Commonwealth realms. Despite a half century of decolonisation zeitgeist, many countries feel so spiritually and politically close to the UK that they retain a Personal Union with a common head of state. That friendship should be far better recognised and acknowledged in the UK, not just in security matters but more broadly, such as over residency rights and work visa points. CANZUK International has been doing some good work here and deserves official support.

Meanwhile, the EU will go on doing its own thing. The UK will have its work cut out, not least in prepping to police its freshly restored territorial waters with sufficient assets and aplomb to deter saltwater lawbreakers from the outset. But at least the necessary break has been made. Like any federal construct, the EU expands most quickly at times of crisis. We saw it with Maastricht after the Berlin Wall fell; we saw it after 9/11 with rejected Justice and Home Affairs powers dusted off; and we saw it with the Eurozone bailouts. Given what is on the horizon, EU integration will again surge ahead over the next couple of years. The only change is, this time, the UK won’t be dragged along with a foot stuck in the stirrup.

DEFENCE

LEE ROTHERHAM

Dr Lee Rotherham is Director of the think tank The Red Cell, Executive Director of Veterans for Britain, Chairman of the Museum of Brexit project, and was Director of Special Projects at Vote Leave.

https://conservatives.global/escaping-the-runaway-horse-of-eu-integration/

Back of the queue? No, Britain’s Commonwealth friends and allies will welcome Brexit

Tuesday 28 June 2016 8:59am

James Paterson

James Paterson is a Liberal senator for Victoria in Australia’s federal parliament.

Britain and Australia fought in two world wars together – but share much more besides (Source: Getty)

The people of the United Kingdom had a big decision to make on 23 June. It was entirely their call.

The British people know better than anyone else the costs and benefits of staying or leaving the European Union - and voted accordingly. But those on the Leave side should be forgiven if they have the false impression that staying in the EU is something their allies around the world sincerely desired.

On the contrary many of Great Britain’s friends in the international community will welcome the decision to leave the EU.

Some have argued that the free world, including Australia, benefits from the UK’s continued membership of the EU. They argued the UK is a force for good within the EU, providing a sensible voice which prevents worse decisions from being made.

It is hard to see where this has occurred in recent years, when the EU has lurched from crisis to crisis and many of its member countries appear unwilling to enact the necessary reforms that would boost their economies. Given the Cameron government’s difficulties in renegotiating even the terms of its own membership, it seems unlikely that the UK would have been able to save the EU from itself in the future.

Even if it were true that the EU is better with the UK as a member, it is not clear that the reverse is true. Staying in the EU for our benefit was a high price to ask a friend to pay, given the very real loss of sovereignty, democracy and prosperity the UK has suffered due to its membership.

In reality, the best thing for the EU and its member countries is for the UK to leave and prosper. There could be no more powerful case for much-needed change within the EU than to see one of its former members not just survive but grow outside its restrictive supervision. This will show the countries of Europe that there is a better way, and that the path they are on is doomed to failure.

Britain’s continued membership also had very real costs to its relationships with its friends and allies outside the EU. Countries like Australia stand to gain from a strong and independent UK freed from the EU’s dictates.

There could be no firmer bonds between two nations than Australia and the UK. We are a former colony that shares the same language, head of state, legal and political institutions, geopolitical interests and, most importantly, values. But in spite of this shared heritage, Australia’s relationship with the United Kingdom is not as strong as it could be. Sadly, the European Union stands between closer Australia-UK relations.

Despite our distance, the UK is Australia’s seventh largest trading partner and second largest source of foreign direct investment.

But in joining the EU, the UK gave up control over its trade policy. As a result, Australia and the UK have no bilateral free trade agreement. Negotiations towards an EU-Australia free trade agreement, which would include the UK, are scheduled to begin soon. Their successful conclusion would be very welcome and beneficial.

But an EU-Australia free trade agreement and a UK-Australia free trade agreement are not mutually exclusive. In fact, it is likely an agreement with the UK, once outside the EU, will be quicker and easier to negotiate, at the very least because Australia would be negotiating with one partner, rather than 28. If Britain were to leave the EU, it should go straight to the front of the queue for a free trade agreement with Australia.

Even though we loyally and reliably fought alongside the UK in two world wars and many other conflicts, Australian citizens are treated significantly less favourably than EU residents for work visas and immigration. Britain’s acquiescence to the EU freedom of movement principles means that one of the few levers left to a UK government seeking to control migration is to severely limit non-EU migration, including Australians.

This approach has resulted in a 50 per cent decline in Australians migrating to the UK between 1999 and 2011, and further falls since then. It effectively prevents the replication of the highly successful New Zealand-Australia Trans-Tasman agreement, which has facilitated unrestricted two-way migration for work, study and tourism since 1973.

An ambitious plan for Commonwealth free movement of people, starting with Australia, the UK, Canada and New Zealand, could begin to make meaningful progress now the UK has voted to leave the EU. Britain’s membership of the EU denies it access to the most culturally compatible, highly-educated workforce in the world.

On security, the UK is already part of the world’s most crucial intelligence-sharing club, the Five Eyes, including the United States, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Leaving the EU will do nothing to diminish that, or Britain’s other vital security partnerships, including Nato.

Now Britain has voted to leave the EU, it will be welcomed back into the international community outside the EU, particularly by its friends and allies in the Commonwealth.

City A.M.'s opinion pages are a place for thought-provoking views and debate. These views are not necessarily shared by City A.M.

http://www.cityam.com/241014/back-of-the-queue-no-britains-commonwealth-friends-and-allies-would-welcome-brexit