Connect with us
Wise usd campaign
ADVERTISEMENT

China

China’s vetoes during the Syrian conflict

Published

on

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem (L) shakes hands of Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi (R) after a press conference at Diaoyutai state guesthouse, Beijing, 18 June 2019 (Reuters/Fred Dufour).

Author: Rosemary Foot, Oxford

With the internationalised civil war in Syria entering its ninth year, the north-western part of the country is experiencing ‘massive waves of civilian displacement and major loss of civilian life’, induced by Russian-backed Syrian government air and ground strikes against rebel forces.

Such devastation has been a regular feature of this conflict. Yet China, with Russia in the lead, has on eight occasions used its UN Security Council veto at key moments of the war. Indeed, Russia has used its veto on several additional occasions as it seeks to ensure that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad remains in power. But use of the veto is unusual behaviour for Beijing. Prior to the outbreak of fighting in Syria in 2011, Beijing had only used its veto six times since it took its UN seat in 1971. Surprisingly, Beijing has persisted despite attracting very little support from the other 13 members of the Security Council.

The latest veto came in December 2019 when both Beijing and Moscow voted against a resolution designed to allow humanitarian agencies continued access to besieged populations through four previously-agreed border crossings. In Beijing’s view, the agencies needed to coordinate with the Syrian government rather than deliver assistance directly to the populations in need. The resolution, drawn up by non-permanent members of the Security Council, Belgium, Germany and Kuwait, sought to re-authorise the cross-border transfer of humanitarian goods such as medicines and surgical supplies for one year. But just two crossing points were mandated for six months (from January 2020) after extended bargaining by Russia.

Beijing’s recent voting patterns have carried social costs for the Chinese government, particularly in the war’s early stages. In February 2012, Beijing and Moscow both vetoed a Security Council resolution that was expected to pass unanimously after significant revisions had taken into account Chinese and Russian objections. That resolution demanded that all parties in Syria stop all violence and reprisals, while Beijing’s ambassador argued that its passage would undermine prospects for political dialogue with Syrian authorities. China’s veto attracted domestic criticism. It also attracted criticism from then UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon and various Middle Eastern states, 10 of whom had co-sponsored the resolution.

Why has Beijing decided on this course of action? Keeping Bashar al-Assad in power and ensuring the territorial integrity of Syria remain key Chinese objectives. Following the 2011 UN intervention in Libya — which saw the overthrow and eventual killing of its leader Muammar Gaddafi — China perceived the threat of external intervention designed to force regime change in relation to any government attempting to deal with domestic unrest as having gained in strength.

In the Middle East, such forms of external intervention are also seen as generating conditions enabling the rise of Islamist extremism. China’s fear of ethnic Uyghurs joining jihadist organisations in Syria has grown over the course of the war, with Beijing now justifying its draconian and counter-productive policies in Xinjiang as a response to that fear. A Global Times editorial claims that it was only through the strong leadership of the Chinese Communist Party that Xinjiang managed to ‘avoid the fate of becoming “China’s Syria”, or “China’s Libya”’.

China and Russia have also decided to strike a bargain, and more frequently than in the past, to operate as a ‘P2’ within the UN Security Council by supporting each other on issues of core concern. This is happening at a time when a usually dominant ‘P3’ of Britain, France and the United States find their own relations fraying over a range of matters, including developments connected with Mali, Israel–Palestine and Iran.

Beijing now believes that it can more easily deflect criticism of its more outspoken stance. Such boldness is a result of China’s increased global economic and political influence. But to mitigate criticism of its vetoes from Middle Eastern states, Beijing stepped up its regional engagement by launching its first ‘Arab Policy Paper’ in 2016 and Chinese President Xi Jinping visited several countries in the region.

China has since worked to cement economic ties through the Belt and Road Initiative, infrastructure investment and trade. Through diplomacy, Beijing reminds a generally sympathetic audience of the devastating consequences of western-led military interventions in Iraq and…

Read the rest of this article on East Asia Forum

Continue Reading

China

China’s November 2024 Economy: Navigating Mixed Signals and Ongoing Challenges

Published

on

In November 2024, China’s economy exhibited mixed results: industrial production rose by 5.4%, while retail sales grew only 3%, below forecasts. Fixed asset investment also faltered. Policymakers are anticipated to introduce measures to stimulate domestic demand and combat deflation.


China’s economy showed mixed performance in November 2024, with industrial production and exports showing resilience, while retail sales and fixed asset investment underperformed, amid ongoing challenges in the property sector. Policymakers are expected to implement targeted fiscal and monetary measures to boost domestic demand and address deflationary pressures.

The National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) has released China’s economy data for November 2024, revealing a mixed performance across key indicators. Retail sales grew by 3 percent year-on-year, a significant slowdown from October’s 4.8 percent growth and well below the 4.6 percent forecast. Industrial production, however, showed resilience, rising by 5.4 percent and exceeding expectations of 5.3 percent growth.

The property sector continued to drag on the broader economy, with real estate investment contracting by 10.4 percent for the January-to-November period, further highlighting the challenges in stabilizing the sector. Fixed asset investment also fell short of expectations, growing by 3.3 percent year-to-date, down from 3.4 percent in October.

In November, China’s industrial value added (IVA) grew by 5.4 percent year-on-year (YoY), slightly accelerating from the 5.3 percent recorded in October. This modest improvement reflects continued recovery in key industries, supported by recent stimulus measures aimed at stabilizing the economy.

The manufacturing sector led the growth, expanding by 6.0 percent YoY, while the power, heat, gas, and water production and supply sector grew by 1.6 percent. The mining industry posted a 4.2 percent YoY increase. Notably, advanced industries outpaced overall growth, with equipment manufacturing and high-tech manufacturing rising by 7.6 percent and 7.8 percent YoY, respectively, underscoring the resilience of China’s innovation-driven sectors.

Key product categories showed robust output gains in November:

From January to November, IVA increased by 5.8 percent YoY, maintaining steady growth over the year despite headwinds from a slowing property market and external uncertainties.


This article was first published by China Briefing , which is produced by Dezan Shira & Associates. The firm assists foreign investors throughout Asia from offices across the world, including in in ChinaHong KongVietnamSingapore, and India . Readers may write to info@dezshira.com for more support.

Read the rest of the original article.

Continue Reading

China

Ukraine war: 10% of Chinese people are willing to boycott Russian goods over invasion – new study

Published

on

Since Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, some Chinese citizens express dissent through potential boycotts of Russian goods, reflecting a complex relationship despite government support for Russia.

Since Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, the Chinese government has been criticised for its refusal to condemn the war. In 2024, the economic and diplomatic relationship between the two nations appears stronger than ever.

Because of strict censorship and repression imposed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), it is difficult to know the extent to which the general public shares their government’s support of Putin’s regime. But a newly published study I carried out with colleagues found that more than 10% of Chinese people surveyed were willing to boycott Russian goods over the war in Ukraine.

This is a surprisingly large figure, especially since existing surveys indicate that Chinese people hold a broadly positive view of their neighbour. We used a representative sample of 3,029 Chinese citizens for this research, to dig into public attitudes to Russia. The survey was done in 2022 after the Ukraine invasion.

We were aware that due to widespread censorship, our participants might not be willing to give honest answers to questions about Russia’s actions in Ukraine. They might also not feel safe to do that in a regime where disagreement with the CCP’s position is often met with harsh punishment. This is why we asked them to tell us if they would be willing to boycott Russian products currently sold in China.

We felt this question was a good indicator of how much the participants disapproved of Russian foreign policy in Ukraine. More importantly, we were also curious to find out whether Chinese citizens would be willing to take direct political action to punish Russia economically for its aggressive behaviour.

In our study, we split respondents into the three different ideological groups in China: “liberals”, who support the free market and oppose authoritarianism; “the new left”, who sympathise with the policies pursued in China under Mao Zedong; and “neo-authoritarians”, who believe the Russian-Ukrainian conflict is an extension of the rivalry between authoritarian China and the liberal United States. These groups were based on the main political beliefs in China.

We found that liberals were most likely to say they were willing to boycott Russian products. Liberals believe that China should work with, rather than against, western democracies. They also place a high value on human rights and democratic freedoms. Because of their beliefs, they are likely to think that Russia’s actions against Ukraine were unprovoked, aggressive and disproportional.

Chinese and Russian economic and diplomatic relations seem closer than ever in 2024.
American Photo Archive/Alamy

The new left and neo-authoritarians we surveyed were more supportive of Russian products. The new left see Russia as a close ally and believe that Nato’s expansion in eastern Europe was a form of aggression. Neo-authoritarians, on the other hand, believe that supporting Russia, an allied autocracy, is in China’s best interest.

Boycotting Russian goods

Asking Chinese participants if they are willing to boycott Russian products might seem like a simple matter of consumer preferences. However, our study reveals a great deal about the way in which regular citizens can express controversial political beliefs in a repressive authoritarian regime.

Boycotting products of certain companies has long been studied in the west as a form of unconventional political action that helps people express their beliefs. However, in the west, boycotting certain products is simply one of many ways people are able to take political action. In a country such as China, boycotting a Russian product might often be the only safe way to express disagreement with the country’s actions.

This is because citizens do not have to tell others they chose not to buy a product, and their actions are unlikely to attract the attention of the authorities.

Since Russian goods are readily available to Chinese consumers and China is encouraging more Russian exports to reach its market, the Russian economy could be significantly affected by an organised boycott campaign in China. The considerable level of support for a boycott expressed by some of our participants, as well as previous acts of solidarity with Ukraine in China, suggest that such a campaign could already be taking place in the country.

This could harm Russia because it regularly exports a number of different products such as meat, chocolate, tea and wine to China. These goods made up 5.1% of China’s total imports in 2023 – and this figure is likely to increase if Russia becomes more isolated from the west, and therefore more dependent on China for its trade.

While 5.1% of the Chinese market might seem like a low figure, China is home to over 1.4 billion people. In this context, even a small boycott could result in a serious loss to Russian companies.

Our research shows that Chinese citizens don’t always support the official position of the communist party. It also shows that many people there will express even the most unpopular political opinions – if they can find a safe way to do it.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

China

Australia Can Enhance China’s Credibility in the CPTPP

Published

on

In early 2024, China sought to join the CPTPP, potentially offering modest economic benefits to Australia. Key reforms include limiting state-owned enterprise subsidies, enhancing data flows, and banning forced labor.


China’s Interest in the CPTPP

In early 2024, China expressed a keen interest in joining the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), a trade agreement involving eleven Pacific Rim economies and the United Kingdom. This move is anticipated to yield modest economic benefits for Australia. However, it also opens the door for vital reforms in areas such as the control of subsidies for state-owned enterprises, allowing free cross-border data flows, and prohibiting forced labor practices.

Economic Implications for Australia

A May 2024 report from the Australian Productivity Commission indicated that China’s accession to the CPTPP might raise Australia’s GDP by only 0.01%. This modest gain isn’t surprising, given Australia’s existing preferential trade arrangement with China through the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership. Nonetheless, the CPTPP encompasses more than just tariff reductions, focusing on broader trade principles and standards.

Reform Commitments Required from China

For China to become a CPTPP member, it must demonstrate adherence to high-standard rules initially developed with the country in mind. This commitment will help alleviate concerns among member nations like Japan and Canada, particularly regarding China’s economic practices and geopolitical tensions, such as those with Taiwan. Membership would necessitate reforms, including limiting SOE subsidies, enabling freer data flows, and banning forced labor, with significant penalties for non-compliance.

Source : Australia can encourage China’s credibility in the CPTPP

Source link

Continue Reading