Connect with us

NEWS

The West projects its own crimes onto China by accusing it of ‘genocide’ and ‘colonialism’

Published

on

A key Western propaganda strategy is to accuse others of crimes that they’ve themselves committed. This is seen most blatantly in Western accusations that China is committing “genocide” or “colonialism” in Xinjiang.
As I say, not as I do

Most Western criticisms of China can be categorized under one broad umbrella: psychological projection. It is involuntary, reflexive and Pavlovian; as well as strategic, planned and deliberate. It’s a key pillar of Western propaganda, especially against China. It manifests in accusing others of that which you are guilty of.

Few propaganda campaigns meet the criteria better than the “Xinjiang genocide” narrative. Western history has no shortage of genocide and mass murder – both at home and abroad. Thus, in a natural reversal, many in the West accuse China of genocide. Such accusations are weaponized by the Western propaganda machinery – from the media to Wikipedia – and then projected onto China. Of course, there’s little evidence for any of it.

The United States of America, the vanguard of Western propaganda today, remains at the forefront of this campaign. The entire nation itself was of course founded on the genocide of indigenous peoples. Thus, in a classic example of projection, the US projects its crimes onto someone else, officially accusing China, its main rival, of genocide.

It is of course an entirely political decision – the US regime’s own lawyers disagree with the assessment.

Not to be outdone, also accusing China of “genocide” is Canada’s House of Commons. Recently, as unmarked graves of indigenous children are being discovered across the country, Canada has sought to divert attention by stepping up its “human rights” criticisms of China. It even went to the extent of delivering a joint statement on behalf of 44 countries at the UN Human Rights Council, which, with no sense of irony, mentioned reports of “forced separation of children from their parents” in China – exactly what Canada itself had done to indigenous children, word for word. Goebbels would’ve been proud.

Such flippant, reckless accusations of “genocide” by Western nations and their legislatures and media are despicable; not to mention a grave injustice to victims of actual genocides. Few diplomatic actions are more irresponsible than making a joke of perhaps the most serious accusation that can be levied on a nation state.

A project of projection

Yet, despite the factual inaccuracy and historical revisionism, such projection nevertheless feels comfortable. Projecting your own guilt on someone else is an easy coping mechanism. It makes you feel better knowing that those “Others” are no better than you are. It helps you avoid coming to terms with your own guilt. This could help explain why so many are willing to absorb and believe it.

As an added bonus it also provides a much-needed diversion from their own crimes, not to mention aids the hybrid war against China.

An old falsehood in the West’s quiver is accusing China of colonialism. When once China was accused of imperialism and even “genocide” in Tibet, with even Hollywood celebrities speaking out, that is no longer in fashion. Today, the same narrative is being recycled for Xinjiang.
Industrial-scale lies

Colonialism is defined by economic exploitation and wealth extraction. The colonizer extracts wealth from the “colony,” either by exploiting its labor or natural resources, and ships it back to benefit the home nation. The “colony” becomes drained of capital and sees little benefit from its own natural resources and labor. Consequently, the colonizer grows richer.

Few colonial examples illustrate this better than India, the largest “colony” of the largest imperial empire in the modern world.

When British colonialists first started landing on Indian shores, the subcontinent commanded the single highest share of the world’s economy. In 1700 AD, India had 24.4% of the world’s GDP, the largest in the world. It was the global leader in manufacturing, producing 25% of the world’s industrial output. From the late 17th to the early 18th century, India accounted for 95% of British imports from Asia. The Indian economy at the time was in a proto-industrial state, and if left to its own devices, would possibly have experienced an “industrial revolution” of its own.

Instead, it was Britain that had the industrial revolution – financed by Indian capital. By the mid-18th century, the relative situation between India and Britain was largely reversed, with Britain beginning to replace India as the world’s leading economic and commercial power, leading directly to its superpower status.

Estimates cited by the Indian Minister of External Affairs S. Jaishankar, suggest the total robbery amounted to $45 trillion, around 17 times Britain’s current GDP.

India’s share of world GDP had come down from 24.4% to 3% when the British left in 1947. The same study also estimates that an unbelievable 1.8 billion people died from deprivation and famines in 190 years – between 1757 and 1947. No wonder then the British House of Commons projects Britain’s crimes onto someone else – officially accusing China of genocide by passing a non-binding motion (Britain having committed no shortage of crimes against China as well). There is little doubt that if India today was the rising power that China is, the West would’ve concocted similar accusations and projected their crimes onto India instead.

China’s nefarious plot to make people richer

Today, the “Xinjiang genocide” narrative has been largely debunked, with even the most wicked propagandists split on whether the term is appropriate.

Accusations of colonialism are no less farcical. While colonialism is defined by economic exploitation and wealth extraction, China’s policies in Xinjiang and Tibet, while far from perfect, are the opposite. These regions have become exponentially richer than what “democratic” countries like India achieved for their border minority regions, or indeed, for their whole countries. China recently announced the elimination of extreme poverty, including in Tibet and Xinjiang.

In 2020, Tibet had the fastest economic growth among all of China’s 31 provinces and administrative regions. Per capita income has doubled in the last 10 years. Primary school enrollment is nearly universal. The unemployment rate is below 4%. Nearly all higher-education graduates have a job.

Xinjiang has a per capita income of around $7,868, higher than that of Goa ($6,698), India’s richest state by per-capita income. Meanwhile, Kashmir, a restive Muslim-majority region of India that also has a history of separatism and terrorism, languishes with a per capita income of $1,342.

Beijing has invested about 2.35 trillion yuan in Xinjiang over the past seven decades. GDP grew at an annual rate of 7.2% from 2014 to 2019. Per capita disposable income has multiplied more than 100-fold in 40 years. Primary school enrollment is 99.91%. 99.7% of residents are covered by basic medical insurance. Colonialism indeed.
Genociding truth

Of course, none of this means that Chinese rule is legitimate because it has made these regions richer. Xinjiang and Tibet are as much part of China as Texas or Florida are of the US. Yet, for decades, Western propaganda has desperately tried to poison the well and portray Chinese rule as illegitimate. The US has directly funded Tibetan and Uighur separatists for decades.

Normally, one would assume that the more serious the accusation, the more overwhelming the evidence. But in this case, it’s the opposite. No wonder few outside the West are buying it. The Xinjiang narrative remains one of America’s weakest propaganda campaigns.

The Western cabal often tries to slander China at the UN by releasing statements criticizing it. China and its allies then release counter-statements in response. The two groups have been exchanging official barbs over the last three years, at numerous UN sessions. In every single such exchange, the pro-China side always gets more support than the pro-US side – every single time.

In the latest back and forth, where Canada fired the opening salvo with its joint statement last month, the result was an overwhelming backlash of anti-imperialist solidarity – a whopping 90 nations released statements supporting China and opposing any interference in its internal affairs. The international community stood with China against the US-led Western onslaught.

Expectedly, this elicited complete radio silence from Western media. It could only keep shouting over the rooftops about how “44 nations criticize China at the UN” – in story after story, with no mention of the nations supporting China. After all, propaganda by omission remains the easiest and oldest form of propaganda.

Truth is often said to be the first casualty of war. It is also the first casualty of an information war. And in the West’s campaign to accuse China of “genocide,” the only thing being murdered is the truth.

If you like this story, share it with a friend!

NEWS

China is raising its retirement age, now among the youngest in the world’s major economies

Published

on

Starting next year, China will raise its retirement age for workers, which is now among the youngest in the world’s major economies, in an effort to address its shrinking population and aging work force.

The Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, the country’s legislature, passed the new policy Friday after a sudden announcement earlier in the week that it was reviewing the measure, state broadcaster CCTV announced.

The policy change will be carried out over 15 years, with the retirement age for men raised to 63 years, and for women to 55 or 58 years depending on their jobs. The current retirement age is 60 for men and 50 for women in blue-collar jobs and 55 for women doing white-collar work.

“We have more people coming into the retirement age, and so the pension fund is (facing) high pressure. That’s why I think it’s now time to act seriously,” said Xiujian Peng, a senior research fellow at Victoria University in Australia who studies China’s population and its ties to the economy.

The previous retirement ages were set in the 1950’s, when life expectancy was only around 40 years, Peng said.

The policy will be implemented starting in January, according to the announcement from China’s legislature. The change will take effect progressively based on people’s birthdates.

For example, a man born in January 1971 could retire at the age of 61 years and 7 months in August 2032, according to a chart released along with the policy. A man born in May 1971 could retire at the age of 61 years and 8 months in January 2033.

Demographic pressures made the move long overdue, experts say. By the end of 2023, China counted nearly 300 million people over the age of 60. By 2035, that figure is projected to be 400 million, larger than the population of the U.S. The Chinese Academy of Social Sciences had previously projected that the public pension fund will run out of money by that year.

Pressure on social benefits such as pensions and social security is hardly a China-specific problem. The U.S. also faces the issue as analysis shows that currently, the Social Security fund won’t be able to pay out full benefits to people by 2033.

“This is happening everywhere,” said Yanzhong Huang, senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations. “But in China with its large elderly population, the challenge is much larger.”

That is on top of fewer births, as younger people opt out of having children, citing high costs. In 2022, China’s National Bureau of Statistics reported that for the first time the country had 850,000 fewer people at the end of the year than the previous year , a turning point from population growth to decline. In 2023, the population shrank further, by 2 million people.

What that means is that the burden of funding elderly people’s pensions will be divided among a smaller group of younger workers, as pension payments are largely funded by deductions from people who are currently working.

Researchers measure that pressure by looking at a number called the dependency ratio, which counts the number of people over the age of 65 compared to the number of workers under 65. That number was 21.8% in 2022, according to government statistics, meaning that roughly five workers would support one retiree. The percentage is expected to rise, meaning fewer workers will be shouldering the burden of one retiree.

The necessary course correction will cause short-term pain, experts say, coming at a time of already high youth unemployment and a soft economy.

A 52-year-old Beijing resident, who gave his family name as Lu and will now retire at age 61 instead of 60, was positive about the change. “I view this as a good thing, because our society’s getting older, and in developed countries, the retirement age is higher,” he said.

Li Bin, 35, who works in the event planning industry, said she was a bit sad.

“It’s three years less of play time. I had originally planned to travel around after retirement,” she said. But she said it was better than expected because the retirement age was only raised three years for women in white-collar jobs.

Some of the comments on social media when the policy review was announced earlier in the week reflected anxiety.

But of the 13,000 comments on the Xinhua news post announcing the news, only a few dozen were visible, suggesting that many others had been censored.

Continue Reading

NEWS

Russia warns NATO of ‘direct war’ over Ukraine

Published

on

Moscow’s envoy to the UN has reiterated where the Kremlin’s red line is

Granting Kiev permission to use Western-supplied long-range weapons would constitute direct involvement in the Ukraine conflict by NATO, Russia’s envoy to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, has said.

Moscow will treat any such attack as coming from the US and its allies directly, Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday, explaining that long-range weapons rely on Western intelligence and targeting solutions, neither of which Ukraine is capable of.

NATO countries would “start an open war” with Russia if they allow Ukraine to use long-range weapons, Nebenzia told the UN Security Council on Friday.

“If such a decision is made, that means NATO countries are starting an open war against Russia,” Moscow’s envoy said. “In that case, we will obviously be forced to make certain decisions, with all the attendant consequences for Western aggressors.”

Putin issues new warning to NATO

“Our Western colleagues will not be able to dodge responsibility and blame Kiev for everything,” Nebenzia added. “Only NATO troops can program the flight solutions for those missile systems. Ukraine doesn’t have that capability. This is not about allowing Kiev to strike Russia with long-range weapons, but about the West making the targeting decisions.”

Russia considers it irrelevant that Ukrainian nationalists would technically be the ones pulling the trigger, Nebenzia explained. “NATO would become directly involved in military action against a nuclear power. I don’t think I have to explain what consequences that would have,” he said.

The US and its allies placed some restrictions on the use of their weapons, so they could claim not to be directly involved in the conflict with Russia, while arming Ukraine to the tune of $200 billion.

Multiple Western outlets have reported that the limitations might be lifted this week, as US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and British Foreign Secretary David Lammy visited Kiev. Russia has repeatedly warned the West against such a course of action.

 

Continue Reading

NEWS

China makes its move in Africa. Should the West be worried?

Published

on

Beijing maintains a conservative economic agenda in its relations with the continent, while finding it increasingly difficult to avoid a political confrontation with the West

The ninth forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) and the FOCAC summit held in Beijing on September 4-6 marked a significant phase in Africa’s relations with its global partners in the post-Covid era. China is the last major partner to hold a summit with African nations following the end of the pandemic; Africa summits were held by the EU and the US in 2022, and by Russia in 2023. The pandemic, coupled with rising global tensions, macroeconomic shifts, and a series of crises, underlined Africa’s growing role in the global economy and politics – something that China, which has undergone major changes (both internal and external) as a result of the pandemic, is well aware of.

It is clear that the relationship between China and Africa is entering a new phase. China is no longer just a preferential economic partner for Africa, as it had been in the first two decades of the 21st century. It has become a key political and military ally for many African countries. This is evident from China’s increasing role in training African civil servants and sharing expertise with them, as well as from several initiatives announced at the summit, including military-technical cooperation: officer training programs, mine clearing efforts, and over $100 million which China will provide to support the armed forces of African nations.

In the political arena, however, Beijing is proceeding very cautiously and the above-mentioned initiatives should be seen as the first tentative attempts rather than a systematic strategy.

While China strives to avoid political confrontation with the West in Africa and even closely cooperates with it on certain issues, it is becoming increasingly difficult to do so. Washington is determined to pursue a policy of confrontation with Beijing in Africa – this is evident both from US rhetoric and its strategic documents.

Dirty tactics: How the US tries to break China’s soft power in Africa

A “divorce” between China and the West is almost inevitable. This means that Chinese companies may lose contracts with Western corporations and won’t have access to transportation and logistics infrastructure. Consequently, China will need to develop its own comprehensive approach to Africa, either independently or in collaboration with other global power centers.

An important sign of the growing confrontation between the US and China in Africa was the signing of a trilateral memorandum of understanding between China, Tanzania, and Zambia regarding the reconstruction of the Tanzania-Zambia Railway (TAZARA), which was originally built by China in the 1970s. If it is expanded, electrified, and modernized, TAZARA has the potential to become a viable alternative to one of the key US investment projects in the region: the Lobito Corridor, which aims to enhance logistics infrastructure for exporting minerals (copper and cobalt) from the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Zambia by modernizing the railway from the DR Congo to the Angolan port of Lobito.

In inland regions such as Eastern Congo, transportation infrastructure plays a crucial role in the process of mineral extraction. Considering the region’s shortage of rail and road networks, even a single non-electrified railway line leading to a port in the Atlantic or Indian Ocean can significantly boost the operation of the mining sector and permanently tie the extraction and processing regions to specific markets.

It appears that China’s initiative holds greater promise compared to the US one, particularly because Chinese companies control major mines both in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Zambia. This gives them a clear advantage in working with Chinese operators and equipment, facilitating the export of minerals through East African ports. Overall, this indicates that East Africa will maintain its role as the economic leader on the continent and one of the most integrated and rapidly developing regions for imports.

A former colonial European power returns to Africa. What is it after now?

The highlight of the summit was China’s pledge to provide $50 billion to African countries over the next three years (by 2027). This figure echoes the $55 billion commitment to China made by the US (for 3 years) at the 2022 US-Africa Summit and the $170 billion that the EU promised to provide over seven years back in 2021. Consequently, leading global players allocate approximately $15-20 billion annually to Africa.

In recent years, there has been noticeable growth in such promises. Nearly every nation is eager to promise Africa something – for example, Italy has pledged $1 billion annually. However, these large packages of so-called “financial aid” often have little in common with actual assistance, since they are typically commercial loans or corporate investments. Moreover, a significant portion of these funds is spent in the donor countries (e.g. on the procurement and production of goods), which means that they contribute to the economic growth of African nations in a minimal way.

As for China, it will provide about $11 billion in genuine aid. This is a substantial amount which will be used for developing healthcare and agriculture in Africa. Another $30 billion will come in the form of loans (roughly $10 billion per year) and a further $10 billion as investments.

The overall financial framework allows us to make certain conclusions, though it’s important to note that the methodology for calculating these figures is unclear, and the line between loans, humanitarian aid, and investments remains blurred. In terms of investments (averaging around $3 billion per year), Beijing plans to maintain its previous levels of activity – in recent years, China’s foreign direct investments (FDI) have ranged from $2 billion to $5 billion annually. Financial and humanitarian aid could nearly double (from the current $1.5 billion-$2 billion per year) while lending is expected to return to pre-pandemic levels (which would still be below the peak years of 2012-2018).

Can Africa seize control of its own energy?

China’s economic plan for Africa seems to be quite conservative. It’s no surprise that debt issues took center stage during the summit. During the Covid-19 pandemic, macroeconomic stability in African countries deteriorated, which led to challenges in debt repayments and forced Africa to initiate debt restructuring processes assisted by the IMF and the G20. Starting in 2020, a combination of internal and external factors led China to significantly cut its lending to African countries – from about $10-15 billion down to $2-3 billion. This reduction in funding has triggered economic reforms in several African countries (e.g. Ghana, Kenya, and Nigeria), which have shifted toward stricter tax and monetary policies. While promises to increase lending may seem like good news for African nations, it’s likely that much of this funding will go toward interest payments on existing obligations and debt restructuring, since China wants to ensure that its loans are repaid.

Despite China’s cautious approach to Africa, its interaction with the continent will develop as a result of external and internal changes affecting both Africa and China. Africa will gradually become more industrialized and will reduce imports while the demand for investments and local production will increase. China will face demographic challenges, and its workforce will decrease. This may encourage bilateral cooperation as some production facilities may move from China to Africa. This will most likely concern East African countries such as Ethiopia and Tanzania, considering China’s current investments in their energy and transportation infrastructure. Additionally, with Africa’s population on the rise and China’s population declining, Beijing is expected to attract more African migrant workers to help address labor shortages.

Continue Reading

Trending