Connect with us

NEWS

US-led human rights resolution against China could backfire

Published

on

Washington’s resolution against China at the UN’s rights body is bound to be embarrassing

The United States called on the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) on September 26 to discuss alleged human rights violations in China’s Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region. Washington’s request comes after a recent UN report that warned of possible crimes against humanity in the Chinese territory.

The resolution brought forth by the US was also co-sponsored by the United Kingdom, Canada, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Iceland and Norway. The 47-member UNHRC will vote on the resolution this week, with Western countries apparently afraid that it might not pass. If it does, a debate on the issue will be scheduled for the council’s next session in February.

Indeed, a joint statement delivered by Pakistan on behalf of 68 states during the 51st session of the UNHRC called out Western countries for having double standards on the issue of human rights and stressed that Xinjiang, Hong Kong and Tibet-related issues were strictly China’s internal affairs.

Looking at the list of current council members, it appears at first glance that China has more support than the West, and 16 of these countries signed onto the aforementioned statement. So the likelihood of the US resolution being tossed out is quite high. It’s also important to note how mild the action from Washington was, given the fact that it probably knew anything more than a “discussion” would surely have zero chance of passing.

UN report accuses China of ‘crimes against humanity’

While the prospects of this not passing are already embarrassing enough for Washington and represents a tidal shift in global power, in a way it would almost be less embarrassing. That’s because opening up a discussion on human rights would not bode well for Uncle Sam.

If we just look at the accusations commonly leveled against China in Xinjiang, such concerns as “forced labor”, “forced disappearances,” and infringements on other rights found in the UN report are commonplace in the US. Let’s take a look at some examples.

Starting with “religious, cultural and linguistic identity and expression,” it’s quite obvious that a country that committed one of the worst genocides in human history, the US, ought to keep its mouth shut on this. But we should note that Washington’s genocide against the Native population and its suppression of Native identity is ongoing.

Take for instance a widely reported incident involving a Native American man, Darrell House, who was at his people’s ancestral lands and got tased by a federal government agent while praying. Of course, the parks service said at the time that it was “reviewing” the incident – but such instances happen all the time. In fact, Native Americans are at the center of constitutional law debates time and time again mainly over their religious practices.

Moving on to the “rights to privacy and freedom of movement,” again, we can see that the US routinely violates this. As we learned with the leaks from National Security Agency (NSA) whistleblower Edward Snowden, the US operates the world’s largest global spy network in the world and collects bulk data on its own citizens without their consent.

China rebukes US as ‘world’s biggest human rights violator’

As for freedom of movement, the case of human rights lawyer Steven Donziger is notable. He won a lawsuit where he represented Ecuadoreans against oil giant Chevron for polluting their country. Then the company fought the ruling, never paid a cent in restitution and lobbied the federal government to pursue trumped up racketeering charges against Donziger. He was under house arrest for more than two years.

“Reproductive rights” have been all over the news in the States after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, which had established a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion. Now women’s rights are under serious threat across the country as states begin implementing punitive anti-abortion laws.

“Employment and labor issues” is interesting given the fact that it is widely known that, as of last year, a full-time job in the US at the federal minimum wage of $7.25 can’t pay the rent anywhere in the country. Workplaces are also extremely unsafe, which is evident by the prevalence of Covid-19 in the country. The ongoing pandemic is, more than anything, a workplace safety issue – and the federal government allowed itself to be influenced by employers to undermine workers’ safety.

Of course, there’s no one more exploited than prisoners because the US still allows for slavery as a form of punishment in its constitution. A June report from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) found that incarcerated workers in the US earn an average wage of between 13 to 52 cents per hour – despite producing nearly $11 billion worth of goods and services annually.

China, India and Brazil abstain in vote on US resolution, Russia vetoes

That’s, of course, well below the minimum wage – and the state can take up to 80% of this already measly pay for room and board, court costs, restitution and other fees, ironically such as prison maintenance and construction. Almost 70% of prisoners polled said they can’t afford basic necessities – and, damningly, 76% said “they are required to work or face additional punishments such as solitary confinement, denial of opportunities to reduce their sentence, and loss of family visitation.”

On “issues of family separation and reprisals,” of course most people are familiar with the terrible stories of “kids in cages” at US migrant detention camps. The US routinely separates migrant families at its border – and, according to internal documents seen by The Intercept, its federal agents have at least discussed reprisal against pro-immigrant activists.

With the issue of “enforced disappearances,” the US government notably runs a camp at Guantanamo Bay on the island of Cuba dedicated to literally just that. It has detained 780 people there since 2002 – and many of them without any formal criminal proceedings. The torture techniques used there have included psychological abuse and threats to harm the families of detainees, which certainly falls under the category of “intimidations, threats and reprisals.”

That covers every single accusation in the UN report, showing just how hypocritical Washington would be on this issue if it really decided to open a debate at the UNHRC. We can see that with the most minimal effort, China and other countries could rip Uncle Sam’s moral superiority to shreds.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of TSFT.

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