Share This

Thursday 30 September 2021

Beyond the submarine feud, contains China's rise

https://youtu.be/-RqjM2ij5dc 

Indo-Pacific: AUKUS alliance causes anger in France and EU | DW News

https://youtu.be/8WpwHJV6TG4

China and France criticise UK-US-Australia submarine pact

A Royal Australian Navy submarine is seen during a drill with the Indian Navy in Darwin on September 5. Australia is buying a fleet of nuclear submarines as part of a new defence pact. Photo: TNS

The new US security pact with Australia and Britain shows Biden’s approach in building overlapping alliances and partnerships in dealing with its China challenge

THE empire strikes back. So it seemed as United States President Joe Biden announced recently at a press conference attended virtually by Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison and his British counterpart Boris Johnson, the conclusion of a new military and security agreement between their three nations.

The agreement smacks of the old “Anglo” arrangements made a century ago between what used to be called the “Mother Country” and two of her major English-speaking siblings. And President Biden’s jovial reference during the latest press conference to the Australian Premier as “that fellow Down Under” only heightened the “retro” feel of the entire enterprise.

But appearances can be deceiving, and what may look and sound like a blast from the past could well turn out to be a major pointer of the world of tomorrow. For there is little doubt that the new Aukus arrangement – as this pact is rather ungainly called – is already being rated as a fundamental step change in Asian and, perhaps, even global security structures.

Professor Rory Metcalf of the Australian National University and one of his country’s most prominent strategic experts, is not a man known to exaggerate. But on this occasion, no exaggeration seemed too much: Australia, he wrote after the Aukus deal was announced, “has crossed a strategic Rubicon, bitten the bullet, nailed its colours to the mast”. In short, no expression, however grand or over-used, is out of place in expressing the significance of the new deal.

French fury over subs deal

Following the announcement, most of the attention concentrated on the impact of the Aukus agreement on Australia’s existing contract with France for the delivery of a new generation of conventional, diesel electric powered submarines. That deal has been cancelled and will be replaced with the supply of nuclear-powered submarines based on Us-developed technology.

The French were predictably apoplectic at the loss of a contract for the construction of 12 Barracuda submarines, a mega deal worth at least Us$88bil in today’s prices, and a critical part of France’s struggle to maintain an indigenous naval industry.

Officials in Paris were particularly indignant about being kept in the dark by the Australians about their negotiations for a nuclear submarine replacement deal. French Foreign Minister Jean-yves Le Drian called the entire episode a “stab in the back”; junior politicians in Paris have used even more colourful language, and French officials have been steeling themselves for a prolonged legal battle with Australia over what they claim is a broken contract.

As is often the case with military deals which contain many confidential clauses, the conclusion may well be that both sides to the dispute are right.

The French may be correct to point out that Australia could have gone for the purchase of nuclear submarines back in 2016, when the initial deal was signed. It was Canberra that insisted on the diesel variety partly because the anti-nuclear mood was strong among Australians then, and one of the chief attractions of picking France’s Barracuda submarines at that time was precisely the fact that the submarines could be switched from diesel to nuclear power. So, it looks odd that the Australians are now ditching a French contract by arguing that it does not offer them the technology which they could have had from the start, but rejected.

However, the Australians may also be right in claiming that the French submarine project is both behind schedule and more than double the initial budget, and that the promises initially made by Paris to transfer 90% of the work to shipyards in Adelaide were subsequently whittled down to not more than half of the construction capacity, thereby failing to create the national Australian submarine manufacturing capability which Canberra craved.

But all these arguments, although weighty, are marginal. For what persuaded the Australian government to go for the deal was the unique access it offers to the technology which no other nation has, apart from the US and the United Kingdom.

Only six nations in the world have nuclear-powered submarines: Britain, China, France, India, Russia and the US. The Americans have never shared their technology with any other country apart from Britain, and even that technology-sharing deal was concluded back in the late 1950s.

There is no question, therefore, about the significance of the latest agreement for Australia. A senior American official who briefed the media about the Aukus deal on condition of anonymity underlined the “very rare” nature of the arrangement and the “extremely sensitive” technology that will be shared.

“This is, frankly, an exception to our policy in many respects. I do not anticipate that this will be undertaken in any other circumstances going forward; we view this as a one-off,” he told journalists.

The French were wondering why they were not offered a part in one shape or another in this Australia-britain-us triumvirate. The answer is quite simple and, of course, fully known in Paris.

The French have spent decades trying to develop technologies which are independent from the US and offered as alternatives to American platforms. President Emmanuel Macron uses every opportunity to urge the rest of Europe to develop “strategic autonomy” from the US. It should come as no surprise, therefore, that the Americans are taking France at its word and propose to respect French “autonomy” by excluding it from sensitive military projects.

The Five Eyes 

 In reality, the Aukus deal builds on almost 80 years of intelligence cooperation within the so-called Five Eyes arrangement in which the Australians, Brits and Americans are also joined by New Zealanders and Canadians. The unique flow of classified information between them served as not only the foundation for the current deal, but also the basis for common threat assessment.

Australia has decided that it needs nuclear-powered submarines because they are stealthier and can endure far longer periods submerged, but also because the submarine deal is a curtain-raiser to something far bigger: the development and transfer of technology with the Americans and British involving a variety of other fields, including cyber, artificial intelligence and quantum technology.

Furthermore, senior US officials are now talking about setting up “a new architecture of meetings and engagements” between relevant defence and technology teams from the three countries which will not only identify joint areas of research and development, but also promote “deeper interoperability” across the entire spectrum of a future battlefield. This is, to all intents and purposes, a new alliance.

And the longer-term political ramifications are just as substantial.

In a 30-minute phone call on Wednesday, the French and US presidents agreed to try to find a way forward and will meet in Europe at the end of next month.

But there is no doubt that the conclusion of the Aukus deal marginalises Europe. The Europeans have spent the past 18 months proclaiming their desire to elaborate a new policy towards the Indopacific region, and particularly towards China, one which will supposedly entail both a “critical engagement with China” and a friendly engagement with the US.

Yet when the chips were down, the only European partner the US was interested in enlisting was Britain. The fact that the announcement of the Aukus deal came literally hours before the European Union unveiled its own Asia policy paper only added to the continent’s sense of marginalisation.

The deal with Australia is also a huge boon for British PM Johnson. He was castigated for pulling Britain out of the EU, something which supposedly made his country irrelevant. But the Aukus pact seems to confirm Johnson’s claims that out of the EU, the Brits have plenty of global engagement alternatives. The deal with Australia also demolishes the argument that the Johnson government is not taken seriously in Washington.

The Aukus deal also ensures that Britain’s existing intelligence and technology cooperation links with the US are now being recast as part of a global effort to keep up with the perceived Chinese threat, a useful advantage for the British, who often fretted that, with the old confrontation against Russia now less important, the US would lose interest in cooperation with them.

America’s China strategy

But the most significant aspect is what the Aukus deal tells us about America’s long-term strategy on China.

For years, the discussion in many world capitals was about the feasibility of creating a broad, global Us-led coalition to contain China, one which includes most Asian countries, and mimics the Nato alliance in Europe during the Cold War. But that was never feasible in Asia, and probably was never even considered in Washington.

Instead, what President Biden is seeking to promote is several more restricted alliance and partnership arrangements, some overlapping and some complementing each other. The Quad is one such arrangement, the Aukus another, and there will be others in the offing.

The approach has the advantage of enhancing the existing hub-andspokes arrangements whereby the US is crucial to every single regional arrangement but is not presiding over a uniform region-wide alliance.

The overlapping nature of these arrangements is intended to increase the cost which China may have to pay in any future confrontation, but at the same time does not isolate the Chinese or condemn the region to a Cold War-style confrontation. Still, the Aukus military pact is not without its own potential difficulties.

The fact that it is seen as a public rebuff of France and of the EU is decidedly unhelpful. The US needs EU cooperation in Asia, and particularly French cooperation. Next to the British, the French have the most capable European military force, and the only one apart from the British with true long-range expeditionary capabilities. France is also a Pacific power: It has two million citizens in the region.

So, urgent steps must be taken to include France in any future regional projects.

Because of its privileged and exclusive nature, the Aukus deal can also create tensions with other US allies such as Japan and South Korea, which may wish to get similar technology-sharing deals.

So, it’s better if, after the initial publicity splash, the Aukus copies the example of America’s nuclear submarines and dives into the depth of secrecy, never to be talked of again. Most of its added value is by working behind the scenes.

There will also be political difficulties. Critics in Australia will claim that their country is losing its independence by getting too close to the US. And critics in Britain – including former prime minister Theresa May – are already warning that the Aukus deal makes the British too dependent on US policy towards China, with potentially grave consequences.

Still, none of this detracts from the conclusion that, in seeking to counter China, the US has lost none of its ability to innovate and surprise. And decision-makers in Beijing would be well advised to reflect on how their own actions of condemning Australia, boycotting Australian goods and, more recently, presenting a set of humiliating conditions to the Australians as a precondition for the restoration of normal relations have contributed to the creation of the Aukus alliance.

Far from achieving what Beijing would regard as Canberra’s “good behaviour”, the pressures have resulted in an Australia which will be better armed and more closely aligned with the US, precisely the outcome China sought to avoid.

Jonathan Eyal is the Europe correspondent at The Straits Times, a member of the Asia News Network (ANN), which is an alliance of 24 news media entities. The Asian Editors Circle is a series of commentaries by editors and contributors of ANN.

 Source link

 

Related:

 

Malaysian Parliament should reject Aukus | The Star

https://www.thestar.com.my/opinion/letters/2021/09/28/malaysian-parliament-should-reject-aukus

 

Australian Aukus subs: are China’s fears of a nuclear arms race in.

 https://www.thestar.com.my/aseanplus/aseanplus-news/2021/09/27/australian-aukus-subs-are-chinas-fears-of-a-nuclear-arms-race-in-the-indo-pacific-founded

 

  Why AUKUS, Quad and Five Eyes anger China

The declared aim of a new defense agreement comprising the U.S., U.K. and Australia, christened AUKUS, is to maintain a “free and open IndoPacific,” with nuclearpowered submarines potentially on patrol. But you can add it to the list of arrangements among democracies attempting to counter China’s growing power. The so-called Quad partnership, created after the devastating 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, and even the World War II-era “Five Eyes” spy alliance now seem overwhelmingly focused on Beijing. The growing web has provoked fury from Beijing and worries in some Asian states that the new groupings could fuel a dangerous arms race in the region.

Q: Q:What is AUKUS?

A: A:A new security partnership that will see Australia acquire nuclearpowered submarine technology – but not nuclear weapons – from the U.S. and U.K. While it could take more than a decade for Australia to build its first sub, the agreement shows the U.S. seeking to form a more cohesive defense arrangement in Asia to offset China’s rapidly modernizing military. Australia has long tried to balance security ties with the U.S. and its close economic ties with China, insisting it didn’t need to pick sides. But Beijing’s barrage of punitive trade reprisals following Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s push for an investigation into the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic appears to have drastically changed the strategic calculus in Canberra.

Q: Q:Why are the submarines important?

A: A:Nuclear-powered vessels are vastly superior to their diesel-electric counterparts: They’re faster, can stay submerged almost indefinitely, and are bigger – allowing them to carry more weapons, equipment and supplies. Given Australia’s remote location and the fact its subs may operate in waters stretching from the Indian Ocean up to Japan, these are big pluses. Until now, only six nations – the U.S., U.K., France, China, Russia and India – have had the technology to deploy and operate nuclear-powered subs. France was enraged by the Aukus deal, which came as a surprise, because Australia simultaneously canceled a $66 billion agreement it had had with Paris for conventional subs.

Q: Q:What’s the Quad?

A: A:It brings the U.S., Japan, India and Australia together in an informal alliance of democracies with shared economic and security interests that span the Pacific and Indian Oceans. Formed to coordinate tsunami relief efforts, it lay dormant for years afterward until 2017, when it was revived under then-U.S. President Donald Trump as his administration sought to challenge China from every angle. Trump’s successor, Joe Biden, organized the first-ever gathering of the Quad leaders in March, at which they pledged to accelerate production of Covid-19 vaccines and distribute them across Asia. Although their statement doesn’t mention China, the talks came amid a flurry of U.S. diplomacy designed to build a common approach to dealing with Beijing.

Q: Q:What’s Five Eyes?

A: A:It’s a decades-old intelligence-sharing arrangement among the U.S., the U.K., Canada, Australia and New Zealand. It’s so good at keeping secrets that its existence wasn’t publicly revealed until the mid-2000s. It isn’t clear how much intelligence is shared, but most of whistle-blower Edward Snowden’s vast 2013 dump of classified U.S. National Security Agency data, for instance, was marked FVEY, meaning it was available to other Five Eyes members. Advocates say the collaboration was used to positive effect in the Afghanistan war as well as in counter-terrorism operations in the Philippines and East Africa. Snowden attacked it as unanswerable to democratic oversight by national governments. Cracks emerged this year over China, when New Zealand distanced itself from moves to broaden the group’s remit and take positions on issues such as Beijing’s human rights record.

Q: Q:Why so much focus on China?

A: A:Its rise has steadily become one of the biggest foreign policy challenges not just for the U.S., but for almost every Chinese neighbor and democracies around the world. China’s rapid military development is a particularly acute threat to neighboring countries such as India and the Philippines, which have active maritime or border disputes. But it also threatens the U.S. military presence that has underpinned Asia’s security architecture for decades. Researchers at the University of Sydney, for example, warned last year that China’s growing missile arsenal could wipe out America’s bases in Asia during the “opening hours” of any conflict. China’s global economic reach has also greatly expanded as state-owned companies buy up strategic assets such as ports around the world that could be harnessed in times of war. Its statecraft – spearheaded by “wolf warrior” diplomats – has also grown more aggressive, particularly throughout the Covid pandemic.

Q: Q:What’s China’s reaction?

A: A:It has consistently lashed out at what it calls a “Cold War mentality,” denouncing such partnerships as anti-China cliques. Chinese officials argued that Aukus will stoke an arms race in the Asia-Pacific region. In their view, its members are trying not just to compete, but to contain China’s rise – to throw a military net around it in vital waterways like the South China Sea and undermine the country’s economic development. Relations have been getting tenser on all sides. Biden, like Trump, has trained his energies on preventing the world’s second-largest economy from pulling ahead. Beijing also has sparred with the U.K. over Hong Kong and Canada over detained citizens, while Europe has called China a “systemic rival.”

US-Australia nuclear arms deal


On September 15, the heads of government of Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States announced the formation of AUKUS, "a new enhanced trilateral security partnership" among these three countries. Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison and British Prime Minister Boris Johnson joined US President Joe Biden to "preserve security and stability in the Indo-Pacific," as Johnson put it.

While China was not explicitly mentioned by these leaders at the AUKUS announcement, it is generally assumed that countering China is the unstated motivation for the new partnership. "The future of the Indo-Pacific," said Morrison at the press conference, "will impact all our futures." That was as far as they would go to address the elephant in the room.

Zhao Lijian of the Chinese Foreign Ministry associated the creation of AUKUS with "the outdated Cold War zerosum mentality and narrow-minded geopolitical perception." Beijing has made it clear that all talk of security in the IndoPacific region by the US and its NATO allies is part of an attempt to build up military pressure against China. The BBC story on the pact made this clear in its headline: "Aukus: UK, US and Australia launch pact to counter China."

What was the need for a new partnership when there are already several such security platforms in place? Morrison acknowledged this in his remarks at the press conference, mentioning the "growing network of partnerships" that include the Quad security pact (Australia, India, Japan and the United States) and the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing group (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK and the United States).

A closer look at AUKUS suggests that this deal has less to do with military security and more to do with arms deals.

Morrison announced that the "first major initiative of AUKUS will be to deliver a nuclear-powered submarine fleet for Australia." Two red flags were immediately raised: first, what will happen to Australia's pre-existing order of diesel-powered submarines from France, and second, will this sale of nuclear-powered submarines violate the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)?

In 2016, the Australian government made a deal with France's Naval Group (formerly known as Direction des Constructions Navales, or DCNS) to supply the country with 12 diesel-electric submarines.

A press release from then-prime minister Malcolm Turnbull and his minister of defense (who is the current minister of foreign affairs), Marise Payne, said at the time that the future submarine project "is the largest and most complex defense acquisition Australia has ever undertaken. It will be a vital part of our defense capability well into the middle of this century."

Australia's six Collins-class submarines are expected to be decommissioned in the 2030s, and the submarines that were supposed to be supplied by France were meant to replace them. The arms deal was slated to cost (in Australian dollars) "about $90 billion to build and $145 billion to maintain over their life cycle," according to The Sydney Morning Herald.

Australia has now canceled its deal with the French to obtain the nuclear-powered submarines. These new submarines will likely be built either in the US by Electric Boat, a subdivision of General Dynamics, and Newport News Shipbuilding, a subdivision of Huntington Ingalls Industries, or in the UK by BAE Systems; BAE Systems has already benefited from several major submarine deals.

The AUKUS deal to provide submarines to Australia will be far more expensive, given that these are nuclear submarines, and it will draw Australia to rely more deeply upon the UK and US arms manufacturers.

France was furious about the submarine deal, with Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian calling it a "regrettable decision" that should advance the cause of "European strategic autonomy" from the United States.


US rules out adding India or Japan to AUKUS pact

Washington, Sept. 23: The United States has ruled out adding India or Japan to the new trilateral security partnership with Australia and Britain to meet the challenges of the 21st century in the strategic Indo-Pacific region. On September 15, US President Joe Biden, Australian PM Scott Morrison and British PM Boris Johnson jointly announced the formation of the trilateral security alliance AUKUS under which Australia would get a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines for the first time.

“The announcement of AUKUS last week was not meant to be an indication, and I think this is the message the President also sent to (French President Emmanuel) Macron, that there is no one else who will be involved in security in the Indo-Pacific,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters at her daily briefing on Wednesday.

Ms Psaki was responding to a question if countries like India and Japan whose leaders would be in Washington this week for the first in-person Quad summit would be made part of the new security alliance.

“On Friday you’ll have the Australians there (for the Quad summit). But then you also have India and Japan. Would you envision for them a similar kind of military role that you’ve now defined for the Australians?” a journalist asked.

“AUKUS? What would it become? JAUKUS? JAIAUKUS?” Ms Psaki then quipped, before giving an answer to the question. The trilateral security alliance AUKUS, seen as an effort to counter China in the IndoPacific, will allow the US and the UK to provide Australia with the technology to develop nuclear-powered submarines for the first time. China has sharply criticised the trilateral alliance, saying such an exclusive grouping has no future and will gravely undermine regional stability and aggravate the arms race and hurt international non-proliferation efforts.

The move also angered France, an European ally of the US, which said it had been “stabbed in the back” and publicly voiced its outrage at the AUKUS alliance. It recalled its ambassadors to the US and Australia after the AUKUS security deal was announced.

 Source link 

 

Related posts

 

https://youtu.be/6XVxdoHoMBM     The world needs to prepare for the arrival of the coming nuclear submarine craze     The Ohio-class ballis...
 
AUKUS: a blunder follows a mega mess - New Age:   US president Joe Biden speaks on national security with British prime minister Boris Joh...
 
 

Moral vacuum at the heart of modernity, now embodied in US laws!

  ` ` MAN and nature are running out of time. That’s the core message of the UN Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change ...

Moral vacuum at the heart of modernity, now embodied in US laws!

` In short, historically it was the Church that gave the moral blessing for colonisation, slavery and genocide during the Age of Globalisation. The tragedy is that the Doctrine of Discovery is now embodied in US laws.

Sunday 26 September 2021

Major progress for China’s diplomacy as US heeds call from Chinese request list to release Meng Wanzhou

 https://youtu.be/9B7DybgHA1o 

 China Is Greeting Meng Wanzhou As A National Hero. How About Two Michaels?

 
https://youtu.be/IAwJbyqZ4_Y

 Meng Wanzhou waves to a cheering crowd as she steps out of a charter plane at Shenzhen Bao'an International Airport in Shenzhen, south China's Guangdong Province, Sept. 25, 2021.(Photo: Xinhua)

 

Hard-won victory reflects legal, political wrestling; good for ties


When many Chinese woke up Saturday morning surprisingly learning that the return of Huawei's Meng Wanzhou to China became a reality, some said it was the best news in quite a while.

The high-profile case of Meng, which has become a political dilemma significantly affecting the global geopolitical landscape, has been settled through both legal channels and political wrestling, experts said, noting that China, the US and Canada have seen the best scenario with much compromise made by the Biden administration in resolving the matter. It also helped pave the way for the positive interaction between the world's largest economies in the near future amid strained China-US relations.

It was also one mistake of the US administration that has been corrected in line with the request of China, as China put forward two lists to the US during the bilateral talks in Tianjin in July, including the List of US Wrongdoings that Must Stop which urged the US to release Meng, showing that Beijing's US policies began taking effect and remaining mistakes of the US have to be corrected.

Meng Wanzhou speaks to media outside the British Columbia Supreme Court in Canada on Friday. Photo: cnsphoto

Meng Wanzhou speaks to media outside the British Columbia Supreme Court in Canada on Friday. Photo: cnsphoto

After being separated for more than 1,000 days, she finally reunited with her family and such an emotional moment also aroused reactions from ordinary Chinese people who firmly believe that the motherland will always be "on their back" and save them from crisis.

"The color red, symbolizing China, lightens the brightness in my heart," Meng said in a post shared on her WeChat moment on her fight back home, noting that she deeply appreciates the motherland and the leadership of the Communist Party of China, as without them, she would not have been freed.

An official report by the Xinhua News Agency said thanks to sustained efforts by the Chinese government, Meng left Canada on a chartered plane arranged by the Chinese government on Friday local time. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian also welcomed her return in a post on his personal Weibo account.

"Meng's return once again shows China's steadfast position in defending the rights and interests of Chinese citizens in its diplomacy with the US and overall foreign diplomacy," Li Haidong, a professor at the Institute of International Relations at China Foreign Affairs University, told the Global Times on Saturday.

Such firm position is also being taken as the backbone for Chinese citizens and companies overseas, inspiring numerous Huawei staff amid the US-led severe crackdown on its 5G technologies and sanctions over the past three years. On her return, dozens of Huawei employees shared the moment on their personal accounts, saying that with the support of the government, they would never yield to any unilateral foreign sanctions or bullying.

Many ordinary Chinese cheered Meng's return, posting welcome notes on social media. Chinese netizens were also thrilled at the news. Topics related to Meng's return topped the search list of Sina Weibo for almost the whole day, with relevant posts being read more than 100 million times.

The Global Times reporter saw crowds gathering at Shenzhen Baoan Airport with Welcome Home banners, and they cheered on Meng's return. Some were family members and relatives of Huawei staff, and they hailed the senior executive as a role model in facing US hegemony and a national hero, while more than 30 million netizens watched her arrival on livestream.

The Ping'an International Financial Center, a landmark skyscraper in Shenzhen, was lit up on Saturday evening to welcome Meng's return.

Meng waves to the crowd after her arrival at the Shenzhen Bao'an International Airport.(Photo: Xinhua)

Meng waves to the crowd after her arrival at the Shenzhen Bao'an International Airport.(Photo: Xinhua)

Hard-won victory 
 
In a video seen by the Global Times, a GPS tracker ankle bracelet that Meng had worn for over two years was removed on Friday, leaving a bruise on her ankle that some Chinese netizens considered "an impressive memory" about US bullying and political persecution against a Chinese citizen.

It has never been an easy fight for the defense team of Meng over the past two years, who has been battling with the help of the Western legal tools against extradition to the US, and reached a "pretty good" result in the eyes of both Chinese and foreign legal experts after the marathon-like legal proceedings.

Meng appeared virtually in an American federal courtroom in Brooklyn on Friday, and reached a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) in a case of federal charges against her for bank and wire fraud. Under the terms of the agreement, Meng will not be prosecuted further in the US and the extradition proceedings in Canada will be terminated, according to a statement of William Taylor, one of the lawyers who represented Meng.

"She has not pleaded guilty and we fully expect the indictment to be dismissed with prejudice after 14 months. Now, she will be free to return home to be with her family," he said.

The senior executive of Huawei was arrested by Canadian authorities in December 2018 at the behest of the US, who remained under detention in Canada pending a Canadian judge's ruling on the US' extradition request for nearly three years. Meng and her defense team made the final push against extradition to the US, and the legal proceedings ended on August 18 without a decision.

A statement from the US Department of Justice (DOJ) said that under the terms of the DPA, Meng acknowledged that she knowingly made false statement to a financial institution in Iran-related transactions, and agreed not to commit other federal, state or local crimes.

"It's a pretty good deal," Gary Botting, a Canadian legal expert and author of several books on extradition, told the Global Times on Saturday, noting that through the case, many believe that the US is in no position to lead the world like a "police," and hopefully, the US judge presiding over the prosecution of Meng will see that.

Some Chinese legal experts said that it's not accurate to  take a DPA as a guilty plea agreement, like some Western media reported, as any arrangement should be accepted by all parties. Without paying a hefty fine or admitting guilt in court is also considered a good arrangement, experts said, noting that the US would make much more compromise to "pull out a nail set by the US" in China-Canada and China-US relations.

Lü Xiang, a research fellow at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times early Saturday that there are multiple factors driving the US to resolve this issue, including the consistent attitude of the Chinese government in urging the US and Canada to release Meng, and the mounting pressure that Canada has been facing as it clearly knows that if it insists on the extradition of Meng to the US, it would create irretrievable negative consequences on China-Canada relations, and also the unjustified procedures with the lack of evidence throughout the legal proceedings in Canada would further extend the legal battle many years.

Photo:Cui Meng/GT

Photo:Cui Meng/GT

Political wrestling

The day Meng flew back home, Canadian media reported that two Canadians - Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor - left China on a plane to Canada. Spavor was sentenced in August in China to 11 years in prison after being convicted of spying on China's national secrets. He was ordered deported from China.

Although some Western media outlets and politicians claimed the release of the two Canadians was an example of "hostage diplomacy," experts said Meng was a "political hostage" taken by the US and Canada, noting that mounting evidence throughout the legal proceedings during Meng's fight against extradition showed she was the victim of political prosecution.

"In Spavor's case, imposing the order of deportation means he may not serve his jail time in China but will be deported to Canada. It leaves room for indictment while unleashing a gesture of goodwill," Qin Qianhong, a constitutional law professor at Wuhan University, told the Global Times on Saturday.

Kovrig and Spavor were charged by the Prosecutor General's Office in China for crimes undermining China's national security in June 2020. Spavor was convicted of spying on China's national secrets and was ordered deported from China, a court in Dandong, Northeast China's Liaoning Province, announced on August 11.

Spavor was found to have taken photos and video of Chinese military equipment on multiple occasions and illegally provided some of those photos to people outside China, which have been identified as second-tier state secrets, a source close to the matter told the Global Times on September 1.

Chinese officials and diplomats reiterated that the incident of Meng is different from the cases of the two Canadians in nature.

China's position on Meng's case is consistent and clear, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said on Saturday. Facts have fully proved that this is an incident of political persecution against Chinese citizen, with the purpose of suppressing China's high-tech enterprises, she noted.

The accusation of Meng's so-called "fraud" is purely fabricated, she said, noting that even HSBC, which the US refers to as a "victim," has issued documents sufficient to prove her innocence. The actions of the US and Canada were typical arbitrary detention, the spokesperson added.

"There are flexibilities in legal proceedings around the world with different factors considered, which is sometimes embedded with the nature of humanity. Releasing the two Canadian citizens unlocks the bottleneck in China-Canada ties, which was expected," Lü said.

For Canada, which made a wrong political choice of being an accomplice of the US, it is still bearing the "bitter fruits." The deal can also help it ease strained ties with China, especially in trade, experts said.

He Weiwen, a former senior Chinese trade official, said Canada should make a further step if it wants to mend ties with China. "For instance, to show a positive attitude in China's participation in the CPTPP."

The deal indicates that the US has started to face up to the bottom lines China has drawn for further cooperation, and Washington is now "correcting mistakes it has made," experts said, noting that "it might be a turning point for China-US relations."

China in July put forward two lists to the US during talks in North China's Tianjin, one of which was the List of US Wrongdoings that Must Stop and the other the List of Key Individual Cases that China Has Concerns with.

China's attitude toward the US and Meng's case has been clear: her release is a must, and it seems bilateral ties are moving forward based on the two lists China put forward, Gao Lingyun, an expert at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences in Beijing, told the Global Times on Saturday.

In the List of US Wrongdoings, China urged the US to revoke the extradition request for Meng among other requests.

In the list, China also urged the US to unconditionally revoke the visa restrictions over CPC members and their families, revoke sanctions on Chinese leaders, officials and government agencies, and remove visa restrictions on Chinese students.

In the other List of Key Individual Cases, China expressed serious concerns to the US on some key individual cases, including some Chinese students' visa applications being rejected, Chinese citizens receiving unfair treatment in the US, Chinese diplomatic and consular missions being harassed and rammed into by perpetrators in the US, growing anti-Asian and anti-China sentiment, and Chinese citizens suffering violent attacks.

Gao said the US' decision was obvious, since many things in the world such as climate change and the pandemic fight require China-US cooperation. And the US has been hurt from the deteriorating ties - inflation and debt - which made it urgent for the US to mend ties with China.

The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday US Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo said she would seek to improve US business ties with China. Raimondo said she plans to lead delegations of US chief executives overseas, including to China, to hunt for business and discuss longstanding trade issues, though nothing has yet been put on the calendar.

The US also realizes that measures that aim to suppress and contain China are useless. In the end, the world's two largest economies must return to the right track of cooperation, Gao said.

Landmark buildings in Shenzhen exhibit giant slogans welcoming Meng's return.(Photo: Xinhua)
Landmark buildings in Shenzhen exhibit giant slogans welcoming Meng's return.(Photo: Xinhua)

Not to lose guard

Although the deal with the DOJ ended up with no crime and no punishment as Meng admitted wrongdoing but without a guilty plea, the agreement pertains only on Meng, Reuters said, noting that the DOJ said it is preparing for a trial against Huawei and looks forward to proving its case in court.

Huawei said in a statement on Saturday that the company expected Meng's return and reunion with her family. Meanwhile, the company will safeguard its interests in the lawsuit in the Eastern District of New York.

Some experts also warned that though the landmark progress of the incident created a positive atmosphere for China-US ties to return to the right path, Washington has created too much trouble over the past few years in confronting China, and some severely challenged Beijing's sovereignty. It will unlikely give up its plan of suppressing China's high-tech development.

"It will be difficult to see fundamental changes in the bilateral relationship in the next few years, unless the US takes more brave and active moves in improving ties," Li said.

Meanwhile, China-Canada relations have entered a period of debugging. Obstacles to the smooth development of China-Canada relations have been clearly removed. It also created conditions for Trudeau's China policy afterwards, he noted.

For Huawei, struggling on its track of transforming from a hardware maker to software provider amid the still tight US chip ban is still a long-term work, which has been gradually making progress.

"The transformation process is painful, since it's a transformation of the business model. But the good news is that we have gradually changed," Xu Zhijun, Huawei's rotating chairman, said during a roundtable interview Friday, noting that a frequent reshuffle of its senior executives is a reflection of how hard the transformation process is.

Key events in Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou's case. Graphic: GT

 
 
RELATED ARTICLES
 

 GT Voice: Meng's homecoming a rare chance to reset China-US relations

 

While many observers expect the return of Huawei's Chief Financial Officer Meng Wanzhou to create a relatively favorable atmosphere for US-China relations, some stubborn anti-China forces can't help but flagrantly ...

 
 

Saturday 25 September 2021

HUAWEI CFO Meng Wanzhou leaves Canada for motherland after sustained efforts by Chinese government

https://youtu.be/NFuqwFcvnco 
 
 

China Is Greeting Meng Wanzhou As A National Hero. How About Two Michaels?

https://youtu.be/9B7DybgHA1o
 
 
Meng Wanzhou Photo:AFP

Meng Wanzhou Photo:AFP


Huawei's Meng Wanzhou reached a landmark deal with the US Justice Department on Friday that allows her to return to China, under which the senior executive of the Chinese company has not pleaded guilty. It marks the end of Meng's nearly three-year detention in Canada, and may help ease the frozen China-Canada tie and frictions between China and the US, experts said.

Meng has been released after reaching the agreement.

Thanks to sustained efforts by the Chinese government, Meng Wanzhou left Canada on a chartered plane by the Chinese government on Friday local time. She will return to the motherland and reunite with her family, according to a report from the Xinhua News Agency.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian said he welcomes the return of Meng in a post on his personal Weibo account.

In a video footage seen by the Global Times, a GPS tracker ankle bracelet that Meng had worn for over two years has been removed, and she addressed the public after the hearing, expressing gratitude for the Canadian judge and court upholding the rule of law. She also thanked the Chinese embassy in Canada, her defense team and her colleagues. Although it has been a very difficult time, there's always hope, Meng said.

Meng appeared virtually in an American federal courtroom in Brooklyn on Friday, and reached a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) in a case of federal charges against her for bank and wire fraud. Under the terms of this agreement, Meng will not be prosecuted further in the US and the extradition proceedings in Canada will be terminated, according to a statement of William Taylor, one of the lawyers who represent Meng.

"She has not pleaded guilty and we fully expect the indictment will be dismissed with prejudice after fourteen months. Now, she will be free to return home to be with her family," he said.

It's exciting news that the US and Meng have finally reached an agreement, which would also be a landmark deal that may help ease frictions in the China-US relations, Chinese experts said.

At the request of the US government, the Canadian government, based on so-called accusations of fraud levelled by the US, on December 1, 2018 illegally detained Meng, who is also the daughter of Ren Zhengfei, founder of Huawei.

Meng and her defense team made the final push against extradition to the US, and the legal proceedings ended in mid-August without a decision. The judge was supposed to convene a case management conference on October 21. During the conference, she would indicate a date when the decisions will be given, according to a court note the Global Times obtained at the time.

The earlier-than-expected deal with the US made all the following process "unnecessary." On the same day, the Canadian court also signed off on a discharge order for Meng, withdrawing the US extradition order and allowing her to return to China.

Lü Xiang, a research fellow at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times early Saturday that there are multiple factors driving the US to resolve this issue, including the consistent attitude of the Chinese government in urging the US and Canada to release Meng, and the mounting pressure that Canada has been facing as it clearly knows that if it insists on the extradition of Meng to the US, it would create irretrievable negative consequences on China-Canada relations.

Over the past years, Chinese diplomats and experts have urged the Trudeau administration many times to correct its mistake of serving as Washington's willing accomplice that has dragged China-Canada relations to freezing point.

The souring bilateral relationship has also disrupted the once stable trade relations between the two countries, and some Chinese businesspeople have been looking for a "plan B" over the past two years to diversify their import sources other than Canada.

"Canada has been persuading the US to drop the case. For the Biden administration, it has been evaluating US-China relations from the position of strength over the past eight months, and it understands that if it drops the charges against Meng, such progress would meet the expectation for improving bilateral ties," Lü said.

On the same day Meng flew back home, Canadian media outlets reported that two Canadians - Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor - left China on a plane back to Canada. Spavor was sentenced in August in China to 11 years in prison after being convicted of spying on China's national secrets. He was ordered to be deported from China.

Although some Western media outlets and politicians claimed the releasing of the two Canadians was an example of "hostage diplomacy," experts said Meng was indeed a "political hostage" taken by the US and Canada, noting that mounting evidence throughout the legal proceedings during Meng's fight against extradition showed she was the victim of political prosecution.

"In Spavor's case, imposing the order of deportation means he may not serve his jailtime in China but will be deported back to Canada. It leaves certain room for indictment while unleashing a gesture of goodwill," Qin Qianhong, a constitutional law professor at Wuhan University, told the Global Times.

Kovrig and Spavor were prosecuted by the Prosecutor General's Office in China for suspected crimes undermining China's national security in June 2020.

Kovrig was accused of using an ordinary passport and business visa to enter China to steal sensitive information and intelligence through contacts in China since 2017, while Spavor was accused of being a key source of intelligence for Kovrig.

Spavor was found to have taken photos and videos of Chinese military equipment on multiple occasions and illegally provided some of those photos to people outside China, which have been identified as second-tier state secrets, a source close to the matter told the Global Times on September 1.

Chinese officials and diplomats reiterated that the incident of Meng is entirely different from the cases of the two Canadians in nature.

Another factor behind the resolution of the matter is that Canada and the US can't ignore the strong public call to release Meng, experts said. Her release has been widely considered as the best scenario among China, Canada and the US, as the incident of Meng has become a dilemma that froze China-Canada relations and dragged China-US ties into a spiraling downturn over the past few years.

Nearly 15 million netizens from over 100 countries and regions including major allies of the US, such as the UK, Australia and Canada, signed a petition launched by the Global Times on August 18, and an open letter was sent to Canadian Ambassador to China Dominic Barton, demanding Meng's immediate and unconditional release, and protesting the ugly acts of the Canadian government.

On her flight back home, Meng said in a public note that she deeply appreciated the motherland and the leadership of the Communist Party of China, as without them, she would not have been freed. "The color red, symbolizing China, lightens the brightness in my heart," she said.

 
 
 

China's national power ensures Meng's different outcome from Alstom executive: Global Times editorial

It is China's national power that shaped this final result. A country will be surrounded with more troubles as it gets stronger, but only a strong country can enable us to deal with those troubles with dignity. Whenever we encounter a challenge, we neither have to risk it all in the fight, nor do we need to compromise our dignity.

 

Image
 
 
RELATED ARTICLES
 

That sinking feeling from Down Under: Australia, United Kingdom and United States (Aukus) pact

AUKUS: a blunder follows a mega mess - New Age:  

US president Joe Biden speaks on national security with British prime minister Boris Johnson and Australian prime minister Scott Morrison in East Room of the White House in Washington, DC on September 15. — Agence France-Presse/Brendan Smialowski -

 

US President Joe Biden, in announcing on video the Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States (Aukus) pact

What does the Aukus deal for Asia?

The Aukus military alliance essentially signals to the world that money spent on real war is preferred to money spent on social justice at home and concerns for people and planet.

LAST week, US President Joe Biden, in announcing on video the Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States (Aukus) pact, called Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison “that fellow from Down Under” in what appears to be a senior moment.

Considering that the military alliance has upset a lot of people from China, France and even their own commentators should not have been surprising.

Has Australia, one of the four advanced Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development or OECD countries from the Asian region (Japan, South Korea and New Zealand) seriously thought through Aukus implications on her Asian neighbours?

First, do eight nuclear submarines by 2040 make serious military sense for Australian security?

We can understand that a maritime power in the South Pacific with lots of coastal waters to patrol needs a strong navy.

But as former Prime Minister Paul Keating rightly pointed out, China is a land-based power and being over 3,200km away from Australia, does not present a military threat to Australia.

Assuming that the nuclear submarines will be similar to those planned by the United States, which will acquire 12 of the Columbia class nuclear submarines for US$128bil (RM535bil) by 2030 (the US Government Accountability Office), Australia may be paying at least US$85bil (RM355bil) for equipment that may be obsolete by the time they come onstream.

By 2040, even the US director of National Intelligence has admitted that China’s gross domestic product or GDP (22.8% of world GDP) would outclass the United States (20.8%). Twenty years is a long time to improve defences against submarine attacks.

Submarines have at best deterrent effects under conventional warfare, but their real threat comes from carrying nuclear missiles. But even the potential of carrying such missiles would invite enemy nuclear retaliation.

This is exactly why Asean countries like Malaysia and Indonesia showed serious concern that the Aukus deal may become a catalyst to the nuclear arms race.

If that is the case, Australia would lose her status as a haven for nuclear-free living, something that New Zealand cares seriously about, which is why she distanced herself from the deal.

Second, which businessman would spend nearly the same amount of money that he earns to point a gun at his best customer?

China imported US$100bil (RM418bil) in 2020 from Australia, with the latter earning a trade and service surplus of USS$55.5bil (RM235bil).

Then to spend US$85bil (RM355bil with likely huge over-runs based on past experience) on defence against your top trading customer defies business logic.

Third, the Anglosphere military alliance created a split with Europe, already sore after Brexit and Kabul. France is not only the first foreign ally (helping in the US Independence War against Britain) of the United States, but also has serious Indo-Pacific interests with 93% of her maritime economic exclusivity zone (10.2 million sq.km) – the second largest in the world – located there.

Fourth, you have to ask whether Australian military intelligence is an oxymoron when it recently ordered 70-tonne US Abram tanks that are too heavy to carry by train across Northern Territory bridges nor by road to defend the northern Australia coast.

Climate change

Her Asian neighbours would be much happier if Australia took the lead in the Asia-Pacific region on climate change, rather than spending on arms.

Amongst the rich countries, Australia has the highest per capita emission rate, similar to the United States.

But out of 200 countries, Australia ranks fifth or sixth as the biggest global emitter, so her voice on fulfilling the requirements of the Paris Accord matters.

Unfortunately, given the huge influence of the mining lobby, Australia may not even achieve her Paris agreement to cut emissions by 26% to 28% below 2005 levels by 2030, let alone improve on that commitment by the 26th session of the Conference of the Parties or COP26.

Australia may be rich enough to mitigate against her own risks of climate warming, but the effect of climate change on her neighbours, particularly the Pacific Islands is going to be devastating.

In 2019, Pacific island nations such as Fiji, Kiribati, Nauru, Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Timor Leste and Tonga declared that by 2030, their land could become uninhabitable by rising seas, water salination, reef destruction and more natural disasters.

Biodiversity decline

The latest World Bank model suggests that the global decline in biodiversity and collapse in ecosystem services such as wild pollination, food from marine fisheries and timber from native forests could result in US$2.7 trillion (RM11 trillion) decline in global GDP by 2030.

The injustice is that the poorest countries, including those in Asia-Pacific will bear most of such eco-system and GDP losses.

In particular, many indigenous people who depend on nature will bear the costs of loss of habitat and livelihood.

Why are we not surprised that on Sept 13, 2007, when the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was adopted by 144 member countries, the four votes against were the Anglosphere countries of Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States? In all four rich countries, the record of treatment of the indigenous people have been shameful, such as the unmarked graves of indigenous school children in forced assimilation schools in Canada.

Human rights

According to Human Rights Watch, aboriginal and Torres Islander people comprise 29% of the Australian adult prison population, but just 3% of the population.

In the United States, states with large native populations have incarceration rates for American Indians of up to seven times that of whites.

The Aukus military alliance essentially signals to the world that money spent on real war is preferred to money spent on social justice at home and concerns for people and planet.

Who really profits from the nuclear submarine contract?

Look no further than the exclusive submarine suppliers such as General Dynamics (from the United States) and British Aerospace.

The Aukus deal confirms essentially that Australia opts to sink or swim with their rich Anglosphere few, rather than the global many.

Who said the world was fair?

Andrew Sheng writes on global issues from an Asian perspective. The views expressed here are the writer’s own

.Andrew Sheng | South China Morning Post

Tan Sri Andrew Sheng (born 1946) is Hong Kong-based Malaysian Chinese banker, academic and commentator. He started his career as an accountant and is now a distinguished fellow of Fung Global Institute, a global think tank based in Hong Kong.[1] He served as chairman of the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) before his replacement by Martin Wheatley in

Source link

 

Related:

 

The leaders of the US, Japan, India and Australia — known as the Quad — finished their face-to-face meeting in Washington on Friday in an attempt to cement ties while containing China, but experts said that an interlude during the meeting involving US President Joe Biden complaining about his translation device malfunction is an omen of the emerging anti-China clique's future — that it cannot function at all due to US' declining capability and changes of the global situation. 
 
 The leaders of the US, Japan, India and Australia — known as the Quad — finished their face-to-face meeting in ...

 Exclusive: China has taken reciprocal countermeasures against UK Parliament's ban on ambassador, ... China has taken reciprocal countermeasures regarding the UK Parliament's banning of Chinese ambassador from attending events in the Parliament last ..

65 countries express opposition to interference in China's internal affairs at UN ...

Pakistan, on behalf of 65 countries, delivered a joint statement against interference in China's internal affairs under the pretext of ...

 

 Furious Paris calls scrapped deal a ‘stab in the back’Biden, Macron discuss sub row
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202109/1234943.shtml

 

China, others reveal negative impact of Western unilateral coercive measures on human rights

At a side meeting of the 48th session of the UN Human Rights Council on Wednesday, permanent missions of 10 countries including China discussed the serious violation of human rights caused by unilateral coercive measures by the US and other Western countries, urging them to abolish such actions immediately.

 

 Related posts:

 

https://youtu.be/6XVxdoHoMBM     The world needs to prepare for the arrival of the coming nuclear submarine craze     The Ohio-class ballis..
 
https://youtu.be/imTUcSgtZls  President Xi's words match his thoughts, while Biden’s speech plays with words and ideas https://youtu.be/...
 
To break out of its paralysis, the West needs to take a hard look and address three key challenges The rise of the populist variant i.
 
 

Moral vacuum at the heart of modernity, now embodied in US laws!

  ` ` MAN and nature are running out of time. That’s the core message of the UN Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change ...

Moral vacuum at the heart of modernity, now embodied in US laws!

` In short, historically it was the Church that gave the moral blessing for colonisation, slavery and genocide during the Age of Globalisation. The tragedy is that the Doctrine of Discovery is now embodied in US laws. 
 

THE GLOCALISATION OF HUMANITY

Rightways