Some Biden administration officials are pushing for the sale of TikTok's US branch, citing the so-called security concerns over the company's operations in the country, the Wall Street Journal reported on Monday.
One couldn't help but raise the suspicion that behind the so-called reasons of protecting US national security is the untold, hidden intention to seize Chinese technology.
While a forced sale may just be a proposal for discussion by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the US, there is no denying that TikTok has been increasingly cornered in the US. This is not because its commercial operation has run into problems, but because it has faced growing political coercion from anti-China politicians in Washington.
At least 15 states across the US have banned TikTok on government devices in the past month. Many federal agencies, including the White House and the departments of defense, homeland security and state, have already banned TikTok from government-owned devices. The latest funding bill passed by the US Congress last week includes a measure banning TikTok from devices used by federal employees.
Two weeks ago, anti-China senators including Marco Rubio announced a legislation bid to block all transactions from any social media company "in or under the influence" of China and Russia, which could kick TikTok out of the US if the bill were to become law.
All of these bans or legislative efforts are on the grounds of the so-called national security threat. Without any solid evidence or proof, the charge has been frequently used by the US government in cracking down on TikTok for quite some time.
Former US President Donald Trump once attempted to force ByteDance to sell TikTok to US companies two years ago, but a US federal judge blocked the attempt, and further bids to argue the case were dropped when the Biden administration came to power.
Yet, as TikTok has gained a larger market share amid a challenging business climate, there has been a menacing resurfacing of national security risks, which offers a glimpse into the deterioration of regulatory environment in the US.
It is doubtful how much US national security is at stake that precipitated Washiington's crackdown on TikTok. Instead, it looks increasingly like a robbery of others' technology.
A report published by GroupM, a media buying agency owned by WPP, estimated earlier this month that TikTok doubled its advertising revenues in 2022, becoming the only big social media platform to garner rising advertising revenues this year, beating rivals like Meta and Snap.
What Washington cares about is not whether TikTok is free of security concerns, but the sheer commercial interests behind the rapid rise of TikTok. To put it bluntly, the US government never appeared interested in offering any solution to the so-called security problem.
The US use of government power to stigmatize or try to rob TikTok is nothing but a Washington driven effort to maintain its global hegemony. If anything, unfair treatments the company received in the US market have been sufficient enough to hurt its reputation and increase the political risks in the eyes of the investors and advertisers, which will inevitably squeeze the country's future development space.
To put it another way, it shows that Washington simply cannot allow a foreign company to grow competitive enough to challenge its American peers.
The reason why TikTok has been targeted by the US is because it represents the rise of a new algorithmic technology that has enabled it to become the most successful app in the world in recent years. This is the representative of Chinese high-tech companies gaining an advantage in international markets through their own innovations.
Indeed, when the former Trump administration tried to push through a forced sale of TikTok in 2020, China introduced a new export regulation requiring Beijing's approval for certain technology transfers, including recommendation algorithms. And it is beyond doubt that China will protect its own core technologies and will not allow technology robbery by any party.
Making a reasonable argument is not a term in Washington's dictionary in the China-US power game.
Ned Price, US state department spokesperson, said on Monday that the US hopes China can address the current COVID-19 outbreak as "the toll of the virus is of concern to the rest of the world given the size of China's GDP, given the size of China's economy."
His remarks aren't surprising at all. Washington has been putting and will go on to put all of China's policies and measures under the prism of China-US competition. That means the wordings of the US side will be all about shaping an international atmosphere that benefits only the US.
When China's role in the global economy is mentioned, some very recent examples can be cited. In the just-concluded World Cup, products made in Yiwu, China's small commodity hub, have accounted for nearly 70 percent of the market share of World Cup merchandise, ranging from national flags, soccer balls to jerseys, according to the Yiwu Sports Goods Association. Made-in-China products, including but not limited to projectors and leggings, injected vigor into Black Friday, a traditional shopping bonanza in the West that kicked off on November 25, reports show. Last but not the least, the US announced in late November that it will extend its tariff exclusions for some Chinese medical products for an additional three months in order to continue to fight the COVID-19 pandemic.
Responding to Price's remarks, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning said on Tuesday that in the past three years, China's COVID policy has provided maximum protection to people's lives and health, minimized COVID's impact on socioeconomic development, and bought precious time for understanding the virus on the basis of science, for research and development of vaccines and therapeutics, and for vaccinating more people across the country. We have achieved the most effective results at minimum cost.
Washington does not have a say in China's influence on the world economy. Kristalina Georgieva, managing director of the IMF, said earlier this month that recalibrating COVID policies "can be very good for the Chinese people and economy, and also good for Asia and the world economy." Morgan Stanley raised its forecast for China's GDP in 2023 to 5.4 percent from its previous outlook of 5 percent, predicting that a rebound in activity will come earlier and be sharper than expected.
China is the only country that has earnestly fought the battle against COVID with strict measures for three years, unlike the US, which had given up fighting the virus long long ago. Just because China has taken the lead in reining in COVID, it is able to resume businesses and production in an efficient manner. In 2020, China was the only major world economy to grow in that pandemic-ravaged year. In 2021, China's GDP was $17.7 trillion, accounting for 18.5 percent of the global total.
In an interview with the Global Times, Sean Doherty, head of International Trade and Investment and member of the Executive Committee of the World Economic Forum, said that China shows tactical resilience in maintaining flexible supply chains amid the pandemic, while describing China as a role model in facilitating trade domestically and a leading power in the WTO's investment facilitation discussions.
However, it's another story in the US. Washington wasted no time politicizing the virus, launched an ideological warfare and divided the world when unity was badly needed the most amid the global public health crisis.
When the US needs to boost its economy, it tends to turn to unlimited quantitative easing, referred to as printing money wildly, which is aimed at attracting inflows of financial capital. But when its measures led to high inflation, which has been especially severe during the pandemic, the US starts to raise its interest rates, time and again. The aim is to make the US dollar stronger, attract investment capital from investors abroad seeking higher returns on American bonds and interest-rate products. But for other countries, the endless interest rate hikes are making it more and more expensive to service their dollar-denominated debts, causing currency depreciation and worsening inflation on their own soil. With the kits, like quantitative easing and raising interest rates, in its tool box, the US has been reaping benefits and wealth from the world.
This is the truth: When China makes contributions to the world economy during the pandemic, Washington is busy making deliberate transfer of wealth from the world to the US.
Despite Price's rhetoric, the world will see which side has been the problem. If Price does cares about the world economy, he should have advised the White House to restrain itself when disrupting global supply chains and provoking conflicts and even wars.
People celebrate the 100th founding anniversary of the Communist Party of China, in Tiananmen Square in Beijing, on July 1, 2021. Photo: VCG
A survey released on Saturday at the 2023 Global Times Annual Conference showed that more than 62 percent of participants around the globe believe that China's influence is rising, double the number that believes the US' influence is rising, and more people expect that the China-US tension is likely to turn into "conflict" rather than "easing."
On shared global issues, concerns over inflation, war, energy and the food security crisis have surpassed concern over the COVID-19 pandemic, with analysts saying the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the following serious impact to the world economy have brought more urgent problems and impending dangers to the world, while most countries and people are showing less worry toward the impact brought by the pandemic, which is into its third year, as the virus has become less harmful.
The survey is released annually and conducted by the Global Times Research Center. This year, from October 29 to December 6, the survey which covered 30 questions related to China-US relations, global security and development, received more than 36,000 effective samples from 33 countries all over the world including China, the US, Russia, France, the UK, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt, Nigeria, Kenya, Pakistan, India, Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, Japan, Singapore, Vietnam, Indonesia and South Korea.
Analysts said the survey reflects that the world welcomes and has strong confidence in China's development and Chinese modernization, even though the US and some of its allies are trying to spread the China threat theory, still more and more people are losing faith in the US and globalization that is dominated by US hegemony.
Which is more influential?
On the question "How has the US or China's international influence changed in the recent year?" more than 30 percent among all participants worldwide believe the US' influence is rising, while a similar number of participants believe the US' influence is declining. More than 62 percent believe China's influence is rising.
In countries like Kenya, South Africa, Nigeria, Austria, Poland and India, more people believe that the US' influence is rising rather than declining. In the US, 32 percent of participants believe their country's international influence is rising while another 32 percent believe the US' influence is declining, while 56 percent believe China's influence is rising.
"Judging from real national strength, the US still has the upper hand in terms of military, economy and science and technology, but if viewing 'international influence' from a perspective of being a leader to represent values shared by humanity, or the popularity and favorability among other countries, the US' influence is certainly decreasing," Shen Yi, a professor at the School of International Relations and Public Affairs of Fudan University told the Global Times.
Lü Xiang, an expert on international relations and research fellow at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times there are two main reasons why the majority of the participants worldwide believe China's influence is rising - first, China's sustainable and fast development as well as the powerful national strength are most convincing evidence; second, China's ideas for global development and security have been accepted well worldwide.
China's principles of not seeking hegemony and non-interference, as well as standing with developing countries forever, have been set very long ago. When China was a weak and undeveloped country, other countries did not really care about what China said, according to the expert. Today China has become a major world power with undoubted national strength, and more and more countries have found that China keeps its promise of not seeking hegemony, Lü said.
The China-proposed Belt and Road Initiative have continually brought benefits and development to China's partners worldwide, comparing the destructions and instabilities caused by the US hegemony around the globe, it's very natural for the countries around the globe to be more favorable on China's rising influence, Lü noted.
Although more people in African countries like Kenya, South Africa and Nigeria, as well as some European countries like Poland and Austria believe the US' influence is rising rather than declining, the vast majority in these countries (from 56 percent in Poland and 70 percent in Austria, to 78 percent in South Africa and 76 percent in Kenya) also firmly believe that China's influence is rising.
For China's rising international influence, Shen said it could be interpreted from two perspectives. One is that countries around the world do have a better impression about China and they hope China will play more important roles in the future as they have benefited from ties with China, or they want China to be more powerful to balance the negative impacts brought by US hegemony, Shen said.
But in some Western countries, especially the US' allies that follow Washington closely, the reason why they believe China's influence is rising is because of the long-existing hyping of the "China threat" theory in their countries, and they are afraid of the rising influence of China as US propaganda tries to shape an aggressive image of China around the globe, Shen noted.
"The US is not in its prime of life, no longer the protagonists of Hollywood action movies who are handsome, elegant, quick in action and reaction. Today's US is like 'a mafia boss in his later years who can barely walk but still holds particularly large power among the gangsters. Today, the US' position is largely determined by the system it built long ago," said Jin Canrong, associate dean of the School of International Studies at the Renmin University of China.
China-US relations
The survey also shows that the world is concerned about China-US tension. More of the participants in 19 countries, including the US, expect China-US relations to "maintain the status quo."
In China and the US, the survey results show that 45 percent of Chinese participants expect the China-US tension to ease, and 39 percent expect to maintain the status quo, but only 11 percent in the US expect the two sides will see an easing of tensions in the future, and 44 percent of American participants expect the status quo to remain unchanged.
Lü said China does not have an anti-US propaganda now, while all news reports about China-US relations are objectively introducing the facts and also trying to guide the public to understand the China-US relations based on good will. "But in America, the two major parties are trying their best to make China look like an enemy," and to use Sinophobia to cover their incompetence in internal affairs.
"If you read US mainstream media, you will see their reports are hyping and inciting conflict between the US and China every day, whether in politics or the economy, so US politicians and media should be held accountable for the worsening China-US ties that make the world concerned," Lü noted.
Among the samples collected from the 33 countries, 23 percent of them believe that the most likely cause of a potential conflict between China and the US is that "China imposes more retaliation against the US," about 22 percent believe it would be "troublemaking by Taiwan secessionists" and 19 percent consider it would be "the US strengthening its containment strategy against China."
Chinese analysts said it seems like the most realistic task for China and the US in the future is to keep managing their differences and competition to keep the current situation from losing control, and it would be very difficult to completely ease tensions in the short term.
The US elites should be aware of the danger of China-US conflict, especially on sensitive affairs like the Taiwan question, and to what extent the two major powers can avoid conflict depends on the US' attitude toward China. If the US stops its containment strategy, China does not need to retaliate the US at all, experts stressed.
Future globalization
The survey result also shows that the world is increasingly worried about the danger of conflict between the two biggest economies, while most participants around the globe believe that the world needs to find a new or better way to develop globalization. Chinese interviewees are very confident in "achieving satisfactory globalization in the next 10 years" and they are less concerned than other countries' participants on the problems like "war," "prices rising" and "food and energy crises."
Experts said this shows that China has protected Chinese people well when the world is suffering from the turbulence in recent years, so Chinese people have sensed less negative impacts of the current globalization. This also proves that China is qualified to share its wisdom and experiences to the world to overcome common challenges, and the people around the globe expect China to be more active in providing public goods to reform the problematic world order.
China will eye rapid economic growth next year, said economists when attending the 2023 Global Times Annual Conference
UN biodiversity deal adopted at COP15 at watershed moment
Pushing forward deal highlights China’s leading role in preserving biodiversity: experts
Chinese Minister of Ecology and Environment Huang Runqiu (centre-rignt), Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, David Ainsworth (centre-left), Executive Secretary of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, Elizabeth Maruma Mrema (2nd right) and Inger Andersen Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Program (right) during a plenary meeting at the 2022 UN Biodiversity Conference, known as COP 15, in Montreal, Canada on Monday. Photo: AFP
Nearly 200 countries adopted a landmark deal set to reverse environmental destruction and preserve global biodiversity over the next decades at a marathon UN biodiversity summit on Monday.
The successful adoptionof the deal, under China's presidency, signals the country's leading role and commitment in converging and pushing forward global efforts in protecting the world's biodiversity at a watershed moment, said experts.
Now that the targets have been set, what matters most is whether nations follow through, said experts. The thorniest issue is still finance, and experts have called for this burden to fall largely on developed countries, which are equipped with technology and funds to help developing countries.
A UN biodiversity deal, entitled Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and aimed at reversing biodiversity loss and setting the world on the path to recovery, was adopted on Monday at the UN biodiversity conference, COP15, the Xinhua News Agency reported on Monday.
"The package is adopted," Chinese Environment Minister Huang Runqiu, the chair of the COP15 nature summit, declared at a late-night plenary session in Montreal as he struck his gavel, sparking loud applause from assembled delegates, the AFP reported.
The framework sets the target of effective conservation and management of at least 30 percent of the world's lands, inland waters, coastal areas and oceans, with emphasis on areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem functioning and services, according to the final release the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity sent to the Global Times on Monday.
The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework prioritizes ecologically representative, well-connected and equitably governed systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation, recognizing indigenous and traditional territories and practices. Currently 17 percent and 10 percent of the world's terrestrial and marine areas respectively are under protection, according to the release.
It also called for the progressive phasing out or reform by 2030 of subsidies that harm biodiversity by at least $500 billion per year, while scaling up positive incentives for biodiversity's conservation and sustainable use. The scheme is set to raise international financial flows from developed to developing countries, in particular the least developed countries, small island developing states, and countries with economies in transition, to at least $20 billion per year by 2025, and to at least $30 billion per year by 2030.
After the adoption, EU Commissioner Virginijus Sinkevicius tweeted, "DEAL Tonight, we make history at#COP15. The Kunming-Montreal deal for Nature & people all over the world. 30% degraded ecosystems on land & sea to be restored by 2030;30% terrestrial & marine areas conserved & managed by 2030."
A statement the UN Development Programme (UNDP) sent to the Global Times on Monday said it welcomes the historic agreement reached at COP15."This agreement means people around the world can hope for real progress to halt biodiversity loss and protect and restore our lands and seas in a way that safeguards our planet and respects the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities," reads the statement.
The agreement reached today in Montreal is a significant breakthrough for biodiversity. It reflects never-before-seen recognition from countries at all income levels that biodiversity loss must be stopped through high-ambition changes to our society's relationship with nature and the way our global economy operates. It also reflects a determination from political leaders around the world to make this happen, Carlos Manuel Rodriguez, CEO and Chairperson of the Global Environment Facility, said in a statement sent to the Global Times on Monday.
After four years of negotiations and 12 years since the last biodiversity targets were agreed in Japan, the Chinese president ofCOP15put forward its recommendations for a final agreement after two weeks of intense negotiations among 196 countries.
Reaching a consensus on global environment issues, such as protecting biodiversity and climate change, were never easy, as nations' interests on those topics always conflicted, Lin Boqiang, director of the China Center for Energy Economics Research at Xiamen University, told the Global Times on Monday.
"That is why China put forward such a draft that had won wide applause among delegates from so many countries," said Lin. "This can be seen as a remarkable first step toward global biodiversity protection for the next decades, and this has highlighted China's leading role in this field."
Implementation matters
Speaking at a Saturday conference, Huang admitted that the most challenging remaining divergences lie in the financial mechanisms, resource mobilization and the goals of the framework. "Targeting these three problems, we have invited minister-level officials from Rwanda, Chile, Egypt, Germany, Norway and Canada, and have set up three coordination working groups," Huang said.
The final release said by 2030 at least $200 billion per year in domestic and international biodiversity-related funding from all sources - public and private are to be mobilized.
Developing countries previously pushed for half of that̶$100 billion per year̶to flow from wealthy countries to poorer nations, Reuters reported on Sunday.
Lin pointed out that the proposed targets show China's ambition and pragmatism in pushing forward a workable scheme, as setting the financial targets too high may backfire as many developed countries may refuse to pay.
"Setting up an agreement is for everyone to work on. Yet judging by developed countries' blustery promises on climate issues, whether they will pay the money on biodiversity remains questionable, so the final release lowered the target for developed countries to pay at least $20 billion per year by 2025," said Lin.
The developed countries still haven't fulfilled their pledge of providing $100 billion per year for developing countries to tackle climate damage.
Developing nations have limited capacity to achieve goals set at the current stage, thus the financing onus falls largely on those developed countries that have the technology and money to help, said Lin.
Huang Runqiusaid at a conference last week that the most important factor for a successful COP15 is reaching a framework of protecting biodiversity. What kind of framework is successful depends not only on how much we have agreed, but also how much we will realize, said Huang.
As presidency of the conference, China hopes that all the goals and promises are acceptable to all participants, and will endure the test of time, said the Chinese environment minister. He hoped that both developed and developing countries will feel they have fulfilled their promises by 2030, and only those goals and promises can be counted as a real success.
Xinhua file photo of a B-52 strategic bomber After a series of failures, the US Air Force on Monday nnounced that it has finally succe...
MALAYSIA
Tweet
National disasters management agency NADMA warned of soil movement post monsoon. Those residing near sloppy areas >25 degrees steep to stay alert. Five states involving 20 districts now gripped by floods .>18,000 families affected. 469 evacuation centers activated.
Europe will certainly not become more secure after this round of NATO expansion
There is a lack of mutual understanding and compromise in European culture, where countries are focused on maximizing their own security
interests without regard for others. The US is certainly glad to see Europe in this state.
Editor's Note:
NATO, which is constantly looking for imaginary enemies and justifying its existence by inciting confrontation, is holding a summit from Tuesday to Thursday, and it also plans to extend its tentacles to the Asia-Pacific region. Behind its aggressive narrative, contradictions and divisions within NATO have become increasingly prominent. The Russia-Ukraine conflict is not going according to NATO's playbook. This series of articles will provide some clues regarding NATO's predicament. This is the fifth piece.
NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, was established in 1949, but to this day it remains an important tool for suppressing the opponents of the West. The initiative to unite 12 countries originally belonged to the United States, which became the most powerful world leader after the end of World War II. The US was the foundation of the organization's military power, a source of economic and financial assistance to member countries. It goes without saying that not only the highest command posts belonged to the Americans, but they also defined strategic objectives at all stages of NATO's activities. The main mission of this organization from the very beginning was the unification of military and economic resources under the command of the US to prepare an all-out war against the Soviet Union. The countries of another military bloc, the Warsaw Pact Organization (ATS), led by the USSR, also became enemies. It was created only six years after NATO - in 1955.
NATO played an important role in weakening the USSR and its allies. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact in 1991, the question arose about the feasibility of continuing the existence of NATO. But the US, which really ruled the bloc, set a new task for it - to involve former ATS member countries and post-Soviet republics in its structure. This was considered necessary to expand the zone of America's strict control over Europe as the most important part of the world at that time. NATO was also used to "sweep" the European space during the war against Yugoslavia. NATO and its de facto twin in the field of economics and politics - the European Union - were used in organizing the "color revolution" in Kiev and provoking the current Ukrainian crisis. In these situations, the US uses NATO as a tool for dirty work, saving the US from the loss of "precious American lives" and the risk of retaliatory strikes on the territory of the US.
NATO's successful fulfillment of its tasks in Europe led Washington to think about using the potential and experience of the bloc in another part of the world. Having recently identified China as the most serious threat to the international order, Washington is faced with a lack of resources to contain and suppress the growing Chinese power.
In order to mobilize the existing resources, the Biden administration has developed a concept of Indo-Pacific security, strongly resembling a similar concept for the North Atlantic. The concept has already been reinforced by the creation of the Indo-Pacific Command of the US Armed Forces. Already available resources were activated - military alliances with Japan, South Korea and Australia. The AUKUS military group was created. The activity of the QUAD military-diplomatic group is stimulated. The creation of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework was recently announced. But even these actions are not enough for Washington.
Therefore, it is urgently necessary to extend the scope of NATO's responsibility to the Indo-Pacific region as well. Obviously, US efforts are aimed at uniting all Asian and European allies, their military, economic and geostrategic resources to create a new tool for the realization of American global ambitions. It can be conditionally called the Indo-Pacific Treaty Organization according to the patterns of NATO.
Of course, the arrival of NATO to the East, especially since the new military bloc of the West, will threaten the security interests of Russia as a Pacific power. But first of all, it will be directed against China. Strengthening the militarization of the region will also contradict the interests of economic stability and security of ASEAN, APEC and other groupings of the region.
Serious obstacles may arise in the way of implementing Biden's chess game. We are not talking about the fluctuations of European satellites in NATO such as "ready for anything" Poland, the "Baltic troika" or the Balkan neoplasms. It is unlikely that we will talk about England with its age-old anti-Chinese traditions and loyalty to Washington at the level of a conditioned reflex. But such large "stakeholders" as Germany, France, Spain and Italy may think hard about the consequences of entering into a military confrontation with China, taking into account their trade and economic interests.
These powers are well aware of the benefits of bilateral trade with China, which amount to tens and hundreds of billions of euros. They are also aware of the intention of the White House to lift trade sanctions against China in an attempt to bring down the threatening increase in inflation. The role of trade and economic "cannon fodder" is unlikely to entice figures claiming some level of independence even within the framework of NATO. In Madrid, the leaders of significant European powers are unlikely to voice their doubts, but then they will try to "put on the brakes" in implementation of Biden's Indo-Pacific plan.
Another important reason for avoiding the dubious honor of becoming a member of the anti-Chinese coalition may be Washington's inconsistency. Just two years ago, then US president Donald Trump reproached NATO member countries for the insufficiency of military efforts, the desire to "ride for free" and even promised to dissolve the military bloc. What will happen after the next presidential election? Will Trump come back? Won't those business and political circles that oppose the dispersion of the waning power of their power, for the concentration of resources on solving domestic economic and humanitarian problems, win?
Europeans are already suffering losses from following Biden's anti-China course. The ratification of the China-Europe Comprehensive Investment Agreement has been disrupted. Taking into account the hostile policy of Poland and the Baltic countries, Chinese logistics companies are reviewing the routes of goods delivery to Europe via the Silk Road. Beijing is studying the experience of "crippling sanctions" against Russia. After all, Washington has threatened to impose similar sanctions not only in case of the aggravation of the situation around the Taiwan island, but even if China refuses to participate in sanctions against Russia.
The US' convulsive attempts to return itself to the role of world hegemon are unlikely to succeed. But they can cause considerable harm to mutually beneficial relations between countries, which will be difficult to compensate quickly.
The author is head of the "Russian Dream-Chinese Dream" analytic center of the Izborsk Club. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn
On the heel of the G7 summit, NATO leaders are scheduled to convene in Spain from Tuesday to Thursday for their annual summit
with the main focus on Russia and toughening up its stance toward China, while analysts said including China in the US-led military bloc's new
strategic concept cannot help alleviate US divergences with the EU, especially on China, and severe domestic problems will also weaken Washington's ambitious plan to maintain hegemony.
America's lucrative gun business Cartoon: Carlos Latuff
US President Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden visited the Texan town of Uvalde on Sunday, laying a bouquet for the 21 victims, including 19 children, in the latest mass shooting. The grief that this school tragedy brought to American society is far from dissipating. Only 12 days ago, the Bidens were at the site of another mass shooting - a supermarket in Buffalo, New York - to mourn the 10 victims. Just in the past weekend, there were multiple shootings across the US, killing at least six people and injuring more than 30 others.
Public anger is growing as more details of the Robb Elementary School shooting are revealed. According to reports, as many as 19 police officers stood in a hallway outside the classroom where the gunman was hiding for nearly an hour before they opened the door. One of the young victims bled to death while waiting for police to come, media reported. The New York Times released an opinion piece titled "Don't Talk to Me About 'Civility.' On Tuesday Morning Those Children Were Alive," denouncing the hypocrisy of the so-called "civility" hyped by the American elites. Biden also asked: "These kinds of mass shootings rarely happen anywhere else in the world. Why are we willing to live with this carnage? Why do we keep letting this happen?"
But in a country that prides itself on being a "beacon of light," the clamor of public opinion as well as the condemnation from celebrities and politicians are not enough for the US system to reform its gun laws. The number of shootings in the US is increasing, like black ants gathering around rotting flesh. 2022 is not even halfway over, and more than 17,000 Americans, including 650 children, have already died from gun violence. Some Western media believe that US society has become "numb" in one shooting incident after another. Living a normal life after the gunfire should be called "American characteristics." And the American people can only dodge the bullets that come at any time by luck.
Such tragedies are exacerbated by the division of American politics. One can see that "rituals" are replacing real reflection as the standard procedure for each tragic incident. Flags were lowered at half-mast when a million Americans died due to epidemic control failure. The flags were lowered for the slow search and rescue of people trapped in collapsed houses, and for the mass casualties by shootings.
After the president and politicians made mournful rhetoric, saying "enough" and calling for "change," and gun ownership showed "a glimpse of regret" at charity dinners, the country can move on. Then the two parties will put their own spin on it. These tragedies have turned into weapons against opponents in a partisan struggle. When it comes to the problem itself, it has become a ball to be kicked around.
In addition to the weak gun control, the shootings also reflect the intensification of various social contradictions in the US, such as the wealth gap, racial discrimination, drug abuse, and public security. The US system is equally incapable, or lacks interest, motivation, and courage, to address these problems thoroughly. Behind the opposition to gun control are powerful interest groups and the inertia of the traditional understanding of guns in US society. The huge influence of the National Rifle Association (NRA) in American politics daunts every politician. People's rights are always giving way to political interests or "political correctness." This is the inherent logic of the US system.
It is worth noting that when the US' internal problems have become increasingly prominent, it has intensified its external aggression, which is a vicious circle at another level. US Vice President Kamala Harris on Saturday spoke at a memorial service for Ruth Whitfield, a victim of the Buffalo supermarket shooting, that the US "is experiencing an epidemic of hate." Another fact that she was reluctant and inconvenient to say is that the US is undergoing "an epidemic of hostility" externally. In recent days, Washington was still obsessed with fabricating a lie of the century over "the human rights in Xinjiang" and has been recklessly attacking and smearing UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet's visit to China. They probably did not expect Bachelet to reserve her longest answer for the US shootings and the racism at the press conference at the end of her visit. She said that "people believe that they are superior to others and feel they have the right to kill other people, but they are not."
Facts have proven once again that the "darkness under the lights," including the shooting cases, is a chronic human rights disease that the US, the so-called "beacon of light," neither dares nor is willing to illuminate. To solve this problem, one cannot rely on self-touching "ceremonies," or use "human rights" as a weapon to attack other countries. We urge the US government to take concrete actions to solve its own severe human rights problems, and stop being a negative example of double standards in terms of human rights. We call on the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to launch an investigation into human rights problems in the US as soon as possible, so that the US-style hegemony cannot cover up its bad deeds.
US-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) released its World Report 2020 on Tuesday. Kenneth Roth, executive director of HRW, said in his speech that China has launched an assault on the international human rights system.
An NGO as it is, HRW has been openly coordinating with the US on its tough China policy. The organization's funding source and personnel structure have shown it will embed US national interests deeply into its goals. Roth once served as a US federal prosecutor. HRW's extreme antagonism toward China results from his prejudice and political stand.
The organization's main business is global human rights, but it seems it is unfamiliar with human rights conventions and standards under the UN system. The right to development - a human right that the UN stresses the most - is almost completely missed out in the latest HRW's report.
People like Roth are only suitable for talking big in New York's high society. If their interpretation of human rights is examined from the perspective of developing societies and emerging markets, people will easily find they are narrow-minded and paranoid. They are keen to show their sympathy for the lack of human rights in developing societies, but they have no idea what the most important thing is there.
It is acceptable to criticize China. But HRW has been propagating a huge lie by smearing China, a country where modern life has spread rapidly and people's living standards have been greatly raised. HRW has been living in an abnormal atmosphere of public opinion about China.
Have people like Roth ever visited Chinese cities and spoken with ordinary Chinese families? Have they ever been to the shopping malls and streets that have sprung up all over China, and talked with ordinary Chinese people there? Have they left nightclubs and walked back to the hotel at night in China? Is China's human rights system the worst in the world? Are they talking about human rights or the privileges of the very few followers of the US value?
The life span of the Chinese people is becoming longer. Conditions of food, clothing, housing, transportation, education, public health services and provisions for the aged have been improved. Pollution has been effectively controlled. Chinese people have become the main force of global tourism and studying abroad. China's internet is also one of the most developed worldwide. These have formed the basis of the continuing development of China's human rights.
China is different from the US and the West politically. Thus, China has its own characteristics in political participation and governance of public opinion. The Chinese system supports the country's development. Our system does not threaten that of the West and should gain respect from the West.
Some extreme Western political elites have attacked China violently for geopolitical purposes. People like Roth are not really advocating the general advancement of human rights, but are following the needs of US politics. They are tarnishing the great human rights cause of mankind, and should be ashamed of it.
People like Roth should go deep into a huge society like China and really understand what is going on there and what people really care about. The likes of Roth should seriously study the world, not arrogantly represent the world.
HRW report reflects Western elites’ hypocrisy: analysts
Experts attend a side-event on China's human rights protection of ethnic
minorities amid the 41st session of the UN Human Rights Council in
Geneva, Switzerland, July 2, 2019.
Criticizing China for "suppressing" human rights is the card that the West has been playing for decades. This reflects the hypocrisy and deep ignorance of arrogant Western elites who cannot give an objective assessment of other countries' situations, analysts said on Wednesday, in response to the latest report of nongovernmental organization (NGO) Human Rights Watch which deemed China as a global threat to human rights development.
In its 335-page World Report 2020, the New York-based NGO claimed that China is now a global threat to human rights. Kenneth Roth, executive director of HRW, claimed that the country is also using its "growing economic clout to silence critics and to carry out the most intense attack on the global system for enforcing human rights since that system began to emerge in the mid-20th century."
Roth was banned from entering Hong Kong on Sunday, about a month after the HRW was sanctioned by the Chinese central government for their "horrible activities" in instigating the months-long riots in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR).
The NGO, which claims it does not receive funds from the government, releases human rights reports every year, evaluating the global system for protecting human rights. However, many of its officials and members are former US federal government officials, and the NGO has been using its right to speak to export the ideological tendency, Chinese analysts said.
"To judge other countries at will by ignoring the facts is their way of doing things," an analysts close to a government-related think tank who preferred not to be named, told the Global Times on Wednesday.
Meanwhile, another NGO, Freedom House, said in its latest report that Chinese media's overseas expansion posed "serious implications for the survival of open, democratic societies."
Rioters set up barricades on streets to block traffic in Hong Kong on Jan. 1, 2020. (Xinhua)
Long-term ignorance
The Chinese Foreign Ministry said on Wednesday that HRW's China-related remarks, including its report, are devoid of facts and paint white as black, and that there is no need to discuss it.
"These two organizations have been viewing China from distorted views for a long time. Their China-related comments always ignore facts with no objectivity," Geng Shuang, spokesperson of Chinese Foreign Ministry, said at a routine press conference.
"The state of the human rights situation in China is in the best of times," he noted.
Some China-related topics HRW highlighted in its 2020 report have appeared in previous reports, including criticism over so-called repressions of Uygur people, tightening controls on freedom of expression and the erosion of HKSAR's freedom. Also, HRW has always been enthusiastic about criticizing other countries and regions as well as paying close attention to topics on juridical fairness, racial discrimination, extortion, and confessions by torture.
Its 2020 report has also adopted the same biased way of depicting "old stories" with new arguments. For example, in the Hong Kong chapter, HRW claimed that a large number of protesters acted peacefully, but the police used excessive force by intentionally ignoring the legitimacy of police law enforcement.
This is not the first time HRW pointed its finger at other countries' internal affairs, coming up with reports filled with biased views and false evidence. It ignored cases of police beating African-Americans to death in the US or the infamous abuse of detainees at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp, according to a letter jointly released in May 2014 by more than 130 scholars, mostly from the US, criticizing the HRW. Singapore's Ministry of Law also refuted the NGO criticism of proposed fake news laws in 2019 in Singapore.
The letter, calling on HRW to close its revolving door to the US government, noted that many members of the HRW are former CIA agents and former US officials. The organization's standard on human rights is in accordance with US diplomatic policies and interests, thus damaging its credibility and independence.
"It also reflects the lack of oversight of NGOs in international law. For example, what criteria does HRW use to evaluate human rights in other countries?" the analyst said, noting that it seriously undermines the joint efforts of other countries in the field of human rights.
A rioter starts a fire on a Hong Kong street corner. Photo: Cui Meng/ GT
Politically driven
Chinese analysts also noted that the funding and membership of the NGO linked it close to the US government, although it claims to be nongovernmental, and its goal is to work for the country's national interests.
A graduate of Yale Law School and Brown University, Roth used to serve as a federal prosecutor, whose perception of China's human rights is embedded with hostility and political bias.
"They've been watching and criticizing other countries based on their understanding and idea of the West's concept of human rights. China has its own human rights concept, formulated on our social, economic and cultural background. But the Chinese concept was often disregarded by those NGOs," another anonymous expert told the Global Times on Wednesday.
Human rights include, first and foremost, the right to life, subsistence and development, the Xinhua News Agency said in a commentary in 2019. When HRW criticized China's Xinjiang policy, it turned a blind eye to the region, which used to fall victim to violent terrorist attacks that has killed innocent people but has been developing into a peaceful and prosperous place.
Its perception of China's human rights status also reflects the hypocrisy and arrogance of provocative Western elites, analysts said.
Though these NGOs claim to be politically neutral, it is impossible for them to completely ignore the political background and stance of Western countries, He Zhipeng, a professor of international human rights and legal education at Jilin University in Northeast China, told the Global Times.
"They usually take Western culture as the basis or ideological fortress, and always stand on the basis of the Western human rights ideology to observe and criticize other countries, while China's socio-economic and cultural background is often unheard in their investigation," he said.
