hash tag
Reaching out
China is set to become world's biggest economy before decade is out 
China to overtake US as world's biggest economy by 2028, report predicts
China to overtake US as world's biggest economy by 2028, report predicts
Let's talk about China
- Thread starter not-bono-ever
- Start date
Good thread peeps.
Here in Hong Kong, the changes have been dramatic, profound and applied with a stunning ferocity and rapidity. Our way of life has been strangled and lies gasping on the floor. There are huge numbers of worried and/or scared people here just sitting out the pandemic and trying to figure out what happens next and what to do about it.
On Wednesday morning, they rounded up over 50 of our best and brightest (academics, activists, district councilors, [former-] lawmakers, politicians, etc.,) under the new, draconian National Security Law (NSL), on suspicion of "subversion". The main charge seems to be that they planned to try and win a majority in the democratically elected seats in the (now suspended,) LegCo elections. Three media outlets and a law firm were also raided and an American lawyer arrested. Bail is unlikely. Sentences range between 3 years and life. Some of them are friends I've known for decades.
I'm livid, sad, frightened, subdued, frustrated, resigned, dazed and confused and, at times, utterly crushed.
These motherfuckers are going for the jugular. Brutal and merciless. No dissent will be tolerated.
It's all just so very, very sad.
Whimper
Here in Hong Kong, the changes have been dramatic, profound and applied with a stunning ferocity and rapidity. Our way of life has been strangled and lies gasping on the floor. There are huge numbers of worried and/or scared people here just sitting out the pandemic and trying to figure out what happens next and what to do about it.
On Wednesday morning, they rounded up over 50 of our best and brightest (academics, activists, district councilors, [former-] lawmakers, politicians, etc.,) under the new, draconian National Security Law (NSL), on suspicion of "subversion". The main charge seems to be that they planned to try and win a majority in the democratically elected seats in the (now suspended,) LegCo elections. Three media outlets and a law firm were also raided and an American lawyer arrested. Bail is unlikely. Sentences range between 3 years and life. Some of them are friends I've known for decades.
I'm livid, sad, frightened, subdued, frustrated, resigned, dazed and confused and, at times, utterly crushed.
These motherfuckers are going for the jugular. Brutal and merciless. No dissent will be tolerated.
It's all just so very, very sad.
Whimper
ska invita
back on the other side
Powerful mustread
www.theguardian.com
How I survived a Chinese 're-education' camp for Uyghurs
The long read: After 10 years living in France, I returned to China to sign some papers and I was locked up. For the next two years, I was systematically dehumanised, humiliated and brainwashed
Powerful mustread
How I survived a Chinese 're-education' camp for Uyghurs
The long read: After 10 years living in France, I returned to China to sign some papers and I was locked up. For the next two years, I was systematically dehumanised, humiliated and brainwashed
that's some serious jail time. Most people would break.
you underestimate him, he's no fool.
Flavour
hang the bankers
Powerful mustread
How I survived a Chinese 're-education' camp for Uyghurs
The long read: After 10 years living in France, I returned to China to sign some papers and I was locked up. For the next two years, I was systematically dehumanised, humiliated and brainwashed
Jesus fucking christ what a nightmare. Unbelievable. And to think this story is probably largely the same (without the ten years in France bit) for how many people? Millions? And how many aren't so "lucky" to be declared innocent and released after "only" two years in these torture camps.
ska invita
back on the other side
xi jinping is basically untouchable isnt he.... i dont expect any western governments to rock the boat over "muslims" being tortured, but perhaps hong kong might yet provoke some kind of reaction. though i guess any type of sanctions would trigger counter sanctions? so much interdependence now.... is that the reticence?
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
yeh. but for those of us watching the alliance between russia and china and the re-orienting of the american military away from their opponents of the past 19 years and towards peer- and near-peer adversaries - ie russia and china - the consequences appear likely to be down the road a bit but no less severe for that
Flavour
hang the bankers
I think for the time being the "step too far" territory for the PRC still contains invading Taiwan and forcibly integrating it but there will come a day, I think, that this may no longer be seen as a "step too far" for which there would be intolerable consequences. It may not even be that far away. But no consequences for HK because the countries that could theoretically punish China will not (the USA) and the countries that would like to punish China cannot (the UK).
ska invita
back on the other side
so piss poor a response - worse than doing nothing in some ways - just demonstrates the utter weakness
www.theguardian.com
China's treatment of Uighurs amounts to torture, says Dominic Raab
Foreign secretary sets out measures to ensure UK companies cannot profit from forced labour in Xinjiang
ska invita
back on the other side
Theres an "interesting" vote in parliament tomorrow
I cant imagine it not passing, but still...
This is edited from a piece in the Times
"The issue will come to a head tomorrow, when the House of Commons votes on a cross-party amendment to the Trade Bill which would stop ministers striking trade deals with countries found guilty of genocide by the High Court. The measure is aimed fairly and squarely at China, which is accused of appalling human rights abuses against the Uighur population in Xinjiang where a million Muslims have been detained in political re-education camps and women forcibly sterilised. But the implications go much wider, raising questions about whether foreign policy should be “ethical” and about the relationship between ministers and the judiciary.
The proposal, which is supported by all the opposition parties, was recently passed with a huge majority in the House of Lords. Several former Conservative cabinet ministers including Lord Blencathra, the former chief whip, Lord Forsyth of Drumlean, the former Scottish secretary, and Lord Pickles, the former party chairman, rebelled to back an amendment tabled by Lord Alton, the crossbench peer and veteran human rights campaigner.
The Board of Deputies of British Jews is also urging the government to accept the clause. In a letter to the prime minister at the weekend, the president Marie van der Zyl noted the similarities between what is alleged to be happening in China and the events in Nazi Germany 75 years ago : “people being forcibly loaded on to trains, beards of religious men being trimmed, women being sterilised and the grim spectre of concentration camps”. She urged Mr Johnson to accept the change to the Trade Bill, insisting: “this is a moment where Britain must be courageous”.
The government is planning to whip its MPs to vote down the amendment but the revolt on the Tory benches in the House of Commons has grown fast in recent days. One rebel leader said “between 50 and 60” Conservative MPs intended to defy the whips, enough to defeat the government. Some will almost certainly fall into line but there is an increasingly angry mood among backbenchers who are yearning for moral leadership from No 10. “This is a government that listens only when it is forced to by rebellion,” one said.
Jeremy Hunt, the former foreign secretary, is among those who is now planning to rebel and either abstain or vote in favour of the amendment tomorrow. “I feel very strongly about this,” he told me. “I was always very struck having visited the genocide memorial sites in Rwanda that Bill Clinton thought his biggest mistake was that he didn’t intervene. He made a wrong call. I think there’s something very powerful about the fact that a UK court could make a determination.”
Although the Foreign Office is nervous of offending China, Mr Hunt believes that having an independent court ruling would in fact strengthen ministers’ hands in dealing with Beijing. “It gives the Foreign Office a bit of cover, they can say this is a court power. It would stiffen the resolve of any government to stand up to genocide.” Britain should, he insists, help “breath life into values-based diplomacy” after Brexit and ahead of the inauguration of Joe Biden in Washington this week. “Donald Trump provided strength but not moral leadership and in the end you need both.”
Downing Street has already been forced to back down once by Tory rebels over China when the prime minister pledged to phase out the role of the Chinese company Huawei in the 5G mobile communications network. Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary, also announced last week that companies trading in Britain would face fines unless they could prove that their supply chains were free from forced labour. On Sunday Mr Raab, himself the son of a Jewish refugee who fled the Nazis, said he supported the “spirit” of the amendment to the Trade Bill and condemned China’s treatment of the Uighur community as a “serious violation of human rights on an appalling industrial scale”.
But, having clashed with the judges over the prorogation of parliament in 2019, ministers are determined not to hand them power over foreign policy and trade agreements. The government insists that it is not for British courts to determine whether genocide is taking place in another country. The problem, however, is that this may be the only way in which a ruling can be made. As a member of the UN Security Council, China can block a case being taken to the International Criminal Court. It can also prevent a hearing at the International Court of Justice, since this requires the consent of the parties concerned.
Tom Tugendhat, the Conservative chairman of the Commons foreign affairs committee, who is also planning to vote against the government says: “The whole point of Brexit was to be able to take back control of powers that shape our lives. We need to use that power to have our courts determine whether genocide has been committed and let our sovereign parliament determine the consequences.”
The moral cause has united both Leavers and Remainers against the government. Iain Duncan Smith, the former Tory leader believes the Foreign Office is “desperate not to upset China” after the Huawei decision. But he told me: “There has to be a moral purpose to our foreign policy. We are beyond the days when everyone played games with bad regimes.” This goes way beyond leaving behind the “golden era” of relations between Britain and China that was once championed by David Cameron.
Mr Johnson has already done damage to Britain’s reputation abroad by threatening to break international law if there was no Brexit deal. Ministers have so far failed to join the Netherlands and Canada in supporting the genocide case against Burma at the international court. The question is: what does global Britain stand for now that it is free to set its own course? How willing is the government going to be to turn a blind eye to the human rights abuses in Turkey or the repression of women’s rights campaigners in Saudi Arabia? Having left the EU, we will need all the friends we can find to trade with — but at what price?
I cant imagine it not passing, but still...
This is edited from a piece in the Times
"The issue will come to a head tomorrow, when the House of Commons votes on a cross-party amendment to the Trade Bill which would stop ministers striking trade deals with countries found guilty of genocide by the High Court. The measure is aimed fairly and squarely at China, which is accused of appalling human rights abuses against the Uighur population in Xinjiang where a million Muslims have been detained in political re-education camps and women forcibly sterilised. But the implications go much wider, raising questions about whether foreign policy should be “ethical” and about the relationship between ministers and the judiciary.
The proposal, which is supported by all the opposition parties, was recently passed with a huge majority in the House of Lords. Several former Conservative cabinet ministers including Lord Blencathra, the former chief whip, Lord Forsyth of Drumlean, the former Scottish secretary, and Lord Pickles, the former party chairman, rebelled to back an amendment tabled by Lord Alton, the crossbench peer and veteran human rights campaigner.
The Board of Deputies of British Jews is also urging the government to accept the clause. In a letter to the prime minister at the weekend, the president Marie van der Zyl noted the similarities between what is alleged to be happening in China and the events in Nazi Germany 75 years ago : “people being forcibly loaded on to trains, beards of religious men being trimmed, women being sterilised and the grim spectre of concentration camps”. She urged Mr Johnson to accept the change to the Trade Bill, insisting: “this is a moment where Britain must be courageous”.
The government is planning to whip its MPs to vote down the amendment but the revolt on the Tory benches in the House of Commons has grown fast in recent days. One rebel leader said “between 50 and 60” Conservative MPs intended to defy the whips, enough to defeat the government. Some will almost certainly fall into line but there is an increasingly angry mood among backbenchers who are yearning for moral leadership from No 10. “This is a government that listens only when it is forced to by rebellion,” one said.
Jeremy Hunt, the former foreign secretary, is among those who is now planning to rebel and either abstain or vote in favour of the amendment tomorrow. “I feel very strongly about this,” he told me. “I was always very struck having visited the genocide memorial sites in Rwanda that Bill Clinton thought his biggest mistake was that he didn’t intervene. He made a wrong call. I think there’s something very powerful about the fact that a UK court could make a determination.”
Although the Foreign Office is nervous of offending China, Mr Hunt believes that having an independent court ruling would in fact strengthen ministers’ hands in dealing with Beijing. “It gives the Foreign Office a bit of cover, they can say this is a court power. It would stiffen the resolve of any government to stand up to genocide.” Britain should, he insists, help “breath life into values-based diplomacy” after Brexit and ahead of the inauguration of Joe Biden in Washington this week. “Donald Trump provided strength but not moral leadership and in the end you need both.”
Downing Street has already been forced to back down once by Tory rebels over China when the prime minister pledged to phase out the role of the Chinese company Huawei in the 5G mobile communications network. Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary, also announced last week that companies trading in Britain would face fines unless they could prove that their supply chains were free from forced labour. On Sunday Mr Raab, himself the son of a Jewish refugee who fled the Nazis, said he supported the “spirit” of the amendment to the Trade Bill and condemned China’s treatment of the Uighur community as a “serious violation of human rights on an appalling industrial scale”.
But, having clashed with the judges over the prorogation of parliament in 2019, ministers are determined not to hand them power over foreign policy and trade agreements. The government insists that it is not for British courts to determine whether genocide is taking place in another country. The problem, however, is that this may be the only way in which a ruling can be made. As a member of the UN Security Council, China can block a case being taken to the International Criminal Court. It can also prevent a hearing at the International Court of Justice, since this requires the consent of the parties concerned.
Tom Tugendhat, the Conservative chairman of the Commons foreign affairs committee, who is also planning to vote against the government says: “The whole point of Brexit was to be able to take back control of powers that shape our lives. We need to use that power to have our courts determine whether genocide has been committed and let our sovereign parliament determine the consequences.”
The moral cause has united both Leavers and Remainers against the government. Iain Duncan Smith, the former Tory leader believes the Foreign Office is “desperate not to upset China” after the Huawei decision. But he told me: “There has to be a moral purpose to our foreign policy. We are beyond the days when everyone played games with bad regimes.” This goes way beyond leaving behind the “golden era” of relations between Britain and China that was once championed by David Cameron.
Mr Johnson has already done damage to Britain’s reputation abroad by threatening to break international law if there was no Brexit deal. Ministers have so far failed to join the Netherlands and Canada in supporting the genocide case against Burma at the international court. The question is: what does global Britain stand for now that it is free to set its own course? How willing is the government going to be to turn a blind eye to the human rights abuses in Turkey or the repression of women’s rights campaigners in Saudi Arabia? Having left the EU, we will need all the friends we can find to trade with — but at what price?
Last edited:
not-bono-ever
meh
China will be offended sure but like meh. We did enough tugging them off for a decade under the Cameron regime
Artaxerxes
Look out, he's got a gnu!
The amusing aspect of this China fear is that the west actively made the problem by erm, outsourcing literally every industry there for profit and enabled the CCP to survive and thrive and get rich while hollowing there own countries out.
It’s still depressing and I’m glad I’ve not got kids but it’s worth an ironic chuckle as the various politicos clutch there hands and say what can we do?!?!
Artaxerxes
Look out, he's got a gnu!
Wait till these guys hear about what Saudi Arabia has been up to...
ska invita
back on the other side
Quite...and we've seen how they feel about that with the arms trade ban to Saudi which they studiously ignore
Johnson was meant to go and fawn over Modi this month for the new post Brexit Indian trade deal too
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
It would have been emetic
ska invita
back on the other side
Covid postponed so still to come...get your sick bags ready
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
hitmouse
so defeated, thinks it's funny
No sympathy for the Chinese state, obv, but I imagine if you were Chinese state media or similar you could probably produce quite an amusing mash-up of UK politicians solemnly discussing the importance of human rights this week vs UK politicians discussing the "torture and war crimes are good actually" Bill last year.
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
Instead they just exploited their own massive reserve army of cheap labour. I always wonder how the fuck these types square the circle when it comes to China having billionaires, as well as Western companies making huge profits using Chinese labour. Also as of late China has begun issuing loans, similar to what the IMF does. So much for not exploiting the global south.
I think we need to push against this sucking up to China on the left. It seems to be getting a bit more common, and I don't think China are even really trying to push this kind of thing. I can imagine it getting much worse if they do decide to push it.
not-bono-ever
meh
anyway
a kick in the balls for the departing US administration from central command
www.theguardian.com
a kick in the balls for the departing US administration from central command
China announces sanctions against 'lying and cheating' outgoing Trump officials
Chinese foreign ministry announced sanctions against Mike Pompeo and 27 others as Biden was taking presidential oath
not-bono-ever
meh
From tiktok
The PRC must be shitting themselves now
The PRC must be shitting themselves now
gosub
~#
The EU-China investment agreement is a disaster for the West
The EU-China Comprehensive Investment Agreement that was announced in December 2020 at joint virtual press conference between Ursula von der Leyen, Charles Michel, Xi Jinping, Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron is a disaster for the western world. It fails to address human rights violations in China.
www.neweurope.eu
The EU-China investment agreement is a disaster for the West
The EU-China Comprehensive Investment Agreement that was announced in December 2020 at joint virtual press conference between Ursula von der Leyen, Charles Michel, Xi Jinping, Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron is a disaster for the western world. It fails to address human rights violations in China.
The deal is indeed a disgrace, but it still needs to be ratified by the European Parliament - and it won't.
Chinese aircraft enter Taiwan's air defence zone
Escalation prompts US president, Joe Biden, to make first public remarks on relationship with Taipei
not-bono-ever
meh
the issue of Taiwan nukes is hinted at in the articles on this.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
People who read the book Gomorrah or saw the 2008 film of the same name will remember that there have been for years Chinese workers effectively slaves in europeThe EU-China investment agreement is a disaster for the West
The EU-China Comprehensive Investment Agreement that was announced in December 2020 at joint virtual press conference between Ursula von der Leyen, Charles Michel, Xi Jinping, Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron is a disaster for the western world. It fails to address human rights violations in China.
gosub
~#
Heard stories via mate whose wife is a Chinese national. Not seen the film cheers for the heads up.
This is one area of policy where I'm glad of the erratic steering of the last 4 years
Similar threads
