Geo-Strategic Trend - 110. page

Xinhua reported, one day after U.S. President Trump announced the new Middle East peace agreement, that the key players had mixed responses. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu stood behind the U.S. and supported the proposal. The Palestinians clearly refused the proposal in full, since they were not at all involved in drafting the deal. The UN Secretary General supported the “Two Nations” strategy since it had been determined in a number of UN resolutions. The Arab League said the U.S. plan will result in the loss of many rights on the Palestinian side and called for compliance to international laws and standards. Egypt urged a dialogue between Palestinians and the Israelis to offer their thoughts on the Trump proposal. Turkey, however, described the U.S. proposal as already dead. Iran asked all Islamic countries to stand up against the U.S. “shameful agreement.” Jordan in the meantime supported all peaceful efforts and suggested a swift start of proper negotiations. The European Union needed more time to look carefully at the new proposal but was willing to help in the negotiation. The French government will also carefully study the agreement and stick to a “Two Nations” solution. The Germans said only an agreement accepted by both sides can lead to long-lasting peace. The British government welcomed the U.S. proposal, but emphasized the importance of having the buy-in of both the Palestinians and the Israelis.

Source: Xinhua, January 29, 2020
http://www.xinhuanet.com/2020-01/29/c_1125511294.htm

On January 28, when the situation of the Wuhan coronavirus continued to worsen, the World Health Organization director general, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, traveled to Beijing to meet with Chinese president Xi Jinping and other Chinese Communist Party leaders. Tedros gave high praise to the commitment of the Chinese government to combat the transmission of the virus very highly.

As multiple governments, including the U.S., France, Japan, South Korea, and Russia, have implemented or planned to evacuate their citizens from Wuhan, WHO advised against it, expressing full confidence in the Chinese government’s capabilities.

Earlier on January 23, WHO decided not to declare the outbreak a public health emergency of international concern, or PHEIC. On January 28, WHO admitted an error in its risk assessment. The Geneva-based UN agency said in a situation report that the risk was “very high in China, high at the regional level and high at the global level,” and that it had stated things “incorrectly” in its previous reports on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday that the global risk was “moderate.”

Records of donations of WHO member states (to Who) show China’s payments rose from sixth place in 2016-2017 with a share of 5.14 percent, to the third place in 2018-2019 with a share of 7.92 percent, second only to the 22 percent from the U.S. and 9.68 percent from Japan.

Lin Shih-chia, Chief Executive Officer of the non-government organization Foundation of Medical Professionals Alliance in Taiwan (FMPAT), told Radio Free Asia that it was not surprising that the WHO gave priority to politics over professional judgment. Lin, who has been advocating Taiwan’s participation in WHO for 25 years, recalls that, although the mission of the WHO should prioritize the health of all human beings, Taiwan’s experience over the past few years has shown that WHO placed politics high on its agenda. From 2009 to 2016, Taiwanese delegates were able to attend the World Health Assembly as an observer. However, after Tsai Ing-wen, a leader unfavorable to Beijing, was elected, Taiwan was no longer qualified as an observer.

According to Chen Chien-jen, Taiwan’s vice president and epidemiologist, during the SARS epidemic in 2003, Taiwan was blocked from immediate notification of the situation because Taiwan was not a WHO member state. 37 Taiwanese died from SARS.

Jessica Drun, a researcher at the Project 2049 Institute, told RFA that, “China’s influence in the United Nations and international organizations is ubiquitous. … When political considerations are given priority (over public health considerations), health care across the region and the world is at risk.”

Source: Radio Free Asia, January 28, 2020
https://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/huanjing/jt-01282020122829.html

After the outbreak of the new coronavirus pneumonia in Wuhan, the National Biosafety Laboratory (NBL), Wuhan, which specializes in coronavirus, and is the only laboratory with the highest level of biosafety in China, inevitably received the public’s attention. The media recently revealed the political controversy surrounding the lab.

The Lab, the BSL-4 (Biosafety Level 4) facility, was built in 2015 and officially put into operation in 2018. The Biosafety Level 4 lab is also called the P4 (Pathogen Level 4) lab, which is the laboratory with the highest biosafety level in the world today. It aims to provide a platform for scientists to study the prevention and cure technologies that apply to the world’s most dangerous pathogens.

As France is a global leader in virus research and as former French Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin was a pro-China activist, he became the behind-the-scenes driver for the establishment of the Wuhan P4 Laboratory.

A recent article in the French Challenges magazine quoted from journalist Antoine Izambard in his book France-Chine: Les Liaisons Dangereuses (France-China: Dangerous Liaisons) that the Chinese Academy of Sciences requested France to assist in the establishment of a P4 laboratory in 2003 and that it caused great controversy. Some French virus experts worried that China would use the technology that France provided to develop chemical weapons. French intelligence agencies also issued a serious warning to the government.

At the same time, another French magazine, Valeurs Actuelles, published an article in 2018, mentioning that the close relationship between former French Prime Minister Raffarin and China invited the attention from the French General Directorate for Internal Security (DGSI). The article mentioned that, through his influence, Raffarin had been developing cooperation between Europe and China. He also held important positions in Chinese companies, foundations, and universities, including the director of Plastic Omnium in China and he was a member of the France China Foundation.

In an earlier report in the British Daily Mail newspaper, Tim Trevan, an American biosafety consultant made a comment in the Nature Journal in 2017. Regarding the establishment of a P4 laboratory in China, he expressed his concern about a potential virus leakage. He believed that the Chinese system would make laboratories unsafe because free speech and open information are particularly important for scientific development.

Source: Radio Free Asia, January 28, 2020
https://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/huanjing/hj-01282020115801.html

Since the outbreak of the new coronavirus, Taiwan has confirmed at least one case of the Wuhan pneumonia. Nevertheless, Taiwan was not invited to join other member states with confirmed cases in an emergency meeting that WHO (the World Health Organization) held on Wednesday January 22.

On Wednesday, in its response to the Wuhan pneumonia epidemic, the Chinese Foreign Ministry’s spokesman Geng Shuang said at a regular press conference regarding Taiwan’s exclusion from the WHO, “No one cares more about the health and well-being of Taiwan compatriots than the Chinese central government.” On Taiwan’s participation in international organizations, Geng said, “Reasonable arrangements must be made through cross-strait consultations under the one-China principle.”

The Taiwan government responded to Geng’s statement with dissatisfaction, regret, and condemnation. Taiwan’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Joanne OU said on Thursday that, while the pneumonia epidemic in Wuhan has “intensified sharply and continued to spread outward,” not only did the Chinese Foreign Ministry not “share the facts about the epidemic’s situation” with Taiwan, but it also “posed as the central government and played politics” to denigrate Taiwan’s national sovereignty status. “The Taiwan Ministry of Foreign Affairs deeply regrets such a bad act on China’s part and condemns it.”

In an interview with the VOA, Richard Bush, a senior researcher at the East Asian Studies Center at the Brookings Institute, said that the handling of the new coronavirus put China in an awkward situation, but Beijing’s political operations may “not be a bad thing. It actually let people see clearly what kind of government it is.”

Source: Voice of America, January 23, 2020
https://www.voachinese.com/a/taiwan-accuses-china-of-playing-politics-on-coronavirus-20200123/5257924.html

Recently, several alumni from the Free University of Berlin (FUB) published an open letter to Germany’s Federal Minister of Education and Research, the Mayor of Berlin, and the President of FUB, calling for clarification on the issue of China funding a German professorship position in the East Asian Studies Department. They called for an immediate end to such a practice. The advocate of the open letter, David Missal, had been deported from China in August 2018 for following the story of a Chinese activist lawyer who the regime had suppressed.

According to the Berlin based Daily Mirror newspaper, the Chinese government agency Hanban has being funding a professorship at FUB. The professor will create a Chinese teaching program while, at the same time, serving as the head of the Confucius Institutes in Berlin. The newspaper also reported that the German government was aware that Hanban is a cultural institution under the Propaganda Department of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and that China and the CCP are trying to exert influence on Germany’s China scholars through the activities of the Confucius Institutes, which have close ties with Hanban. Signatories of the open letter are worried that such a language teaching program will exclude articles that are critical of the CCP. Because this professorship receives funding from China, it faces a greater risk of self-censorship. One cannot even rule out the possibility that the CCP will fund political science professorships in the future.

The open letter made four requests. These include the exposure of the contents of the contract signed between Hanban and the FUB on the professor position; clarification of the channels via which such an agreement was reached; an announcement of the measures planned to prevent Hanban and the CCP’s influence on teaching contents; and a request that either Hanban’s contract for this new professor position be terminated immediately or the position be funded through other channels.

The Daily Mirror reported in December of last year that the Liberal Democratic Party’s parliamentary group warned against China’s influence over German universities through cultural institutions. There are currently 19 Confucius Institutes in Germany, most of which cooperate with German universities. The Confucius Institute at the Free University of Berlin started in 2006. It is the first Confucius Institute in Germany.

Source: Deutsche Welle, January 21, 2020
https://p.dw.com/p/3WYFM