Geo-Strategic Trend - 90. page

China’s General Administration of Customs announced on February 26 that it will halt the importation of Taiwan’s pineapples starting on March 1, citing “harmful organisms” detected in the fruit.

Taiwan’s Foreign Minister Joseph Wu responded by starting a “Freedom Pineapple” campaign on Twitter to condemn Beijing’s politically-driven ban on the fruit. “China now bans our pineapples to punish farmers in the south. Remember Australia’s Freedom Wine? I urge like-minded friends around the globe to stand with Taiwan & rally behind the Freedom Pineapple.”

Last year, Australia advocated investigating the source of the COVID-19 disease and angered China. China imposed trade barriers on Australian wine, beef, barley and other products. Democratic countries took action to support Australia and called for drinking Australian wine.

Some Twitter posts used the hashtag that included: “India should show solidarity with Taiwan,” “We would love to buy them in the U.S.,” “Help Taiwan’s farmers counter China’s weaponization of trade,” “Delicious pineapple cakes from Taiwan,” “Taiwan has probably the best pineapple in the world,” and “Democracy pineapples.”

Taiwan’s president also tweeted, “After Australian wine, unfair Chinese trade practices are now targeting Taiwanese pineapple, but that won’t stop us. Whether in a smoothie, a cake, or freshly cut on a plate, our pineapples always hits the spot. Support our farmers & enjoy delicious Taiwanese fruit!”

J. Michael Cole, a researcher at the Canada based Macdonald-Laurier Institute, echoed the campaign on Twitter, “In the latest round of attempts by China to punish Taiwan, Beijing has announced it will cancel all imports of Taiwanese pineapple staring on March 1. I don’t know about you, but I am suddenly craving Taiwanese pineapple.”

Source: Central News Agency, February 27, 2021
https://www.cna.com.tw/news/firstnews/202102270027.aspx

At a Liberal Democratic Party’s (LDP’s) defense and security panel on February 25, Japan’s government officials said, amid rising concerns about the escalation of the Sino-Japanese rivalry surrounding the Senkaku Islands, that if a foreign official ship were to forcibly land on the Senkaku Islands (called the Diaoyu Islands in China), the Japanese coast guard might consider this as a vicious crime and might use weapons to suppress the opponent’s resistance. Analysts believe that this is a reaction and measure to strengthen deterrence against Chinese coast guard vessels entering Japanese territorial waters.

According to the LDP members at the meeting, this is the first time government officials have referred to the coast guard’s possible firing on foreign official vessels aiming to land on Japanese territory.

The interpretation (of the LDP’s response) is partly based on applying the use of the police power under a police law to the coast guard. Earlier Japan’s coast guard was only allowed to fire weapons directly at foreign vessels in cases of self-defense and emergency escape.

In addition, the government also stated that, when a foreign government ship takes away any Japanese citizens, the Japanese coast guard can board the opponent’s ship and retake the hostages. For small drones flying around territorial waters, the self-defense forces can regard it as a violation of airspace and respond with actions that including shooting them down.

Source: Kyodo News, February 25, 2021
https://china.kyodonews.net/news/2021/02/a1946ad0ab43.html

The British newspaper the Daily Mail reported on February 21 that “Hundreds of independent schools left in dire financial straits by the coronavirus pandemic are being targeted by Chinese investors.” “Nine of the 17 schools under Chinese control are owned by firms whose founders or bosses are among China’s most senior Communist Party members.”

“One firm admitted its acquisition of British schools is aimed at supporting China’s controversial Belt and Road strategy, which aims to expand Beijing’s global influence.”

As companies controlled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) are seeking to expand their influence on the British education system, the public is concerned that Beijing’s tentacles are reaching British classrooms.

“Schools are using educational tools for teaching children a ‘whitewashed’ view of China.”

Ma Jian, a Chinese-born British writer, told Radio Free Asia that the CCP is pursuing Xi Jinping’s “Chinese Dream” and its next target is the young generation of democratic nations. “Britain has basically turned itself into a trading branch of China. Not only has it coupled with China in business, economy, and trade, but also in cultural affairs. You will find that universities, research institutes, middle schools, and elementary schools have got a lot of money from China. Companies are implementing of Xi Jinping’s ‘Belt and Road Initiative’ and ‘Chinese Dream’ by means of the acquisition of these private schools. The education deals are aiming at the next generation.”

Wang Jianhong, a scholar who has been concerned about the human rights situation in China, also believes that these Chinese companies are controlled by Beijing. Taking advantages of the rule that democratic countries cannot interfere much in market transactions, the Chinese government has been promoting its global expansion. After years of infiltration into the British academic community, the academia has seen the trend of self-censorship and even whitewashing for the CCP. “The CCP has been stepping up its investment in Britain’s private schools and education system. How could an ordinary Chinese company buy British private schools? They definitely have government background. As the basic education in the UK is directly owned by companies controlled by the CCP, we are worried about the ideological infiltration into the curriculum. Even if you have got rid of the Confucius Institute, the CCP has all kinds of methods, including the acquisition of private schools.”

Some British politicians expressed a sense of concern. Conservative MP Tom Tugendhat, chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, said: “China’s strategic understanding and reach means that they have an advantage in seeking to influence others and using established brands, including some of our own, to achieve that position. … We need to decide what it is we are prepared to defend, but before that we would need to understand what it is we want.”

Reported by the Daily Mail, “A key player in the market is Bright Scholar, which bought a number of schools and colleges in 2018 and 2019, including Bournemouth Collegiate School, St Michael’s School in Llanelli, Carmarthanshire – where Justice Secretary Robert Buckland and singer Cerys Matthews were once pupils – and Bosworth Independent College in Northampton. … Bright Scholar is owned by Yang Huiyan, who is reportedly worth £20 billion, making her Asia’s richest woman, and was founded by her father Yang Guoqiang, a member of the Communist Party’s highest- ranking advisory council.”

“The Wanda Group, which invests in technology, real estate, hotels and the media, bought the schools in 2017 through City of London based asset manager London & Oxford Group. … It was founded by Wang Jianlin, a former People’s Liberation Army soldier who is worth an estimated £10 billion and is a member of China’s senior Communist Party advisory council.

“Two more schools – Kingsley School in Bideford, Devon, and Heathfield Knoll School in Worcestershire – are owned by China First Capital Group, which has senior Communist Party members on its board.”

“Riddlesworth was bought by the Confucius International Education Group in 2015 and its website lauds its links with the late Princess. … The firm’s owner, Kong Lingtao, who claims to be a direct descendant of the Chinese philosopher Confucius, also boasts of his visit to Buckingham Palace in 2014, when he met Prince Philip.”

Another company, the Ray Education Group, bought Adcote School for Girls near Shrewsbury, Shropshire, and Myddelton College in Denbigh, Wales, in 2018.

“On its website, Ray Education details plans to use its British schools to help expand to other countries as part of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road strategy to boost China’s global economic and political influence.”

Source: Radio Free Asia, February 22, 2021
https://www.rfa.org/cantonese/news/uk-school-02222021112954.html
Daily Mail, February 20, 2021
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9282617/British-private-institutions-bought-Chinese-firms.html

United Daily News (UDN), one of the primary Taiwanese news groups, recently reported that North Korea is changing the official English translation of the title of the country’s top leader. Up until January 22, the North Korean official news agency KCNA (Korean Central News Agency) was using “Chairman of the State Affairs Commission” as the title for Kim Jong-un. However, starting on February 11, the translation was officially changed to “President of the State Affairs.” The international community typically uses the word “president” to indicate the top leader of a county. This new move appears to be an effort to emphasize that North Korea’s leader is also an international leader. North Korea did not have an official explanation for this latest change. In the meantime, the Chinese translation and the Russian translation remain unchanged. In recent years, socialist countries like China also switched the translation from chairman to president. However, Xi Jinping’s official title in Chinese remains Chairman. The North Korean Constitution clearly designates the Chairman of the State Affairs Commission as the highest leader of the nation. Kim Jong-un has two other titles.

Source: UDN, February 20, 2021
https://udn.com/news/story/6809/5264234

Although China has repeatedly denied assisting the Burmese (Myanmar) military in launching its February coup, many people believe the opposite. Recently, a Burmese citizen’s group disclosed in a report that five Chinese companies have long been selling weapons to the military government.

The civil organization “Justice for Myanmar” recently disclosed in a report that 16 foreign companies supplied conventional weapons and equipment to Tatmadaw (the official name of the armed forces of Myanmar). Among them there were five Chinese firms, namely China North Industries Group Corporation Limited (Norinco), Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC), China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC), China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation (CASIC), and China National Aero-Technology Import & Export Corporation (CATIC). India, Israel, Russia, and Singapore, each have two companies on the list.

Zhang Shengqi, chairman of the Myanmar-Burma Assistance Association, told Radio Free Asia on Thursday, February 18, that Chinese companies have been selling weapons to Myanmar for a long time, and that this is no longer a secret. Zhang said, “It is no secret that China provides arms to the Burmese government forces. The Burmese military is a military ally of China in the south. Ten years ago, the Chinese government moved its security line from southern Yunnan province to southern Myanmar. The whole country of Myanmar is regarded as within the security line of China’s defense. The stability of Myanmar directly affects China’s interests and national security. If Myanmar chooses to have a pro-US, instead of pro-China, stance, Myanmar will once again fall into an endless civil war.”

In recent years, China invested in the Kyaukpyu deep-water port in the western Rakhine State of Myanmar, a US$ 1.3 billion project. After completion, it will become China’s gateway to the Indian Ocean. In addition, the US$ 8.9 billion Mandalay high-speed rail project will connect northern Myanmar with southwest China. In the future, China may transport energy and materials without relying entirely on the Malacca Strait.

Zhang Shengqi expressed the belief that China has huge economic and strategic interests in Myanmar and that geopolitics doomed the special relationship between the two countries. “The military port and China-Myanmar oil pipeline in the Bay of Bengal are the lifeblood for the Chinese military’s energy. China has to protect its military investment and presence in Burma and support Burma’s stability. … The Burmese people have no choice.”

Source: Radio Free Asia, February 17, 2021
https://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/junshiwaijiao/ql2-02172021234248.html

On February 15, Canada initiated the “Declaration against Arbitrary Detention in State-to-State Relations.” It stated, “The arbitrary arrest or detention of foreign nationals to compel action or to exercise leverage over a foreign government is contrary to international law, undermines international relations, and has a negative impact on foreign nationals traveling, working and living abroad.” The Declaration received international support from 58 countries including U.S., Japan, U.K., Australia and almost all of the EU members.

Although the declaration did not indicate which country it was aimed at, it immediately resulted in a strong reaction from China. The spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Canada said on Tuesday February 16 that China expresses strong dissatisfaction and firm opposition to the declaration and has lodged solemn representations with Canada. China also mentioned the arrest of Meng Wanzhou and criticized Canada saying, “This kind of act is no different from a thief shouting to catch a thief. How hypocritical and despicable!” China once again urged Canada to “reflect on its wrongdoing, release Meng immediately, make sure she can return to China safely, and stop creating new obstacles to bilateral relations in any form.” The spokesperson also emphasized that “China is a country under the rule of law.” Two Canadian citizens, Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, were “arrested and prosecuted by competent authorities of China in accordance with the law for the suspected crimes of undermining China’s national security.”

The U.S. State Department last week called on China to release the two arrested Canadian citizens and rejected China for “using coercion as a political tool.” In a telephone call earlier this month with Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris “expressed strong solidarity” with Canada for the detention of Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig, the two Canadian citizens arbitrarily detained in China in 2018. She spoke with Trudeau, and made it clear that the U.S. will continue to do everything in its power to secure their release.

Source: Radio Free Asia, February 17, 2021,
https://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/junshiwaijiao/ac-02162021071153.html

Well-known Chinese news site Sina (NASDQ: SINA) recently reported that the U.S. government has approved the sale of the F-15EX fighter jet to the Indian Air Force. India has not finalized the decision to purchase it yet. The F-15 was originally developed by Macdonald Douglas (now part of Boeing) in the 1960s and was enhanced after 2018 as the F-15EX. The F-15 series did have glorious combat records, mostly set by the Israeli Air Force. However, it’s completely meaningless for India, since India has already owned many Russian Su-30MKI fighter jets, which are in the same class. The Indian Air Force has never owned any U.S. fighter jets before. Thus, it could become a nightmare for the Indians on logistics. It may be a better idea for India to buy a different Boeing fighter jet F/A18E/F Block III (also known as the Super Hornet). It uses the F414 engine, which is the same engine loaded in India’s domestic fighter jet MK2 and a few other models. This choice could lower the cost of maintenance and repair. The Super Hornet may also support India’s need for aircraft carrier fighter jets. The United States Air Force did plan to acquire 144 F-15EX fighter jets.

Source: Sina, February 13, 2021
https://mil.news.sina.com.cn/china/2021-02-13/doc-ikftpnny6644921.shtml