Chinascope – Page 322

WeChat Users outside China Are under Political Surveillance

Evidence shows that communications among users with WeChat accounts registered outside China are under political surveillance. Moreover, according to a Citizen Lab report published on May 7, 2020, they are also being used to train the algorithms WeChat uses to censor and monitor China-registered users.

WeChat is a communication application released by China’s Tencent in 2011. It is used by more than 1 billion people worldwide, and ranks the third-largest in the world, after Whatsapp and Facebook.

As with all social media in China, WeChat actively censors on its platform, including around politically sensitive topics and discussions related to the coronavirus pandemic. The censorship of users appears to be for accounts registered to mainland China’s phone numbers.

WeChat is required by law to share user data with the State government. Tests at the Citizen Lab showed that, for the first time, communications among non-mainland-China users are subject to surveillance.

Further, it has been demonstrated that such communications are also being used to train the algorithms WeChat uses to censor and monitor China-registered users. After documents and images containing politically sensitive content were sent solely among non-China-registered accounts, it was observed that, shortly thereafter, those files were censored for China-registered users.

Source: Radio Free Asia, May 7, 2020
https://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/meiti/jt-05072020101223.html

Briefings | | May 10, 2020 | Government/Politics Information/Technology

Connected to the CCP: Australian Billionaire Lost 900 Million Dollars for Supporting the CCP

Forbes reported that Australian Billionaire Andrew Forrest openly supported the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) during the coronavirus period and, as a result, saw his fortune shrink by close to $900 million.

During the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic, the U.S. and Australian governments demanded an investigation into how the virus started in Wuhan. However, Forrest defended China’s alleged role in concealing the possible cause of the virus outbreak.

Even the Australian Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, said Forrest’s comments about the virus possibly originating outside China were nonsense. Morrison said, “I don’t think anybody is in any fantasyland about where it started. It started in China.”

Forrest also invited the Chinese consul-general in the State of Victoria, Long Zhou, to speak at a media conference organized by the Australian Health Minister, Greg Hunt. The Australian, a national morning newspaper, published a critical editorial on Long Zhou’s gate-crashing the Minister’s event at Forrest’s invitation. It stated, “Business must not dictate the nation’s foreign policy.”

A prominent radio talk show host, Alan Jones, described Forrest as a “Beijing propaganda sock puppet.”

Forrest’s wealth, estimated by Forbes at $8.8 billion, is based largely on a 30 percent stake in the iron ore mining company, Fortescue Metals, which sells most of its ore to Chinese steel mills.

The effect on the stock market of Forrest’s championing the CCP was severe. On May 4, while most mining companies suffered a price correction with leaders such as BHP and Rio Tinto down about 7 percent from their highs on April 30, Fortescue Metals fell 12 percent, resulting in Forrest losing about $900 million in his stake.

International Journal Retracted 30+ Academic Papers from China

In April, a journal under the international academic publisher Springer retracted 33 papers from China all at once. With eight papers withdrawn earlier in the past two years, the total number arrived at 41. The authors of 39 papers came from China.

The mainland Chinese media The Paper, Multimedia Tools and Applications is the journal that issued the decision. The incident involved dozens of Chinese universities, state entities and companies, including Zhejiang University, the Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, the Wuhan University of Science and Technology, and China Jiliang University. Many papers had received funding from the National Natural Science Foundation of China.

The top three institutions in terms of the number of papers retracted were Zhejiang Electric Power Company under the State Grid, the School of Electrical and Optoelectronic Engineering at the Changzhou Institute of Technology, and Hefei University of Technology. One corresponding author from the Changzhou Institute of Technology had seven papers retracted. State Grid and Hefei University of Technology each had a corresponding author with four papers retracted.

Reasons for withdrawal included plagiarism of unpublished manuscripts, attempts to subvert the peer review process, content plagiarism, and improper copying of images without permission. More than half of the authors agreed to withdraw.

This is not the first incident of collective withdrawals involving Chinese scholars. In August 2015, Springer withdrew 64 papers published in its 10 academic journals, most of which were from China. In April 2017, Springer’s Tumor Biology journal withdrew 107 papers that were from Chinese scholars, all at one time, because of peer review fraud. It was hailed as a major earthquake in Chinese academic circles.

Source: Central News Agency, May 7, 2020
https://www.cna.com.tw/news/firstnews/202005070283.aspx

Briefings | | May 10, 2020 | Information/Technology

China’s Thousand Talents Plan Goes Low Profile

The Thousand Talents Plan (TTP), once a high-profile Chinese government project to attract overseas talent, is now on total radio silence. Ever since the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) started to pursue the scholars involved in TTP, Chinese authorities have mentioned little of the project in public. It is now even difficult to search relevant information on the Internet.

It was rumored that, as early as late September 2018, the Chinese authorities had ordered the official media to suspend the coverage of TTP. A document circulated on the Internet; the “Thousand Talents Plan Youth Project Review Working Group” authored it. It was affixed with the seal of the National Natural Science Foundation of China, which clearly ordained that “the wording of ‘Thousand Talents Plan’ should not appear in written notifications.”

China’s effort to keep a lid on the project is believed to be a response to the FBI’s probe into the TTP scholars that started in September 2018. The Thousand Talents Plan is a short name for “China’s Overseas High-Level Talent Recruitment Program.” In December 2008, the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) decided to implement the program. In January 2009, the Talent Work Coordination Group, a task force underneath the CCP’s Central Organization Department, formulated the “Opinions on the Implementation of the Overseas High-level Talent Recruitment Program.” Over the next ten years, about 8,000 overseas experts were hired with high pay, most of them ethnic Chinese.

Searching the characters “千人計畫” (Chinese characters for TTP) on Baidu, China’s largest search engine, turns out very few results. If the search is done using simplified Chinese character, nothing can be found. The keyword is unsearchable on China’s social platforms such as Weibo. It is rumored that, since April this year, China’s cyber police has been filtering the keyword for TTP. However, searching with characters “中國海外高層次人才引進計畫” (Chinese characters for “China’s Overseas High-Level Talent Recruit Program”) will give some information. Sometimes one has to combine different words so as to find piecemeal data.

Source: Central News Agency, May 6, 2020
https://www.cna.com.tw/news/acn/202005060336.aspx

Briefings | | May 8, 2020 | US-China Relations

Public Opinion: An Open Letter with Fifteen Questions Challenging the Current Top Leader

After China announced it would hold the National People’s Congress and the National Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference in late May, an open letter written in Chinese, addressed to the representatives of the two conferences was widely spread on the Internet. The letter posed 15 questions, mainly against Xi Jinping, though it did not call out his name.

It was said that Deng Pufang, son of China’s former paramount leader Deng Xiaoping, wrote this letter. (However, in Chinascope’s view, this is unlikely since, if Deng Pufang indeed wanted to challenge Xi, he could do it in many other ways that demonstrate more political savvy than an open letter that everyone sees.) However, the letter is worth reading as it shows public sentiment against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its leader. The following are the 15 questions:

As representatives of the two conferences, is it more important to protect the interests of our country and people, or to protect the power of a certain authoritarian?
The Constitution clearly stipulates that the representatives of the two conferences have the right to supervise and correct the wrong decisions of CCP Central. However, a few years ago, CCP Central created a “crime of baseless comments” (for someone who criticizes the top leader or CCP Central) and this year it created a “crime of showing no respect.” What is the value of the representatives of the two conferences then?
The authorities want to “settle questions by THE ONE” (this is a phrase that Xi’s supporters use to state following Xi’s direction). Is “THE ONE” an Emperor who inherited his power from his family, or a publicly elected President, or the CCP General Secretary based on all party member’s votes? Since it is none of these, why he is “THE ONE”?
If party member criticizes the mistakes made by the central leaders, they are “making baseless comments.” If the public does that, they are “stirring up the subversion of the government.” To whom does our country belong?
The Wuhan pneumonia has spread to the whole world. Did the central government delay the prevention and control of this virus? Did it hide information from the public? Should we provide an explanation to the world? Who should bear the responsibility for allowing the pandemic to get out of control?
The relations between China and the United States continue to deteriorate. What responsibilities should the top leader bear?
The turmoil in Hong Kong has lasted for almost a year. Who has destroyed Hong Kong’s “one country, two systems” structure? What responsibilities should the top leader assume?
The “Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)” irrationally invests money based on the central leaders’ own preferences, without the approval from the National People’s Congress and without consideration for the national economy and people’s livelihood. What kind of behavior is this? Now this program is about to be aborted. Who should bear the responsibility?
Without the approval of the National People’s Congress and without expert’s study, the central leaders decided to invest trillions of yuan to build a Xiong’an New District (next to Beijing) based on a few people’s suggestions. Now that the project has been aborted, who should bear the responsibility?
Why did Taiwan drift away from the mainland? What responsibility should the central leaders assume?
A large number of foreign companies have withdrawn from China, a large number of Chinese private enterprises have closed down, and a large number of workers have lost their jobs. Does this have anything to do with the central leaders’ wrong decision? If so, who should bear the responsibility?
What kind of behavior is it for the current top leader to use his power to amend the Constitution by removing the limit that a person can only serve the top leader position for at most two terms? If anyone with power can create law on his own, what is the use of the national Constitution?
CCP Central has decided to re-adopt the planned economy model that the world has long abandoned. Is this decision coming from the consideration of strengthening someone’s personal power or of the interests of the country and the people?
In recent years, China’s international image has plummeted and national credit has been totally lost. Who should bear this responsibility?
In order to prevent the retired senior comrades from proposing a collective motion to call for an expanded CCP Politburo meeting, the CCP Central sent military police to provide “special protection” to retired senior comrades and current high-ranking officials of the party, government, and military. The “special protection” is actually to restrict their communications, freedom of movement, and guest visits. What kind of behavior is this? Who gave him this power? (See Chinascope posting: Leadership: The Widespread of a WeChat Posting Calling for Politburo Meeting to Remove Xi Jinping and Leadership: Fu Zhenghua Removed from the Deputy Party Secretary Position of the Ministry of Justice)

Beijing Forces Hong Kong and Taiwan Entertainers to Hold Correct Political Views in Order to Work on the Mainland

Beijing has once again tightened its ideological control over the film and television circles in Hong Kong and Taiwan. Recently, it has been reported that the China Film Administration, the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television and other movie and television authorities have verbally ordered major film and television companies, including Tencent, iQiyi and other audio-visual companies, to try not to use those Hong Kong or Taiwanese entertainers or behind-the-scenes personnel who have an unknown political view. For those who are hired, they must sign a statement claiming that they will hold the correct political views for the next 10 years, which means that they must show they are patriotic towards the mainland and the party with their word and actions. Otherwise they must be responsible for the financial loss if they are banned from performing because of their political views.

People in Taiwan’s film and television industry have determined that it is likely that the film and television industry is actively cooperating with the party’s political censorship. It is too early to know how the policy will be carried out, but it may put pressure on those celebrities who have depended on the mainland market for a long period of time. If forced to make a political statement, they could become a puppet for the CCP’s propaganda which suppresses personal conscience and freedom of speech.

Taiwan ’s Mainland Affairs Council called on Beijing to respect creative freedom, and not impose the party’s motivation on performing arts and cultural works. The Taiwan Ministry of Culture pointed out that China’s political review system runs against the universal values of respecting freedom of artistic expression and also suppresses creative content, which the world will not accept.

The CCP mouthpiece Global Time reported that the spokesperson for the China State Taiwan Affairs Office had previously clarified that the 10-year political review order was “pure fabrication,” but she also pointed out that China “does not allow a few people to make money on the mainland while supporting the separatist activities of Taiwan independence and it does not want cross-strait exchanges in the movie and film industry be tainted by Taiwan independence forces.”

Source: Voice of America, May 6, 2020
https://www.voachinese.com/a/beijing-tightens-thoughts-control-20200506/5407959.html

Briefings | | May 7, 2020 | Geo-Strategic Trend

Leadership: An Internet Posting That Defended Xi Jinping

In the past couple of months, there have been criticisms of Xi Jinping, including Ren Zhiqiang calling him “a clown who stripped naked and insisted on continuing to be an emperor.” (See Chinascope posting: Leadership: Ren Zhiqiang’s Article: “A Clown Who Stripped Naked and Insisted on Continuing to Be an Emperor”) and an Internet posting calling for an “Emergency Enlarged Meeting of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP’s) Politburo” to “discuss whether Xi Jinping is suitable to continue to be the President of the country, the CCP’s General Secretary, and Chairman of the Central Military Commission” (See Chinascope posting: Leadership: The Widespread of a WeChat Posting Calling for Politburo Meeting to Remove Xi Jinping).

Recently, a posting that was claimed to be written by Xi Jinping’s brother, Xi Yuanping, spread on the Internet. The article defended Xi Jinping. It is doubtful that Xi Yuanping wrote the article, but it offers interesting reading on how someone could justify Xi’s actions. The following are excerpts from the posting:

I don’t want to defend my brother but I want you to understand how difficult it is to manage such a big country. He works around the clock, without any selfish thoughts. Even his most criticized action of removing the President’s two-term limitation was not for himself but rather for the stability of the country… My brother said privately, to be the top leader of the CCP, one must first be extremely “left” (holding the communist position), and then can he be extremely “right” (being open and liberal). Because being extremely “left” will allow him to establish a solid foothold in the party; after he has gained that foothold, he can start a thorough political reform… Some events that received public criticism were not based on his orders but from some other people’s digging holes for him. The handling (taking down) of a few people in the area of the Political and Legal Affairs Committee (referring to Sun Lijun, Fu Zhenghua, and maybe a few other high-ranking officials), is to clean up that garbage… This pandemic has damaged the economy, but also offers an opportunity to start political reform. In the future, the opening of the media, public elections of city and county officials, and making the judicial system semi-independent (from the CCP), will gradually happen.

Public Opinion: “Four Things Not Anticipated”

A Chinese article titled, “Four Things Not Anticipated and Ten Points” was spread on the Internet recently. The article, commenting on how Beijing has misjudged the U.S., was said to be written by Dai Xu, a strategist with the People’s Liberation Army (PLA).

However, Dai Xu, a China’s military hawk, issued a statement on his Weibo account that he didn’t write this article. (#1, Weibo)

Later, Chinascope found that a copy of the article, said to be written by Ling A’feng, was posted on the Internet on July 15, 2018. (#2, CReaders)

The points in the article are worth reading though, as they show a moderate or liberal view from the Chinese side on U.S. and China relations. The following are highlights of the points from the article (#3, U.S.-China Perception Monitor):

As to the Sino-U.S. relations, there are a few things that the Chinese people did not anticipate that would happen:

The U.S. has such a big antagonism against China. The Chinese people never thought that the U.S. government would run its public relations machine at full strength, denouncing China to the maximum extent, describing China as the “trade hooligans” who should never be forgiven, and pushing the “China threat” theory to a new level.
The U.S. government has acted so ruthlessly, in such a short time frame, and given (China) no time to negotiate.
Not a single country has stood up to show sympathy and support for China.
The Republic Party and the Democratic Party in the U.S. have formed a united front (against China).

China must revise its understanding of the U.S.:

Don’t assume that the U.S. is a “paper tiger” (a Chinese idiom for something that looks powerful from outside but is actually weak). On the contrary, the U.S. is a real tiger and can eat people.
Don’t hope that the U.S. will forever make mistakes. It has a correction mechanism for its mistakes and will not forever carry the ‘political correctness’ policy.
The U.S. does not pay serious attention to ideology and value systems; it only cares about economic and trade interests.
Do not go to the U.S. to say it openly, “I want to surpass you and replace you; I want to be the world’s number one.”
The U.S. is not afraid of offending someone. It has many allies, but it, for sure, will not sacrifice its own interests to please an ally.
China should acknowledge that the U.S. is the “world’s number one.” Though it might be hard (for some Chinese) to accept it emotionally, but emotion cannot replace reality.
Do not mention “sharing information” in front of the U.S. The U.S. is big on intellectual property. If you keep showing off your achievements obtained from “information sharing,” then you are a “technology thief” in the eyes of the U.S.
The U.S. is a master at playing strategy games. Don’t let the Americans aim their strategies at you.
Don’t hope that the Presidential election in the U.S. will change its national strategy.
Don’t naively assume that you are fighting just the U.S. The U.S. has a lot of strategic allies. It represents universal values. If it acts, other countries will follow; even if some countries may not want to follow, eventually they will still line up with the U.S. Keep this in mind: if the U.S. increases 30 billion dollars in tariffs on you, (you will get) 60 billion, 90 billion, or even more tariffs (as other countries may follow suit).

China’s Reaction to Trump’s Election Win

Xinhua Commentary Series: Spotlight on the U.S. Presidential Election

Wu Guoguang: Xi Jinping’s Reversal of the Course, Will China’s Transition be Peaceful or Marked with Bloodshed?

Cheng Xiaonong: U.S.-China Strategic Relations Have Crystallized

WeChat Users outside China Are under Political Surveillance

International Journal Retracted 30+ Academic Papers from China

China’s Thousand Talents Plan Goes Low Profile

Beijing Forces Hong Kong and Taiwan Entertainers to Hold Correct Political Views in Order to Work on the Mainland

Articles

Topics