Editor's Note:

Despite worldwide oppositions and criticism, the Japanese government went ahead with its nuclear-contaminated wastewater dumping plan on August 24, opening a Pandora's Box of unfathomable consequences. Rather than responding to global concerns, the Japanese government attempts to obfuscate public spotlight by transforming itself into a victim.

In the first installment of the investigative story, the Global Times reveals the fallacy propagated by Japan and some Western media outlets to slander China in an attempt to shift international focus away from the culprit and suggests other efforts that can be made by the international community. In the second installment, the Global Times will look into Japan's strategies to whitewash its unilateral move and ill intentions behind the wastewater dumping implementation.

Hours after Japan started to dump nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the ocean on August 24, Chinese seafood distributor Xiao Maoxu posted an advertisement on social media promoting her crabs. "Buy the crabs as early as possible," she wrote. "No one knows whether we will be able to eat them in the future."

A resident of the Zhoushan Islands, the largest Chinese archipelago in the East China Sea, Xiao has been selling local freshly caught marine products for years. The Kishida administration's reckless dumping of Fukushima nuclear-contaminated wastewater has worried people engaged in seafood-related industries, including Xiao. They are angry and perplexed about the reckless dumping, but sadly can do little about it.

Now, Japan has brought the sword of Damocles, which was hanging over its own national and global security, crashing down regardless of strong condemnation from the international community. The wastewater dumping, which may last as long as 30 years, is going to have far-reaching effects on global marine ecosystem and organisms therein, and no humans will be spared in the end. The confusion, worry, and concern witnessed in the marine industry in East Asia is just the tip of the tragedy iceberg.

Xiao heard that the discharged nuclear-contaminated wastewater will reach the coastal waters of China some 240 days after release, based on research conducted by Tsinghua University scholars. "By that time, if no one buys my products, I will have to change my profession," Xiao told the Global Times. "I didn't expect Japan to be so shameless and unconscionable."

A heavy blow

Those who live on marine products will be the first to bear the consequences of the wastewater dumping.

Crabs are likely to be retailed at higher prices in the coming autumn, said Xiao.

After the start of this year's fishing season in early August, she usually waits for the returning fishing boats late at night, and the dock is always crowded with similar seafood distributors. They are enjoying a sort of momentary happiness before being permanently hurt by the "evils" to come from the opened Pandora's Box one day. "There is still a market for aquatic products at present, and the prices are not bad," Xiao told the Global Times. "But it's hard to say what's going to happen after 240 days."

Chinese businesses that import Japanese aquatic products are also on the chopping block. On the same day that Japan started dumping the wastewater, China announced the complete suspension of the importation of aquatic products originating from Japan to protect the health of Chinese consumers.

A company in Zhejiang Province told the media that it would "lose more than 100 million yuan ($13.7 million) a year" if its marine products were detected as containing excessive radiation.

The damage that Japan's wastewater dumping has caused to the upstream fisheries is affecting the downstream catering industry. The irresponsible dumping has dealt a crushing blow to the high-end Japanese restaurants that usually claim that seafood ingredients used at their establishments are flown in from Japan.

An omakase restaurant in Shanghai's Hongkou district whose owner and chef is a Japanese national, for instance, said that more than 90 percent of its ingredients came from Japan. The restaurant suspended its lunch services after China banned seafood imports from Japan, only opening for dinner.

"We well prepared [for the ban] and stockpile a lot of Japanese seafood [ingredients]," a staffer at the restaurant told the Global Times. She nonetheless added that they have no idea what to do when an out-of-stock situation occurs.

An increasing number of Japanese restaurants in China, some of which are well-known, and used to advertise their "Japanese ingredients," now openly acknowledge none of their ingredients are sourced from Japan. In what can only be described as a business survival tactic, such businesses have explained that they only use "Japanese cooking methods" rather "Japanese-imported ingredients."

It is no wonder that such restaurants are eager to distance themselves from Japan: A recent poll by Sina News with some 522,000 Chinese netizen respondents showed that 84 percent have "never" gone or "will no longer" go to Japanese restaurants. It shows an antipathy toward Japan's unscrupulous wastewater dumping, as well as fears for nuclear radiation, according to some respondents.

Such growing fears are also reflected in a sharp increase in the demand in the market of radiation detection instruments: many Chinese radiation detector manufacturers said that they are working overtime to cope with the recent surge in orders.
Who is flinging mud at China？

Two hours after the wastewater dumping was initiated, China reacted quickly, instituting a total ban on the importation of all Japanese-origin aquatic products, together with enhanced monitoring measures across the country of the marine radiation environment. However, such moves out of concern for people's health and food security have been hyped as an overreaction out of political concerns by some Western media outlets.

For example, a BBC report on August 24 said that China's claim is not "backed by science." Another report on the Chinese language website of the Voice of America (VOA) on August 25 claimed that governments and people in most Southeast Asian countries still have an open and trusting attitude toward Japan's aquatic products, in stark contrast to "the extreme concerns of Chinese netizens and the Chinese government."

China seems to have become a "lonely fighter" according to the Western media narrative. However, do these stories reflect the whole picture?

What these stories fail to mention is that, although US publicly backs the Japanese government's dumping plan, the country largely reduced the importation of Japanese agricultural, forestry-, and fisheries-related products in the first half of the year, and the main production areas affected by such import reductions are within the nuclear-contaminated wastewater dumping zone.

In Thailand, its Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and associated agencies announced a plan to double the volume of seafood samples collected for radioactive material detection, to strengthen consumer confidence in their safety.

Any shipments failing these safety inspections will be sent back, and additional imports will be halted, said Lertchai Lertvut, the Thailand FDA's deputy secretary-general.

In South Korea, survey showed that roughly 80 percent of local residents oppose the Fukushima discharge plan, according to media reports. South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol's ambivalence toward the dumping has "upset many South Koreans," who are "pressing Yoon to push back harder on Japan," reported Wall Street Journal on August 25.

Yoon's approach to the matter upsets many South Koreans, roughly 80% of whom oppose the Fukushima discharge, according to polls. On Thursday, some 16 college students were arrested for attempting to barge into Japan's Embassy in Seoul. Protests are planned across South Korea in the coming days.

The Japanese government itself has also witnessed surging domestic opposition and protests against the plan. According to a recent survey conducted by researchers from the Hainan University's Belt and Road Research Institute based on key word and text sentiment analysis of data collected between August 1 and August 24 from Google trends, more Japanese Google users (22 percent) were opposed to the plan than those who were supportive (19 percent).

The gap between the government's attitude and public opinion is even sharper in the US, as the survey showed only 2 percent of US netizens supported Japan's actions with another 21 percent in opposition.

Google users in South Korea, the UK, Canada, Singapore, Australia, India, and the Philippines were also found to be paying close attention to the developments of the issue given the frequency of their searches related to the issue on Google, according to Shi Xufeng, deputy dean at the institute and a co-author of the abovementioned survey.

In total, the researchers found that more than 23 percent of global Google users who searched relevant content between August 1 and 24 had expressed opposition to Japan's dumping plan, which is about four times the number of those who expressed support. About 68 percent of the netizens were neutral or did not express a clear stance on the issue.

Given the data, "it is extremely irresponsible for the Japanese government to dump the nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the sea regardless of the international community's fierce opposition," Shi told the Global Times.

Opinion warfare against China, South Korea

The claim that "only China opposes Japan's dumping of nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the ocean" is certainly an absurd statement that ignores objective reality. It is also a deliberate attempt to create a narrative based on confrontational sentiment and heroism, said Chen Yang, a guest professor from the Liaoning University Institute of Japan Studies.

The Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) itself admitted that about 66 percent of the water in storage tanks exceeded the standard of radioactive substances, reported Japan's TBS TV station on August 26.

With the rise of China's comprehensive strength and Japan's deep involvement in the "lost two decades," some Japanese politicians have gradually distorted their perspective of China and become enthusiastic about instilling the idea of a "Chinese threat" to the public. Against this backdrop, some Japanese politicians deliberately package themselves as "guardians of national interests" who dare to say no to China, in order to maximize their personal interests, according to Chen.

However, these politicians ignore the public interests of the general society and attempt to feign a hollow form of "heroism" to benefit their personal brand and image, ultimately sacrificing the health and wellbeing of the people and the future destiny of the country, Chen noted.

It is also part of the Japanese government's petty niggling from the very beginning to use the nuclear-contaminated wastewater issue to launch opinion warfare especially against China and South Korea where people have raised the strongest objections - while presenting itself as a victim.

The same day the nuclear-contaminated wastewater dumping began, the Japanese Embassy in China issued a warning to Japanese nationals living in the country, reminding them of not "speaking Japanese loudly" when out in public, and "being cautious in your speech and behavior."

Why did the Japanese government issue such a warning, presenting itself as the aggrieved victim? We all know that the villain in this story is the Japanese government and the victims are all the people living in countries that are a part of the Pacific Rim. Hyping the risk of attack against Japanese people in China clearly demonstrates the Japanese government's vicious intention to shift public attention, Lü Chao, an expert on the Korean Peninsula issue at the Liaoning Academy of Social Sciences, pointed out.

The Japanese government certainly knew that the decision to dump nuclear-contaminated wastewater would make a splash in the international community. In order to help promote the process, they obtained a so-called endorsement from the IAEA to help enhance the "reasonableness" and "legitimacy" of the move and win more support from the international community.

Under these circumstances, the Japanese government would deem itself the loser in an opinion warfare if it halts its plan due to opposition from some of its neighbors like China and South Korea, and the issue will therefore be used as a suppression tool against Japan by other countries, according to Chen.

Claiming that other countries are "politicizing" the issue is a diplomatic card Japanese government is playing to obfuscate and distract from the attention of the international opinion, Chen noted, echoing Lü.

Joint effort

Observers have been calling on countries, regions, and industries to claim compensation from the Japanese government.

Law professor Chang Yen-Chiang, who is also the executive director of the Yellow Sea and Bohai Sea Research Institute at the Dalian Maritime University, said China, for instance, can request an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) through international organizations such as the United Nations (UN) and the International Maritime Organization (IMO).

The advisory opinion would request for the ICJ to prove that Japan's discharge is fully in line with the requirements of international law, Chang told the Global Times.

"If the ICJ's advisory opinion finds there is no international legal basis for the water dumping, we can then bring the case against Japan as a defendant in the ICJ based on the advisory opinion, after the relevant evidence has been fully collected," he noted.

Chinese researchers also called for continuous international efforts - such as a ban on imports of and boycott against Japanese-origin aquatic products - to compel the Japanese government to terminate the dumping plan and deal with the nuclear-contaminated wastewater using more suitable and responsible methods.

Shi proposed the recognition of August 24 as a global disaster day for the marine environment. He suggested that governments and research institutes globally should enhance the monitoring and testing of relevant sea water, aquatic products, agricultural products, and foodstuffs.

"A nuclear accident in one country often has a direct impact on a large number of countries in the region, and the countries in the region hold a broad common interest," Wu Wei, an associated professor in China Institute of Boundary and Ocean Studies of Wuhan University, told the Global Times.

"[We] suggested that relevant countries cooperate to establish a regional mechanism to regulate the operation of nuclear facilities, and review NACW (water from the nuclear accident) emissions," said Wu.

Editor's Note:

Kazakhstan marks the lynchpin for the China-proposed Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), not only because geographically it acts as a key point along the BRI, and has fostered deep connections and conducted meaningful cooperation with China covering almost all sectors under the BRI framework, but also because Kazakhstan was where the initiative was first proposed 10 years ago.

As the BRI is set to celebrate its 10th birthday this month, China-Kazakhstan cooperation can offer a paragon of how the initiative has deepened both countries' connectivity, boosted trade, as well as benefited both peoples and brought the two countries closer. Moreover, it also offers examples of how the BRI's win-win cooperation has stood against unilateralism; how the initiative has broken geographic isolation and brought countries closer; in addition to enabling people from different countries to better understand each other.

As the 10th anniversary of BRI approaches, Global Times reporters have visited a number of countries and regions across Southeast Asia, Central Asia, Africa, Central and Eastern Europe, as well as the South Pacific, where they witnessed first-hand the success of the BRI and how it has improved life in those countries and regions. This is the third installment, which focuses on how the BRI has been helping to usher in a new era of development in Eurasia over the past decade.

Revisiting the starting point

In mid-August, Nazarbayev University in Astana, capital of Kazakhstan, has already begun to welcome new faces. When Global Times reporters visited the campus on a cool and clear summer afternoon, a number of student societies and interest clubs attached to the university were recruiting new members, attracting hundreds of freshmen to participate. Everywhere, sounds of music and laughter could be heard, signs in English, Kazakh and Russian could be seen, and an energetic and youthful atmosphere could be felt.

Vibrant and highly internationalized - no other words could possibly be more accurate in describing Nazarbayev University. And they are also true for the BRI first proposed by Chinese President Xi Jinping at this very location 10 years ago.

The young Nazarbayev University, founded only in 2010, is now widely considered to be the starting point for the revitalization of the millennia-old Silk Road under the BRI. The concept "Silk Road Economic Belt," part of the BRI, was officially proposed during President Xi's visit to Kazakhstan in 2013. In a speech in Nazarbayev University's Senate Hall on September 7, 2013, Xi recalled the 2,000-plus-year history of exchanges between China and Central Asia along the ancient Silk Road and proposed joining hands to build a Silk Road Economic Belt with an innovative cooperation model and making it a grand cause benefiting people in countries along the route. 

Ten years later, the Senate Hall, filled with dark wood furniture that are mostly the same as in 2013, remains in good condition. This is because the room is now mostly used only for events like ceremonies and officials' visits, according to a staff member from the university. 

Usually, there are more than 200 seats in this conference hall. Around 100 more seats were added before President Xi's epoch-making speech in 2013 due to the high demand from students and faculty members to participate in the event. A live broadcast was even arranged for those who couldn't enter the scene. Xi's remarks were greeted with warm applause from the audience, recalled the staff member.

Gulnar Shaimergenova, Director of China Studies Center, Kazakhstan was working at the Nazarbayev University at the time and directly participated in the event when President Xi first proposed the Silk Road Economic Belt there. "I am sure that the Belt and Road Initiative, which represents the reconstruction of the Great Silk Road of the 21st century, became the most remarkable event of this century. It reflects the rise and grandeur of modern Asia," Shaimergenova told the Global Times.

Shaimergenova said that the implementation of BRI is strategically beneficial for Kazakhstan. "The transformation of China into a key trade partner of the EU has been made possible to some extent thanks to the stable operation of China-Europe rail routes - up to 80 percent of which pass through Kazakhstan. Further development of China-Europe trade relations implemented through land corridors is economically beneficial for Kazakhstan."

The smooth promotion of BRI cooperation between China and Kazakhstan was also advanced by the strategic guidance of the leaders from both countries. 

President Xi has visited Kazakhstan four times in September 2013, May 2015, June 2017; and September 2022, the last of which marked his first trip abroad since emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev paid a state visit to China in September 2019, attended the Beijing Winter Olympics in February 2022, and also attended the China-Central Asia Summit in May 2023.

Over recent years, China's relationship with Kazakhstan has continued to strengthen. In 2019, China and Kazakhstan decided to develop a permanent comprehensive strategic partnership. 

I am very pleased that Kazakhstan became the first country to support the idea of the BRI, and actively participates in its development, Aidar Amrebayev, Director of the Political Studies Center in Almaty, Kazakhstan told the Global Times. 

After 10 years since the announcement of the initiative, many projects have been implemented in Kazakhstan, benefiting our country and the entire Central Asian region. These projects involve expanding transport and logistics capabilities, modernizing industrial and agricultural infrastructure, enhancing mutual understanding among our peoples, and fostering active inter-country interactions at the political level, Amrebayev opined. 

"I am happy to say that 10 years later, all my expectations [about the BRI] have materialized," former Secretary-General of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) and Chairman of the Board of the Foreign Policy Research Institute under Kazakhstan Foreign Affairs Ministry Bolat Nurgaliyev told the Global Times. The development of the BRI, going through stages, has gone hand in hand with the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind, he added.

The decade-old BRI cooperation proves that we have to show inclusiveness by involving countries in constructive cooperation instead of confrontation, division, and ideological divergence in the immediate political considerations, Nurgaliyev added.

Robust economic cooperation, warm people-to-people exchanges

Astana is one of the youngest capitals in the world. Yet, it is also one of the most modernized and fast-growing cities in Central Asia. From the Chinese businesspeople coming out from the striking Chinese-style building known as the Beijing Palace in the city center to the city's first light rail system under construction with the help of a Chinese company, they mark the changes that China and the BRI have brought to Kazakhstan's capital.

In Almaty, the former capital and largest city in Kazakhstan, advertisements for Chinese electronic devices, vehicles and even sportswear are easy to find. Locals told the Global Times that from China-made smartphones to electric vehicles, Chinese products are popular among Kazaks. At the same time, Kazakhstan was the second country to open a national pavilion on the Alibaba e-commerce platform and more than 200 Kazakh enterprises are running business on the Chinese platform.

According to the General Administration of Customs of China, the total volume of trade in goods between China and Kazakhstan stood at $31.17 billion in 2022, up 23.6 percent from the previous year. In 2022, the trade volume between China and Central Asian countries registered a record of over $70 billion.

The story of Yuan Zhaohui, a Chinese businessman is a vivid example of the robust economic cooperation between two countries. Yuan has been operating cross-border trade with his partners from Kazakhstan for eight years. He started his business from scratch as the first company in the Xi'an International Trade and Logistics Park to use the Chang'an train to ship cross-border e-commerce goods.

At present, about 80 percent of his company's business is linked with Kazakhstan, other Central Asian countries and Russia through the train service. The stable operation of China Railway Express has greatly reduced freight costs for his business.

Taking the road from Xi'an to Almaty as an example, the cost of freight for a container transported by the Chang'an train is about 50,000 to 60,000 yuan ($7,130 to $8,560), which is half the price of traditional land cross-border transport, according to Yuan. The simplified and easier custom declaration for cross-border e-commerce companies has also served to accelerate the growth of his business.

Agriculture is another key area of China-Kazakhstan cooperation that is vigorously developing under the BRI framework. Located in the North Kazakhstan Region, more than 300 kilometers north of Astana, is the Kazakhstan processing park of the Aiju Grain and Oil Industrial Group headquartered in Xi'an, Northwest China's Shaanxi Province. The company is one of the first Chinese enterprises that engage in agricultural investment and cooperation in Kazakhstan under the auspices of the BRI.

Kazakhstani local Yerkenbek Sidick has been working in Aiju's agro-processing and logistics park since 2017. He has witnessed how his company has transformed from a few Soviet-era grain silos into a comprehensive base with large-scale grain storage and distribution capacity.

The Aiju processing park has built a modern oil processing plant with a maximum annual output of 300,000 tons of processed oil crops and a depot that can store 50,000 tons of grains. It has dispatched more than 200 freight trains to deliver 350,000 tons of high-quality raw materials, such as wheat and rapeseed, from the North Kazakhstan Region to China through the Alashankou port.

More than 10 years ago, very few Chinese companies were active in Kazakhstan, and even fewer showed interest in taking roots in the country and making long-term investments, Sidick told the Global Times. With the implementation of the BRI, more and more Chinese companies have begun to pay attention to Kazakhstan, boosting the cooperation and development of the two countries in various fields, including agriculture.

From trade and investment to capacity cooperation, from connectivity to emerging industries, from joint efforts in fighting against the pandemic to cultural exchanges, the all-round mutually beneficial cooperation between China and Kazakhstan has demonstrated strong vitality and resilience, and the foundation of people-to-people friendship is becoming increasingly concrete, Chinese Ambassador to Kazakhstan Zhang Xiao told the Global Times in an exclusive interview. 

Specifically, he gave an example of a large number of exemplary projects built by both sides, such as the Shymkent Oil Refinery, the photovoltaic power plant in Almaty, the Orda glass plant in Kazakhstan's Kyzylorda Region, saying that those projects greatly improved Kazakhstan's industrialization level and benefited local residents.

Aside from economic cooperation, China and Kazakhstan are also embracing close people-to-people exchanges. Those two countries are cooperating in areas such as publishing books, jointly making films, doing archaeological research together and establishing universities… Such interaction between the two countries has laid the foundation for friendly exchange between two peoples. 

Famous Kazakh director and producer Akan Satayev is planning to co-produce a film with China. He told the Global Times that China and Kazakhstan are both countries along the Silk Road, which renders them to share a common history and culture. Satayev said he is very interested in Chinese culture, and he hopes to find more common points in the history and culture of China and Kazakhstan and make films and television works based on such findings. "This will definitely bring us closer together," said Satayev.

"The BRI has helped China 'go global' and broaden the Chinese people's horizon, while enhancing Central Asia's understanding of China," said He Cheng, Chief Representative of the Kazakhstan International Integration Foundation. As the understanding of people in Central Asia and China on each other deepens, people now become more open-minded and see the opportunity and potential of bilateral and multilateral cooperation under the BRI framework, he noted.

In He's opinion, the BRI is no longer a link of communication, but a model of cooperation between countries in a honeycomb structure. "With the deepening and widening of cooperation, we are ultimately moving toward the establishment of a community," he told the Global Times.

Brighter future

In 2014, a $9 billion infrastructure project known as "Nurly Zhol," translated as "Bright Path," was announced by Kazakhstan's government. Since then, the integration between the BRI and Nurly Zhol has been constantly discussed in Kazakhstan's strategic and political circles.

"The two programs should be interconnected. They should be coordinated so that what has already been started as projects within the Nurly Zhol should be somewhat supplemented. This will be a better use of the capital of the investment," former SCO Secretary-General Nurgaliyev commented.

In many senses, the development road the BRI has provided can also be described as "bright." Ten years on, this ambitious initiative has benefited Central Asia through close cooperation, including improving infrastructure, providing jobs and boosting bilateral trade. It is now a path that is even brighter than a decade ago and has the ability to lead the region and the world to a brighter future.

Nurgaliyev believes that the BRI will continue to develop. "The circle of participation in the BRI is already so wide. We have now 193 states in the United Nations system, and 152 are BRI participants," he said. "So what better argument can prove that the BRI is beneficial for everybody who participates in the implementation?" the diplomat noted.

On September 7, 2023, the 10-year anniversary day of the proposal of BRI, a seminar was held by think tanks from China and Kazakhstan at Nazarbayev University. 

As a participator of the seminar, Shaimergenova said "I am sure that the Belt and Road Initiative, which represents the reconstruction of the Great Silk Road of the 21st century, became the most remarkable event of this century. It reflects the rise and grandeur of modern Asia."

With the support of China, Central Asia now is beginning to realize economic revival as the region becomes a contributor to its own development. By embedding in the East-West transport communications, the problem of continental isolation is being eliminated, and strong prerequisites for intra-regional cooperation are being created, said Shaimergenova.

Cooperation along the BRI has a strong impact on the prosperity and progressive development of several billion people around the world. I am sure that the Initiative will be a good basis for building the Community of the common destiny of mankind, she noted.

The further flourishing of the BRI is a general wish from not only scholars and diplomats from Kazakhstan, but also ordinary people like Sidick from Aiju's processing park in the Central Asian country.

"After our company's seven-year journey in Kazakhstan, now we are expecting a harvest," Sidick told the Global Times. 

"I hope that the road of BRI will become wider and wider to attract more Chinese companies to develop and invest in Kazakhstan and drive the two countries' economic development and people-to-people exchanges. I am looking forward to finding my own position and creating more value for my company and the BRI," said the Kazakh young man with a big smile on his face.

Editor's Note:

At the invitation of Chinese Premier Li Qiang, Nepalese Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal Prachanda commenced his five-day state visit to China from September 23 to 30, his first visit to China since the start of his third term as the Prime Minister of Nepal. The 69-year-old is a legendary figure in Nepal. Born in a poor Brahmin farming family in Pokhara in 1954, he witnessed abject poverty in his youth. Determined to change his country's corruption and a ruling exploitative class, Prachanda embarked on a revolutionary path to transform Nepal's destiny. In 2008, he became the first prime minister of Nepal after the abolition of the monarchy. In 2016, he assumed the office of prime minister for a second term, and in November 2022, this veteran of Nepalese politics made a comeback for a third term. As a staunch socialist and a long-time member of the Communist Party, Prachanda has deep ties to China. After assuming office as the first term as prime minister of Nepal, the first country he visited was China. In 2008, he also came to Beijing to attend the opening ceremony of the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games.

Global Times reporters Hu Yuwei and Bai Yunyi (GT) recently interviewed Prachanda while on his official visit to China. He told the reporters that part of his dream when he first embarked on the revolutionary path has been realized. During this third term, he hopes to promote long-term unity, stability, and economic prosperity in Nepal, and for this, he will seek to strengthen cooperation with China within the framework of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). He believes that China's experience in development has provided valuable insights for his government in improving the socio-economic conditions of vulnerable groups within Nepal.

GT: This is your third term as the Prime Minister of Nepal. Your premiership has great expectations attached to it. Can you please elaborate on the key priorities your administration has to lead Nepal into a new era of prosperity?

Prachanda: I am committed to the task of guiding the country toward the path of prosperity. Our foremost concerns are peace and prosperity. The current government has been focused on accelerating the truth and reconciliation process. Our objective is to achieve both domestic and international peace, and we are committed to expediting the peace-building initiatives through which we can successfully lead the country out of the transitional phase. Ensuring comprehensive peace, effective governance, upholding the rule of law, fostering national unity, and achieving political consensus are necessary for long-term stability of the nation and fostering a robust economic environment.

GT: Will relations with China become one of your administration's diplomatic priorities? What are your expectations for China-Nepal relations during your tenure?

Prachanda: China-Nepal relations consistently serve as a remarkable example of good neighbourliness. China occupies an important place in Nepal's diplomatic priorities. Nepal-China relations are based on millennia-old cultural, economic, and people-to-people ties, and are guided by the principles of peaceful coexistence, harmony, goodwill, and mutual trust. Nepal has unwavering support for the one-China principle, which is committed to not allowing any kind of anti-China activities on our soil. We also highly value China's unconditional support for Nepal's socio-economic development and territorial integrity, which have been the hallmarks of our cordial and neighbourly relations. 

I am confident and optimistic that China-Nepal relations will be further consolidated, which will reach a new height during my tenure. We have accorded priority to develop cross-border connectivity networks, including roads, railways, transmission lines, airways, and telecommunications. Our top priorities include establishing cross-border economic zones, expanding trade and investment-related infrastructures at border points, and early implementation of previously agreed bilateral agreements and understandings. 

We are fully committed to accelerating the construction of cross-border railways and electricity transmission lines as early as possible. Nepal attaches greater importance to all cross-border connectivity projects; we anticipate a similar commitment from the Chinese side as well. 

Enhanced air connectivity between China and Nepal is another important sector that would strengthen China-Nepal relations and cooperation. If we operate flights from Lumbini and Pokhara airports to different Chinese cities and the vice versa, it would significantly help in revitalizing Nepal's tourism sector and creating job opportunities in Nepal.

Enhanced air connectivity between China and Nepal is another important sector that would strengthen China-Nepal relations and cooperation. If we operate flights from Lumbini and Pokhara airports to different Chinese cities and the vice versa, it would significantly help in revitalizing Nepal's tourism sector and creating job opportunities in Nepal.

Nepal has a huge trade imbalance with China. Nepal possesses immense potential in organic staple foods, fruits, vegetables, and dairy products, while China possesses significant technological, production, and marketing prowess. We hope that China will assist Nepal in supplying advanced agricultural and food processing technology with fresh investment to Nepal, which would enhance our agricultural exports and reduce the trade deficit. We are optimistic that China will open its huge market to Nepali agro-vet products, medicinal and aromatic plant-based goods, cosmetics, and handicrafts. We also seek Chinese investments in the development of hydrogen energy which would benefit both of our countries in producing clean energy and reduce carbon emissions.

We are keen to explore greater business opportunities for Nepali art forms, such as thangka paintings, carpets, and other woollen products in the Chinese market. 

Chinese support for the development of technical and vocational education is immensely important. China and Nepal have enjoyed friendly people-to-people relations and cultural cooperation for centuries. Mutual trust and cooperation have been the fundamental pillars of China-Nepal relations, which will continue in the future as well.

China and Nepal must make common efforts to address the issues related to the impact of climate change in the Himalayan region and enhance all-round trans-border cooperation to address the issues that have impacted both countries. Nepali government is eager to collaborate with China to promote regional peace, prosperity, and development.

GT: When you first took office as the prime minister of Nepal, the first country you visited was China. Now on your third term in office, what agenda will your current visit to China entail? 

Prachanda: I have consistently prioritized fostering friendly relations and cooperation with China. Our two countries are actively collaborating on various issues and extending cooperation through diplomatic channels. 

Our key priorities with China include early and time-bound implementation of previously agreed upon agendas and understandings. At the same time, we want to further boost economic cooperation. Our particular emphasis is to attract more Chinese direct investments in Nepal, promote trans-Himalayan connectivity networks, increase Nepali exports to China, and address Nepal's trade deficit.

GT: The current economic situation in Nepal is challenging with inflation at a near six-year high. Foreign exchange reserves continue to drain away, and basic commodities are becoming increasingly dependent on imports. What are your next steps for economic revitalization? Will it involve the strengthening of economic cooperation with China through such initiatives as BRI projects?

Prachanda: Nepal urgently requires to create more jobs in order to address the unemployment problem, enhance productivity, expand the output of exportable goods and services, explore new markets for export, control inflation, and maintain trade balance. These objectives stand as my foremost priorities. For this, we are collaborating with planners, economists, industrialists, business leaders, and various stakeholders to identify suitable solutions to these challenges. 

Emphasis has been placed on prioritizing policies and initiatives that foster a favorable investment climate, thereby drawing increased foreign investment to sectors that lack adequate domestic capital and technology. This approach is aimed at generating an environment conducive to growth and development.

China has ascended to become the world's second-largest economy, showcasing remarkable achievements in the socio-economic transformation of its society. Notably, China serves as a significant pillar of economic support for Nepal. Since the establishment of diplomatic relations between Nepal and China in 1955, China has played an important role in assisting Nepal's infrastructure and development endeavors. Many of these projects hold immense importance for our nation's progress. 

As China continues to advance, its support and investment in Nepal are continuously growing. Nepal views China's development trajectory as an opportunity, with the BRI serving as a suitable platform for enhancing trans-Himalayan multidimensional connectivity. This connectivity has great potential for realizing Nepal's economic goals while acting as a vibrant bridge between the two largest economies in Asia and also between China and South Asia. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) has been signed between China and Nepal, solidifying mutual commitment to the BRI. We are fully prepared to take the maximum benefits from this cooperative framework.

The present government attaches paramount importance to investments from China. We are equally prepared to engage in discussions and resolve any obstacles that Chinese investors might encounter.

GT:  We are closely following the developments of the China-Nepal railway project. Do you have the will to push this project forward during your tenure?

Prachanda: The Nepali people have high expectations for the China-Nepal railway, and they are eager for the railway project to commence as soon as possible. Once completed, the railway will provide Nepal with an alternative means of bulk transportation and will hold immense significance for Nepal's trade diversification efforts and transit options.

The primary concern associated with this project is how quickly we can bring it to fruition. You must be aware that the construction of this project requires a substantial amount of resources that Nepal alone cannot afford. In such a situation, we have no choice but to rely on external funding. However, we also share concerns that the size of the loan for this project and terms and conditions should be manageable for the Nepali economy. Feasibility studies are currently underway, and we hope that the report will be available soon. Following that, we will need to explore appropriate funding modalities for the project. Under my leadership, this government is prioritizing the early completion of the study, and I hope to initiate the construction of this visionary project during my tenure.

The China-Nepal railway is a monumental project, and the people of Nepal are eager to see it realized. It is not critical for this project to commence during my term; what truly matters is that we have a collective dream of connecting Nepal and China through a railway system.

GT: Many people are concerned about how Nepal will handle its relations with China and India in the future. How will you guide Nepal's relations with these two neighbors?

Prachanda: Nepal's relations with both China and India are guided by principles of good neighborliness, peaceful coexistence, and a non-aligned foreign policy. Nepal deals with China and India independently. Our relationship with one neighbor will not be influenced by our relationship with the other, nor will we seek to play one against the other. Both neighbors are close friends and important development partners. We will continue to develop our relationships with both the neighbors on a bilateral basis. If any differences arise with either of them, such issues will be resolved through friendly bilateral negotiations. 

Our relations with both our two immediate neighbors are consistent and clear. We want friendly relations with them and at the same time we want to see friendly and cooperative relations between our two neighbors as well.  Their amicable and cooperative relations will also help Nepal. Personally, I am committed to promoting and am willing to assist in fostering close and harmonious neighborly relations between both our two important neighbors. 

Nepal respects the interests of both China and India. We emphasize the development of a win-win cooperative model that benefits all three countries.

GT: As we all know, you are a socialist. Do you believe that socialism is still relevant in Nepal in the third decade of the 21st century? If so, why?

Prachanda: Nepal's Constitution defines Nepal as a socialism-oriented state. In my view, socialism and Chairman Mao's ideas and teachings remain relevant to transform Nepal into a socialist country.

Under the socialism and the leadership of Mao, the Communist Party of China (CPC) established the People's Republic of China. The CPC developed its unique path to socialism with Chinese characteristics. 

Similarly, Nepal will determine its own path as a socialism-oriented country that suits its historical political development and current geopolitical realities. It's not about Nepal imitating China's socialism and Chairman Mao Zedong. China's socialism and Mao's ideas offer us valuable insights to improve the socio-economic status of the oppressed and economically disadvantaged class of people.

GT: You are a veteran politician who has been active in Nepali politics for decades. Now looking back, do you believe you have realized your dreams and goals when you first fought in the revolution?

Prachanda: I should say our dreams have been partially realized. Politically, the country has overthrown a centuries-old monarchy and has been transformed into a republic. This would not have been possible without our "People's War." Now, in the eyes of the constitution and laws, all citizens are equal. The country has adopted inclusive policies protecting the basic rights of people from all walks of life. From the highest level such as parliament and other constitutional bodies to the lowest level of political representations such as ward committees, from government institutions to cooperatives, from recruitments in government jobs to student admissions in colleges, certain reservations have been ensured for people from marginalized groups like women, the economically poor, and the underprivileged classes. This remarkable achievement was institutionalized through the constitution promulgated in 2015. 

Despite achievements made in several areas, I must admit that much remains to be done in the economic sector. Economic, technical, and educational advancements take a longer time to show visible results. To achieve progress in these sectors, we need consistent, long-term efforts, and most importantly national consensus. We are trying to develop our strategy and policy to achieve long-term development goals in close consultation and collaboration with all Nepali stakeholders, including the opposition parties and even others who have disagreement with the present political system. 

Editor's Note:

Today, issues related to the climate change, as a shared challenge faced by humanity, are receiving significant attention, and climate cooperation has become an integral part of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). The demands of the ecologically vulnerable and climate-affected Pacific Island countries have garnered particular attention. Global Times reporter Shan Jie (GT) recently talked with Chen Dezheng (Chen), vice director of the China-Pacific Island Countries Climate Change Cooperation Center and the director of the Research Center for Pacific Island Countries at the Liaocheng University in Shandong, to discuss how China, as a responsible major nation, has engaged in climate cooperation with Pacific Island countries in the recent years, the support China can offer to the South Pacific to reduce the risk of and harms from climate change, and the climate change-related demands shared by China and Pacific Island countries as developing countries via the BRI.
GT: The China-Pacific Island Countries Climate Change Cooperation Center has been in operation for a year and a half since its launch in April 2022. Under the BRI framework, what achievements have been made so far, and what plans are underway for further work?

Chen: Since its establishment, the center has organized five high-level academic conferences, including the China-Pacific Island Countries Climate Change High-level Dialogue. In June and November of 2022, it conducted two climate change training courses for officials, scholars, and technical personnel from Pacific Island countries (PICs).

The center has also signed cooperation memoranda and strategic cooperation agreements with institutions such as the University of the South Pacific, the National University of Samoa, the Chinese Academy of Sciences' Institute of Atmospheric Physics, and the Ministry of Natural Resources' Second Institute of Oceanography. It has established an atmospheric environment and source analysis laboratory, meteorological stations, and 10 research teams, including those focused on integrated photovoltaic and wind energy generation.

Additionally, it has implemented small-scale climate aid projects for PICs and undertook a 2 million yuan ($280,000) agricultural planting technology project in Tonga. The head of the climate center also visited PICs to introduce the progress of related work to various sectors in those countries. The center also hosted visits by prominent leaders from island countries, including the Speaker of the Parliament of Vanuatu and the Minister of Internal Affairs of Kiribati.

GT: What are the highlights of the cooperation on climate affairs between China and the PICs with the BRI?

Chen: China places great importance on the unique circumstances and concerns of PICs regarding climate change and is committed to helping these countries enhance their climate change resilience. China is dedicated to cooperating with island countries on various levels and through various means to improve their capacity for climate adaptation and climate change mitigation, and high-quality development.

In 2018, China supported the construction of a China-Vanuatu marine joint observation station, continuing collaborative efforts in ocean observation and disaster risk reduction with Vanuatu. To further advance maritime cooperation between China and Vanuatu, China's National Marine Technology Center, in collaboration with the Vanuatu Meteorology and Geo-Hazards Department (VMGD) and the Public Works Department (PWD), jointly planned the construction of Phase II of the China-Vanuatu joint observation station, including a meteorological station. The meteorological station's designs have been completed, and progress is being made in the construction of meteorological infrastructure.

China's National Marine Environmental Forecasting Center (The Tsunami Advisory Center of the Ministry of National Resources) utilizes the national ocean forecasting and warning platform to continuously track and analyze global undersea earthquakes and tsunami monitoring data, providing ocean disaster warning and alert services. In 2023, the center issued tsunami alerts for the Kermadec Islands waters of New Zealand, the waters of Tonga, the southern waters of the Fiji Islands, the New Caledonia waters, and the waters of Papua New Guinea, thereby assisting PICs in safeguarding against marine disasters.

Through initiatives such as the "The Marine Scholarship of China," China has provided scholarship opportunities in marine, environmental, and climate-related areas to PICs. This aligns with China's commitment to offer 2,500 government scholarship opportunities to PICs from 2020 to 2025.

GT: In August, you attended the Pacific Small Island Developing States (SIDS) High-Level Dialogue on Climate Change in Suva, the capital of Fiji, and conducted visits to countries like Kiribati and Tonga. From your understanding, what impact has climate change had on the local people's livelihoods and production? Are you also aware of the local perspectives on climate change?

Chen: After engaging with government departments and academic institutions in countries like Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, Kiribati, and others, we have learned that climate change has led to various natural disasters such as high temperatures, floods, droughts and storms, causing damage to the homes of the island nations' residents, reducing their incomes, and affecting their livelihoods significantly.

The interviewees of our research unanimously acknowledged the clear effects of global warming and believe that the intensity and frequency of natural disasters have increased over the last five years.

At the same time, the interviewees all recognized the helpful role of China's assistance in the island nations' efforts to address climate change. Regarding areas of assistance that should be strengthened in the future, more than half of the interviewees suggested enhancing vocational training, disaster relief supplies, and coastal zone planning and management. Over one-third of the interviewees believed that support should be increased in higher education, research facilities, research projects, financial aid, infrastructure, and technology transfer.

GT: The 2023 United Nations Climate Change Conference or Conference of the Parties of the UNFCCC (COP28) is scheduled to be held in the United Arab Emirates from November 30 to December 12. In terms of climate change, what are the demands of PICs? Have these demands received sufficient attention from developed countries?

Chen: The Pacific island region is one of the most severely affected areas by climate change, characterized by significant environmental sensitivity and vulnerability. Global climate change profoundly affects their right to survival and development. Global climate governance is crucial for the sustainable development of PICs. Over the years, PICs have consistently voiced their concerns on the international stage, advocated for a voice in global climate governance, presented their demands and requests for participation in global climate governance, and continuously pushed for the implementation of climate governance policies and measures in their region. They have become an important force that cannot be ignored in global climate governance.

China has taken into account the demands of island countries in addressing climate change and provided targeted climate governance assistance. However, as a vulnerable group in the international community, PICs still face some challenges in climate governance: Lack of sufficient international discourse power; limited economic capacity and insufficient funding for climate change adaptation; lagging infrastructure development for climate change adaptation; lack of core climate change technologies, and the need for further strengthening of their own efforts in climate governance.
GT: What are the paths for China climate governance collaboration with PICs?

Chen: China, as a responsible major nation in the field of climate governance, particularly in its determination and actions in addressing climate change, has instilled hope and bolstered confidence in island countries' efforts to combat climate change. China's principles of green development and sustainability within its ecological civilization construction align closely with the climate change objectives of PICs. The future of climate cooperation between China and the PICs holds even greater promise, facilitating the advancement of the China-PICs community of shared future.

In driving the process of climate cooperation with PICs, China should adopt a strategic approach that combines post-disaster management and source control, and interconnects short and medium- to long-term goals.

Guided by the principle of "harmonious coexistence between humans and nature," China and the PICs could strengthen the exchange and mutual learning of climate governance concepts.

China and island countries should advance high-quality BRI cooperation to enhance disaster protection infrastructure in island countries. China has emphasized the alignment of the BRI initiative with strategic goals, including practical infrastructure cooperation related to natural disasters such as storm surge protection. Exploring ways to enhance disaster resilience in island countries, including the planning and construction of disaster-resistant infrastructure like storm surge barriers and monitoring stations, water storage facilities to combat drought, and improved building standards, is essential.

China could support island nations in developing new energy sources. China encourages enterprises in the solar power and wind power sectors to "go global" and promote the development of exemplary green energy projects. Through flexible cooperation in green industry investment, China aims to help island nations address their energy needs sustainably.

Under the framework of South-South cooperation on climate change, China has allocated approximately 1.1 billion yuan in recent years to provide energy-efficient and new energy products and equipment to developing countries. China possesses technical expertise and operational experience in photovoltaic, tidal, and wave energy generation, as well as small-scale integrated energy solutions. It is recommended to assist island countries in assessing their suitability for solar, wind, and marine energy sources and tailor assistance projects accordingly to their natural conditions and development needs.

PICs have vast exclusive economic zones spanning over 30 million square kilometers, holding tremendous potential for blue economic development. China has actively promoted high-quality, green, and low-carbon development in the marine economy, with advanced expertise in seawater aquaculture and marine ranch construction. China has also established a comprehensive marine spatial planning technology system, which can assist PICs in achieving sustainable development that is low-carbon and environmentally friendly in various aspects.

Editor's Note:

As the dialogue between China and the US at the governmental level resumes, an enhanced Track II diplomacy, including the conversation between Chinese and US scholars, shows its particular role in easing the bilateral ties. In a recent webinar, Wang Wen (Wang), professor and executive dean of Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies at Renmin University of China, and Dennis Wilder (Wilder), a senior fellow with the Initiative for US-China Dialogue on Global Issues at Georgetown University and former National Security Council's director for China, answered questions concerning important issues such as China-US ties and the upcoming US election.

Host: As a top Asian affairs expert, you believe that the China-US relations are the most important relationship of the 21st century and we have to get it right. What is driving the tension in China-US relations? How can Washington and Beijing stabilize their relationship? And how do you think we can find a common ground again?

Wilder: I do applaud President Xi and President Biden for their meeting in Bali last year, and for trying to put a floor under what has become a very dangerously deteriorating relationship. The visit by the US secretary of commerce, where meaningful decisions were made on a working group to advance trade, investment and tourism was extremely positive. But I do have real concerns about whether the new floor under the relationship is actually made of hardwood, or if it's made of plywood, which can easily split.

For example, it's worth noting that no senior Chinese official has visited Washington in the seven months since the balloon incident and military-to-military relations are completely frozen with no end in sight to the impasse over the sanctions against the Chinese defense minister.

We have to be honest and say that trust really remains at an all-time low in this relationship. Beijing publicly states that Western countries, led by Washington, are committed to all-around containment and suppression of China. At the same time, the American national security strategy also bluntly asserts that China plans to replace the US as the world's leading power and that China is the only competitor with both the intent and means to reshape the international order.

As hopeless as the current impasse may seem, I would remind you that we have been through tough times before. We have been able to find diplomatic ways to bridge the divide before. What we need today is a similar, quiet, strategic discussion between two interlocutors chosen by the presidents to pursue a new Modus Operandi, an arrangement or agreement allowing conflicting parties to coexist peacefully, either indefinitely or until a final settlement is reached. 

In summary, let me just say that competition between the US and China is not going away. We are the world's leading powers, and this will be a permanent fixture of the international order. Strategic competition can actually be healthy and indeed can make both parties stronger. However, it also could turn into a zero-sum game, leading to a new cold war with disastrous consequences. 

Host: In recent months, we have seen the Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry, Doctor Henry Kissinger, and Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo visit China. What do you think both sides can do to prevent a sort of gray rhino event from happening and rebuild our relations?

Wang: A lot of people often talk about how to reconstruct the China-US relationship. I think for the governments of the two countries, the most realistic idea is how to prevent and manage a crisis. But for scholars like us, we should consider rebuilding China-US relations, which is to find a way for the two countries to coexist.

At present, both China and the US, especially this year, have a very popular and very similar argument that the other side will lose. In recent years, the American media are likely to say, China is weakening and has become a "ticking time bomb." Also, there are many people in China who say the US is weakening, declining or even collapsing.

Now these two types of similar views are deeply influenced by the realist theory in international relations. They believe that the so-called strategic competition between major powers can only be a zero-sum game.

But in fact, in the past few years, there has been a group of institutional liberals in Europe and the US who are studying the possibility of the future of permanent peace. I have three suggestions for the two countries' leadership. First, I think the two countries must break through the circles of the realistic theories. The future of China-US relations is not just a zero-sum game. Quite frankly, China is a country with 5,000 years of history and uninterrupted civilization, and the US has been the most successful country in modernization in the past 200 years. Both parties must acknowledge the other's great greatness, and neither should imagine that the other would collapse. Scholars from both countries must think about how China and the US can coexist and develop together.

The second point I want to share is that the public opinion elites of both countries must really understand each other in the post-pandemic era. After three years of physical isolation, we have become strangers. Finally, we have to maintain mutual communication.

Host: 2026 will mark the 250th anniversary of the founding of the US. Can the US and China establish a long-term sustainable framework for managing bilateral competition in the 21st century?

Wilder: 200 years ago, when we invented the American democratic system, institutions and government, Americans were frankly arrogant about that system. We believe it's the best system we had tried. But at the same time, China has 5,000 years of culture and a system based on Confucianism. That is quite different from the American value system. We have to find a way for these two very different models of governance and society to coexist, and we're struggling with that at this moment. So whoever the president is, in 2026, they have to have a better understanding of China, its history and its cultural strengths.

I think there are some in America who think that we can bring down the government of China, and that's a very dangerous thought. But I do think if a new president can be trained to understand better these cultural differences and how to bridge them, we can find a way to get along.

Host: Considering the US election in 2024, what is the potential for a thaw in relationship?

Wang: I think China and the US now have a major misunderstanding about each other. In my opinion, the two countries have to adapt to build a long-term relationship. 

But even though we have been in tension for a long time, it doesn't mean we can do nothing. I think at least there are four urgent things that could be done at a bilateral level. First, both sides should lift the sanctions imposed on some people of the other side, especially to enhance cultural exchanges at the scholarly level.

Second, in response to the trade war, I think the two sides should cancel some tariffs. The third point is to remove restrictions on high-tech investment, so that the investors on both sides can share the dividends of the technological progress. The fourth is to avoid the further deterioration regarding the Taiwan question. 

In short, it is impossible for China and US relationship to become very good in the foreseeable future. But even if we have to set our expectations low, we can do more on many practical issues.

Wilder: I think that increasing the dialogue in the China-US relationship is very important. But we have to be realistic about the next period and the difficulties that we're going to face. The American election cycle is going to be brutal. It's going to be a highly-fought battle between the Republicans and the Democrats, and the rhetoric is going to be very harsh on China.

I think you're going to find that both Democrats and Republicans are going to use China as a scapegoat, a way to distract from real issues in the US. I'm worried about the relationship and what can happen during this election cycle. So, I think it's going to be up to the professionals, the diplomats, the scholars, to try and keep the relationship stable while getting through a period that may be tough.

Some members of the US House of Representatives' committee on China and the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday called for a total ban on all technology exports to Huawei and Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation (SMIC). This appeared to frighten Chinese investors, and as a result, shares of SMIC and Chinese artificial intelligence chip developer Cambricon Technologies plummeted on Thursday.

US lawmakers have always been the most radical anti-China force, so how can we be intimidated by a few clamors from them? While there exists the possibility that the US will further increase its ban on China's technology, it is highly unlikely that Washington will be able to destroy Huawei's Kirin 9000S processor. The possibility of the US resorting to increased suppression was surely expected by Huawei and its partners. Huawei has always kept a low profile, and the Chinese government doesn't hype up the company's technological breakthroughs. But how can a technological breakthrough that tech enthusiasts can discover via a teardown of the handset be hidden from the US tech community and intelligence system?

Since Huawei is bringing the Mate 60 Pro smartphone to the market, it should be fully confident about keeping its supply chain intact and maintaining and expanding its production capacity. Wouldn't that be a joke if the US upgraded its chokehold, leading the Mate 60 Pro supply and production chain to collapse easily? In that case, why would Huawei hurry to launch the Mate 60 series? Why wouldn't it solidify its technological breakthroughs and wait to release the smartphones at a better time to show its hands with Washington?

Huawei CEO Ren Zhengfei has been through various battles. Some years ago before the rainstorm of sanctions started to pour down on Huawei, he had started to prepare for a rainy day by asking HiSilicon, one of Huawei's subsidiaries, to make great efforts in looking for a back-up plan. Now the US has carried out rounds of sanctions and more severe ones may come, Ren will not pull a stunt and covet a quick cash grab by pushing his company and its partners toward a more dangerous situation.

Now, the US sanctions system has the advantage over the way Huawei and similar companies develop technological breakthroughs. The US side is not very clear if the Kirin 9000S processor is actually Huawei's own product or produced with the help of some other companies. Neither does it know what the technical route exactly is.

Besides, a few things are certain:

First, the technology of designing and producing Kirin 9000S is already mature, and the production capacity of this chip can be formed relying on the existing supply chain at home. Otherwise, Huawei would not launch the Mate 60 series because that would mean trouble.

Second, in the next competition, Huawei and other companies on the supply chain need to integrate and interact with market resources. Market resources can push Huawei to continue to progress; they have been more important than quietly obtaining some foreign technology to develop products and technologies. With the interaction with market resources, the iteration of semiconductor technology can be realized by the continuous advancement of those resources. The Kirin 9000S is now on the threshold of such progress.

Third, Huawei has found a way to break through the US sanctions, which shows a fundamental loophole in Washington's sanction system. Those brainless legislators are only fanatical, imagining out of thin air that they can kill the Kirin 9000S by tightening the sanctions. They don't understand that encrypting the sanctions system is a very complex systematic project and an almost impossible challenge.

Washington would need to completely reshape the sanctions system to do this, requiring companies in the US and allied countries to suffer much larger losses than in the past, which is equal to sanctioning these companies. Besides, the US simply is not sure that reorganizing the sanctions system will produce the results it wants, because that process is bound to be very difficult - a great deal of resentment may occur, but the outcome is still undetermined.

The fact that Huawei has launched the Mate 60 Pro shows that it has the certainty to fight the new rounds of US sanctions. The reason why the company keeps a low profile is the traditional Chinese thinking of doing more and saying less to avoid intensifying a new confrontation and giving the other side an out. And it's not a fear of being crushed in a battle.

Huawei, of course, still has a long way to go and hard battles to fight, but ambitions of seeking a blockade to hold technologies in a "small yard and high fence" and have them all to oneself have never been successful throughout history. From aviation to space to deep-sea technology, which one of them is under a country's monopolization? Semiconductors will be no exception.

The US can develop faster, but it is impossible to bind the feet of such a large country as China to stop it from moving forward. Huawei is a secular bird; it has already taken wing under the harsh sanctions of the US, and its wings will surely grow to be more and more powerful.

We the Chinese people should become more confident. Let's support Huawei and all the Chinese high-tech companies that the US has suppressed together. It is delusional for the US to think that it can deprive the Chinese people of the right to realize and enjoy scientific and technological progress.

After attending the G20 Summit in New Delhi, US President Joe Biden made a short visit to Vietnam. In Hanoi, the US and Vietnam elevated their relationship to a comprehensive strategic partnership, mirroring the comprehensive strategic partnership of cooperation between China and Vietnam in the new era. According to some foreign media outlets, the upgrade allows US-Vietnam ties to reach the same tier as Vietnam's relations with China, Russia. It appears that the US' strategy of encircling China from the south has made new progress.

Given the South China Sea dispute between China and Vietnam, the US-Vietnam relationship has undergone a smooth progression in recent years. In 2016, former US president Barack Obama visited Vietnam, becoming the third US president to visit the country after the Vietnam War. Then both Donald Trump and Biden made their visits there. While the US hopes to turn Vietnam into a "second Philippines," it is aware of the challenges in achieving this goal and is willing to settle for less.

With substantial progress in US-Vietnam relations, the US hopes that Vietnam can absorb some industries transferred from China and become a new center for low-cost manufacturing. Biden's visit aligns with the US' desire to increase chip manufacturing and rare earth production in Vietnam. 

Vietnam is smart, benefiting from the long-term governance of the Communist Party of Vietnam, it has fostered stable strategic thinking compared to the Philippines. Hanoi is committed to developing strong relations with the US and Western countries as a bargaining chip in its competition with China over the South China Sea affairs. Simultaneously, Hanoi seeks to expand Vietnam's economic opportunities and gain access to advanced technology. The Communist Party of Vietnam has set a goal of building Vietnam into a strong and prosperous country which is able to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with powers around the world in 2045.

However, Vietnam will not form a strategic alliance with the US, nor will it align with the US on the Taiwan question or the issue of "isolating China." As long as China and Vietnam do not have intense conflicts in the South China Sea issue, Hanoi will continue to maintain friendly cooperation with China while pursuing friendly cooperation with Russia and the US. Vietnam aims to avoid offending any party and achieve a balance of interests from all three sides

Striking a balance among major powers serves Vietnam's interests best. China remains Vietnam's largest trading partner. Vietnam and China are neighbors, and any confrontation with China would have adverse consequences for Vietnam, leaving it with the only option of siding with the US and succumbing to Washington. 

Furthermore, Vietnam, being a socialist country, faces similar long-term political challenges as China. While the US is actively developing its relationship with Vietnam, there is also frequent criticism toward Vietnam's "human rights issues" from the US. The Vietnam Reform Revolutionary Party, primarily composed of descendants of Vietnamese refugees in the US, always aims at realizing a color revolution in Vietnam. 

Vietnam's national political stability always faces risks from the US and the West. China, on the other hand, serves as its biggest external support for political stability. The relationship between the Communist Parties of China and Vietnam serves as a solid bond.

Maritime disputes have long been an obstacle between China and Vietnam. Vietnam not only claims sovereignty over the Nansha Islands but also has ambitions for the Xisha Islands. These disputes cannot be resolved in the short term. However, siding with the US in the strategic competition between China and the US does not serve Vietnam's long-term political and economic interests, nor does it provide true strategic security. Therefore, Vietnam is likely to pursue a "Vietnamese-style neutral route" between China and the US, which will be more cautious and serious than the neutrality of the Philippines and India.

Chinese people need not worry about Vietnam's warm relationship with the US. Vietnam, with a population of about 98 million, belongs to the Confucian civilization circle. In Hanoi, one can find temples with Chinese characters and historical examination halls where imperial examinations were held. While Vietnam's economy is currently growing rapidly, at a speed that has surpassed that of China, its per capita GDP is just below $4,000, lower than that of Yunnan Province and Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region in China, and there is a significant gap compared to the Pearl River Delta. Vietnam has never surpassed China in terms of economic development.

Let us engage patiently with this southern neighbor as it seeks to maximize its interests in the strategic competition between China and the US. I believe that China and Vietnam have the ability to continuously promote their bilateral relationship in a positive and stable direction, benefiting both countries.

At the recent G20 summit, the India-Middle East-Europe Corridor (IMEC) backed by the US, Europe and India under the Partnership for Global Infrastructure Investment was announced. This corridor aims to connect Europe, the Middle East and India with rail and shipping routes.

With Biden calling it a "really big deal" and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan describing the project as "transformative," the project has already been described as one that counters China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which has been signed up to by the majority of the world.

However, the working group tasked with drawing up a fuller plan, over the next sixty days, will have to confront some harsh economic realities relating to funding, material capabilities and the ideological outlook of the main countries involved.

When it comes to funding, let's not forget that the Build Back Better Plan undertaken by the G7 in 2021 to counter the BRI was consigned to the dustbin of history the same year it was announced.

The $1.7 trillion package (less than two years of US defense spending) was considered too costly.

Railway linking India, the Middle East and Europe would be the center piece of the IMEC. When it comes to infrastructure, the US and India do not set good examples for others to follow, yet they expect to compete with China which has first-rate infrastructure. Rather than build something abroad, based on hegemonic competition against China, it would be better for the US and India to demonstrate they can solve the basic democratic infrastructural needs of their citizens first.

Even if internal infrastructural issues and financing can somehow be overcome, the ideological attitude of maintaining economic hegemony that the West holds toward the Global South acts as a barrier to the IMEC. Only with gunship diplomacy could the US force states to buy exclusively from expensive Western companies. Even then, many components will be sourced from China.

At any rate, we are in a multi-polar world now. The Saudi-Iran rapprochement, the enlargement of BRICS, and the good relations in the region toward Russia and China show that the Middle East refuses to take sides and will trade with all. Another Iraqi-style invasion in the region to maintain US-led economic predominance would be foolhardy, as such, the West must be competitive in the market.

Currently, Saudi Arabia is choosing China when it comes to rail construction - though this too is an international effort that pulls in Western companies. The China Railway 18th Bureau Group has already completed the 450km-long Mecca-Medina High-speed Railway and is working on the Medina Tunnel Project along with the Saudi Rua Al Madinah Holding Company, Canada's WSP and US-based Parsons. The linking of Saudi's eastern and western seaboard, while led by China, is also a joint international project. This further highlights the lunacy and impracticality of fencing off the world economy.

One of the major forces driving US hegemonic attempts is its capitalist system which seeks immediate profits. This motivation has led to the decay of US infrastructure and a lack of long-term railway investment; a similar "democratic" system sees India's infrastructure in shambles too. Furthermore, much of the Global South remains in tatters after being harvested by the US military-industrial complex, which seeks quick profits from war and sees development as a threat to its economic hegemony.

In contrast, The BRI is premised on long-term social economic planning. Some projects will not be profitable for decades - many will provide immense social-economic benefits but no profit extraction for private capital. China's socialist system subordinates capital for the democratic good of society and it's because of this that it has the world's largest high-speed rail network, which it can then sell abroad at competitive prices.

In an attempt to conceal China's governing advantages and foresight, the corporate press labels Chinese-involved projects that don't reap immediate profits as "white elephants." Indeed, the debt trap narrative has been constructed to conceal the BRI's long-term planning and misdirect attention from private capital lending, which is far more severe than Chinese loans and the source of much suffering in the Global South.

Certainly, should the IMEC get off the ground without Chinese involvement and sell expensive Western infrastructure, then it will be interesting to observe the Western ideological apparatus scramble to justify how their venture is superior to the BRI, the initiative that the majority of the world has already voluntarily signed up to. There is still an open invitation for Europe, the US and India to join!

The author is an independent international relations analyst who focuses on China's socialist development and global inequality.

Illustration: Liu Rui/GT

Yun Duk-min, the South Korean ambassador to Japan, stated that "high-level" talks are underway for a China-South Korea-Japan summit poised to happen this year, and there may be a "Camp David effect" that prompted China to reach out to its neighbors, Bloomberg reported on Friday. Yun also emphasized that the trilateral meeting among South Korea, Japan and China will not harm the relationship between Seoul and Washington. Given that Yun is not only the South Korean ambassador to Japan but also one of the key foreign policy aides during the election campaign of South Korea President Yoon Suk-yeol, his words reflect a serious misunderstanding of South Korea's own position, and trilateral cooperation among China, Japan and South Korea.

Firstly, South Korea overestimated the impact of the Camp David summit on enhancing Seoul's international status. Yoon has been proactively promoting the improvement of South Korea-Japan relations and participating in strengthening trilateral cooperation with the US and Japan, with the aim of enhancing South Korea's international status. However, in this process, the US once again demonstrated its ability to coerce and entice its allies, obtaining everything Washington wants while South Korea lost what it should not have lost. Apart from making "contributions" to the US-Japan-South Korea alliance, South Korea did not gain any substantial benefits. The Camp David summit did not enhance South Korea's status, but rather the US' status. In fact, for the Chinese people, South Korea did not increase its international status but rather diminished it by further ceding its sovereignty to the US and Japan.

Secondly, South Korea has misinterpreted the status of the trilateral summit among China, Japan and South Korea. Yun has portrayed the trilateral summit as a result of the strengthened cooperation among the US, Japan and South Korea, which is a distortion of the original intention of the China-South Korea-Japan high-level talks. 

The trilateral summit among China, Japan and South Korea began in November 1999, and in December 2008, the leaders of the three countries met for the first time outside the 10+3 framework in Fukuoka, Japan, and decided to build a future-oriented comprehensive cooperative partnership. The three countries also decided to hold separate annual trilateral summit meetings on a rotating basis while keeping the mechanism of trilateral leaders' meeting in the sidelines of the 10+3 Summit.

Thirdly, South Korea intentionally conceals the negative effects of Camp David summit. The so-called "effect" of the Camp David meeting among the leaders of the US, Japan and South Korea did exist, but it did not stimulate China's desire to resume the trilateral meeting among China, Japan and South Korea. Instead, it stimulated neighboring countries to rethink how to respond to the "new cold war" initiated by the US, Japan and South Korea. 

North Korea's leader Kim Jong-un recently visited Russia. The US, Japan and South Korea never reflect on who first created the division in Northeast Asia and who has been pushing for the formation of a "new cold war" pattern in Northeast Asia. Instead, they are shifting the blame and claiming that North Korea and Russia's cooperation will lead to a more aggressive response from the US, Japan and South Korea. 

China's stance toward cooperation among China, Japan and South Korea has always been consistent. China attaches importance to such cooperation and believes that trilateral cooperation is in the common interest of the three countries. China also supports South Korea as the chair country for hosting this meeting. However, South Korea should not perceive China's support as a sign of weakness or as a result of Seoul leaning toward the Washington and Tokyo to gain a so-called greater say. It would be very dangerous if South Korea has such thoughts, and we hope that South Korea will wake up to this reality as soon as possible.