Senin, 20 Mei 2019

Australia’s China Challenge - The New York Times

SYDNEY, Australia — In a gold-curtained meeting room in Sydney, the Chinese consul general appealed to a closed-door gathering of about 100 people, all of them Australian residents and citizens of Chinese ancestry.

He called on the group to help shape public opinion during a coming visit of China’s prime minister, Li Keqiang, in part by reporting critics to the consulate. Rallies in support of China should be coordinated, he suggested, and large banners should be unfurled to block images of protests against Beijing.

“We are not troops, but this task is a bit like the nature of troops,” said the diplomat, Gu Xiaojie, according to a recording of the session in the consulate obtained by The New York Times and verified by a person who was in the room. “This is a war,” he added, “with lots of battles.”

The previously unreported meeting in March 2017 is an example of how the Chinese government directly — and often secretly — engages in political activity in Australia, making the nation a laboratory for testing how far it can go to steer debate and influence policy inside a democratic trade partner.

It is a calculated campaign unlike any other Australia has faced — taking advantage of the nation’s openness, growing ethnic Chinese population and economic ties to China — and it has provoked an uncomfortable debate about how Australia should respond.

Many countries face the same challenge from China, an authoritarian power pushing its agenda inside and beyond its borders.

In Asia, China has been accused of funneling funds to the campaigns of preferred presidential candidates in Malaysia and Sri Lanka. In the United States, there is concern about Beijing’s efforts to stifle dissent on college campuses. And in Europe, Chinese companies and organizations tied to the ruling Communist Party have held events for political leaders and donated millions of dollars to universities.

China once sought to spread Marxist revolution around the world, but its goal now is more subtle — winning support for a trade and foreign policy agenda intended to boost its geopolitical standing and maintain its monopoly on power at home.

The contours of its playbook are especially visible in Australia, where trade with China has fueled the world’s longest economic boom. Australian intelligence agencies have warned of Beijing’s efforts, and the issue is likely to be contentious for Australia’s conservative prime minister, Scott Morrison, who won a surprise victory in elections Saturday.

Image
An opposition Labor Party senator, Sam Dastyari, resigned amid accusations that he did China’s bidding at the behest of China-born donors.CreditWilliam West/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Representatives of the Chinese government routinely lobby Australian politicians behind closed doors without disclosing their activities, often by threatening economic punishment and persuading Australian business and academic leaders to deliver their message.

The Chinese government and its supporters have also sought to suppress criticism and elevate its views in the Australian news media, by suing journalists and publishers for defamation, financing research institutes and using advertisers to put pressure on Chinese-language outlets.

Beijing has even promoted political candidates in Australia with these outlets as well as via the United Front Work Department, the party’s arm for dealing with overseas Chinese, and — according to some assessments — with campaign contributions made by proxies.

Last year, after a scandal involving donors with ties to Beijing forced a senator to resign, Parliament approved an overhaul of espionage laws making it illegal to influence Australian politics for a foreign government.

Australia’s new government — led by Mr. Morrison, who has been vague about his plans for foreign policy — must now decide what to do next at a time when the public is divided: Many Australians fear China but also favor good relations to maintain economic growth and regional stability.

“There is a lot to unravel with the China story here,” said Mark Harrison, a China scholar at the University of Tasmania.

The Communist Party, he said, is essentially trying to enforce the same bargain with Australia that it has with the Chinese people: a promise of prosperity in exchange for obedience and censorship.

Image
President Xi Jinping of China addressed the Australian Parliament in 2014.CreditRick Rycroft/Associated Press

China’s economic bonds with Australia can be traced to the 19th century, when a gold rush drew Chinese immigrants to the continent. Now, China is an engine of economic growth for the country and its largest trading partner by far, accounting for 24 percent of Australian imports and exports.

With that reliance comes an implied threat: China can take its money elsewhere.

The problem, current and former Australian officials say, is the Chinese government rarely discloses its lobbying activities. Australian businesses linked to China often lean on politicians without public scrutiny, leading security agencies to warn about Beijing manipulating politics.

“In no country is there such a profound rift between business community and security,” said Linda Jakobson, founding director of China Matters, a nonprofit policy group based in Sydney.

Critics say China has exploited that rift — and even tried to use its economic leverage to punish Australia for adopting the new law requiring those working on behalf of a “foreign principal” to register their activities.

In June, Australian winemakers said they were facing problems with their exports to China, and a major deal to expand chilled beef exports into China — negotiated during Mr. Li’s visit — stalled. In January and February, China also delayed coal imports from Australia at some ports.

Beijing denied any effort to punish Australia, and Australian politicians have brushed off these disputes. But it hardly the first time Beijing blurred the lines between business and politics.

In 2009, the Australian government rejected a bid by a Chinese state-owned firm to purchase 18 percent of Rio Tinto, the Anglo-Australian mining giant, after officials argued privately that the sale would give China too much power to set prices.

Beijing’s response was an early version of what has since become common in the relationship: a campaign to pressure the Australian government via China’s business partners.

Chinese officials and investors “put the weights on the relevant Australian executives,” Kevin Rudd, the prime minister at the time, recalled in an interview. “The whole idea at that stage was to maximize business lobby pressure on the government.”

Image
Chau Chak Wing, a billionaire property developer with Australian citizenship, is one of at least two wealthy political donors who have filed lawsuits against media companies in Australia for reporting on donations and links to the Chinese government.CreditPeter Rae/EPA, via Shutterstock

In May 2018, two children in Rockhampton, a rural capital of beef production, painted tiny Taiwanese flags on a statue of a bull during an event celebrating the town’s diversity. There were flags from many countries, but the local government painted over those from Taiwan to avoid offending Beijing, which says the self-governing island is part of China.

“What they want are pre-emptive concessions to Chinese interests,” said Peter Varghese, a former head of Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

Analysts say Beijing tries both to suppress speech in Australia that undercuts its priorities — such as the diplomatic isolation of Taiwan — and to promote its own agenda.

Critics say one prominent example is the Australia-China Relations Institute, a research organization in Sydney led until recently by Bob Carr, a former foreign minister and outspoken defender of China’s positions. The institute was established with a gift from Huang Xiangmo, a Chinese real-estate developer who had donated generously to both of Australia’s main political parties.

Australia recently rejected his citizenship application and revoked his residency, despite his denials of having acted on behalf of the Communist Party.

China has also had success shaping news coverage in Australia, especially in Chinese-language outlets.

Maree Ma, general manager of the company that owns Vision China Times, a newspaper in Sydney and Melbourne, said Chinese officials successfully pressured businesses in 2015 and 2016 to pull their ads because of its critical coverage.

And before Saturday’s election, on WeChat — the Chinese social media platform, which is also popular in Australia — accounts affiliated with the Chinese Communist Party mocked the conservative government, disparaging Australia as “a country whose head has been kicked hard by kangaroos.”

English-language outlets are not immune to the pressure. In 2017, one of Australia’s largest independent publishers delayed publication of a book examining Chinese influence in Australian institutions.

Because Australian law favors plaintiffs in defamation suits, some say such cases — including a large payout in February to Chau Chak Wing, a Chinese-born property tycoon and political donor — have had a chilling effect on reporting and public protesting that might anger Beijing or its allies.

At the Chinese consulate in 2017, organizers showed photos of pro-China activists in Australia roughing up protesters from the Falun Gong spiritual movement, which is banned in China.

The audience applauded.

Image
Yongbei Tang, a prominent Chinese political candidate, in Hobart.CreditMatthew Abbott for The New York Times

China’s playbook prioritizes one particular group: Australia’s growing ethnic Chinese population, a diverse group of more than one million people, about half of whom are immigrants from mainland China.

At times, the Chinese government treats Australian citizens of Chinese ancestry as if they’re still subject to its rule. Critics of Beijing are often pressured. In January, Yang Hengjun, an Australian writer and former Chinese official, was arrested on dubious charges of espionage while visiting China.

More often, Beijing tries to woo people like Yongbei Tang.

Ms. Tang moved to Australia 23 years ago with her husband, an electrical engineer, settling in Hobart, the capital of Tasmania, where she started editing a newspaper called Chinese News Tasmania. Last year, she ran for the City Council.

“All the people in the community know me,” she said, when asked why. “I’m a media person. Influential.”

Ms. Tang had also helped start a local chapter of the Australian Council for the Promotion of Peaceful Reunification of China, which promulgates Beijing’s position that Taiwan is part of China. The group was established by Mr. Huang, the donor whose residency was revoked, and Australian intelligence officials say it is an arm of the party’s overseas influence efforts.

That connection and others made Ms. Tang, an Australian citizen, a subject of intense debate during the campaign, which she lost. Several local Chinese leaders published an open letter condemning her “hiding of titles of many organizations including her association with the Chinese Government.”

Cassy O’Connor, the leader of the local Greens Party, accused her of being part of an attempt by Beijing to dominate the Tasmanian tourism and property investment. “The Chinese government actually picks off smaller states like Tasmania, with smaller economies,” she said.

Ms. Tang denied any ties to the party. “The only wrongdoing I did was to put my hand up, wishing to add a different voice to the Hobart City Council,” she said.

What Ms. Tang actually reveals, analysts say, is the party’s ability to recruit sympathizers around the world, many of whom gravitate to Beijing’s orbit less because of ideology than the potential for wealth and influence. Even after her loss, she received favorable coverage on state television in China.

For many, Australian politics has become an increasingly valuable option — one of many ways to potentially benefit from Chinese power and prosperity.

“We are no longer the sick man of East Asia,” said one business leader at the consulate meeting in 2017. “We Chinese stand tall.”

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/20/world/australia/australia-china.html

2019-05-20 07:00:12Z
52780299181489

Sweden calls for WikiLeaks founder Assange's detention, first step in possible extradition - Fox News

A top Swedish prosecutor on Monday formally asked that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange be detained in absentia over the alleged rape of a woman in her home nearly a decade ago, reports said.

The move was seen as the first step in his possible extradition from Britain. The Australian also faces a U.S. extradition warrant for allegedly conspiring to hack into a Pentagon computer.

Eva-Marie Persson, the deputy director of public prosecutions in Sweden, announced her request that he be held "on probable cause suspected for rape."

Sweden recently reopened the 2010 rape case against Assange.

While a case of alleged sexual misconduct was dropped in 2017 when the statute of limitations expired, a rape allegation remains. Swedish authorities have had to shelf it because Assange was living at the embassy at the time and there was no prospect of bringing him to Sweden.

The statute of limitations in that case expires in August next year. Assange has denied wrongdoing, asserting that the allegations were politically motivated and that the sex was consensual.

Per E. Samuelson, Assange’s Swedish lawyer, told the Associated Press earlier this month that the decision to reopen the rape case is "outrageous."

Assange, who was evicted last month from the Ecuadorian Embassy where he had been holed up since 2012, was arrested by British police on April 11 and is currently serving a 50-week sentence for jumping bail in 2012.

Persson said Monday that British authorities will decide any conflict between a European arrest warrant and U.S. extradition request for Assange.

GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“In the event of a conflict between a European Arrest Warrant and a request for extradition from the US, UK authorities will decide on the order of priority,” she said. “The outcome of this process is impossible to predict.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.foxnews.com/world/sweden-calls-for-wikileaks-founder-assanges-detention-first-step-in-possible-extradition

2019-05-20 07:41:58Z
52780299016908

Minggu, 19 Mei 2019

Rocket Crashes Into Baghdad's Green Zone Near U.S. Embassy - TIME

Rocket Hits Baghdad's Green Zone Near U.S. Embassy | Time

this link is to an external site that may or may not meet accessibility guidelines.

Let's block ads! (Why?)


http://time.com/5591647/rocket-hits-iraq-us-embassy/

2019-05-19 21:00:00Z
52780299996326

Switzerland gun control: Voters back EU regulations - BBC News

Voters in Switzerland have backed a tightening of gun laws to conform with European Union regulations.

Almost 64% of voters in Sunday's referendum supported tougher restrictions on semi-automatic and automatic weapons, final results show.

Switzerland is not an EU member, but risked removal from the open-border Schengen Area if it had voted "no".

Nearly 48% of Swiss households own a gun - among the highest rates of private ownership in Europe.

The EU had urged the country to tighten its laws in line with rules adopted by the bloc following the 2015 Paris terror attacks.

The rules restrict semi-automatic and automatic rifles and make it easier to track weapons in national databases.

The EU's initial proposal sparked criticism in Switzerland, because it meant a ban on the tradition of ex-soldiers keeping their assault rifles.

Swiss officials negotiated concessions, but some gun activists argued that the rules still encroached on citizens' rights.

What does the projected result tell us?

Analysis by Imogen Foulkes BBC News, Geneva

Opponents of the new gun laws described them as a diktat from Brussels, being forced on non-EU member Switzerland against its will. The Swiss national identity, with its long tradition of gun ownership, was, they argued, being undermined.

But Sunday's nationwide referendum shows voters think differently: they have overwhelmingly backed the new gun laws, following their government's advice.

The Swiss seem keen to co-operate in the EU's attempts to prevent terror attacks, and to keep their often tricky relations with Brussels as smooth as possible.

Why is the EU concerned about Swiss gun laws?

After the 2015 Paris attacks, the EU issued Schengen members with new restrictions on automatic and semi-automatic weapons.

The rules called for:

  • A ban on weapons capable of rapidly firing multiple rounds
  • Automatic and semi-automatic weapons to either be banned or heavily restricted
  • Each owner of such a weapon, and the weapon itself, to be known to police across Europe
  • All essential weapon components to be clearly labelled and registered electronically

The EU hoped the rules would help to protect people across Europe, and prevent a repeat of the 2015 attacks.

Failure to adopt the changes could have forced Switzerland to leave the Schengen zone and the Dublin joint system for handling asylum requests.

What did Swiss officials say?

The Swiss government urged voters to back the changes.

It said gun enthusiasts would not notice the new rules, while adopting them would allow Switzerland to retain its Schengen membership.

Officials said membership of the zone had been beneficial to the economy and to fighting crime.

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48328867

2019-05-19 15:22:30Z
CBMiLmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jb20vbmV3cy93b3JsZC1ldXJvcGUtNDgzMjg4NjfSATJodHRwczovL3d3dy5iYmMuY29tL25ld3MvYW1wL3dvcmxkLWV1cm9wZS00ODMyODg2Nw

India election 2019: Exit polls suggest Narendra Modi back as PM - BBC News

India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is on course to win the general election, exit polls suggest.

The BJP and the main opposition Congress party battled it out with powerful regional rivals in a bruising campaign over seven phases of polling.

Results will be announced on 23 May. Analysts warn exit polls have often been wrong in the past.

Many saw the election as a referendum on Mr Modi who won a landslide in 2014.

Four exit polls saw big wins for the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA), predicting that it would win anywhere between 280 and 315 seats, far more than the opposition Congress.

A party or coalition needs 272 to form a government.

India votes 2019

The election began on 11 April and was held in seven phases for security and logistical reasons. With 900 million eligible voters, it is the world's biggest exercise in democracy.

Political parties have not commented on the projections so far. However as voting ended, there was a flurry of meetings by opposition leaders, sparking speculation.

What were the key issues this election?

The economy is perhaps the biggest issue, with farming in crisis, unemployment on the rise and growing fears that India is heading for a recession.

Under Mr Modi, the world's sixth-largest economy has lost some of its momentum. Growth hovers around 7% and a leaked government report claims the unemployment rate is the highest it has been since the 1970s.

A crop glut and declining commodity prices have led to stagnant farm incomes, leaving many farmers saddled with debt.

Many also see this election as a battle for India's identity and the state of its minorities. A strident - and at times violent - Hindu nationalism has become mainstream in the past five years, with increased attacks against minorities, including the lynchings of dozens of Muslims accused of smuggling cows.

Media playback is unsupported on your device

And national security is in the spotlight after a suicide attack by a Pakistan-based militant group killed at least 40 paramilitary police in Indian-administered Kashmir in February. India then launched unprecedented air strikes in Pakistan, prompting Pakistan to respond in kind and bringing the two countries to the brink of war.

Media playback is unsupported on your device

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-48328259

2019-05-19 13:47:59Z
52780299867229

Swiss voters approve tax and pension overhaul: TV - Reuters

Swiss Finance Minister Ueli Maurer attends a news conference after the vote on the Corporate Tax Reform Act III in Bern, Switzerland February 12, 2017. REUTERS/Pierre Albouy

ZURICH (Reuters) - Swiss voters easily approved on Sunday a shake-up of the country’s corporate tax system, heading off what its finance minister had called an existential threat to Switzerland’s role as a business hub, projections for Swiss broadcaster SRF showed.

The projections from the gfs.bern polling outfit saw the measure passing in the binding referendum by a 66-34 percent margin.

The vote on tax reform and pension finance defuses a long-running row over favorable Swiss tax rates for multinational corporations. Acceptance was vital to prevent the country being branded a low-tax pariah, Finance Minister Ueli Maurer has said.

Two years ago, under the Swiss system of direct democracy, voters rejected an attempt to overhaul the tax system, which critics say gives the country an unfair advantage in attracting global companies.

Under pressure from the European Union and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, the Swiss had promised to meet international standards and eliminate special low tax rates that benefit around 24,000 foreign companies based in Switzerland.

The government plans to scrap special tax status for these companies that pay corporate rates in individual cantons as low as 7.8% to 12%, compared with 12 to 24 percent for “normal” Swiss companies.

Cantons in turn will lower their tax rates for normal companies to deter them from leaving.

To cover the resulting revenue shortfall of around 2 billion Swiss francs ($1.98 billion), the federal government will increase the share of federal tax that cantons get.

To allay fears that corporations would benefit at the expense of citizens, the package increases annual contributions to the state pension system by 2 billion francs by raising contributions from employers and workers and having the federal government chip in more.

Reporting by Michael Shields; Editing by Alison Williams

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-swiss-tax-idUSKCN1SP0AO

2019-05-19 11:11:00Z
52780298964309

Swiss voters approve tighter gun control: TV - Reuters

ZURICH (Reuters) - Swiss voters agreed on Sunday to adopt tighter gun controls in line with changes to European Union rules, heading off a clash with Brussels, projections for Swiss broadcaster SRF showed.

FILE PHOTO: A rifle with a Swiss flag is pictured during a competition, ahead of a May 19 referendum on proposals to tighten weapon ownership laws in line with EU steps, in Romont, Switzerland May 11, 2019. REUTERS/Denis Balibouse/File Photo

The projections from the gfs.bern polling outfit saw the measure passing in the binding referendum by a comfortable 67-33% margin.

The restrictions, which apply to non-EU member Switzerland because it is part of Europe’s Schengen open-border system, had raised hackles among shooting enthusiasts ahead of the vote under the Swiss system of direct democracy.

Failure to adopt the rules could have forced Switzerland to leave the passport-free Schengen zone and the Dublin joint system for handling asylum requests.

After militants killed scores in Paris and elsewhere in 2015, the EU in 2017 toughened laws against purchasing semi-automatic rifles such as the ones used in those attacks, and made it easier to track weapons in national databases.

Opinion polls had shown Swiss voters backing the measure by a two-to-one margin.

The initial EU proposal provoked an outcry because it meant a ban on the Swiss tradition of ex-soldiers keeping their assault rifles.

Swiss officials negotiated concessions for gun enthusiasts who take part in the country’s numerous shooting clubs, but any restrictions imported from the EU go too far for right-wing activists concerned about Swiss sovereignty.

Gun rights proponents complained the rules could disarm law-abiding citizens and encroach on Switzerland’s heritage and national identity, which includes a well-armed citizenry.

Switzerland has one of the highest rates of private gun ownership in Europe, with nearly 48% of households owning a gun.

Reporting by Michael Shields, editing by Louise Heavens

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-swiss-eu-guns/swiss-voters-approve-tighter-gun-control-tv-idUSKCN1SP0AA

2019-05-19 10:47:00Z
52780298964309