GOOD MORNING FROM LONDON
14 JULY 2024. CHINA POST #520
CHINA COVERAGE BY FOREIGN MEDIA
#1 ORBAN SURPRISE VISIT TO BEIJING
#2 NATO AND THE US ON UKRAINE AND CHINA
#3 CHINA’S COOKING OIL SCANDAL
————————
#1 ORBAN SURPRISE VISIT TO BEIJING
NIKKEI ASIA
China “is a key power in creating the conditions” for making peace between Russia and Ukraine, Orban wrote on X, explaining why he came just two months after Xi visited Budapest. Chinese state media reported that Orban briefed Xi on his recent visits to Ukraine and Russia, and that Xi “stressed that an early cease-fire and a political settlement are in the interests of all parties.”
China maintains a close relationship with Russia, and Xi himself met with Russian President Vladimir Putin last Wednesday in Kazakhstan.
Hungary, which just took over the European Union’s rotating presidency, stands apart from most of the bloc due to its relatively warm ties with both Russia and China. “We hope that Hungary, as the rotating presidency of the EU, will play a positive role in promoting a healthy and stable development of China-EU relations,” Xi was quoted as saying, just days after additional European tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles kicked in on a provisional basis.
Orban’s Economy Ministry has sharply criticized Europe’s move to impose what it termed “brutal” additional tariffs on Chinese EVs.
Negotiations between China and Europe over the tariffs are expected to continue before EU members vote later this year on whether to apply the levies for five years. Hungary is thought to be a useful voice for Beijing in pressuring European neighbors to, if not drop the tariffs entirely, at least water them down.
Hungary is also becoming a crucial production base for Chinese companies. When Xi went to Budapest in May, the two sides signed a slew of agreements as they established an “all-weather comprehensive strategic partnership for the new era.”
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban arrives in Beijing on July 8, in this photo posted on his X account. It was captioned simply “Peace Mission 3.0,” an apparent reference to his recent visits to Ukraine, Russia and now China. (Hungarian prime minister’s X account)
GRAHAM PERRY COMMENTS;-
Orban is a controversial political leader. He is disliked by mainstream EU countries because he does not sign up to their pro-Ukraine/anti-Russia policy. He is liked by Russia and China for precisely the same reason. But Orban carries additional weight and significance because, in addition to being the Prime Minister of Hungary, he is the EU’s current Rotating President until the end of 2024.
The prevailing EU view – Orban apart – is that Russia is the aggressor and Ukraine is the victim. The US and the NATO Secretary General have done much work to bring together the European powers in an effort to avoid a Ukrainian defeat and the role of Orban is an irritation to the EU countries.
Orban has the ear of Chinese leaders for two reasons;- first because his view on Ukraine accords with the view of China for a cease fire and a de-escalation of fighting and, second, because of growing EU-China tension on trade issues. China’s Electric Vehicle giant BYD is building its largest factory in the EU in Hungary, and several Chinese battery manufacturers, including CATL, are looking to invest in Hungary with the advantage to China of protecting Chinese companies from EU tariffs. The EU does not want to be in dispute with a full member of the EU and treads carefully in its dealings with Hungary – all the more so because Hungary is the current President and as Orban himself says “The number of countries that can talk to both warring sides is diminishing. Hungary is slowly becoming the only country in Europe that can speak to everyone”.
The Chinese state news agency Xinhua’s report on Monday’s Xi-Orban meeting said the two leaders discussed the Ukraine crisis in depth, underlining Beijing’s stance of calling for a cease-fire and creating conditions for direct negotiations. Xi said “the priority is to cool down the situation through observing the three principles of no expansion of the battlefield, no escalation of fighting, and no fanning by any party over the flames,” according to the agency.
———————————–
#2 NATO AND UKRAINE AND CHINA
WALL STREET JOURNAL
“When NATO leaders meet in Washington on Tuesday their agenda will be dominated by Ukraine, Russia and European military spending. But looming over their summit is a country far from alliance territory that NATO didn’t even mention until five years ago: China.
Beijing today figures increasingly large in the plans of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s 32 members and their close allies in the Asia-Pacific region.
China is helping Russia wage war on Ukraine. NATO governments have accused China of involvement in espionage, cyberattacks and disinformation campaigns within their borders. And China has used its economic muscle to punish European countries that support Taiwan.
NATO, in its summit communiqué, plans to criticize China for supporting Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, alliance diplomats said.
Not long ago, Europeans and Asians saw themselves as occupying separate geopolitical spheres—ones that the U.S. uniquely bridged by dint of geography and its global role. No longer.
“There is a greater sense now how the two theaters are linked strategically,” said Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell on a recent visit to Brussels.
When Japan’s Prime Minister addressed a joint session of Congress in April, one of the first issues he raised was Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, a continent away from his home shores.
“As I often say, Ukraine of today may be East Asia of tomorrow,” Fumio Kishida told the packed chamber, days before the House approved $61 billion in military support for Kyiv. Kishida implored the U.S. to stay engaged in both Ukraine and the Indo-Pacific.
Taiwanese leaders fearful of Chinese attacks receive some of their strongest foreign support from Lithuania and the Czech Republic—small European countries with almost no economic interest in East Asia. The former victims of Soviet invasion see a global fight against authoritarianism and want to cement U.S. protection by championing a cause that Washington considers vital.
China, meanwhile, has sent ships through the thawing Arctic to the Atlantic, acquired commercial port facilities across Europe and sought to establish naval access to ports on Africa’s Atlantic coast. — all putting its vessels in waters patrolled by NATO fleets.
One of the few points of agreement between President Biden and his rival in November’s election, Donald Trump, is that China poses a dire security and economic threat to the U.S. and its allies.
NATO first expressed concerns about China in a leaders’ statement in late 2019. In 2022, China for the first time prompted a reference in NATO’s main guiding document, known as the Strategic Concept. China’s “stated ambitions and coercive policies challenge our interests, security and values,” NATO said, citing Beijing’s military buildup and its efforts to use economic coercion, as well as its strategic partnership with Russia.
The alliance’s new emphasis on China and Asia hasn’t sat well with all members. France opposed an internal proposal last year for NATO to post a senior civilian representative in Tokyo, arguing that East Asia is too far from the North Atlantic and member countries should handle relations themselves. Some alliance members from Southern Europe—who are more concerned with illegal migration and threats emanating from the Middle East than with Asia—quietly backed France.
But views on China and its relations with NATO have shifted due to Beijing’s increasingly apparent help for Moscow in Ukraine and China’s unwillingness to condemn the war. US. Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines last month addressed the issue with NATO ambassadors, as part of a wider briefing.
“China has taken a side,” said U.S. Ambassador to NATO Julianne Smith last month. If China curtailed provisions to Moscow, she said, “we believe it would have a major impact on Russia’s ability to conduct the war on the ground inside Ukraine.”
NATO’s retiring Secretary General Stoltenberg observed that China wants to maintain good ties with the West, especially economic relations with Europe, despite supporting Russia. “Well, Beijing cannot have it both ways,” he said. “At some point—and unless China changes course—allies need to impose a cost.”
China rejects NATO’s criticism. NATO “has a blind faith in the use of force, holds on to a Cold War mentality, and creates bloc confrontation, which is the real threat to peace and stability in the region and the world,” China’s Foreign Ministry said in response to questions about NATO’s position. China promotes peace and dialogue, the ministry said, and “NATO should reflect on its role in the Ukrainian crisis and stop shifting the blame to China.”
China respects international law and the sovereignty of Arctic states, its foreign ministry said.
Deep U.S. engagement across the Atlantic and Pacific dates back to World War II. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union also operated in both oceans, but its threat was seen as far greater in Europe and the Atlantic, especially via its links to Cuba.
After the Cold War, when the West saw Moscow as a potential partner and Washington came to see China as an ascendant rival, the U.S. tried to shift its focus to the Pacific. In 2011, then-President Barack Obama announced a “pivot to Asia.” It was widely interpreted as an implicit pivot away from Europe.
“When we talked about the pivot, or rebalance, in the Obama administration,” said Campbell, the deputy secretary of state, “one of the misconceptions was the idea the U.S. was somehow pivoting away from Europe—that we were going to focus more of our attention on the Indo-Pacific at the expense of Europe.”
That either/or interpretation “was mistaken” and the Biden administration has to align views and policies with European allies, Campbell said. “We’re moving together to focus on these issues.”
GRAHAM PERRY COMMENTS;-
The world political situation is deteriorating. More focus today is on hostilities and threats than on co-operation and economic development. Western Europe has responded to the words of retiring NATO Secretary-General Stoltenberg and shown unity for Ukraine in its war against Russia. In recent months Stoltenberg has been travelling in the Far East and drumming up support for the view that Russia in Europe and China in the Far East are a fast-developing military threat to countries in both regions. The sense is growing that hostilities are increasingly likely.
We cannot say that war is inevitable but the build up of forces in Europe and in the Far East raises the possibility that eleventh hour negotiation will not succeed. The basis premise in world affairs from the standpoint of the West is that Russia and China are both expansionist nations committed to world domination. Ukraine today and Europe tomorrow in the West. Taiwan today and Asia tomorrow in the East.
The narrative goes that Russia is determined to expand. It is acquisitive and expansionist. Similarly, the US promotes the view that China is a threat to all countries in South East Asia and is determined to take Taiwan by force as a warning to other countries in the region.
There is an alternative argument for both Russia and China. Russia is not expansionist. It has no grand design but it has always warned against what has become known as “NATO Creep”. The fall of the USSR in 1990 raised the possibility that NATO – then 9 countries – would seek to expand its remit into Eastern Europe. Today NATO has 32 countries as members with talk of Ukraine becoming No 33. So was the Russian move into Ukraine an aggressive move to impose Russian rule on its neighbours or was it a pre-emptive move to stop NATO Creep in its tracks?
Russian history books focus on failed attempts by Napoleon in 1810 to invade Russia and Hitler’s attempts in 1942 to do the same. They also refer to the efforts of the Western powers – led by Winston Churchill – to support the White Russians in their attempt to overthrown the Bolshevik Revolution in 1918. NATO Creep amounted to preparation to succeed where Napoleon, Churchill and Hitler had failed.
Looking at the Far East, the US – with its 750+ military bases has demonised China (1 overseas base to service China’s maritime fleet). China, the US says, is expansionist, acquisitive, and Empire seeking. The Far East, say critics of China, needs US leadership and military power to prevent China from swallowing up its neighbours. China, it is alleged, is a threat in the East in the same way Russia is a threat in the West.
Not quite. The West’s drive against Russia and China does not enjoy world wide support. The fast growing Global South – including Brazil, India, Indonesia, Vietnam, Mexico, Saudi Arabia do not line up alongside the US and its traditional allies and the US is presently quite stretched as the extract below from Nikkei Asia makes clear;
“The U.S. Navy instead has redirected the USS Theodore Roosevelt, a San Diego-based carrier, to move from the South China Sea to the Red Sea as a stopgap measure, until the next East Coast-based carrier is ready.
The Navy is stretched dangerously thin, analysts say, as the U.S. seeks to address crises in Ukraine, Israel and the Red Sea, all the while keeping an eye on China in the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea.”
The US is the largest economy in the world but for maybe only another five years. Listening to the Western media and you would be forgiven for thinking that “All is said and done. The US-led West will prevail”. The US knows it is over-stretched. It is the experience of all Imperialisms – hence the growing US demand for Western European countries to step up their funding of NATO.
But an article in todays (14 July 2024) UK Guardian, its Defence correspondent remains gloomy about the West’s attempts to repulse Russia and China and cites Harvard Professor in support “The most obvious source of strain [within Nato] is the shifting distribution of world power,” argued Harvard professor Stephen Walt. “China has emerged as… a formidable challenger. Asia’s share of the world economy (54%) is substantially larger than Europe’s (17%)… Asia rightly commands a greater share of US attention today, and Europe rightly merits less.” As a result, he said, transatlantic allies were gradually drifting apart.
Efforts to give Nato, as opposed to the US alone, a larger role in the Indo-Pacific have limited scope. Notwithstanding Britain’s half-baked “tilt to Asia” under the Conservatives, “Nato’s European members couldn’t do much to affect the balance of power in Asia even if they wanted to,” Walt wrote.
The US is over-stretched and NATO is under-resourced and politically divided. Will Jaw-Jaw take over from War-War? Will Orban’s efforts succeed in turning the West away from conflict and towards the negotiating table. This Column thinks so.
——————————
#3 CHINA’S COOKING OIL SCANDAL
NIKKEI ASIA
“A scandal over the handling of cooking oil has renewed concerns over food safety in China and cast a harsh spotlight on a major state-owned company.
An undercover report by the state-backed Beijing News alleged that it is an “open secret” that “to save costs,” tankers used to transport fuel and chemicals are also used to move cooking oil and syrup without any cleaning. The report, published last week, named state-owned grain company Sinograin as one of those involved in the apparent misbehavior.
On Tuesday, official media reported that the State Council’s food safety commission will investigate.
Following the news, shares of leading cooking oil supplier Yihai Kerry, known as Jin Long Yu in Chinese, plunged more than 8% in Shenzhen at one point during Wednesday morning trading, touching a record low and illustrating the dark cloud over the industry.
The scandal has sparked a furious backlash on social media in a country where food safety is a long-running concern. After a week’s silence, state broadcaster CCTV posted an unusually harsh commentary on the danger, saying that such misconduct could “consume the lives” of citizens.
Sinograin said in a statement that it has blacklisted the tanker operator as a partner and has begun an internal inspection.
Hu Xijin, former editor-in-chief of state tabloid Global Times, also called for a thorough investigation. “Sinograin is a powerful state-owned enterprise,” he wrote in an online post Monday. “I am not fully convinced that only Sinograin behaved this way while all other companies seem clean.”
Mixed use of fuel tankers is not new in China. Over the past two decades — for example in 2005, 2011 and 2015 — local media outlets in different parts of the country reported that food companies were using such vehicles to transport cooking oil in between other types of shipments.
Since a 2008 scandal over baby formula that contained lethal amounts of the industrial chemical melamine, which affected around 30 million children nationwide and cost Beijing 2 billion yuan ($275 million) in compensation, Chinese consumers have increasingly opted for imported food if they have the means.
Some on social media have defended the companies, arguing that the contaminated cooking oil might be for industrial use. But public tracking records of a particular truck, featured in the Beijing News report, showed the vehicle had been in different coal oil and cooking oil factories in the past few months.”
GRAHAM PERRY COMMENTS;-
One of the constant criticisms of authoritarian systems of government is that the absence of a free and independent press means that the Government is unaccountable and can get away ‘scot free’ with matters such as the current cooking oil scandal. So the argument goes – the media clams up; the government imposes a news blackout; nothing is written or published or spoken. The public are not informed and Governments can continue with their bad ways at the expense of the people. There is no exposure.
It is re-assuring to read, therefore, that currently in China heads will roll as a result of the health scare to the public caused by the failure of tankers transporting fuel and chemicals to also carry cooking oil and syrup without ensuring that the tankers are properly cleaned before use. Health issues abound. It should not happen and the Government and Party organs of power should be properly investigated and punished.
Recently in the UK we have witnessed the large scale injustice visited upon sub-postmasters by their employers’ – the Post Office – use of a faulty computer system to regulate their business activities. Suicides, imprisonment and loss of livelihood occurred on a significant scale. Lying, deceit and fraud was practised on a wide basis. A public investigation has uncovered the significant closing of ranks within the Post Office as a full scale cover-up took place to protect people in high places. In this instance the Post Office has been made fully accountable; heads have rolled; reputations have been shredded and compensation has been paid on a considerable scale.
It is reassuring to read, therefore, that in China Sinograin will come under scrutiny and investigation. The public must be protected. After all the state in China exists for the benefit of the people and not for the protection of wrongdoers, especially Party wrongdoers.
GRAHAM PERRY
