Links - 25th July 2020 (1) (China's 'Peaceful' Rise)

Is China preparing for war? - "Fuelled by our desire for ever cheaper goods, the world has collectively sleepwalked into a supply-side dependency on the People’s Republic.The gamble had been pitched as a trade-off. China was expected to evolve democratic norms and embrace relations with the international community, while we got richer from globalisation. But we have been played... At the same time as it was busy taking control over our manufacturing, China was busy cloning western software, via her lackadaisical respect for international copyright rules.And while the world relies on China for hardware, China avoids software dependency on outsiders by creating substitutes: TikTok to replace snapchat, Weibo instead of Twitter, WeChat & RenRen for Facebook. Indeed, there is an alternative Chinese version for almost any platform... Over decades, we have naively outsourced or lost manufacturing, software, natural resources and critical infrastructure to China. The economic benefits of globalisation are well trodden, yet as Covid-19 has shown, it has left our society vulnerable during a major crisis, unable to manufacture the most basic of necessities such as PPE. Meanwhile, China has achieved self-sufficiency... Considering what we know of colonial history, there is little room for doubt that China is at a pre-colonial stage. States at this stage attempt to centralise domestic power under a strong leader, dominate global supply chains and monopolise industry, all the while expanding abroad to secure natural resources. China is aggressively pursuing total national self-sufficiency, and the question arises as to why. My conclusion is that China is preparing for war: total, not limited war. The kind that seeks to rebalance the world order, tipping it in her favour by replacing the US as the dominant global power. Historically, major conflicts have arisen when the leading global power is challenged by a rival, a problem known as the Thucydides trap — and China is expected (by some metrics) to overtake the United States as the world’s largest economy this decade.Also, and crucially unlike us, China is preparing for the next type of war. The People’s Republic knows that she cannot beat the US militarily — and she knows that type of ground war is almost over.Instead, by securing global supply chains, maintaining IT independence, and having a cast-iron grip over her own population, China can focus on building her cyber and biological war capabilities while remaining relatively safeguarded against the same herself. Considering all of this, from steel to nuclear to telecoms, our policy towards China until 2020 can best be described as one of miserably failed economic appeasement. From China’s perspective, she has successfully gifted us a Trojan Horse... For too long, China has had a strategy for dealing with us, while we have had no strategy for dealing with China. We must urgently pivot our strategic relationship, one that entails assuming that China is in a Cold War with us already, and ends our current naivety.We must minimise our total global supply-chain dependency on China, or any one nation for that matter. Trade with China, yes, but we must ringfence critical infrastructure: nuclear, telecoms and natural resources such as steel.  As recent politicisation of the WHO highlights, the post-war international community — supposedly governed by the UN — is no longer serving its purpose, and perhaps more than ever the UN faces a crisis in moral authority. Instead, NATO-style, we must reorder our strategic and military alliances around the Pacific and build an international consensus against the broader expansionist desire of the Chinese Communist Party"

Suspicions Grow in South Korea Over China’s Online Influence Operations - "In February, one post caught the eyes of online users in South Korea. The uploader, who claimed to be a Korean Chinese, said Chinese “agents” were playing a major role in manipulating online opinion and disseminating pro-government and pro-China content to encourage social division among South Koreans with different political views. One of strategies is to flock to online communities with ongoing debates to promote ideas that could cause further friction among users, according to the post uploader, who claimed that the Chinese government is behind the operation.In response, some online users conducted an experiment. They threw out “bait” by creating a fake online debate. They posted in prominent online communities in South Korea a link supposedly connected to a discussion board where the debate is happening. Instead, however, the link went to websites that are banned in China, such as Free Tibet or Free Hong Kong.The idea behind this experiment was to catch Chinese people who pretend to be South Korean online users, since such websites are heavily censored in China.The result was bizarre but interesting. A massive number of active online users who clicked the link began to give the same response. They all left a comment to say, “I am an individual” in Korean. That reaction raised further questions among South Korean online users. The phrase “I am an individual” sounds unnatural in Korean language and is not commonly used in the South.Some theorized that it was a way for Chinese people to express that they are not associated with websites banned in China. They left such a comment to prove that they were tricked into connecting to those websites, and it was against their intention... He also cited media reports that raised suspicion over China’s online influence operations in foreign countries, saying that there is no guarantee South Korea could be an exception.For instance, the Sydney Morning Herald reported in November last year that the Chinese government was seeking to “take over” Australia’s political system through its “insidious” foreign interference operations.At the time, the paper quoted former intelligence chief Duncan Lewis as saying that the Chinese government was trying to place themselves in a position of advantage through such operations. He added that Chinese authorities were working to win influence in social, business, and media circles as well as targeting politicians.Back in 2015, Hong Kong-based daily Ming Pao also reported that China was recruiting “online agents” who specialized in online opinion-rigging activities, adding that there were about 10 million of them, including 4 million university students."

Chinese Agents Helped Spread Messages That Sowed Virus Panic in U.S., Officials Say - The New York Times - "The alarming messages came fast and furious in mid-March, popping up on the cellphone screens and social media feeds of millions of Americans grappling with the onset of the coronavirus pandemic.Spread the word, the messages said: The Trump administration was about to lock down the entire country... Chinese operatives helped push the messages across platforms... The amplification techniques are alarming to officials because the disinformation showed up as texts on many Americans’ cellphones, a tactic that several of the officials said they had not seen before... Chinese agents also appear to be using texts and encrypted messaging apps as part of their campaigns. It is much harder for researchers and law enforcement officers to track disinformation spread through text messages and encrypted apps than on social media platforms... The propaganda efforts go beyond text messages and social media posts directed at Americans. In China, top officials have issued directives to agencies to engage in a global disinformation campaign around the virus... Some American intelligence officers are especially concerned about disinformation aimed at Europeans that pro-China actors appear to have helped spread. The messages stress the idea of disunity among European nations during the crisis and praise China’s “donation diplomacy,” American officials said. Left unmentioned are reports of Chinese companies delivering shoddy equipment and European leaders expressing skepticism over China’s handling of its outbreak."

Chinese Hackers Attacked Foreign Health Care, Military, Oil Networks as Coronavirus Hit China - "As the coronavirus epidemic reached crisis level in Wuhan, China, in January, a known group of state-backed cyber hackers launched attacks at healthcare companies and other key industries outside the country... there was a dropoff in the group’s cyberattacks five days later, around the Chinese New Year, which occurred on Jan. 25, which is common among China-based threat groups"

Exclusive: Internal Chinese report warns Beijing faces Tiananmen-like global backlash over virus - "An internal Chinese report warns that Beijing faces a rising wave of hostility in the wake of the coronavirus outbreak that could tip relations with the United States into confrontation... The report, presented early last month by the Ministry of State Security to top Beijing leaders including President Xi Jinping, concluded that global anti-China sentiment is at its highest since the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown... The report was drawn up by the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations (CICIR), a think tank affiliated with the Ministry of State Security, China’s top intelligence body... the presentation of the report shows how seriously Beijing takes the threat of a building backlash that could threaten what China sees as its strategic investments overseas and its view of its security standing... anti-China sentiment sparked by the coronavirus could fuel resistance to China’s Belt and Road infrastructure investment projects, and that Washington could step up financial and military support for regional allies, making the security situation in Asia more volatile"

Hong Kong’s autonomy, dying in full view - "Hong Kong’s Basic Law, the mini-constitution that has regulated China’s relations with the city for 23 years, says that ‘no department of the Central People’s Government … may interfere in the affairs’ of Hong Kong. The clear principle of non-interference was never in dispute, until now.In a stunning turn on 17 April, Beijing’s Liaison Office in Hong Kong issued a broad new interpretation, saying that it and the companion Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office in Beijing ‘most definitely’ had the right to get involved in local issues, including commenting on political disputes. The liaison office said it was ‘authorised by the central authorities to handle Hong Kong affairs’. In other words, the principle of non-interference no longer applies.Even more shocking for many residents, their China-appointed leaders agreed... This change came after the liaison office warned that elected opposition lawmaker Dennis Kwok of the Civic Party was abusing his office by filibustering the appointment of a key committee chair to vet government-proposed bills. The filibuster has for centuries given minority politicians some sway over decision-making. Beijing sees it as a weapon for political subversion.In further evidence that autonomy is now effectively dead, top Hong Kong judges complained about mainland interference in judicial affairs after the Chinese state-run media warned them not to ‘absolve’ protesters. And pro-Beijing voices have begun referring to the protests as ‘terrorism’. The new, hardline head of the liaison office, Luo Huining, said on 15 April that Hong Kong needed to quickly pass a long-stalled law against subversion that would give police sweeping new powers. Early on 18 April, 15 prominent opposition figures and pro-democracy leaders were arrested, purportedly for their roles in ‘unauthorised protests’ in August and October. They included media tycoon Jimmy Lai Chee-ying, whose newspaper, Apple Daily, is the most openly pro-democracy, and 81-year-old lawyer Martin Lee, a former head of the Democratic Party known as the ‘father of democracy’. The timing, as the liaison office stepped up attacks, appeared suspicious... Beijing and the local government appear to be using the coronavirus ‘lull’ to clear the decks, hoping to prevent another landslide defeat. They may seek to pass the anti-subversion law before losing control of the legislature.In the process, they have shown that they’re willing to forgo what’s left of the idea of Hong Kong as an autonomous city... Everyone observing the transition knew Beijing’s leaders wouldn’t be able to refrain from meddling for that long. Hong Kong, after all, was anathema to China’s communists, who prize obedience and control while crushing dissent.The experiment has ended quickly... The 2015 booksellers case, in which five members of a local publishing house were kidnapped by Chinese agents, showed that mainland security officials were willing to breach local autonomy to snatch someone they considered a threat.Then came the unprecedented de facto expulsion of Financial Times journalist Victor Mallet, who was denied a visa to work in Hong Kong, out of retribution for a luncheon talk at the Foreign Correspondents’ Club by a local pro-independence activist, which infuriated Beijing.Since then, Hong Kong immigration authorities appear to have weaponised the right to deny entry in order to enforce mainland political priorities, a common practice in China but one unheard of in Hong Kong. This shift was underlined in March when Beijing expelled American journalists from the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Washington Post, and then stipulated that they wouldn’t be allowed to work in Hong Kong.For decades, journalists forced to leave China have found Hong Kong a safe haven.The Hong Kong government refused to comment on immigration matters, saying only that cases were decided ‘in accordance with the law’... The death of Hong Kong is happening in plain sight, if anyone is paying attention."

Hong Kong government capitulates to Beijing office - "The Liaison Office, too, denounced pan-democratic legislators for “malicious filibustering” and especially Dennis Kwok of the Civic Party, who has been chairing the committee for the election of a new chairman.Mr Kwok said that everything he did was consistent with the legislature’s rules. Pan-democrats argued that the election of a committee chairman was a Hong Kong internal affair and the Liaison Office should not interfere, as stipulated in Article 22 of the Basic Law. This provides that “No department of the Central People’s Government … may interfere in the affairs which the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region administers on its own in accordance with this law.”... the government ostensibly set up to run a highly autonomous Hong Kong ended up agreeing that Beijing’s office enjoys a virtually unrestricted right to intervene in local affairs. If that office is going to run Hong Kong, what is left for Chief Executive Carrie Lam to do besides carrying out orders?"

Exclusive: Beijing completely broke their promise on Hong Kong, says veteran democrat Martin Lee - ""At the time Beijing was worried that people would all leave.  To win their hearts, it (promised to allow) Hong Kong people to rule Hong Kong and to have a high degree of autonomy,” reminisced Martin Lee, the founding chairman of the Democratic Party and senior counsel, in an interview before his arrest... In stark contrast with the current strained Hong Kong-China relationship, there was a high level of trust between Hong Kong and China at the time.  Lee described his time drafting the Basic Law from 1985 to 1989 as a “very happy” time, until he quit in protest following Beijing’s 1989 crackdown on the Tiananmen pro-democracy movement.“There was mutual trust at the time – Hong Kong people trusted the Chinese government,” said 81-year-old Lee. “We hoped they would abide by this international agreement. We put all our hopes in the Basic Law and hoped it would safeguard everything over the next 50 years.”... Lee said one of the biggest blows to the Basic Law came in June, 2014 on the 30th anniversary of the Joint Declaration, when a Beijing policy white paper asserted that the Chinese government had “comprehensive jurisdiction” over Hong Kong and the city’s “high degree of autonomy… comes solely from the authorisation by the central leadership.”“This was totally different from what they said before,” Lee said. “They were now saying very clearly that the Party would rule Hong Kong, not Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong. So we have to do whatever they tell us. This has completely broken their promise.”Basic Law articles 45 and 68 state that the Chief Executive and members of the Legislative Council should be elected through universal suffrage and article 22 says the mainland government cannot interfere in affairs in Hong Kong. China rejected the election of the chief executive and legislators by universal suffrage in 2007 and 2008. In August 2014, the National People’s Congress Standing Committee ruled that Hong Kong voters could only elect its top leader by “universal suffrage” from two or three candidates endorsed by the majority of a 1,200-strong largely pro-Beijing nominating committee. Lee sees the landmark ruling as a violation of the two elements most crucial for the success of the “one country two systems” policy: universal suffrage and prohibiting Chinese government interference in Hong Kong affairs.“‘One country two systems’ has not materialised even for one day.  They said all along that Hongkongers would be their own masters so why won’t they give people rights to elect?”... China’s Liaison Office in Hong Kong declared on Friday that it is not subject to Basic Law restrictions in article 22 that bar central government departments from interfering in local affairs – insisting it has the right to comment on Hong Kong matters... “The Communist Party is fully in charge and they give however much freedom they want to give and can take it away any time they like,” Lee said. “They want a goose that lays the golden eggs but they can’t tolerate it if the goose doesn’t obey them.”“This is not a long term solution.”... Did Lee foresee while drafting the Basic Law in the 80s that the Communist Party – with its authoritarian history – would refuse to grant genuine democracy to Hong Kong and frustrations would snowball into the current political crisis?Lee said the Basic Law was created precisely to address that uncertainty, knowing that the “one country two systems” policy would be difficult to implement. “It was a solution where there was no solution,” said Lee.“We hoped it wouldn’t come to this. You can’t say I believe the Communist Party and things would be okay. That’s why we had to put these [guarantees] in legal language in the Basic Law”... “It’s very upsetting, and the saddest part is that China is such a big country – how can you renege on your promises, telling the whole world that the Chinese government, the world’s second largest economy, is not to be trusted?”... “Violence is not a solution.  Foreign countries can only support us when there is no violence,” he said, stressing that the international community has a duty towards upholding the Basic Law as the Joint Declaration was a legally-binding treaty registered with the United Nations... Today, Lee’s name is nowhere to be seen in official documents that celebrate the Basic Law.  He was not invited to an online seminar organised by Beijing to mark the 30th anniversary of the promulgation of the Basic Law.  There was no mention of him in a Hong Kong government promotional video which featured only pro-government figures."