Geopolitics

Why China spoke gently at the UN General Assembly?
Geopolitics

Why China spoke gently at the UN General Assembly?

In a speech to the UN General Assembly, China tried to polish up its tarnished image. Speaking remotely through a video link, Chinese President Xi Jinping showed it off that as a nation they were committed to becoming carbon neutral by 2060.

Jinping also focused on the impacts of Covid-19 and the importance of a sustainable economic recovery, setting goals to peak China’s CO2 emissions before 2030. China has not been sending out the right signals anywhere in the world.

Its movement at the South China Sea is showing its mad need for power control over smaller nations. Its domination over the India chapter at skirmishes at the Line of Actual Control isn’t palatable either; and then the whole controversy around the pandemic and the way it sailed through it while many nations are still trying to get a grip over the increasing number of cases.

According to the United Nations climate reports, it is necessary that at least there should be 45 percent reduction globally by 2030 on the carbon emission rates, for any possibility of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius over pre-industrial levels.

But China has not shown any clear evidence in terms of showing a sense of responsibility and commitment towards reducing carbon emission rates. In fact, its meteoric economic rise has shown otherwise- and continues to be, fueled by extraordinary resource extraction and exploitation.  There have been guidelines by the UN climate reports on limiting the activity of fossil fuel extractions and culling of green cover to maintain the oxygen levels and limiting CO2 levels.

China now uses more concrete than the United States did in the entire century. The former now also emits nearly twice the amount of CO2 as the United States each year, though it emits far less per capita. As a nation, it has always walked its own tune, giving a nod to environmental initiatives only when its economy has shown signs of health.

All this time, it has been funding coal plants through its Belt and Road Initiative. Its soft stance at the UN Council meeting is only to show that it cares about nature, when it fact it isn’t serious to show anything in action. The two major emitting countries are the United States and China. Both are facing consequences of human displacement and climate led catastrophes in their inner circles.

Undeniably, China is responsible for nearly a third of the world’s CO2 emissions. So, with even a little reduction on its part, the rest of the world will be substantially better off. China does not have a good reputation- it cannot project one either. First has been its dubious handling of the pandemic and then its stance of trying to show off a ‘wolf warrior strategy’ to get back at nations on the social media. Both do not suit it as a powerful nation. Putting down its guard and actually trying to play on level ground for the sake of humanity for once, might make the UN members take it seriously.

Geopolitics, energy and security: what future for the Mediterranean?
Geopolitics

Geopolitics, energy and security: what future for the Mediterranean?

Geopolitics and security, economy and development, civil society, and culture. The Mediterranean as an immense cemetery? Or an exciting means of communication between peoples, opportunities for Ulysses, that is, individuals moved by the ardour of knowledge? Maybe a theatre of travels in search of beauty and not about escape. Yes, for this to be the case, first of all, we need to sort out a few situations here and there for Africa and the Middle East.

Yesterday was a hectic day for European diplomacy committed to the crisis in the eastern Mediterranean. Two key-meetings at the end of which Greece and Turkey committed themselves to exploratory talks, the first of this kind since 2016.First, in the NATO headquarters in Brussels, the fifth meeting between the military delegations of Turkey and Greece, which ended with the announcement of a new appointment next week.  The discussions focused on the relaxation of relations between the two countries and bilateral relations between the two armies.

Then the conference call between the Turkish President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, and the President of the European Council, Charles Michel.At the end of the works, the participants declared that “Turkey and Greece are ready to start exploratory talks” on the eastern Mediterranean, where the two countries duel for areas potentially rich in natural gas.

During the videoconference, Erdogan noted that the momentum to reduce tensions and to open channels for dialogue should be “protected with reciprocal steps.” Expressing appreciation for the German mediation efforts, the Turkish President said he believes that “a regional conference with the participation of all parties in the Eastern Mediterranean, including Turkish Cypriots, will lead to positive and constructive decisions that will benefit all.”

During the East Mediterranean Gas Forum organized in Cairo, in another videoconference, Egypt, Cyprus, Greece, Israel, Jordan, and Italy signed the agreement for the creation of an intergovernmental body that will promote cooperation and develop political dialogue on the natural gas sector.No one has escaped the significance of this officialization just as the Mediterranean is upset by the tensions between Athens and Ankara generated by exploration in the Mediterranean and fueled by Turkey choice to continue with new drilling activities and by the country agreement with Tripoli last year.

So, in the coming days, Greece and Turkey will start exploratory political talks in Istanbul. Erdogan has launched an appeal for a sincere dialogue. “The Turkish priority is to resolve conflicts through a fair dialogue based on international law,” he said. Erdogan added that his country does not tolerate any diktat, persecution, or attack, urged by an Emmanuel Macron who, from Paris, invited him to commit himself without ambiguity. Erdogan and Macron then had a telephone conversation in the evening, which would seem to indicate the willingness of all the actors to move towards a political solution.

The crisis in the Aegean, frozen pending these talks, would have been at the center of the European summit on 24 and 25 September, postponed yesterday evening, by October, due to the quarantine of Charles Michel. The meeting had to discuss the French proposal for sanctions against Turkey. The resumption of these talks on the delimitation of maritime zones, suspended since 2016, has been welcomed as a positive signal by observers.

As Erdogan also pointed out to Angela Merkel, how to handle this dispute will be fundamental to restore or not relations between Turkey and the EU. Both Brussels and Ankara understood that. Not surprisingly, the announcement of the resumption of talks took place a few days before the EU summit, which instead should probably have decided on sanctions against Turkey.

Can European Union become a geopolitical force just on the basis of regulatory power? – An Analysis
Geopolitics

Can European Union become a geopolitical force just on the basis of regulatory power? – An Analysis

Geopolitical power is with the nation that has global leading in certainty with trade. There are two well established notions with trade globally, each of which makes sense individually, but when combined the result is not the desired one. The first idea or notion is that since forever now the EU and US have been battling to have their regulatory model as the accepted one globally across varied range of economic sectors. In this battle EU seems to be clearly winning. The second idea suggests that individual countries can use their own regulatory power to extend their foreign policy and expand their strategic influence. Keeping this equation in mind it might seem natural that EU, which has long been trying to develop its foreign policy should be able to use its powerful status to project its interests in trade and regulation globally. However, this theory is just a proposition.

The theory of using both notions and ideas is a proposal welcomed by policymakers of the European Union. The likelihood to acquire traditional tools of running effective foreign policy is a far-fetched idea for EU for now, so the amalgamation of the ideas seems like the best plan available. The required tools to showcase one’s global leadership are considered to be military or political standing, ability to dispense other governments or possessing a central intelligence service. These tools are essentially lacking when it comes to EU. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has expressed her plans of making the commission a “geopolitical commission”, for which she has full intentions to make a reality.

“Brussels effect” has been quite helpful in winning regulatory battles for EU with the US – the effect lets European rules and standards to be exported through governments and companies.

EU’s chemicals, cars and other products safety regulations are more widely accepted across the world as compared to their American counterparts. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is the closest single model for data privacy that has been adopted by many countries.

Reality check! Why US can predominantly establish its influence is because of the use of dollar payment system in many countries. This is conducive of US’s power globally and thereby increasing its economic governance. EU on the other hand has power to enforce trade sanctions but not in as powerful and discriminatory manner as the US. The power that US President Donald Trump showcased when imposing sanctions on Iran and when he went after Huawei for breaching sanctions, in most likelihood, will not be matched by the Union. But the wide use of GDPR gives EU a definite satisfaction but is not a concrete geopolitical tool that can be used by EU to strengthen its global power.

EU can move to the role of world leader if it procures enough tools and tangible power like guns, intelligence agencies and money; or if all the member countries start working collectively. This is genuinely the higher probability route for EU to become a geopolitical force.

Chinese fishing boats, between food security and geopolitics
Geopolitics

Chinese fishing boats, between food security and geopolitics

The month of July was about to end when the Ecuadorian naval authorities identified a fleet of 340 Chinese fishing boats near the Galapagos archipelago, a real army that proceeded with the fishing activities to the maximum allowed in an area protected. Today these vessels are still present in the region and have reignited the debate on the practice of overfishing – the overexploitation of fish resources in a given area by the Chinese industry. Activists and environmental protection bodies were very outraged by the massive presence of industrial fishing vessels that threaten the ecosystem with the killing of excessive quantities of fish and shellfish, as well as leaving behind a mass of waste that surfaces on the beaches and in the local fishing nets. The Galapagos case is not isolated.

 At the beginning of September, the Pakistan Fisherfolk Forum (PFF) fishing lobby denounced the arrival of about twenty Chinese fishing vessels in the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) of the provinces of Sindh and Baluchistan. The group indicated how intensive fishing has reduced fish stocks by 72% compared to last year. Similar cases have been repeated over the last decade in the waters around Timor Leste, the Philippines, New Zealand. All solved with little fact, if not the complaint and reporting of the companies involved, which got away with the amount of a late payment or removal from the affected areas to return later with altered identifiers and logbooks to preventrecognition.

China is not the only nation to monopolize fishing in international waters, even if the number of hegemonic states in the sector is incredibly low: six. According to research published in Science Advances, China, Taiwan, Japan, Spain, Indonesia, and South Korea hold about 80% of the vessels for international fishing on the high seas. These data reveal a rapidly growing trend, consistent with the growing purchasing power of Asian citizens. An Asia Research and Engagement (ARE) report on protein consumption in Asia predicted a 78% growth in meat and fish purchases by 2050.

Among these, China is the country of concern. Its demographic weight and ample political and economic resources allow Chinese companies to maintain a significant presence in the fisheries sector in international waters. That is counting a fleet of at least 3,000 industrial fishing boats, according to the limits imposed by the thirteenth five-year plan, the biggest in the world. The measures taken by the Chinese government to limit the damage to the image due to multiple international complaints are claims that circumvent the problem. An example is the recent seasonal ban on squid fishing in certain waters between the Pacific and South Atlantic. The restrictions define periods and areas where neither China nor other countries fish for squid because useless: “It is as if China has put a fishing ban on the moon,” the activists replied on Twitter. The lack of effective international measures to counter these activities, coupled with the political instability of most of the countries involved, makes it difficult to counter a phenomenon that will only grow in the coming decades and risks putting Asian and South American nations into one against the others.

In its annual analysis of the state of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), the Pentagon highlighted the rapid development of China military technologies in the aviation and navy fields, also paying attention to the phenomenon of the militarization of Chinese industrial fishing boats. Civilian involvement in the South China Sea takes place through the Chinese practice of advancing a militarized fleet on state-owned civilian ships. The People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia (PAFMM) is a civilian reserve coalition that routinely operates by chartering civilian boats. A factor that makes the nature of some industrial expeditions off the coast of China and is highly strategic points in the chessboard of the Sea increasingly ambiguous. South Chinese and the Pacific. The presence of well-equipped ships and exploratory missions, in particular for detecting submarine oil and gas fields, also reinforced the suspicions around the atolls and small islands historically contested by the Chinese government.

How internet has become the flag-bearer of spreading racism, violence and bigotry – An overview
Geopolitics

How internet has become the flag-bearer of spreading racism, violence and bigotry – An overview

 Living in a technologically advanced world that is connected through internet has innumerable advantages – getting news as it happens in any corner of the world, staying in touch with people in every nook of any country. But there is also a darker side of the internet that can’t be denied. The far-right extremist groups are taking advantage of the networking system to spread their racially divisive ideas, hate and mistrust. The “cyber-racism” is a real entity which is responsible for creating widespread violence and bigotry across the world.

Even the inventor of World Wide Web, Tim Berners-Lee admits that he may have unleashed an untamed technology which has potential to cause massive damage. He once said, “Humanity connected by technology on the web is functioning in a dystopian way. We have online abuse, prejudice, bias, polarization, fake news, there are lots of ways in which it is broken.”

Research shows that propaganda of divisive ideas, both political and racial, is reinforced and influenced not just by extremist groups but also individuals who are largely unaffiliated. But the way of using internet to their advantage is different for each. Racist groups are predominantly active on many communication channels through which they achieve different strategies and goals. The effects of their propaganda are also distinctively specific. Individuals engage in cyber-racism mostly to hurt specific people who are their deliberate targets. They connect with like-minded people to confirm their racist views. They communicate primarily through blogs, forums, chat rooms and news commentary websites.

The current widespread racist fight going across the world and primarily in United States of America is spread by similar white supremacists and also individuals. The individuals’ strategies include minimizing or denying issue of racism, condescending non-whites and reframing the current news stories to support their views and inclination. Groups on the other hand prefer communication through their own channels or websites. They are strategically specific in what they wish to achieve and communicate it clearly through their websites. Websites are their portal to gather support through racist propaganda and views. They feed on manipulating information and using the rhetoric cleverly to preach a broader ‘white’ identity among followers. The path of different ethnicities argument they argue about is unavoidable and their views of ‘white people oppression’ is what delivers their propaganda. The division, mistrust and bigotry it creates is the root cause of violence and racial imbalance across the world.

The geopolitics of religion to understand how the world changes
Geopolitics

The geopolitics of religion to understand how the world changes

The Hagia Sophia conversion into a mosque by Turkey has rekindled attention to the importance of the geopolitics of religions. It was born less than twenty years ago. The geopolitics of religions takes place with the intensification of de-secularization and de-westernization process of large areas of the world, especially Asia. The refinement of its reading skills, on different levels of spatial analysis, makes it a powerful and essential tool for understanding the most important political and social phenomena currently underway.

Yves Lacoste was the first to introduce the concept and term of “geopolitical representations.” In practice, according to Lacoste, in addition to the geopolitical situations that translate, on a given territory, the rivalries between different powers in conflict, there are also historically consolidated antagonistic geopolitical ideas, individual and collective, which we can call as “representations” in a double sense: cartographic, that is referring to the graphic representation of a given disputed territory; and theatrical, where the peoples and nations protagonists of the drama that takes place in the ground, are described as actors who play on a stage.

We can say that religious representations are the ‘mythomoteurs’ of geopolitics. Basically, in this idea, there were already the necessary and sufficient premises for the development of a specific branch of geopolitics. That concerns the study and interpretation of all those collective “geopolitical representations” that arise from the different religions. But, at the end of the twentieth century, faiths were almost completely removed from the framework of political research as they were considered as a historical and cultural phenomenon now in a phase of inexorable regression and exhaustion. Only in the last twenty years, and more precisely since 1993, has the geopolitics of religions finally emerged from its long gestation, establishing itself internationally as a sub-discipline of the sector.

At the second level of magnitude, the continental one, we find the great religions protagonists of the cultural history of Eurasia, one of which, Islam, also widespread in a large part of Africa. Mackinder already indicated them in the fateful lecture of 1904, as almost prefigured by geographical determinism: «To the east, south and west of this heart of the earth there are peripheral regions, arranged in a vast crescent and accessible to seamen. The physical conformation identifies four, and it is not negligible that, in general, each of them coincides with the sphere of diffusion of one of the four great religions: Buddhism, Brahmanism, Islam, and Christianity. The first two regions are the monsoon lands, one facing the Pacific Ocean, the other facing the Indian Ocean. The fourth is Europe, washed by Atlantic rains. These three together, while covering less than seven million square miles, have more than a thousand million inhabitants, or two-thirds of the world’s population. The third coincides with the land of the Five Seas. Also known as the Near East, mostly devoid of humidity due to the proximity of Africa and sparsely populated.

Through the colonization process that takes place between the fifteenth and early twentieth centuries, it is Christianity that is the first to spread almost all over the world. In this regard, the data relating to the planetary spread of Christianity is significant. Taking into account that the world population during the last five centuries has increased from about 426 million to the current 6 billion, the percentage of Christians, which was 19 percent in the early 1500s, reaches a peak of 35 percent in the year 1900, to decline to 33 percent in 1980, and even to 23 percent in 2000. It is useless to underline the geopolitical importance of this data. That must be integrated with that, unfortunately poorly documented, relating to the recent mass conversions of Westerners to religions such as Islam and Buddhism in the first place.

RELATED NEWS: Geopolitics at the time of COVID-19

EU’s differences with China over trade, human rights and democracy make it shift towards Indo-Pacific region
Geopolitics

EU’s differences with China over trade, human rights and democracy make it shift towards Indo-Pacific region

European Union’s ties with China has grown cold over the last few years, particularly since 2018 when the communist nation cracked down on pro-democracy supporters in Hong Kong. The nations part of the union chose to drift away over their difference of opinion with China especially over democracy, human rights, non-transparent terms of trade and economic policy. To sum up the current state of ties between the two, Yu Jie, senior research fellow at Chatam House told CNBC, “Trust is very thin”.

Things grew worse with China’s imposition of new security law in Hong Kong, which the communist regime passed in June, just after the European officials met their Chinese counterparts and raised concern over China’s handling of pro-democracy protests. Along with Hong Kong situation, Europe also openly opposed China’s muscle flexing over Taiwan and its treatment of muslim minority community of Uighur.

“We have to recognise that we do not share the same values, political systems, or approach to multilateralism,” Charles Michel, president of the European Council, said in June after a call with the Chinese President Xi Jinping.

We want to help shape (the future global order) so that it is based on rules and international cooperation, not on the law of the strong. That is why we have intensified cooperation with those countries that share our democratic and liberal values

German foreign minister Heiko Maas

Besides, EU’s frustration over trade with China rose over the latter’s indirect tactics to keep its market closed. The EU has argued that European companies working in China do not experience same levels of transparency and fair competition as provided to Chinese firms in the European market. However, the analyst believed that the two might not be able to formalise an effective trade agreement as they had earlier planned to achieve by the end of the year.

“I don’t think we will hear any significant progress,” Janka Oertel, Asia director at foreign policy think-tank the European Council on Foreign Relations, told CNBC.

The European bloc has started to explore new trade relations beyond China, which directly puts Asian-Pacific countries in limelight. EU, specifically Germany, which has been one of the largest trading partner of China in the entire continent has adopted India-Pacific strategy over China’s political, economic and human rights issues. Besides, Germany had been growing concerned over its increasing dependence over China. “We want to help shape (the future global order) so that it is based on rules and international cooperation, not on the law of the strong. That is why we have intensified cooperation with those countries that share our democratic and liberal values,” German foreign minister Heiko Maas said on September 2.

How guise of ISIS makes the West Flourish in Mozambique
Geopolitics

How guise of ISIS makes the West Flourish in Mozambique

As the world tries to come in terms of the silent destruction caused by the corona virus pandemic, terrorist groups continue to move unabated here and there. The fighters with the Al Sunnah wa Jama’ah (ASWJ) entered Mozambique in 2017 and have finally captured the strategic points in August 2020. Proclaiming their allegiance to ISIS, they have left the military handicapped. The Mozambique military are not getting their salaries as the government cannot afford them anymore. It is under pressure from the International Monetary Fund.

Surprisingly, the investors and IMF would prefer the government appoints private companies who can provide protection. On the list are names like South African Dyck Advisory Group (DAG), the Russian Wagner Group, and Erik Prince’s Frontier Services Group. According to Colonel Lionel Dyck, the head of the Dyck Group, “the Mozambican Defence Forces are unprepared and under-resourced.”

But what has come to light is the fact that these private security companies are also being employed by energy majors. French energy company Total and the U.S. energy company ExxonMobil are the main protagonists here.

The Mozambique government has already signed an agreement with both on the extraction from the gas fields in Area 1 and Area 4 of Mozambique’s Rovuma Basin. Now, these fields seem to be need security forces to keep them safe. According to a narrative fed by Total, Mozambique’s government, and the private security firms is that the conflict in northern Mozambique is authored by the Islamists, and that all measures must be taken to thwart this three-year-old insurgency.

According to political analysts, there is no war in the making but the western powers are using the radicalization as an excuse to claim control over gas reserves. People are suffering under unemployment and poverty. Drug trafficking and ruby smuggling is on the rise. But the emergence of ISIS will not see a huge Islamic state in the making because the number of Muslim population is small there. Unless the Mozambique government does not get all glee eyed over the deals being offered by the US and France, there is all the chance that there is going to be civil war, and loot by foreign powers here.

Belgrade attacks Russia, how the Balkan geopolitics is changing
Geopolitics

Belgrade attacks Russia, how the Balkan geopolitics is changing

On 7 July 2020, Serbia experienced the most turbulent political unrest since the fall of Slobodan Milošević in 2000. Protesters across the country were shocked by the government’s decision to re-impose a blockade to contain the second wave of Covid-19. Thousands of protesters took to the capital, Belgrade, and other Serbian cities such as Novi Sad, Niš, Kragujevac, and Smederovo. Protesters stormed the parliament building, and riot units and special forces of the Serbian police intervened against the demonstrators with tear gas and violence.

However, as the “War on the Rocks” blog reports, something rather unusual happened amid the riots: pro-government tabloids accused pro-Russians and right-wing anti-Europeans of organizing the protests. Since Kosovo declared independence from Serbia in 2008, the Serbian government has nurtured its partnership with Russia to gain support on the Kosovo issue, build leverage with the West and win votes among pro-Russian sides of the country. Serbian electorate. Therefore, these accusations by the Serbian media and the tabloids are interesting. The government’s willingness to blame Russia for the protests demonstrates the scale of the political crisis in Serbia, and highlights, how Serbian-Russian ties are no longer what they used to be and the power that President Aleksandar Vučić has. Independent institutions no longer exist, and Vučić is ruling a deeply polarized society, where people can only channel their anger into the streets.

The editorial line of the Serbian tabloids does not mean that Belgrade will soon break ties with Moscow, but it does show that the geopolitics of the Balkans is changing. Russia can no longer count on the loyalty of the Serbian government, which is now willing to scapegoat Russia to win the favor of the West.The coalition led by Vučić and his Serbian Progressive Party is made up of former collaborators of Milošević and has been in power since 2012. Vučić and his party now dominate Serbian institutions, including the national security apparatus and the media.

When the pandemic hit Serbia, Vučić responded with a state of emergency and a strict curfew. After two months, the government ended the state of emergency, allowing citizens to return to their lives. Despite the virus, Serbia has made it possible to play football and tennis matches with a high turnout of the public and without social distances. Serbia was the first country in Europe to hold national elections after the blockade. The parliamentary elections on 21 June had low turnout as the opposition boycotted the vote. As a result, the Serbian Progressive Party won a two-thirds majority in parliament. The victory removed the control from Vučić’s power.

After the elections, a report came out according to which the Serbian government hid the Covid-19 data. Vučić, after power securing, decided to reintroduce the weekend curfew in Belgrade.This decision sparked protests with a strict and, in many cases, excessive police response.The accusation against Russia was the scapegoat for the government’s media machine. Interestingly, pro-government tabloids avoided mentioning Vladimir Putin’s name in their headlines, and Vučić denied allegations of Russian involvement. Allegations of Russian interference continued even as the protests faded. On July 23, SrpskiTelegraf reported that the deep Russian state, without Putin’s permission, was trying to overthrow Vučić. The Russian ambassador to Serbia reacted on Twitter, saying that Russia is “unpleasantly surprised and revolted by the text on the front page, which without any evidence tries to promote an incredible hype about Russia’s” Deep State.” Putin was not named directly, but the fact that the Russian ambassador reacted to a tabloid cover story shows that the Russian government recognizes that Belgrade is, at least for now, turning its back on Moscow.

As China imposes its aggression, US stands firm in support of Taiwan: The changing scene of geopolitics
Geopolitics

As China imposes its aggression, US stands firm in support of Taiwan: The changing scene of geopolitics

Until at least four years back China was seen as a close ally to United States. No country would be openly vocal against the Chinese policies. But Donald Trump changed the whole equation after he took the Presidency of US in 2016. He has been by large the strongest critic against China’s reforms – be it the imposing of controversial security law in Hong Kong, or its treatment of Uighur community, or latest escalations against Taiwan.

On Sunday a US guided missile destroyer sailed in the waters of Taiwan Strait, this being second such movement in less than two weeks. And the clear signal from Washington of its willingness to stand up for Taiwan against China’s aggression. Furthermore, on Monday it stressed the classified commitments with Taiwan that were formalized during Reagan administration. The “Six Assurances” make the guidelines of US arms sales clear and also the diplomatic support provided to Taipei by Washington, irrespective of coercion from Beijing. US has been a strong ally with Taiwan for decades after the island separated from China mainland at start of civil war. But the leaders and policymakers in Washington have always refrained from displaying their support to Taipei overtly. 

China has long seen the island of around 24 million people, a self-governing democratic country, as an essentially inseparable part under its authority, and has never hesitated to avail any opportunity of unifying the island with mainland. A non-defined status quo has always existed between China and Taiwan, but under President Xi Jinping Beijing has reasserted its claims on the island. Constant military action is threatened by China in response to island’s attempts towards independence formally. China has called US’s Six Assurances “illegal and invalid”. Ma Xiaoguang, spokesperson for Taiwan Affairs Office of State Council in Beijing said, “Relying on the so-called ‘Six Assurance’ by the United States to seek ‘Taiwan Independence’ will only lead to self-inflicted disasters.”

Experts say that US’s very deliberate and openly claiming support to Taiwan are well demonstrated by revealing of the Six Assurances, the recent sailing along Taiwan Strait, US arms sale, and latest visit of a high ranked US Cabinet Secretary to the island. The upcoming US presidential elections in November are in high probability will destabilize already turbulent relations between Washington and Beijing. But US is leaving no stone unturned to show Taipei of its rock-solid stand.

1 2 3 4 10

The World Reviews

The World Reviews provides latest world news and brief stories. To know more news about world follow us.