dimanche 28 mai 2017

Sina Delenda Est

‘A matter of principle’: Richard Marles says South China Sea exercises about national interest
By PRIMROSE RIORDAN

Richard Marles: Stop Chinese aggressions

Labor shadow defence spokesman Richard Marles has repeated his support for freedom of navigation exercises close to Chinese controlled islands in the South China Sea.
The strong comments from Mr Marles are in contrast to Labor’s pro-China Foreign Affairs Spokeswoman Penny Wong who has said while Australia should support freedom of navigation and international law, the country should focus on de-escalation.
“We would urge de-escalation. We would urge that these issues are resolved diplomatically, are resolved peacefully and that there is not escalation,” Senator Wong told the ABC in March.
The comments come after former Defence Department head Dennis Richardson told Fairfax Media Australia should challenge China’s claims to the islands by carrying out its own “freedom-of-navigation” naval operation in the contested waters.
While Australian forces traverse the region via sea and air, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has said Australia is yet to commit to sailing within the 12 mile territorial zone around Chinese controlled islands.
Mr Marles was asked whether he still thought Australia should get involved in freedom of navigation exercises in the zone claimed by China close to Chinese controlled islands in the South China Sea.
“Well as a matter of principle my view has not changed,” he told Sky News.
“The construction of the artificial islands in the South China Sea have been found by the court of arbitration internationally have been found to be in breach of the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea.”
“That convention matters to us. Any actions including freedom of navigation operations that support the law of the sea are in our national interest.”
Mr Marles said the decision to undertake such exercises can only be made clearly from office and they can be done in a less provocative way.
But he said it would be wrong to ignore Australia’s national interest in the area.
“To ignore that national interest that we have in the South China Sea is just wrong as well… We clearly have an interest,” he said citing Australian trade flows through the region.
In early May opposition foreign spokeswoman Penny Wong said there would be a mistake not to support Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative global infrastructure plan.
Mr Marles was more cautious and said Australia should consider its national security interests when looking at the project.
“It’s looking at this on a case-by-case basis. It’s not about rejecting China’s initiative out of hand that makes no sense at all.”
“There are going to be important infrastructure projects and desire from China to invest in them which may well be in our national interest that we should ultimately support.”
“Clearly we should be bearing in mind our national security when we engage in these and we need to be looking at things through that lens.”
The Turnbull government has so far resisted a push to align the Chinese fund and the $5 billion Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility.

samedi 27 mai 2017

Joshua Wong, the student who risked the wrath of Beijing: ‘It’s about turning the impossible into the possible’

He was still a geeky teenager when he led Hong Kong’s 2014 umbrella protests. Since then Beijing’s grip has tightened, but he’s not giving up the resistance
By Tania Branigan
Joshua Wong, Hong Kong activist and face of the umbrella movement.

Cometh the hour, cometh the boy. 
Very much a boy: 17 and looking even younger behind his black-rimmed spectacles, with baggy shorts accentuating his skinniness and shaggy hair in need of a trim. 
Bright, well-mannered and slightly geeky, everyone’s son was about to become an international celebrity.
In September 2014, an unprecedented wave of civil disobedience swept Hong Kong, with tens of thousands of people pouring on to the streets to call for democratic reforms. 
The shock wasn’t just seeing riot police deployed in the heart of a city regarded as apolitical, money-focused and essentially conservative. 
It was the numbers and sheer youth of these peaceful demonstrators, umbrellas held aloft to ward off teargas and pepper spray, as they confronted – peacefully, tidily and very, very politely – the wrath of Beijing.
The Face of Protest, in the words of Time’s cover, was teenager Joshua Wong
It was the detention of Wong and other student protesters – for storming into the blocked-off government complex – that first brought sizeable crowds to the streets of Central district, and the heavy-handed response of police that catalysed that extraordinary, exhilarating moment known as the umbrella movement. 
But when I tracked him down after his release he dodged personal questions and, indeed, most others. He didn’t like the idea of movements getting hung up on stars.
Two-and-a-half years on, the battle has shifted from the streets to the polling booths. 
Wong, now 20, has co-founded a new party, Demosisto, and is studying for a politics degree, although, he says: “Sometimes it feels as if I major in activism and minor in university.” 
Earlier this month he was in Washington, testifying before the cameras to US senator Marco Rubio’s congressional-executive commission on China. 
When I meet him, in London, he is promoting the modestly titled Netflix documentary Joshua: Teenager vs Superpower
“Being famous is part of my job,” he suggests in the film. 
He’s even smartened up, with shorn hair and a rather dapper jacket.

Police fire teargas at pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong in September 2014. 

“We’re working on it,” says his friend and fellow Demosisto founder Nathan Law, with a grin. 
He means the makeover, but portrays Wong’s profile as a collective, pragmatic decision too: “It is always a team play ... What we wanted to project through Joshua’s story is that as long as the city is undemocratic, and there’s underprivilege, and people’s interests are neglected, we will keep going.”
Wong judges the documentary, which won a Sundance Audience award, “a good platform to get people internationally – especially people who watched the umbrella movement and have maybe forgotten it already – more interested in the situation. In 2014, of course, it wasn’t necessary to have much focus on myself ... It’s been really hard to maintain people’s interest.”
The upsurge of protest was, in a way, as surprising to Wong as anyone.
“At school, the teachers told us: Hong Kong people are economic animals, focused on investment and the stock market. There was a sense that business development was the most important thing,” he says.
He comes from a quiet, middle-class family, not especially political, although his parents are supportive and, because of their faith, encouraged him to take an interest in the city’s poor. 
“I’m a Christian and my motivation for joining activism is that I think we should be salt and light,” he says – the salt of the Earth and the light of the world – “but a lot of politicians in Hong Kong say they are guided by the Bible. I think it’s ridiculous: how can you say your judgment fully represents God?”
His moral seriousness helps to explain why, aged just 14, he co-founded a group called Scholarism to protest against national education, a “patriotic” curriculum that critics attacked as pro-Beijing brainwashing. 
The small bunch of schoolchildren sparked huge protests: Wong shot to local attention – and the government backed down. 
Then came the umbrella movement.
There are obvious parallels with youthful, social media-fuelled protests elsewhere, as the original name of Occupy Central suggests, but when I ask about his political inspirations, he dismisses the idea: “No. No,” he says at once.
Wariness probably plays a part; it would do them no favours to be seen as influenced by foreigners. But his explanation is pragmatic. 
There are things to be learned from other movements, he concedes – “strategy, dealing with pressure, dealing with people. But it’s hard to follow tactics because they’re a different generation and different circumstance. Martin Luther King and Gandhi emphasised civil disobedience; but in their context that was very different from Hong Kong in 2014.”
Wong (right) with Nathan Law.

Can young people fuming at Brexit or Donald Trump’s presidency learn anything from him?
“I’m not saying everyone should be Joshua Wong or follow my journey. But at least it proved that activism is not just related to experienced politicians or well-trained activists who have been working for NGOs; it can also be students and high-schoolers,” he says.
The comedown from his moment of glory was swift and harsh. 
The protests dragged on for 79 days, losing goodwill and producing no immediate result as the National Education protests had. 
Recriminations flew: the leaders were too radical; or not radical enough. 
Middle-aged Hong Kongers had voiced their shame that it took young people to spur them into protest. 
Now some began to see them as naive, almost accidental heroes.
More punishing was Beijing’s reaction. 
The trigger for the protests was electoral reform proposals; but the deeper impetus was pushing back against the rapid erosion of Hong Kong’s freedoms
When Britain handed the territory back to China in 1997, the countries agreed that its way of life would continue unchanged for 50 years, with Hong Kong retaining a high degree of autonomy under the “one country, two systems” framework. 
Then, 2047 seemed a long way off. 
China needed to protect Hong Kong’s stability for the sake of its own economy, and might itself liberalise. 
Beijing promised universal suffrage. 
Wong, born the year before handover, will be 51 when the deal ends – but in Washington this month, he suggested it was already “one country, one and a half systems”. 
China has betrayed the joint declaration,” he says.
Hong Kong is now trapped in an irresolvable contradiction. 
Many residents are staunchly pro-Beijing; and for an even larger tranche, the priority is stability. 
But the young generation, in particular, increasingly see their identity as “Hong Kong” rather than “Chinese”; chafe at Beijing’s dictates; and are pushing back to reassert the region’s autonomy. 
Every such move intensifies Beijing’s fears and tightens its grip. 
Hong Kong’s institutions – the media, judiciary, universities – have come under ever greater pressure since the umbrella movement
Most chillingly, in 2015, five booksellers known for provocative works on China’s leaders vanished – only to resurface on the mainland, in custody, over book smuggling
And with each move by Beijing, the antagonism increases.
Lam Wing-kee, one of the Hong Kong booksellers who was taken into custody in mainland China. 

In part, Wong’s fame always rested on its sheer implausibility, captured in the title of the documentary. 
But he is more than a symbol. 
He isn’t glamorous and is no dazzling orator. 
Yet he has a knack for saying just the right thing at the right time in a way that people relate to, and for seeing the broader picture: “One person, one vote is just the starting point for democracy. What I hope is that politics shouldn’t be dominated by the pro-Chinese elite; it should be related to everyone’s daily life,” he says.
His group has, on the whole astutely, weighed and responded to each political shift. 
They have not stopped working. 
And against the odds, they have notched up significant wins.
Last September, Law became Hong Kong’s youngest legislator at 23 (Wong was too young to stand). It proved they could do more than protest: these days, they talk about bus routes as well as democracy. 
It also proved that it was not just about Wong. 
But that victory, too, is in doubt: the government wants to disqualify Law and other young activist-legislators from straying from their oath of office. 
If the courts rule against him this month, he will not only lose his seat but go bankrupt, saddled with the government’s costs.
“As young activists the unique advantage is that we have less burden; we don’t need to worry so much about salary or managing the situation with families,” Wong says.
But the advantage is relative. 
The young activists have sharply curtailed their future career options. 
He and Law were convicted over their initial 2014 protest under unlawful assembly laws and there have been fresh arrests over the 2014 protests. 
Wong was detained for 12 hours while trying to enter Thailand, and he and Law have been attacked by pro-Beijing protesters.
“We expected that maybe in future we may be put in jail. But how it’s created a threat to daily life is not easy to handle,” he says. 
“If at 14 I could foresee my future and this kind of pressure – I think it would be hard for me [to commit to it].”
In the documentary, he admits to moments where he has wept and thought he couldn’t go on. 
But he insists he enjoys it too: “I think its valuable, even if sometimes it’s quite boring and exhausting. I’m working up to the second I go to sleep.”
Law says – with affection – that Wong is a robot, without a second life: “His growing-up time was in politics. All the thoughts in his mind, as a teenager, were about how to change society. He can’t drag himself away to private life.”
That sounds like fun for his girlfriend, I say. 
Wong looks embarrassed: “I met her in Scholarism. So she strongly supports this.” 
He still plays video games and goes to the movies, he says. 
But clearly not very often.
Wong (centre) in Hong Kong in October 2014, as thousands of pro-democracy supporters occupied the streets surrounding the financial district.

The truth is that they keep fighting, in part, because they are already down a path with very few exits: “If I continue with activism, maybe in 10 or 20 years it will be one country one system – and then I will have to leave Hong Kong. And I was born and live in Hong Kong and I really love Hong Kong,” he says.
“Since 2015, I’ve travelled to different places, and every time I just miss the food. The milk tea, the breakfast in the cha chaan teng [a kind of cheap local restaurant]. I love those things. I don’t know why people love fish and chips. At all. No idea.”
He is really exercised now: “Visiting New York and DC – having lunch with think-tank leaders and just grabbing a sandwich and a Coke, without any rice or hot food – why they can accept these things every day for their lunch I just don’t know. I love Hong Kong very much.”
It’s the most expansive he has been, which isn’t as incongruous as it sounds. 
The fuel for the umbrella movement was never detached idealism, but a visceral attachment to a way of life that Hong Kong’s residents see fast disappearing, thanks to the flood of mainland wealth and the surge in migration as well as Beijing’s political grip.
Critics say the movement accelerated the cycle of clampdown and pushback with its rejection of electoral reform proposals. 
Beijing offered one person, one vote – but only if the slate of candidates for chief executive was under its control. 
That was pointless, said the activists; it offered no meaningful choice.
“In the long term, the erosion of Hong Kong autonomy is a given,” says Steve Tsang, the head of the Soas China Institute, who was raised in Hong Kong. 
“The game is how you slow down and minimise that. You don’t do it by going to war with Beijing – because you can’t win. They would rather destroy Hong Kong.”
China is the world’s second-largest economy; the region is no longer economically indispensable. 
But 30 years are left on the agreement’s clock, and, as Tsang says, a lot could change in China in that time. 
Saying yes to electoral reform would have given residents some say and encouraged Beijing to ease up.
Demonstrators protest at Wong’s detention as he tried to enter Thailand last year. 

The counter view is that without resistance there is little cost to Beijing’s encroachments, and that Hong Kong was sleep walking into a wholly different future. 
Suzanne Pepper, a long-time Hong Kong resident and researcher, says the original – much older – conveners of the civil disobedience wanted a wake-up call for Beijing. 
It was the students who turned it into a wake-up call for Hong Kong.
Now, as the cycle continues, ever more radical voices are emerging. 
Talk of independence in Hong Kong was once the preserve of an extreme fringe; last year, a survey found 17% of residents wanted it – rising to 40% among 15-to-24-year-olds – though more than 80% judged it impossible. 
Demosisto says it wants self-determination; and that, of course, is just as unacceptable to Beijing.
They are, as Law says, “walking on a high wire, careful of every step”. 
They have dodged obvious traps: being pushed into more extreme positions, or, equally, being distracted into battles within pro-democracy ranks. 
Wong admits that decisions become harder as their influence grows, but is strikingly confident in his own judgment: “I still have strong beliefs and know what’s the next step.”
There have been potential missteps; Pepper says Wong’s testimony to Rubio’s committee makes it easier for opponents to push the idea that he is the dupe of hostile foreign forces. 
A pro-Beijing paper has attacked him as a “race traitor”. 
But they need to keep international attention and, says Wong, “Hong Kong is a global and open city. It’s normal to reach out ... We hope the international community will keep its eyes on Hong Kong and support this movement.”
That looks particularly optimistic given the UK’s reluctance to challenge China in any but the most muted way over the erosion of promises in the joint declaration. 
Hong Kong’s former governor Chris Patten warned recently that Britain was “selling its honour”. Wong says he has been shocked by its silence at critical moments and is scathing overall: “It just focuses on trade deals.”
And that, perhaps, is the subtext of the new documentary’s title. 
It’s not so much investing Wong with superhero status as asking why a bunch of teenagers and twentysomethings have been willing to confront the might of China, at considerable cost, while governments are craven. 
That question becomes all the more important as the 20th anniversary of the handover approaches this summer. 
Xi Jinping is expected to make his first visit to the region as Chinese president to mark it: another potential flashpoint.
Beijing’s grip is continuing to tighten and the outlook for activists is, on any rational reading, grim. But Wong sees that as an admission of defeat before the struggle has even begun. 
“Don’t be afraid or scared for the future of Hong Kong,” he insists. 
“My starting point was founding Scholarism: at that moment, I couldn’t expect 100,000 people in the streets. I couldn’t imagine the umbrella movement when it began. I couldn’t imagine Demosisto. It’s always about turning things that are impossible into the possible. The enjoyable moment is creating the miracle.”

• Joshua: Teenager vs Superpower is released on Netflix on 26 May.

Joshua: Teenager vs. Superpower review – a Hong Kong schoolboy takes the fight to China

A rousing documentary profiles Joshua Wong, the adolescent activist who found fame with his protests against the Chinese government
By Gwilym Mumford

Hong Kong activist Joshua Wong, who is profiled in Joshua: Teenager vs Superpower.

Joshua Wong, the student who risked the wrath of Beijing: ‘It’s about turning the impossible into the possible’

The Joshua of the title is Joshua Wong, an unassuming Hong Kong schoolboy who decided to pick a fight with the next global superpower, and won, at least initially. 
In 2011 14-year-old Wong and his Scholarism movement managed to defeat an effort to make China’s communist National Education curriculum mandatory in Hong Kong schools through the power of peaceful protest. 
It was the first victory an activist group managed in the territory since it came under Chinese rule in 1997.
If Wong had cashed his chips in there and then his story might have made for a pleasing if fairly minor documentary. 
But, as this absorbing new Netflix film shows, he instead got involved in a far more significant battle: over the democratic future of Hong Kong itself.
In 2014 Scholarism became part of the wider Umbrella movement, the Occupy-style group set up to protest a refusal by China to allow Hong Kong to elect their own leaders. 
Officially the country is afforded a relaxed position within the One China policy, permitted to maintain its present capitalist form for 50 years as part of the handover deal made between China and the UK. 
Yet, there has been a perceived ratcheting up of influence by Beijing in recent times, prompting a more robust response from those opposed to China’s control, particularly from younger citizens like Wong who see Hong Kong’s semi-autonomy as central to their identity.
Joshua Wong.

Teenager vs Superpower does a solid job of contextualising this larger ideological battle, with talking heads and archive footage, but it’s always clear that the focus here is Wong. 
He’s a remarkable figure perhaps because, on the surface he seems so unremarkable -- a gawky teen in oversized clothes from a lower-middle class background who nevertheless manages to rouse people with his energy and plain speaking. 
His ‘wunderkind’ status helps too of course – one commentator here compares him with Joan of Arc for his ability to enter a complex adult conflict and resolve it with youthful simplicity.
While Teenager vs. Superpower is often as in thrall to Wong as his followers, director Joe Piscatella does also allow for some dissenting voices who see Wong’s celebrity presence as detrimental to the larger movement. 
One accuses him of hijacking the protests and there’s a sense that his adolescent impetuousness might cost him dearly in the end. 
Rallying cries like “it’s time for total war” are unlikely to be received warmly by those in Beijing, and Joshua is aware of the parlous situation he’s created for himself when, at one point in the documentary he notes, “I can’t ensure I will not be disappeared in the future.”
For the time being China seem to be adopting a softly softly approach to Wong and indeed the larger protest movement inside Hong Kong. 
As the documentary progresses – and it’s worth issuing a spoiler warning here for those who don’t want to be broadsided by details of widely reported real-life events – we see the Umbrella Protests falter and ultimately fail, not because of a Tiananmen Square-style crackdown, but as a result of apathy and fatigue on the part of its participants. 
Even a hunger strike by Wong, when his camp is finally dismantled by police, isn’t enough to reinvigorate the movement. 
Ultimately, even Scholarism feels forced to call it a day.
That would of course make for a pretty downbeat coda to an otherwise rousing documentary – not to mention wildly out of character from Wong – and encouragingly things end with him and several other members of Scholarism forming a new political entity, Demonsisto, and plotting to run for political office. 
The fight for Hong Kong’s future is far from over, and it seems that Joshua is going to be a major player in it.

In the South China Sea, the U.S. is Struggling to Halt Beijing’s Advance

Despite a belated U.S. naval patrol, Beijing’s bid to extend its military power over the South China Sea is moving ahead unchecked.
BY DAN DE LUCE, KEITH JOHNSON

For the first time since Donald Trump took office, a U.S. warship has sailed near a Chinese-controlled island in the disputed South China Sea, signaling an attempt to project a more assertive American stance against Beijing just before a major regional defense summit.
The mission, a passage by the guided missile destroyer USS Dewey­ on Wednesday within twelve nautical miles of Mischief Reef, in the Spratly island chain, was long anticipated and delayed.
The last such operation took place in October, and U.S. commanders who had already chafed under Barack Obama’s tight leash had hoped to get a freer hand and to carry out more patrols under Trump.
Instead, the new administration has declined several requests from the military to carry out naval patrols in the disputed waterway.
Eager to secure China’s help in pressuring North Korea over its nuclear weapons program, the White House has moved cautiously and chosen not to confront Beijing over the South China Sea, officials and congressional aides told Foreign Policy.
But with defense ministers and senior military officers from across Asia due to meet in Singapore next month, including U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis, the administration needed to show it was willing to back up its words with some action and demonstrate that it would uphold the principle of freedom of navigation, experts said.
“This was a good, albeit overdue, move by the Trump Administration,” said Ely Ratner, formerly deputy national security adviser to Joe Biden and now at the Council on Foreign Relations.
It was the first time a U.S. warship had sailed within the twelve-mile limit of any Chinese-held feature — a way to show that Washington doesn’t buy Beijing’s claims that rocks generate a territorial sea, and so push back against China’s expansionist claims
“This was the big one folks were waiting for,” he said.
And while those so-called freedom of navigation operations, or FONOPS, by themselves don’t amount to a U.S. strategy to deal with the South China Sea, he said, the first step is to make sure that China can’t unilaterally fence off bits of international waters. 
“FONOPs are an essential part of that,” Ratner said.
During the campaign and early days of the administration, Trump and his deputies staked out a tough line on China.
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson suggested in his confirmation hearings that U.S. forces would actually try to expel China from disputed waters and islets it now claims.
But North Korea and its rapidly-expanding missile and nuclear weapons program have grabbed the attention of the Trump administration, pushing the disputes over the Chinese land grab in the South China Sea — and Beijing’s open militarization of many islets and atolls — to the back burner.
Trump has toned down his rhetoric on trade disputes and other spats with China specifically to secure Beijing’s cooperation in defusing the North Korea crisis.
“The president and his advisers have calculated that if we are to get China’s help on North Korea, better to take the foot off the gas on more contentious issues,” said Mira Rapp-Hooper, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.
Even though as a candidate Trump portrayed former president Barack Obama as a weak president in his dealings with China and other adversaries, his administration’s cautious diplomacy bears some resemblance to Obama’s policies, as the previous White House concluded that more could be gained from Beijing by avoiding a full-blown confrontation over the South China Sea or other disputes.
Much to the consternation of U.S. allies in Asia, the Trump White House has yet to fill senior positions at the State Department and the Pentagon handling Asia policy, and has said little about the South China Sea issue publicly.
The uncertainty over the administration’s policy on China has alarmed America’s partners and weakened the resolve of some governments in Southeast Asia, who fear Washington will no longer back them up if they try to take on Beijing in the South China Sea.
At a meeting last month in Manila of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, government ministers from the region backed off of references to “land reclamation and militarization” after lobbying from China.
The Pentagon sought to downplay the significance of the operation, which it described as routine. Adm. John Richardson, the chief of naval operations, described the passage at an event in Washington Thursday as “not confrontational,” and said that the so-called freedom of navigation operations by U.S. ships receive exaggerated scrutiny for the supposed diplomatic messages they convey.
“They sure get a lot of attention when they happen,” he said, but the operations are routinely conducted all over the world without the fanfare associated with the South China Sea missions.
The operations sure get a lot of attention in China.
And such operations are also closely watched in Washington as a barometer of the administration’s willingness to push back against China. 
Amid growing concern in Congress that the Trump administration is making strategic concessions to China in hopes of persuading Beijing to shift its stance on North Korea, several senators from both sides of the aisle wrote a letter earlier this month urging the administration to show resolve in the South China Sea and conduct more frequent naval patrols in the waterway.
The first real test of the effect of Wednesday’s naval mission will come in early June at the Shangri-La dialogue, a large annual gathering in Singapore that serves as a venue for high-level talks on crucial matters of Asian security.
Many maritime experts view the focus on freedom of navigation operations, and how they are publicly presented, as misplaced.
“In my view, the publicity around the FONOPs is problematic. Many observers now view it as an indicator of U.S. resolve, which it is not,” said M. Taylor Fravel, an expert on Chinese maritime issues at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Such missions are merely meant to uphold traditional rights to navigation in international waters for all countries, he said.
What’s more, they can give Beijing an excuse to ramp up its own provocative behavior, feeling as if its claims of sovereignty are being challenged.
“They were never intended to do more, such as deterring China’s broader ambitions in places like the South China Sea.”
Ultimately, and despite the belated U.S. mission near Mischief Reef, Washington has few tools at its disposal to convince China to retreat from its years-long acquisition and garrisoning of a spate of tiny reefs and atolls in the South China Sea, one of the world’s busiest waterways.
Some experts and lawmakers have urged imposing economic sanctions on Chinese companies taking part in the vast island-building project, but the Trump administration has shown no sign it is ready to consider such a move.
Since it began dredging sand from the seafloor to vastly expand the size of those pinpricks of coral in 2014, China has built airfields, deep harbors and air defense systems on many features and deployed advanced fighter jets, despite promises to stop militarizing the area.
The bid to extend its reach in the waterway is part of China’s much broader effort — backed up with an arsenal of missiles — to push out its defensive perimeter from the Chinese coast and keep potential rivals at arm’s length in the event of a conflict.
“The United States does not have great options in the South China Sea,” Fravel said.
“China will not vacate the features it occupies and the United States will not forcibly remove them. “
China’s project has moved at a brisk pace, with reports of new military installations appearing every few weeks.
Earlier this month, a state-run Chinese paper said that Beijing had installed 155 mm rocket launchers on Fiery Cross reef in the Spratlys, purportedly to deter combat divers from Vietnam, which has been at loggerheads with China over territorial claims in the South China Sea.
“They basically succeeded in their construction projects, and are now well on their way to having floating bases out in the Spratly Islands, and there’s been really very little pushback and they’ve had to pay very little cost for doing so,” said Rapp-Hooper.

vendredi 26 mai 2017

Come to express anger over Xi Jinping, Hong Kong June 4 vigil organiser says

Lee Cheuk-yan says they want to reignite interest among young people in democracy in mainland China after university student unions stayed away last year
By Kimmy Chung

The organisers of the annual candlelight vigil marking the June 4 Tiananmen Square crackdown have called for more Hongkongers to attend and express their anger at Xi Jinping before his expected visit to the city in late June.
The organisers also hope to reignite youngsters’ passion for democracy by inviting a high school boy band to perform. 
The rise of localism has driven university student unions away from the vigil.
“It is a very important opportunity to tell Xi Jinping that Hong Kong people are very angry at what he has done in both China and Hong Kong ... The suppression of human rights in China and the suppression of democracy in Hong Kong,” Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China secretary Lee Cheuk-yan said.
“Hong Kong people know very well that the whole so-called chief executive election was fake ... and was controlled by Beijing,” he added.

Lee said the leadership election would give extra meaning to the 28th anniversary vigil this year, in addition to remembering those who sacrificed themselves for democracy in 1989.
Xi is expected to visit the city to mark the 20th anniversary of the city’s handover to China on July 1.
Hong Kong is the only place on Chinese soil where large-scale events to mark the June 4 crackdown are held. 
Support has waned in recent years as more people, especially youngsters, believe the city should focus on its own fight rather than democracy in mainland China.
The attendance last year was down to 125,000 -- the lowest since the 20th anniversary vigil in 2009, according to the organisers. 
The organisers expect around 100,000 to take part this year but refuse to predict an exact number. “Our biggest obstacle is our apathy... I think what we need to do is to reignite the passion for political reform in Hong Kong and China,” Lee said, adding that he believed Hongkongers were still passionate about the issues.
It will be the second year that university student unions will be absent from the stage. 
To represent the voice of the next generation, the organiser has invited high school boy band Boyz’ Reborn to compose a song and perform at the vigil. 
A representative of the Tiananmen Mothers will speak by video link.

Si vis pacem...

Taiwan Prepares for China Attack With Tanks, Warships and Fighter Jets as Tensions Spike
By Josh Saul

Amid heightened tensions with Beijing, Taiwan rehearsed what its armed forces would do if attacked by China in elaborate, live-fire war games.
The games took place Thursday on the Penghu Islands, situated in the 100-mile-wide strait between Taiwan and China, and included rocket artillery, tanks, warships and fighter jets.
Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen wore a camouflage helmet and flak jacket as she watched over the drills.
"When Taiwan shows its determination to take the road of defensive autonomy, it is putting on a display to the world of our determination to protect our home and land," she said at a military base in Penghu, according to Agence France-Presse.
The preparations also included attack helicopters firing missiles and jet fighters dropping bombs, AFP reported. 
Photos of the war games showed missiles blasting off from trucks and flying across fields, and soliders jumping from black helicopters.
While the Taiwanese war games come during a time of deteriorating relations with China, the South China Sea has also been the site of recent tension between China and the U.S.
A U.S. Navy warship sailed within 12 miles of an artificial island built by China, causing China to lodge “stern representations” with the U.S., Reuters reported on Thursday. 
The incident was the first such challenge to China in the geopolitically important body of water since Trump took office, according to Reuters.
The relationship between China and Taiwan has long been fraught. 
China sees the island as a province, while people on Taiwan—a territory with its own democratically elected government—believe the island should be completely independent, according to the Council on Foreign Relations.
The U.S. is Taiwan’s only ally, and it works to support Taiwan without angering China. 
Trump spoke on the telephone with Taiwan President Ing-Wen after he was elected, a controversial move considering it was the first time since 1979 that the leaders of the two countries had spoken.
The Taiwanese live-fire war games were preceded by computer-aided war games earlier in the month. Taiwan’s defense minister said in April that the military was switching its defensive strategy toward “multiple deterrence,” which means having the ability to attack and defend simultaneously and to stop enemy forces from entering Taiwan by air, land or sea, according to The China Post.

Century of Humiliation: AlphaGo Second Win

Chinese authorities banned the broadcast of Ke Jie's stinging defeats
By Yi Shu Ng

A Go match between the world's top player, Ke Jie, and Google's AlphaGo that took place this week was censored by authorities.
The AI beat Ke Jie in yet another match today, securing a second win in the three-part match.
Three journalists have reported receiving verbal directives barring their news organisations from broadcasting the match — as well as the Go and AI summit held in Wuzhen, east China.
One journalist reported being barred from even mentioning Google's name while reporting on the event, while another said that while they could mention Google, they were barred from writing about Google's products.
This is what users in China see when attempting to watch a livestream of the match. 
"Livestream has been cut by a moderator," the error message said.
A leaked copy of a government directive was also posted on California-based China Digital Times, a website that monitors censorship in China. 
"No website, without exception, may carry a livestream," the directive said. 
"If one has been announced in advance, please immediately withdraw it."
The match was not allowed to be broadcast in any form — including liveblogging, live photos and video streams, or even on personal social media accounts, the directive added.
Staff who were already sent to Wuzhen were recalled, according to a video editor who spoke to Quartz about the ban.
Replays were reportedly available on streaming sites like bilibili.com and other websites. 
All three parts of the match were available live on YouTube, which cannot be accessed without a VPN.
Go fans were really not pleased on Weibo:
"I'm watching the replay. AlphaGo has certainly evolved... when it was matched against Lee Sedol, AlphaGo was probably not Ke Jie's match. But the lack of a livestream really makes it hard for Go fans," said a user.
"I don't understand why they won't livestream this domestically. Was watching this on bilibili when they cut the stream. What won't you show others? I had to go to YouTube, damn," said another user.
"Why won't you allow for a livestream of the AlphaGo and Ke Jie match? It isn't coming at a sensitive time, no?" a third user asked.
"Does anyone with authority know why they won't let us watch the livestream? Apparently relevant departments requested for the livestream to not be broadcast domestically, and the broadcast which was advertised in April on CCTV5 (China Central Television's sports channel) was cut and replaced with a live broadcast of basketball." said a fourth user. 
"You could watch it on YouTube, and many sites have pulled footage off there, but they've been cut in the middle of the game."
The livestream's ban is the latest development in a longstanding feud between China and Google, after a drastic fallout in 2010 when the company detected a series of cyberattacks on other U.S. companies.
Google has refused to abide by Chinese censorship rules, but the company has made inroads beyond the Great Firewall — Google Translate was made available in the country in March this year.
Government officials have also indicated a willingness to allow some Google services, like Google Scholar and other services that do not involve "sensitive" information, back into the country.