Connect with us

Published

on

Chinese President Xi Jinping is expected to deliver a major speech on Friday, the anniversary of Russias invasion of Ukraine, outlining a so-called peace plan for the war.

Here are three questions to which analysts are looking for answers. 1. Will China provide military aid to Russia? If yes, what sort?

Experts believe that China is unlikely to supply weapons to Russia. United States and European officials have recently cited intelligence that Beijing was mulling over this possibility, although it has so far refrained from sending lethal aid such as artillery shells.

In response to such concerns, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said at a regular press conference on Wednesday that this was groundless speculation.

Associate research fellow James Char at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) believes that the claim of arms supply to Russia remains speculation.

But Beijing has been exploiting Moscows predicament by buying more Russian commodities at a discount since the start of the conflict, while avoiding transactions that might risk secondary sanctions, he said.

I think the Chinese Communist Party leadership would not want to take that risk, especially since the Chinese economy is still in the midst of recovering from its previous zero-Covid policy, added Dr Char.

Other experts have said that China supplying weapons to Russia could be perceived as an escalation of the war, and worsen relations with the US and other Western nations, running contrary to Beijings recent efforts to mend ties.

Professor Benjamin Ho of RSIS China programme said Chinas goal is simple: So long as the war does not spill into China, it is in Beijings interests to have all the major players distracted in Ukraine.

Having the West being bogged down with a conflict with Russia clearly works to Beijings advantage. Whether that requires China to send lethal weapons or not, I leave it to others imagination. 2. What specific proposals will Mr Xi provide to end the war?

Dr Chen Gang, a senior research fellow at the East Asian Institute, believes that Mr Xis peace initiative would include asking both sides to agree to a ceasefire and resume peace talks.

He could ask other countries to stop supplying weapons to Ukraine, and for Ukraine to promise not to join the US-led Nato military alliance. He is likely to say that Russias security concerns should be respected.

These are part of Chinas basic position on the war, and Dr Chen does not expect a significant policy shift to be announced.

I dont think they will ask Russia to withdraw to pre-February 2022 positions or to give up Crimea.

China has refused to condemn Russias action or call it an invasion, instead using Moscows line that Nato had provoked the conflict. But Beijing has also said it is against war and the use of nuclear weapons. More On This Topic China says Russia ties solid as rock amid Ukraine peace push Beijing hopes peace between Russia and Ukraine can be Made in China Dr Char said the speech will largely comprise broad statements calling for a negotiated settlement that fall short of specifics on how to end the war.

By sticking to this third camp between the pro-Nato and pro-Russia positions, Beijing can continue to enjoy the most advantageous position among the major powers, he added.

This means it neither needs to exhaust its military and human resources like Moscow, nor hand over billions of dollars in aid, as Washington has been doing.

Prof Ho added: I doubt China has any clear plan to resolve the Ukraine war, at least not one which will be acceptable to Ukraine and other Western countries. 3. How will the plan fit into Mr Xis grand security vision for the world?

Political scientist Chong Ja Ian at the National University of Singapore expects Mr Xis speech to follow along the lines of the Global Security Initiative concept paper that China released on Tuesday, with broad statements about non-nuclear use and respect for sovereignty.

The initiative launched by Mr Xi in 2022 is his flagship security proposal, which aims to uphold indivisible security, a concept also endorsed by Russia.

The concept paper also stated, among other things, that the use of unilateral sanctions and long-arm jurisdiction do not solve problems but only create more difficulties and complications likely a reference to US and other Western nations that have imposed economic sanctions on Russia over the war.

Dr Char said the concept of indivisible security essentially calls for the right to safeguard ones legitimate security interests, and that no countrys security should be built at the expense of others security.

China also believes it has little to gain from switching to a pro-West position, and it does need Russia as a diplomatic partner.

Beijing realises that anything but a contrarian position (to the West) would deprive it of much-needed diplomatic space to manoeuvre, and so will likely continue to refrain from criticising Russia publicly, at least.

China is aware that its disagreements with the US and the other Western powers would not simply disappear even if it were to side with Kyiv, he added. More On This Topic US concerned by China-Russia ties as Putin signals Xi visit China says it will offer concrete ideas to end Ukraine war

Continue Reading

World

Trump warns Hamas – and claims Israel has agreed to 60-day ceasefire in Gaza

Published

on

By

Trump warns Hamas - and claims Israel has agreed to 60-day ceasefire in Gaza

Analysis: Many unanswered questions remain

In the long Gaza war, this is a significant moment.

For the people of Gaza, for the hostages and their families – this could be the moment it ends. But we have been here before, so many times.

The key question – will Hamas accept what Israel has agreed to: a 60-day ceasefire?

At the weekend, a source at the heart of the negotiations told me: “Both Hamas and Israel are refusing to budge from their position – Hamas wants the ceasefire to last until a permanent agreement is reached. Israel is opposed to this. At this point only President Trump can break this deadlock.”

The source added: “Unless Trump pushes, we are in a stalemate.”

The problem is that the announcement made now by Donald Trump – which is his social-media-summarised version of whatever Israel has actually agreed to – may just amount to Israel’s already-established position.

We don’t know the details and conditions attached to Israel’s proposals.

Would Israeli troops withdraw from Gaza? Totally? Or partially? How many Palestinian prisoners would they agree to release from Israel’s jails? And why only 60 days? Why not a total ceasefire? What are they asking of Hamas in return? We just don’t know the answers to any of these questions, except one.

We do know why Israel wants a 60-day ceasefire, not a permanent one. It’s all about domestic politics.

If Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was to agree now to a permanent ceasefire, the extreme right-wingers in his coalition would collapse his government.

Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich have both been clear about their desire for the war to continue. They hold the balance of power in Mr Netanyahu’s coalition.

If Mr Netanyahu instead agrees to just 60 days – which domestically he can sell as just a pause – then that may placate the extreme right-wingers for a few weeks until the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, is adjourned for the summer.

It is also no coincidence that the US president has called for Mr Netanyahu’s corruption trial to be scrapped.

Without the prospect of jail, Mr Netanyahu might be more willing to quit the war safe in the knowledge that focus will not shift immediately to his own political and legal vulnerability.

Continue Reading

UK

The PM faced down his party on welfare and lost. I suspect things may only get worse

Published

on

By

The PM faced down his party on welfare and lost. I suspect things may only get worse

So much for an end to chaos and sticking plaster politics.

Yesterday, Sir Keir Starmer abandoned his flagship welfare reforms at the eleventh hour – hectic scenes in the House of Commons that left onlookers aghast.

Facing possible defeat on his welfare bill, the PM folded in a last-minute climbdown to save his skin.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Welfare bill passes second reading

The decision was so rushed that some government insiders didn’t even know it was coming – as the deputy PM, deployed as a negotiator, scrambled to save the bill or how much it would cost.

“Too early to answer, it’s moved at a really fast pace,” said one.

The changes were enough to whittle back the rebellion to 49 MPs as the prime minister prevailed, but this was a pyrrhic victory.

Sir Keir lost the argument with his own backbenchers over his flagship welfare reforms, as they roundly rejected his proposed cuts to disability benefits for existing claimants or future ones, without a proper review of the entire personal independence payment (PIP) system first.

PM wins key welfare vote – follow latest

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Welfare bill blows ‘black hole’ in chancellor’s accounts

That in turn has blown a hole in the public finances, as billions of planned welfare savings are shelved.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves now faces the prospect of having to find £5bn.

As for the politics, the prime minister has – to use a war analogy – spilled an awful lot of blood for little reward.

He has faced down his MPs and he has lost.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘Lessons to learn’, says Kendall

They will be emboldened from this and – as some of those close to him admit – will find it even harder to govern.

After the vote, in central lobby, MPs were already saying that the government should regard this as a reset moment for relations between No 10 and the party.

The prime minister always said during the election that he would put country first and party second – and yet, less than a year into office, he finds himself pinned back by his party and blocked from making what he sees are necessary reforms.

I suspect it will only get worse. When I asked two of the rebel MPs how they expected the government to cover off the losses in welfare savings, Rachael Maskell, a leading rebel, suggested the government introduce welfare taxes.

Meanwhile, Work and Pensions Select Committee chair Debbie Abrahams told me “fiscal rules are not natural laws” – suggesting the chancellor could perhaps borrow more to fund public spending.

Read more:
How did your MP vote?
Welfare cuts branded ‘Dickensian’

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Should the govt slash the welfare budget?

These of course are both things that Ms Reeves has ruled out.

But the lesson MPs will take from this climbdown is that – if they push hard in enough and in big enough numbers – the government will give ground.

The fallout for now is that any serious cuts to welfare – something the PM says is absolutely necessary – are stalled for the time being, with the Stephen Timms review into PIP not reporting back until November 2026.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Tearful MP urges govt to reconsider

Had the government done this differently and reviewed the system before trying to impose the cuts – a process only done ahead of the Spring Statement in order to help the chancellor fix her fiscal black hole – they may have had more success.

Those close to the PM say he wants to deliver on the mandate the country gave him in last year’s election, and point out that Sir Keir Starmer is often underestimated – first as party leader and now as prime minister.

But on this occasion, he underestimated his own MPs.

His job was already difficult enough – and after this it will be even harder still.

If he can’t govern his party, he can’t deliver change he promised.

Continue Reading

Politics

US sanctions crypto wallet tied to ransomware, infostealer host

Published

on

By

US sanctions crypto wallet tied to ransomware, infostealer host

US sanctions crypto wallet tied to ransomware, infostealer host

The US Treasury has sanctioned a crypto wallet containing $350,000 tied to the alleged cybercrime hosting service Aeza Group.

Continue Reading

Trending