Winter Olympic games in a country with concentration camps? Are Swedish athletes expected to bobsled through a gulag?  Have their equipment carried, not by volunteers, but by forced labor with bruises on their backs? It should be completely out of the question. Sweden has no choice but to boycott the Winter Olympics in China next year. So why the silence?   

Fear is an important factor and a rational one considering how easily the Chinese regime resorts to blackmail and power politics. For each passing day, the Chinese ambassador in Sweden sounds less like a diplomat and more like Tony Soprano.

According to The Economist, around 85% of Swedes have a negative view of China, a statistic partly attributable to the ambassador’s undiplomatic behaviour. Any objection concerning Huawei, Gui Minhai, trade or Hong Kong, however minor and justified, is enough to awake his wrath and have open threats hurled against you. “Stop what you are doing or face the consequences”, he is fond of saying to Swedish journalists, businesses and the government itself.

It is a credible threat. Standing up to China is costly both in terms of commerce and security policy. On the other hand, a gulag is a gulag. This short article does not allow for a full list of torture methods to which the Uighurs are being subjected to. Among a total population of 12 million Uighurs, between one and two million people have been either brainwashed, physically abused, forcefully sterilized, raped or forced into labour. And that is not all. The whole Xinjiang province is an open-air prison where the distinction between free and unfree people is hard to make.

Even on the streets, people are being harassed, kept under surveillance and forced to spy on each other. Having a beard and taking a moment to pray can be interpreted as extremism. To receive a phone call from a Muslim majority country can be penalized, regardless of what the phone call is about. 

There is another creative evil which the Chinese regime is spreading into every household. Han Chinese (members of the majority ethnic group in China) are encouraged to move into Uighur homes, and the hosts are forced to share their beds and meals with the uninvited guests. Sometimes they stay for up to ten days, each month. This practice is called ”becoming kin”. One witness account tells us about a ten-year-old girl being paired up with a man twice her age. There they were, “the relative” and the child, sitting on a sofa in front of the mother who could do nothing but watch.

Children belonging to abducted parents are seen as a logistical problem because there are so many of them. They end up in different “educational facilities”, surrounded by high fences. Their teachers are instructed to distance children from parents, partly by prohibiting any use of the Uighur language in schools. The parents’ religion is also demonized. When pupils are asked if God exists and answer yes, they get beaten.

China’s extermination campaign aims to dilute and eliminate Uighurs’ Islamic faith, culture and language. It is an extreme example of what islamophobic assimilation policy can lead to. It is also a crime against humanity on a scale that is hard to find anywhere else in the world. A crime that the USA government has labelled as genocide, invoking satellite images, eyewitness testimonies and official documents which are in no need of hacking. Sometimes they are readily available to download from a Chinese municipality’s website.

Consumer and NGO campaigns against Western companies profiting on Uighur slave labour have recently been intensified. When H&M and other corporations voice concern about cotton harvested in Xinjiang, they are met with a fierce boycott organized by the Chinese government and nationalist Internet trolls.

The USA, EU and Canada have jointly imposed sanctions against Chinese individuals actively involved in the atrocities. More than ten Muslim-majority countries have withdrawn their official support for Xi Jinping’s treatment of Uighurs. Needless to say, these actions are far from sufficient.

Boycotting the Winter Olympic games is the least Sweden could do. This issue should not be conflated with the age-old debate about politics and sports. It should not be seen as a debate of any kind. Celebrating sports in China today is equal to dancing on someone’s grave. It simply cannot happen. So why not make Sweden’s boycott official – today?

The post No to Winter Olympics in China during an ongoing genocide! first appeared on Opulens.

DICTATORSHIP. Philosopher Clive Hamilton and sinologist Mareike Ohlberg are attempting to make a comprehensive approach to how China and the Chinese Communist Party are handling their foreign interests in a globalised world in their “Hidden Hand – Exposing how the Chinese Communist Party is Reshaping the World”.

When Samuel. P Huntington wrote about the clash of civilisations in his essay with the same name, the Chinese culture was already one of seven examples, depending on how one is counting, that he emphasised.

His thesis has been pondered upon and analysed since he wrote the essay. I am not wholly convinced that we have come closer to a consensus in the public debate. The recent pandemic has put the world at a stop due to the outbreak of Covid-19 in Wuhan. It has also led to the world’s relations with China and the Chinese Communist party being brought into the limelight. 

In the book “Hidden Hand – Exposing how the Chinese Communist Party is Reshaping the World” writers Clive Hamilton and Mareike Ohlberg are attempting to make a comprehensive approach to how China and the Chinese Communist Party are handling their foreign interests in a globalised world. Even Sweden has been affected, for example, in a way that the Swedish citizen Gui Minhai has not been heard or seen of since 2018. 

As a writer and book publisher, Minhai was convicted to ten years of prison in 2020. Questions about his captivity have been raised several times, but from CCP:s point of view, the case is closed. The reason being that Minhai was rumoured to publish a book called “Xi Jinping and his mistresses” something that really has provoked the CCP and especially it’s leader Xi Jinping. Minahi’s case is mentioned in the book. 

When discussing China, it is important to understand that it is Xi Jinping, CCP:s chairman since 2013 and probably the most powerful politician in the world, who is in charge of things. During Xi Jinping’s time at power, the tune has been sharpened against everything and everyone who could be seen as a threat to China and CCP:s interest internally and globally.

In the book, which is one of the more informative published about Chinese politics, the writers show in several areas and examples the real influence of the CCP. It is an appalling reading. CCP’s attempts to increase its influences over the electrical infrastructure,  intellectual property and raw materials will be difficult to ignore.

 With one example after another, the writers present the economic and intellectual influence that the CCP has over the West and its different institutions. Even examples where Chinese interests have bought whole institutions. The book’s credibility is high concerning which examples the writers have chosen, showing how ridiculously unaware the West’s economic elite have been for years.

Countries like Australia, Canada, the UK and the USA, have many times been naive concerning how they handled the extention and magnitude of Chinese influence. The writers are taking up several examples when governments and interest groups have been convinced of China’s legitimate measures, while the requirements of compensation have been almost nonexistent among western stakeholders. 

CCP:s influence is both economical and strategical.

Cooperations with many western scientists and software developers are an important factor for CCP, and is something which the CCP is working on in order to become a global leader in IT. To this, espionage and cyberhacking can be added, with direct and indirect traces to China, which have increased dramatically during the last years.

Today, university after university are establishing long-term cooperations with Chinese interests, ultimately leading to CCP’s security organisations that actively are searching for new knowledge areas to develop. The digital strategy of CCP has been clear. It is about creating a Chinese future, including everything that enables digital control over the population. Something that the citizens of Hong Kong already have experienced during the last years. 

 It is not an exaggeration to call mainland China one of the most monitored and surveilled areas in the world, especially in big cities. This specific surveillance policy is directly ordered and cherished by the highest levels in CCP.  The CCP’s political rhetoric speaks about dissidents and traitors, lessons learned from the fall of the U.S.S.R. 

Something which has characterised Xi Jinping’s time in power is the constant fear that CCP will lose its legitimacy and be overthrown. There is no price too high to pay when it comes to CCP’s dominance internally and globally. 

Corruption within the party are continually occurring and have become a high priority for  Xi Jinping’s leadership. The many exposures and trials connected to corruption speak volumes. Also, it is an easy way to get rid of one’s political rivals to the chairman post. As stated on a real poster with Xi Jinping pictured in 2014: “The question of corruption is completely critical, flies as well as tigers have to be smashed”. 

”Belt and Road- Initiative” (BRI), a project with over 70 participating countries, is one of the world’s most comprehensive infrastructure projects. China is providing a helping hand to developing countries and other stakeholders to create large infrastructure projects. 

And it is not only out of generosity that the BRI is performed since, in the end, it is also about China getting more control over harbours, other types of infrastructure and raw-materials in relevant countries. Something that countries like Malaysia and Kenya experienced the hard way. For example, Mombasa – Kenya’s largest harbour-  became Chinese owned after the Kenyan government could not repay their construction loans. 

I see very few chances that other countries will have the will and power to break down the Chinese influence in the short term. Despite the concerns with demographic problems,  because of the former one-child policy, the CCP are unwilling to drop their control of mainland China and other parts of the world.

The post China’s hidden hand first appeared on Opulens.

DEMOCRACY. For a long time, the idea of “A League of Democracies” has been suggested.  How could it influence world politics? Could 2021 be the year when the league is created?

The UK has the presidency of the G7 this year, a group of nations created during 70s also consisting of Germany, France, Italy, Japan, Canada and the United States. British Prime minister Boris Johnson will arrange a first digital summit and if possible due to the Covid-19 situation, even a summit in Carbis Bay in June. Johnson has also invited the Prime ministers of Australia, India and South Korea. 

Other countries have previously been invited as guests to G7 meetings. Still, this time the aim is to create a foundation for the guests to participate in the transformation from G7 to D10 – Democratic 10, a group of the world’s ten largest democracies. 

According to the UK government, D10 has two advantages compared to earlier proposals: it is not too big, making cohesion easier, and neither is it too small as it would encompass the Pacific region better than the current G7 current concentration on transatlantic relations. The D10 would also keep its focus on two issues: development of 5G, the next big phase in communication standards, and development of critical supply chains. These choices for a future D10 would mean a conflict with China. 

Boris Johnson has several reasons to propose the formation of the D10. In domestic politics, he feels the pressure that the slogan “Global Britain” should have some kind of content after Brexit. Also, he wants to create a better impression and improve relations with the new American president Joe Biden, whose staffers often see Johnson as a populist with a crazy hairstyle in the like of Donald Trump. 

The host country can organise a G7 meeting in the way it wishes, but how will the other members react? Decision-makers hail the idea of creating aD10 in Washington DC and Tokyo. The Biden administration sees it as something positive – an alliance of like-minded countries with the intention to take on the challenge from China.  

For a long time, President Joe Biden has been proposing a top-meeting for democracies during his first year of presidentship. The enlarged G7 meeting can give a platform for establishing cooperation in several policy areas. D10 could become a way for Biden to show the USA’s renewed interest in multilateralism, at the same time Biden can gather a more powerful alliance against China that the USA will more and more be coming into conflict with. 

Australia, India and South Korea all have open conflicts with China. Also, they see favour on an influential alliance that is not only reserved for the West. The Pacific region has the highest economic growth, which is seen as the best answer for the pandemic and that more and more stands up in the centre for the global power struggle. 

In comparison to this trio, Canada is more cautious, while Europeans are outright sceptical. France, Italy and Germany are worried that the D10 could become an alliance with an edge against China and Russia (whom they rather would wish to bring back into the G7’s fold) 

Italy, which has its economy closely connected to China’s, is demanding guarantees that G7 will not change. France suspects that Johnson wants to reduce the influence of the EU member countries in the G7 framework and in conjunction their power in future negotiations with the UK. 

The Chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel,  has recently successfully steered the  EU:s agenda in order to decide on a controversial investment agreement with China. She thinks that the forming of the D10 could trouble Germany’s industrial exports to China and the country’s import of gas from Russia. 

The old G7 from the Cold War needs to find new reasons to exist in a changed and unstable world. It is a fact that the democratic countries in Asia and Oceania have a more prominent importance today. 

There are those who fear that the creation of a D10 would worsen international tensions, but maybe not with China and Russia. The EU has dropped its criticism of China’s concentration camps in Xinjiang because the EU wants China’s investments. The EU’s trade strategy to save its industry that is passing through a crisis is based on establishing carbon tariffs against the rest of the world.  

Germany has become dependent on the Russian gas, and Berlin has decided not to use its participation in the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline as a way to influence Moscow. Besides that such actions have resulted in an open field for illegal annexation, poisonings, at least one assassination, attempts to undermine western democracy and even the German government in secret offering one billion Euros last year in order to secure an American guarantee not to impose sanctions against the Nord Stream 2 project.

It is possible that the League of Democracies will not be successful this time due to the conditions in world politics have changed, even for the G7. Cold War II does not have the same conflict spaces as the first one. But the debate shows that democracies can have fundamentally different interests when it comes to geopolitics. Groupings between them are not easy to create, as is often presented. International organisations and agreements are becoming more powerful when they are clear in their aims and have members acting in good faith. 

The post D10 – an alliance of democracies? first appeared on Opulens.

CONFLICT. The only uninhabited continent could play a role in the political scene in the coming years. Due to the growing influence and role of environmental activists – Antarctica is becoming increasingly important, writes Filip Đukić. 

In the 1950s, Antarctica was perceived as a sterile, cold continent that was inhospitable for living. With constant reference to climate change and the Coronavirus pandemic, the status of Antarctica has changed.

As the political situation is geopolitical in most cases – in this case, is in full form – it is so predictable that national interests will strengthen. We can notice the strongest national interest in it – the Chinese one. And while other countries have begun to delay and cut funding for Antarctic exploration, the Chinese have decided to embark on building the largest Antarctic – krill-fishing boat – in the world that will be completed by 2023.

The economic potential of Antarctica is also increasingly coming to light. Minerals, commercial fishing, tourism are just some of the reasons that are increasingly attracting countries around the world to take an even stronger position in the race for Antarctica.

Antarctica is known for its extreme preservation, as ironic as it may sound due to increasing climate change. We can say that geopolitics is only partly going in the direction that the Nazis once had; the doctrine of Karl Haushofer, geopolitics for militaristic goals.

Antarctica may still not be a hospitable place to live, but a country that has any domination over it – will have a variety of options. With that control, you have a monopoly over the world in various aspects. 

Today’s geopolitics – as in this case linked to Antarctica – is an opportunity for manipulation. In other words – whoever has primacy over Antarctica will be able to dictate real and imaginary problems as far as global warming is concerned. That is not fictitious, and utopian thinking as climate change creates the emergence of various treaties and agreements between states on the issue of greenhouse gases.

Yes, national interests can go so far that non-national Antarctica can be nationalized. If scientists of specific states are in the field (and state and politics have their fingers in science as well, which is not something new), the same country can dictate pieces of information related to global warming. Yes, WikiLeaks shows that. 

The result would be a change in agreements such as the Paris Agreement. Although there are seven states; New Zealand, Australia, France, Norway, the United Kingdom, Chile, and Argentina in Antarctica as part of a research team – I expect China to take a step forward and claim the right to the territory.

The Antarctic Treaty and Article IV – which prevent the claim to national sovereignty of any state in the Antarctic continent – are still in force for the time being. China, the biggest polluter on the planet, will surely build even more of its research stations. The Chinese also have the most isolated station called Kunlun and are even more elusive from international control.

Although some experts, such as Professor Brady claims that the Chinese have a militaristic intention towards Antarctica – my opinion is that they are more interested in the research part. With that, they can more easily come up with the idea of national sovereignty in Antarctica. 

Antarctica may still not be a hospitable place to live, but a country that has any domination over it – will have a variety of options. With that control, you have a monopoly over the world in various aspects. 

The post Antarctica can give a monopoly first appeared on Opulens.