As governments escalate efforts to intimidate reporters and control narratives, journalism — and democracy itself — is under threat, said CPJ and the ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights, a group of lawmakers working to improve rights in the region. In a joint statement on the eve of World Press Freedom Day on May 3, they also called for stronger protection mechanisms for reporters and the reform of repressive laws that criminalize journalism.

There were at least 52 journalists behind bars in Southeast Asia on December 1, 2024, CPJ’s latest annual global prison census shows. They were mainly held in Myanmar and Vietnam, while one journalist was being held in the Philippines. The Philippines and Myanmar have also consistently ranked among the top offenders where murderers of journalists go free.

Read the full statement here.

This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by CPJ Staff.

Among candidates to be the next head of the Catholic Church, several prominent cardinals in Asia are thought to be under consideration.

Pope Francis passed away on Monday at the age of 88, concluding a 12-year papacy. A papal conclave is expected to convene at the Vatican within the next 15 to 20 days to elect his successor.

While the official appointment of a pope requires the votes of 90 out of 135 cardinals in the Vatican, prominent candidates span 71 countries, with several overseeing dioceses in Asia from Sri Lanka, South Korea, the Philippines and Myanmar. Any candidate from these countries would be the first Asian pope to sit in the Vatican.

The 76-year-old Charles Maung Bo, born in northwest Myanmar’s now-embattled Sagaing region, resided over the Lashio diocese in the country’s northern Shan state from 1986 until 2003, when he was appointed Archbishop of Yangon and later became a cardinal under the authority of Pope Francis in 2015.

(L'Osservatore Romano via AP)

Despite Catholics comprising just over 1% of Myanmar’s majority-Buddhist population, sources close to Myanmar’s Cardinal Charles Maung Bo said that the College of Cardinals may be looking at finding a candidate with a diplomatic and humanitarian-oriented approach similar to Pope Francis.

Charles Maung Bo became more prominent in 2021 following the country’s military coup when he called for a peaceful solution in the face of armed rebel movements across the country.

In an interview with Radio Free Asia in 2023, he referred to the population of Myanmar as “brothers and sisters,” calling on all sides to lay down their weapons.

“Guns beget more guns. Bullets beget more bullets. If violence is met with violence, it will only lead to more violence,” he said. “All of us, no matter which side we are on, all those who are armed, should lay down our weapons and be family.”

(Chris Helgren/Reuters)

In Sri Lanka, another Buddhist-majority country, 77-year-old Malcolm Ranjith, who serves as the Archbishop of Colombo, the nation’s capital, is eligible for appointment.

Others have speculated that the next pope-elect may come from South Korea, where around 30% of the population is Christian, or the Philippines, a Catholic-majority country. Both have leaders in the Catholic church eligible for the Vatican.

(Max Rossi/Reuters)

South Korea’s 74-year-old Cardinal Lazzaro You Heung-sik may be considered, given the Catholic church’s growth in the country in the last few decades and its large financial contributions to the Vatican. He was appointed to a role within the Vatican as Dicastery for the Clergy as a prefect in 2021 and as a cardinal in 2022.

The Philippines’ Luis Antonio Tagle, 67 years old, has often been compared to Pope Francis and named by experts as a favorite of the late pope for his humanitarian and progressive social views on issues such as migration and same sex marriage, but may prove to be too young for the conclave, who typically select a candidate in his 70s.

(Alessandro Bianchi/Reuters)

As of 2025, there have been 266 popes recognized by the Roman Catholic Church, starting from St. Peter, considered the first pope, to Pope Francis, who became the 266th pontiff in 2013.

Historically, no pope of fully Asian descent has ever led the Catholic Church.

Discussions have been reignited around the possibility of a non-European pope – particularly from Asia – with reports suggesting that an Asian pope would carry deep symbolic and strategic significance, reflecting Catholicism’s rapid growth across the region and reinforcing the Church’s shift toward a more global identity.

As of the end of 2023, Asia was home to approximately 121 million Catholics, accounting for about 11% of the global Catholic population, which totals around 1.4 billion. This represents a growth of 0.6% from the previous year, indicating steady expansion in the region.

The Philippines and India remain the largest contributors to Asia’s Catholic population, with 93 million and 23 million Catholics respectively, together comprising over three-quarters of the region’s total. ​

Edited by Taejun Kang and Mike Firn.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by RFA Burmese and Kiana Duncan for RFA.

China is in need of allies after the imposition of 145% tariffs on its exports to the U.S., Washington’s restrictions on its semiconductors and other trade barriers. President Donald Trump’s administration says it is retaliating due to China’s trade surplus, its shipments of synthetic opioids and restrictions on U.S. investment.

“China stood steadfastly with Cambodia in its just struggle against foreign invasion and for national sovereignty and independence,” Xi said in comments published by Cambodia newspapers including the English-language Khmer Times, ahead of his arrival from Malaysia.

“Together, the two countries have shared the rough times and the smooth and consistently supported each other in times of need,” Xi said.

The Southeast Asian country was bombed by the U.S. during the 1954-74 Vietnam War and invaded by Vietnam in 1978, forcing out the genocidal Pol Pot regime that came to power in the aftermath of the Cold War era conflict.

China is the biggest investor in Cambodia, constructing roads, airports and ports. It is also the biggest exporter to the kingdom.

The theme of unity in the face of unnamed adversaries has been a recurring theme in the Southeast Asian tour, which began on Monday in Vietnam before moving to Malaysia, where Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim hosted Xi at a welcome dinner on Wednesday.

“In the face of shocks to global order and economic globalization, China and Malaysia will stand with countries in the region to combat the undercurrents of geopolitical and camp-based confrontation, as well as the counter-currents of unilateralism and protectionism,” Xi said, without naming the camp it saw as its biggest threat.

Xi discussed green technology, artificial intelligence and a US$11.2 billion railway project during a meeting with the Malaysian king, Sultan Ibrahim Iskandar on Wednesday, Chinese state news agency Xinhua reported.

China is the biggest exporter to Malaysia and the country’s biggest investor. The same is true of Vietnam, where Xi signed 45 agreements on areas such as improved supply chains and a railway project.

China had been working on a decoupling strategy long before Donald Trump took up his second term as U.S. president this year. By 2023, nearly two thirds of its economic growth was driven by domestic consumption, World Bank data show.

“At the same time, China has pursued deeper economic integration with the rest of the world,” according to Lili Yang Ing, secretary general of the International Economic Association.

“The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, now the world’s largest trade bloc, exemplifies China’s pivot toward Asia,” she said.

“Beijing has also strengthened Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreements with ASEAN, South Korea, and several Middle Eastern economies, while negotiating new agreements in Africa and Latin America,” Ing said.

“These diversified trade and investment channels buffer China from U.S. pressure.”

Southeast Asian nations could also help in the face of America’s call on them to cut their trade surpluses and stop re-exporting Chinese goods as their own.

While Trump declared a three-month cut to 10% on “retaliatory tariffs” against Southeast Asian nations, they face a return to some of the highest U.S. tariffs in the world if trade talks are unsuccessful after those 90 days are up: 24% for Malaysia, 46% for Vietnam and 49% on Cambodian exports.

Edited by Taejun Kang and Stephen Wright.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Mike Firn for RFA.

Southeast Asian nations face some of the highest tariffs threatened by Trump, which would burden even the region’s relatively wealthier countries such as Malaysia and Thailand. With limited options, many are offering concessions to the U.S. and avoiding retaliatory measures.

Vietnam, which sends about 30% of its exports to the U.S., is in a “precarious position,” said Nguyen Khac Giang, former head of political research at the Hanoi-based Vietnam Institute for Economic and Policy Research.

If the threatened 46% tariff on Vietnamese exports is enacted, annual economic growth would drop to 3%-4% from about 8%, he told an online panel organized by the ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute in Singapore.

“Half of our textiles and footwear is exported to the U.S.,” he said. A big rise in tariffs, Giang said, “could mean the mass layoff of millions of Vietnamese workers.”

“For Vietnam that would be very devastating because we are still in the period of development when we have to depend a lot on labor intensive manufacturing,” he said. “It could be very bad, not only for Vietnam’s economic development but also for stability.”

Trump on Wednesday announced a 90-day pause on higher tariffs for many countries hours after they were supposed to go into effect. At the same he raised tariffs on China to 145% after Beijing hiked its retaliatory tariffs against the U.S. to 84%.

(Leah Millis/Reuters)

Trump’s tariff shock therapy is purportedly aimed at encouraging a revival of American manufacturing, which fell as a share of the economy and employment over several decades of global free trade and competition from production in lower-cost countries.

Any changes could take years as many American corporations have made substantial investments in overseas production. Efficient manufacturing in the U.S., like elsewhere, also is reliant on components produced in other countries.

The impact of higher U.S. tariffs on Southeast Asian countries will be determined by how dependent each economy is on international trade and the U.S. in particular.

Some such as Vietnam have relied heavily on exporting to provide jobs and raise living standards and are reliant on both the Chinese and U.S. markets.

Other such as Myanmar, riven by civil war since 2021, have relatively little trade with the U.S., but business owners in the country told RFA that some industries and workers could still suffer.

“Myanmar’s exports are not that much going to the United States. However, what is being exported includes things like garments … as well as other finished goods such as bags and shoes,” said a business owner who didn’t want to be named. “These items will face some impact, although it’s relatively small.”

Indonesia, the biggest economy in Southeast Asia and the region’s most populous country with more than 270 million people, is insulated to a degree by its large domestic market and lower reliance on exports.

Malaysian exporters, meanwhile, are already discussing with U.S. customers how they can jointly absorb the cost of higher tariffs - which means both lower profits for the exporters already operating on thin profit margins and higher prices for American consumers.

The 46% tariff faced by Vietnam is the third highest among Southeast Asian countries and partly reflects U.S. accusations that Vietnam has become a conduit for Chinese manufacturers seeking to avoid U.S. tariffs on their goods.

Some administration officials have said one third of Vietnam’s exports to the U.S. are Chinese in origin. Research by Harvard and Duke universities, Giang said, shows the proportion is 2%-15%.

RFA Burmese contributed to this report.

Edited by Mike Firn.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Stephen Wright for RFA.

Southeast Asian nations were some of the hardest hit by the tariffs announced Wednesday, at nearly 50% in some cases. The tariffs will be paid by U.S. importers and could have a range of consequences – from higher prices for American consumers to falling incomes for the exporting nations.

China, the world’s second-largest economy after the U.S., faces an additional 34% tariff on top of the 20% the U.S. imposed earlier this year when Trump demanded the country buy more U.S. goods and stop the flow of the deadly synthetic opioid Fentanyl.

“China firmly opposes this and will resolutely take countermeasures to safeguard its own rights and interests,” the country’s commerce ministry said Thursday, accusing Trump of adopting bullying and damaging tactics.

The tariff shock therapy is aimed at encouraging a revival of American manufacturing, which fell as a share of the economy and employment over several decades of global free trade and competition from production in lower-cost countries.

Any changes could take years as many U.S. corporations have made substantial investments in overseas production. Manufacturing in the U.S., like elsewhere, also is reliant on components produced in other countries.

The 49% duties imposed on Cambodian exports will force the country’s garment industry to slow to a near halt, according to Stephen Higgins, managing partner at Mekong Strategic Capital in Phnom Penh.

The broader economy is likely to suffer since the garment and apparel industries contribute more than one third of Cambodia’s gross domestic product. Higgins says production may shift to India, which only faces a 36% U.S. tariff and giving workers the skills to produce more high-end products may have little immediate impact.

“In the short term, things like tech innovation and training just aren’t going to shift the dial enough to help Cambodia, or any country, weather these punitive tariffs. Redirecting trade is going to take time, and in the interim, a lot of Cambodians who can least afford it are going to lose their jobs,” Higgins said.

“If there’s one thing we’ve learned, it is that Washington is highly unpredictable these days. Hopefully once constituents in red (Republican) seats start seeing prices go up, or they start suffering from retaliatory tariffs from the E.U., they’ll put a lot of pressure on their representatives to do something about these tariffs. But I just don’t see that happening overnight.”

Vietnam, meanwhile, had the fourth-largest trade surplus with the U.S. last year at a record US$123 billion and faced growing pressure from Washington to lower it.

Hanoi lobbied unsuccessfully to try to avoid higher tariffs. Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh met U.S. Ambassador Marc Knapper last month and promised higher imports of American products.

On Tuesday, Vietnam cut import duties on some American fuel, automobile and agricultural products, but that did not stop Trump targeting the country’s exporters with a 46% tariff, the second-highest in Asia.

Pham met with Trade and Industry Minister Nguyen Hong Dien on Thursday to discuss the impact on Vietnam’s economy and to look for ways of reducing the trade surplus, Tien Phong online reported.

Trump has a track-record of abruptly raising and lowering tariffs imposed on Canada and Mexico and, according to Tien Phong, Vietnam’s Deputy Prime Minister Ho Duc Phoc is hoping to persuade him to roll back import duties when he visits the U.S. capital next week.

In Thailand, Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra said her government was working to help affected exporters and would set up a committee to negotiate with the U.S. over the 36% tariffs slapped on its exports.

She said Thailand was willing to lower the 72% duties the U.S. says Thailand charges, which include the effect of currency manipulation and market barriers.

Edited by Stephen Wright.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Mike Firn for RFA.

The study by conservation group Fauna & Flora and researchers from Cambodia and Scotland estimated there are 51 Asian elephants in the adjacent wildlife sanctuaries of Prey Lang, Preah Roka and Chhaeb – about one-tenth of the wild population in Cambodia. They said that was larger than anecdotal reports had indicated.

The population also is more genetically diverse than others in the Southeast Asian country – crucial for long-term survival – due to descent from two ancient and geographically distinct lineages, according to the study published this month.

The research was funded by the now shuttered U.S. international aid agency, USAID, and conducted in collaboration with Cambodia’s environment ministry.

Though outwardly positive news, the overall picture for an emblematic species that is central to Southeast Asian cultures is grim. The study said a population of more than 1,000 animals may be necessary to prevent inbreeding and ensure survival beyond a century.

“The population estimates produced in this study show that the elephants in this landscape are in an extremely precarious situation, with numbers far lower than needed for continued population survival,” the study said.

(Fauna & Flora)

Cambodia’s Asian elephant population is estimated at 400-600 animals in the wild. Aside from habitat loss, they must also withstand stress from any global-warming induced changes to their environment.

By sampling elephant dung and conducting genetic analysis, the researchers were also able to pinpoint the numbers of males and females and the animals’ ancestry.

RELATED STORIES

Elusive large-antlered muntjac likely breeding in Cambodian national park

Can 1 million saplings save Cambodia’s forests?

British journalist says Cambodia blacklist won’t deter environmental reporting

The analysis showed that some of the animals moved between the Preah Roka and Chhaeb sanctuaries but not between those two areas and Prey Lang, underlining the dangerous fragmentation of the populations and the importance of expanding conservation areas.

“As wildlife across the globe is increasingly confined to shrinking and degraded habitats, the management of small, fragmented populations is becoming ever more critical,” said Pablo Sinovas, Fauna & Flora’s Cambodia director.

“Despite its small size, this population retains high levels of genetic diversity,” he said in a statement. “Combined with the significant habitat we estimate remains available, this offers a rare and valuable opportunity for recovery.”

Alex Ball, a conservation manager at the Royal Zoological Society of Scotland, said the researchers hope to employ the methods used in the study across Cambodia and in other countries.

They hope to build a clearer picture of Asian elephant numbers, “which will inform how best we can work to help reverse the decline of these spectacular animals,” he said.

Edited by Mike Firn and Taejun Kang.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Stephen Wright for RFA.

The program, a collaboration between the Asian Disaster Preparedness Center, NASA and the now shuttered U.S. aid agency, used satellite technology and geospatial data to help countries respond to cross-border environmental hazards such as agricultural land burning and forest fires. It also monitored and forecast air pollution.

The annual deterioration in Southeast Asia’s air quality began with a vengeance last month as toxic pollution shrouded cities such as Bangkok and Hanoi for a week.

UNICEF, the U.N.’s agency for children, this week released data that showed that poor air quality remains the largest cause of child deaths after malnutrition in East Asian and Pacific countries.

“The suspension of the project during the regional haze season is unfortunate and presents challenges,” the disaster center’s air pollution and geospatial imaging expert, Aekkapol Aekakkararungroj, told Radio Free Asia.

“The immediate consequence is that some of the planned activities, such as data integration and capacity-building efforts with local stakeholders, have been delayed,” he said. “This could potentially slow down the development and dissemination of tools that support timely decision-making and response strategies.”

The State Department said Jan. 26 it had paused all U.S. foreign assistance overseen by the department and the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID, during a review to ensure projects are consistent with Trump’s foreign policy agenda.

The decision froze humanitarian programs worldwide — from landmine removal to HIV prevention — that are crucial to developing nations. Most of USAID’s thousands of employees have been put on leave from Friday, according to a notice that is now the only information on USAID’s website.

The U.S. also has announced its withdrawal from the World Health Organization, or WHO, and the Paris Agreement to limit the increase in average global temperature to less than two degrees Celsius.

Aekkapol said the disaster center is seeking funding from other international donors and if successful could resume its air pollution work within a few months.

“I am optimistic that our efforts to secure alternative funding and partnerships will help us regain momentum by April,” he said.

Collaboration with NASA would continue, he said.

Child deaths

Poor air quality is a health and economic burden worldwide that weighs particularly heavily on lower-income regions such as Southeast Asia.

Although deaths in Asia linked to air pollution have declined substantially over the past two decades due to better healthcare and reduced indoor use of fuels such as coal for cooking and heating, they remain at alarmingly high levels, UNICEF officials said at a press conference in Bangkok on Thursday.

Toxic air is linked to about 100 deaths a day among children under five in East Asia and the Pacific, UNICEF said, based on data compiled by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. Use of dirty fuels for cooking and heating at home accounts for more than half of the deaths.

Fine particles in the atmosphere — the basis of Southeast Asia’s annual haze — from land burning and fossil fuel sources such as vehicle exhausts also are a culprit. Its accumulation over cities or the countryside can depend on weather conditions.

RELATED STORIES

Musk says US aid agency will be closed

Hotline unlikely to suffice in Mekong battle against dry season air pollution

Top polluting nations dispute climate accountability at international court

About two thirds of children in the region live in countries where particulate matter levels in the air exceed WHO guidelines by more than five times.

Progress over the past two decades in reducing child deaths from air pollution “represents truly what is possible if we can keep this trajectory going,” said Nicholas Rees, an environment and climate expert at UNICEF.

Maintaining the progress depends on factors such as political will, the strength of efforts to reduce reliance on fossil fuels and the capacity of health systems, he told RFA.

“Without that, I fear progress will not only be slower in the years ahead, but we may even reverse some of the gains we have made,” he said.

Edited by Mike Firn.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Stephen Wright for RFA.

South Korea’s Acting President Choi Sang-Mok said he wanted a telephone conversation with the new U.S. president in the near future.

“We will work to arrange a call with President Trump soon and actively engage in high-level communication between the two nations’ foreign and industry ministers,” said Choi during a meeting to discuss economic issues.

Choi added he was concerned about the impact of tariffs on the South Korean economy after Trump said at his inauguration speech he planned to “tariff and tax foreign countries to enrich our citizens.”

“A working-level delegation has already been dispatched to Washington, D.C., to assess the background and specific details of upcoming measures,” Choi said.

U.S. ally South Korea will also be keen to sound Trump out about his plans for North Korea after his unprecedented but ultimately unsuccessful effort to engage with its leader, Kim Jong Un, during his first term.

RELATED STORIES

As Trump takes power, defense pick’s ASEAN fumble raises concerns

Trump calls North Korea ‘nuclear power,’ Seoul disagrees

Beijing sees Trump presidency as ‘critical’ juncture for Sino-US ties

Other Asian leaders voiced geopolitical concerns, particularly after Chinese President Xi Jinping told Trump on Friday that the “Taiwan issue” – or Beijing’s belief that the island is an integral part of China to be reunited by force if necessary – was a “red line” not to be crossed.

“Taiwan eagerly looks forward to working hand in hand with the new administration and Congress to further strengthen Taiwan-U.S. relations on the existing foundation, jointly safeguarding democracy and freedom, and promoting global prosperity and development!” Taiwan President Lai Ching-te wrote on Facebook.

Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba also talked of the need for an alliance with the U.S. in order to maintain peace in the region.

“I look forward to collaborating with you to reinforce the enduring Japan-US partnership and jointly pursue our shared goal of a free and open Indo-Pacific,” Ishiba wrote on social media platform X.

Vietnam’s Communist Party general secretary, president and prime minister all sent their congratulations to Trump as the two nations mark 30 years of diplomatic ties, state media reported.

To Lam, Luong Cuong and Pham Minh Chinh “expressed their belief that with the leadership and support from Trump, Vietnam-U.S. relations will continue developing steadily based on the principle of respecting each other’s independence, sovereignty, and political regimes for regional and global peace, stability, cooperation, and sustainable development,” the Vietnam News Agency said.

Edited by Mike Firn and Taejun Kang.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by RFA Staff.

The end of the Cold War; regional cooperation in the form of ASEAN; economic progress; a new birth of democracy and liberty — all are valid explanations.

Yet one simpler reason is that most of the more serious sovereignty disputes, largely a hangover of colonialism, had been fought by then.

Rival claims over Borneo between Indonesia and Malaysia ended after the “confrontation” of 1963-1966.

Tensions between Malaysia and the Philippines over Sabah — now part of Malaysia but which in previous centuries was administered by the Sultanate of Sulu, which the Philippines claims gives it authority — almost sparked a war when it formally joined the Malaysian Federation in 1963.

Manila broke off diplomatic relations and Ferdinand Marcos, the Philippine dictator, drew up plans to invade, although diplomatic relations later resumed without too many shots being fired.

What to do about Chinese-majority Singapore was settled when it was kicked out – or left, depending on whom one asks – of the Malaysian Federation in 1965.

On the mainland, the departure of Vietnamese troops from Cambodia in the late 1980s and then Vietnamese-China peace terms in 1991 allowed all governments in the region to get on with properly drawing borders that had been scribbled and traded by French colonialists.

Even though 1991 was the year of the barbaric Santa Cruz massacre in Timor-Leste’s Dili, it was obvious at the time that Indonesia’s annexation of the former Portuguese colony couldn’t persist.

(Tee/AP)

Although many of these territorial disputes were, at best, shelved rather than resolved, there was a spirit after 1991 that the more pressing concern of regional governments was making money, mutually if possible, rather than squabbling over scraps of land.

It helped that the rest of the world – particularly the United States and China – had more at stake in Southeast Asian peace after 1991 than in stirring sovereignty disputes to serve their own ends.

Worldwide irredentism

Alas, we’re now living in a new age of irredentism.

Moscow launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 on the premise that the Ukrainian nation doesn’t even exist and therefore should be re-annexed by Russia.

Beijing is risking World War Three in its pursuit of “reunifying” Taiwan.

Much of the Middle East warring today rests on 1st century claims of homelands.

South Korea and North Korea both have designs to incorporate the other half of the peninsula. Venezuela apparently wants to annex Guyana.

The latest fray in Southeast Asia is between Cambodia and Thailand over the island of Koh Kood/Koh Kut – although it’s actually about who controls a 27,000 sq.km area of the Gulf of Thailand that sits on natural gas reserves.

In early November, Thai Defence Minister Phumtham Wechayachai travelled to the island for a visit that served no purpose other than for Thailand to restate its ownership.

Conservative circles in Bangkok are stirring this trouble primarily to offend the coalition government now led by the Thaksin family, yet these things have a way of getting out of hand.

(Jordao Henrique/AP)

A few weeks ago, Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet appealed for calm.

“One side claims their land is lost; the other says it isn’t. Why should we bring fire unnecessarily into our home? Acting rashly could provoke unnecessary conflict,” he said.

No doubt he has his own memories of having been a general when Cambodia and Thailand’s militaries came to blows in 2008 over the Preah Vihear Temple, a dispute that dates back to the Franco-Siamese Treaty of 1907 that swapped territory between Cambodia and Thailand, including Koh Kood/Koh Kut.

Sabah tensions

Yet, while Hun Manet’s own dictatorial ruling party has managed to quiet just about anyone capable of an independent thought, it cannot keep the Cambodian people silent whenever they get the whiff of something that smells like territorial sellout.

Intense public pressure this year led to Phnom Penh quitting the Cambodia-Laos-Vietnam Development Triangle Area in September.

The decision was taken solely to appease those who claimed that the rather trivial economic scheme was a violation of Cambodian sovereignty by Vietnam, the Cambodian nationalist’s bete noire.

Now, the same voices are pressuring the Cambodian government to be tough on Bangkok. Phnom Penh cannot simply wash its hands of a lame economic agreement to appease critics this time around.

Tensions between Malaysia and the Philippines over Sabah are flaring again, as well.

In July 2020, the Philippines’ then-foreign minister, Teodoro Locsin Jr., tweeted in response to a U.S. government statement about sending aid to north Borneo: “Sabah is not in Malaysia if you want to have anything to do with the Philippines.”

Malaysia’s then-foreign minister, Hishammuddin Hussein, retorted: “This is an irresponsible statement that affects bilateral ties… Sabah is, and will always be, part of Malaysia.”

Tensions died down somewhat afterwards, yet Malaysia sent a protest note to the Philippines last month over two new maritime laws that Kuala Lumpur says encroaches upon the sovereignty of Sabah.

The leaders of both countries agreed this month not to discuss Sabah, which is perhaps better than them debating it, since Manila is aware that a 2011 Supreme Court ruling means the Philippines has not abandoned its claim and Malaysian political circles are increasingly touchy about sovereignty.

RELATED STORIES

EXPLAINED: Thai holiday island at center of dispute with Cambodia over offshore gas

Cambodian leader to discuss border issues, trade on first Thailand visit as PM

Malaysia protests new Philippine maritime zones laws for South China Sea

‘Adventurous ideas’

In 2022, former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, perhaps more in a spirit of making himself a nuisance than making a genuine suggestion, told supporters that Singapore should be returned to the state of Johor, which ran the city’s affairs before its independence.

K Shanmugam, Singapore’s home affairs minister, warned Mahathir this is “not a game.”

“It is serious business,” he said. “If you get a leader in Malaysia like Dr. Mahathir, adventurous ideas may be attempted.”

The 99-year-old Mahathir probably won’t return to political office, but in January the Malaysian government set up a royal commission to study why, in 2018, Mahathir’s administration ended its review of an International Court of Justice ruling ten years earlier that awarded sovereignty of Pedra Branca island to Singapore.

On Dec. 5, the royal commission delivered a damning 217-page report that recommended a criminal investigation into Mahathir over his failure when premier to protect and defend Malaysia’s sovereignty.

Likely to stir up tensions with Singapore once again, the commission also ruled that “Malaysia has an arguable case” for claiming sovereignty over Pedra Branca.

Presumably, if Mahathir should be held criminally liable for not having asserted Malaysia’s claim in the past, as the commission argued, then Anwar Ibrahim, the current prime minister, now has a legal duty to reassert his country’s claims.

One might also add that this year has again seen tensions over who controls certain hamlets – mainly Naktuka – in Timor-Leste’s Oecusse enclave, which sits in the middle of West Timor, an Indonesian province.

Dili can be forgiven for nervousness after seeing Prabowo Subianto elected Indonesia’s president this year. Subianto was head of the Kopassus special forces that committed war crimes after Indonesia invaded and annexed Timor-Leste in 1975.

What seems to be driving all of this are the South China Sea disputes, which have forced every claimant government to think in terms of territorial competition.

China’s irredentist “nine-dash line” has naturally compelled governments in the Philippines, Malaysia, Vietnam and increasingly Indonesia to restate their opinions almost weekly on what territory they possess.

Amid this scramble to assert and reassert one’s territorial claims, it isn’t surprising that voices have grown louder about reclaiming other lost lands.

Such things tend to snowball.

David Hutt is a research fellow at the Central European Institute of Asian Studies (CEIAS) and the Southeast Asia Columnist at the Diplomat. He writes the Watching Europe In Southeast Asia newsletter. The views expressed here are his own and do not reflect the position of RFA.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by David Hutt.

Over the past five or so years, Rubio has co-authored almost every congressional bill on human rights in Southeast Asia.

He co-introduced the Cambodia Democracy and Human Rights Act in 2022, stating at the time that “the Hun Sen dictatorship destroyed democracy in Cambodia and allowed the nation to be exploited by the Chinese Communist Party.” He reintroduced the bill in 2023.

In 2020, Rubio appealed to the State Department to designate Vietnam a “country of particular concern” for abuse of religious freedom, noting that “the only way to realize the full potential of the U.S.-Vietnam relationship is to press them to take serious steps to improve the human rights situation in Vietnam.”

A year earlier, he co-introduced the Vietnam Human Rights Sanctions Act to the Senate, which, had it passed, would have pressured the White House to impose “sanctions and travel restrictions on Vietnamese nationals complicit in human rights abuses.”

He was critical of the Obama administration’s rush to renormalize ties with Myanmar’s semi-military government in the early 2010s, and unabashed in saying the Burmese military orchestrated a “genocide” against the Rohingya.

In 2021, he was one of six senators to call on the Biden administration to impose much tougher sanctions on the military junta that took power in Myanmar through a coup in February that year.

In 2017, he tried to introduce legislation to restrict the export of defense articles to the Philippines in response to then-President Rodrigo Duterte’s brutal and illegal war on drugs. The same year, he challenged U.S. Secretary of State Nominee Rex Tillerson to pressure Duterte about his “human rights violations.”

China-hawk

Rubio is principally known as a China-hawk, and he has been blacklisted by Beijing in retaliation for U.S. sanctions on Chinese officials for the genocide against the Uyghur ethnic minority and for the crackdown in Hong Kong.

He has co-sponsored numerous bills against the Chinese Communist Party’s human rights violations, including the Uyghur Human Rights Policy Reauthorization Act and numerous Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Reauthorization Acts.

RELATED STORIES

Is Southeast Asia ready for the abrupt changes Trump could usher in?

Vietnam faces Trump era with awkward trade surplus with the US

China hawk to steer Trump’s national security

Last year, he introduced the Deterring Chinese Preemptive Strikes Act to strengthen American air bases in the Indo-Pacific region. He was the arch-campaigner against TikTok and Huawei, and for the past decade has fought resolutely to bring attention against Beijing’s genocide of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang region.

However, a blinkered China-hawk who perceives all foreign relations through the Beijing prism would not have sponsored resolutions condemning the Communist Party of Vietnam, which the “realists” in the Biden administration courting Hanoi treated as an ally beyond reproach.

Rubio’s actions indicate he knows that America cannot be indolent about the sins of its friends.

Perhaps he has tempered some of his views, but Rubio would appear to be instinctively interventionist and instinctively knows that America has a duty to not only promote global prosperity but also global liberty.

During Trump’s first term, Rubio co-sponsored legislation to make it harder for the U.S. to withdraw from NATO.

His more controversial comments about the Ukraine war – ”I’m not on Russia’s side, but unfortunately the reality of it is that the way the war in Ukraine is going to end is with a negotiated settlement’ – can be read in multiple, not all isolationist, ways.

Promoting values

Even if the senator who has been outspoken on human rights has to temper his views while serving as the top U.S. diplomat, it will still be heartening to have a U.S. secretary of state who has spent as much time with Southeast Asian dissidents, exiles and opposition politicians as with government officials and chambers of commerce.

It will be positive to have an American foreign affairs chief who knows Cambodia is a “dictatorship,” who says Myanmar’s generals committed “genocide,” and who called out Duterte’s drug war for human rights violations.

At least since the Obama administration, there’s been a tendency to appoint senior Asia officials who spent considerable time in the region. This brought expertise, but it also brought a certain mindset from those who previously “had to get along with” the region’s tyrannical regimes.

If Trump was isolationist and transactional in his first term, there’s been a temptation by the Biden administration to single-mindedly focus on alliance building against China, without sufficient thought for the local inhabitants of those allies.

Indeed, it’s difficult to exaggerate not just how little the Biden administration did for human rights in Southeast Asia as his foreign policy pursued realpolitik goals.

Rubio’s record suggests he will remind U.S. leaders and diplomats why they are effectively fighting a new Cold War against China – it isn’t only about trade margins and tariffs and spheres of influence.

If he is able to temper Trump’s transactional instincts toward foreign leaders no matter how unsavory, Rubio is someone who could pursue a more muscular foreign policy against China without forgetting that key values are a factor in the rivalry.

David Hutt is a research fellow at the Central European Institute of Asian Studies (CEIAS) and the Southeast Asia Columnist at the Diplomat. He writes the Watching Europe In Southeast Asia newsletter. The views expressed here are his own and do not reflect the position of RFA.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by David Hutt.

During his campaign for office, Ishiba had mooted changes to the deployment arrangements of the Japan Self-Defence Forces and the need to move beyond the purely bilateral approach to regional security anchored by US agreements with various countries, be it with Japan, South Korea, the Philippines and others.

Ishiba’s suggested changes to Japan’s self-defence posture builds on a cabinet decision made during the Abe administration to reinterpret the country’s constitution to permit exercising the right of collective self-defence.  It was a problematic move, given the pacifist nature of a text that renounces the use of force in the resolution of international disputes.

In September 2015, then Prime Minister Shinzo Abe convinced the Diet to pass a package of security bills known as the Legislation for Peace and Security, thereby allowing Japan to participate in limited forms of collective self-defence.  Opponents warned, understandably, that the legislation paved the way for Japan to attack a country in concert with another on the premise of collective self-defence, despite not itself being directly attacked.  They have every reason to be even more worried given Ishiba’s recent meditations.

The intention to broaden the remit of how Japan’s armed forces are deployed is also a reminder to the United States that Tokyo is no longer interested in playing a subordinate role in its alliance with Washington. “The current Japan-US security treaty,” complains Ishiba, “is structured so that the US is obligated to ‘defend’ Japan, and Japan is obligated to ‘provide bases’ to the US.”  He suggests “expanding the scope of joint management of US bases in Japan”, a move that would reduce Washington’s burden, and revising the Japan-US Security Treaty and Status of Forces Agreement to permit the stationing of Japanese forces on Guam.

What makes his suggestions disconcerting is not merely the establishment of a power bloc bound by the glue of collective self-defence – an arrangement that has much to do with defence as a growling provocation.  Ishiba is intent on being even more provocative in suggesting that any such “Asian version of NATO must also specifically consider America’s sharing of nuclear weapons or the introduction of nuclear weapons into the region.”

Were such a move taken, it would, at least from a Japanese perspective, fly in the face of a doctrine in place since December 1967, when Prime Minister Eisaku Sato articulated the three non-nuclear principles of “not possessing, not producing and not permitting the introduction of nuclear weapons, in line with Japan’s Peace Constitution.”

As with so many in the business of preaching about international security, false paradigms and analysis are offered from the pulpit.  The Japanese PM, much like neoconservative hawks in Washington and Canberra, prove incapable of seeing conflict in generic, transferrable terms. “Ukraine today is Asia tomorrow,” he falsely reasons. “Replacing Russia with China and Ukraine and Taiwan, the absence of a collective self-defense system like NATO in Asia means that wars are likely to break out because there is no obligation for mutual defense.” Ergo, he reasons, the need for an Asian version of NATO.

Ishiba’s suggestions have yet to gather momentum. Daniel Kritenbrink, US assistant secretary of state for East Asia and the Pacific, told a forum on Indo-Pacific security at the Stimson Center in September that he preferred the current “latticework” approach to US regional alliances featuring, for instance, the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue involving Japan, India and Australia, and AUKUS, featuring Australia and the UK. “It’s too early to talk about collective security in that context, and [the creation of] more formal institutions.” It was far better to focus on “investing in the region’s existing formal architecture and continuing to build this network of formal and information relationships.”

Kritenbrink’s analysis hardly gets away from the suspicion that the “latticework” theory of US security in the Indo-Pacific is but a form of NATO in embryo. As Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said with tartness in 2022, “The real goal for the [US] Indo-Pacific strategy is to establish an Indo-Pacific version of NATO. These perverse actions run counter to common aspirations of the region and are doomed to fail.”

From New Delhi, the view towards such an alliance is not a glowing one.  On October 1, at an event held by Washington’s Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Indian Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar proved dismissive of any NATO replication in Asia. “We don’t have that kind of strategic architecture in mind.” India had “a different history and different way of approaching” its security considerations.

With the return of Donald Trump to the White House, the collective defence hawks so keen on adding kindling to conflict will have their teeth chattering.  Ishiba’s ideas may well have to be put back into cold storage – at least in the interim.  And as luck would have it, his own prime ministerial tenure already looks threatened.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Binoy Kampmark.

The creation of more minilateral agreements, though, rather than multilateral ones like the 32-member North Atlantic Treaty Organization, are not only likely but may be more effective, they added.

A minilateral agreement is an accord between a small group of nations that have come together to achieve mutual goals or tackle shared problems, according to international relations experts.

For instance, a good example is a minilateral agreement renewed last year by the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia for joint patrols on their seas, said geopolitics expert Don McLain Gill.

“The most we can expect [in the form of a defense alliance] for now is an area- specific and time-dependent security cooperation between particular states in the region in a way that would also reflect individual varying sensitivities,” he told RFA affiliate BenarNews.

Another lecturer from the university concurred.

“I think that [creating] minilaterals is more plausible,” political science lecturer Sherwin Ona told BenarNews.

“I also think that armed enforcement has its limitations and has a tendency for escalation.”

Established in 1949, NATO commits its 32-member countries to each other’s defense in the event any are attacked. Aside from the United States, other NATO members include the United Kingdom, Italy, Germany, France, and Canada.

Conversation about a regional NATO, Asian or Southeast Asian, revived after now-Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba wrote a paper late September for think-tank Hudson Institute about his proposal for such a defense alliance.

“[T]he absence of a collective self-defense system like NATO in Asia means that wars are likely to break out because there is no obligation for mutual defense,” Ichiba wrote late September.

“Under these circumstances, the creation of an Asian version of NATO is essential to deter China by its Western allies,” added the then-candidate for prime minister added.

The proposal was rejected by the United States and India said it doesn’t share Ishiba’s vision.

Similar ideas have irritated Beijing, which sees itself as the main focus of these proposals, in the same way that Moscow has accused NATO of concentrating its defense efforts against Russia.

In Southeast Asia specifically as well, the idea of a NATO-like grouping has been talked about in response to some countries claiming harassment by Beijing’s vessels in the South China Sea, where they have overlapping claims.

Beijing claims most of the South China Sea, but its claims overlap those of Taiwan, which isn’t a member of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), and Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam, all of which are.

Philippine Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro Jr. trod carefully when asked on Tuesday about a grouping similar to NATO consisting of the 10 members of ASEAN.

“I don’t think it is possible at this time because of the dichotomies and divergence between country interests,” Teodoro answered at the venue of a private conference in Manila.

Still, he acknowledged the need to boost multilateral security alliances.

Teodoro noted that Manila has a bilateral defense alliance with Washington since 1951, even before it became one of the Southeast Asian countries to set up the ASEAN in 1967.

RELATED STORIES

US not seeking to create ‘Asian NATO,’ defense secretary says

Vietnam, Philippines to sign defense cooperation agreement

US election: Trump II to affect trade, security in SE Asia, experts say

Sherwin Ona, a political science lecturer at Manila’s De La Salle University, told BenarNews that ASEAN nations would stick to the bloc’s “non-interference policy.”

Besides, some Southeast Asian countries are very pro-Beijing because their economies are heavily dependent on China, indicated Ona.

“I agree [with Teodoro] about the beneficial relationship between countries that are pro-Beijing.”

Another reason Southeast Asian countries may be cool to the idea of an “Asian NATO” is because they have different security interests, noted a researcher at the New Delhi-based think-tank Observer Research Foundation.

“This is because most countries are convinced that a multilateral security architecture will only elevate regional insecurities, and make them subservient to great power contestations,” Abhishek Sharma wrote in the Deccan Herald.

‘Loose, flexible’ minilaterals

Minilaterals are “loose and flexible,” believes Gill.

“This is not NATO’s established collective security structure,” he said.

Minilaterals are “only as good as they last.”

Gill explained that if one country in a three-nation minilateral agreement felt it did not any longer share the same interest with the other two, “it can walk out anytime.”

Geopolitical analyst Julio Amador III believes a network of “minilateral ties” might be able to offset this shortcoming and would be more effective.

Additionally, he said there was a way ASEAN as a bloc could become “a formidable diplomatic counterweight.”

If the group’s members, particularly those that drift towards China, agree that there are some issues “that go beyond national interests, that there are issues that do matter to the collective interests of the group,” ASEAN could be powerful, Amador said.

However, De La Salle University’s Gill said that the character of Southeast Asian cooperation tended to be based mostly on mutual interest.

“An ASEAN version of NATO is unlikely going to happen given the nature of ASEAN,” he said.

BenarNews is an RFA-affiliated online news organization.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Jason Gutierrez for BenarNews.

Since the LDP holds a parliamentary majority, the next party leader will  replace Fumio Kishida as prime minister. Kishida announced his intention to step down in August. 

“We must believe in the people, speak the truth with courage and sincerity, and work together to make Japan a safe and secure country where everyone can live with a smile once again,” Ishiba said in a brief speech to lawmakers after the party vote.

The LDP chose Ishiba as Japan grapples with increasing security threats and risk of war in the region, with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, North Korea’s nuclear ambitions and China’s growing military assertiveness.

The 67-year-old Ishiba, who said changes in the security environment were the reason he announced his candidacy, has been strong on deterrence.

The former defense minister expressed his desire to create an “Asian version of NATO” and bring equality to the Japan-U.S. Status of Forces Agreement.

“Ukraine is not a member of NATO. It is not hard to imagine that this prompted President [Vladimir] Putin’s decision,” he said, stressing the need to build a collective security system in Asia, at a news conference on Sept. 10, referring to the Russian leader’s decision to send troops into Ukraine.

While Ishiba does not question the importance of the security alliance with the U.S., he has said Japan needs to play a greater role in the alliance and have a larger say in how American troops are deployed in Japan. 

For instance, he wrote in his 2024 memoir that “Japan is still not a truly independent country” because of the “asymmetry” of its dependence on America for its security.

Ishiba also announced he would consider revising the SOFA, or Status of Forces Agreement, which sets the rules for U.S. military operations in Japan. The agreement was concluded when the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty was revised in 1960 and has remained unchanged.

Ishiba said that as LDP president, and thus prime minister, he would seek to establish a base in the U.S. to train Japan’s Self-Defense Forces.

He argued that SOFA should be at the same level as an agreement that would be established upon the creation of such an SDF base in the U.S.

“If we are going to revise SOFA, it has to be something that will strengthen the alliance and improve the regional security environment,” said Ishiba. 

RELATED STORIES

US, South Korea, Japan to finalize trilateral secretariat establishment

‘Too early’ for an Asian NATO: US official

Front-runner for next Japanese leader eyes better North Korean ties

Ishiba is known as a strong backer of Taiwanese democracy while also calling for deeper engagement with China.

He wrote in his memoir that conflating the Russian invasion of Ukraine and a possible Chinese attack on Taiwan was driven by emotion, not a pragmatic assessment of Chinese threats and the impact on Japan.

The nail-biter party election consisted of two rounds. In the first round, the  368 LDP members in the legislature and 368 rank-and-file members cast  ballots. In a second runoff round between the top two candidates, 415 votes were cast.

Ishiba came second, after economic security minister Sanae Takaichi, in the first round but he beat Takaichi in the runoff by 21 votes.

“I want to protect Japan, protect the people, protect the local regions, and want to be the LDP that follows the rules,” Ishiba said after the first vote.

He will be officially announced as prime minister at a special legislative session on Oct. 1.

Edited by Mike Firn.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Taejun Kang for RFA.

Since the LDP holds a parliamentary majority, the next party leader will replace Fumio Kishida as prime minister. Kishida announced his intention to step down in August.

“We must believe in the people, speak the truth with courage and sincerity, and work together to make Japan a safe and secure country where everyone can live with a smile once again,” Ishiba said in a brief speech to lawmakers after the party vote.

The LDP chose Ishiba as Japan grapples with increasing security threats and risk of war in the region, with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, North Korea’s nuclear ambitions and China’s growing military assertiveness.

The 67-year-old Ishiba, who said changes in the security environment were the reason he announced his candidacy, has been strong on deterrence.

The former defense minister expressed his desire to create an “Asian version of NATO” and bring equality to the Japan-U.S. Status of Forces Agreement.

“Ukraine is not a member of NATO. It is not hard to imagine that this prompted President [Vladimir] Putin’s decision,” he said, stressing the need to build a collective security system in Asia, at a news conference on Sept. 10, referring to the Russian leader’s decision to send troops into Ukraine.

(Hiro Komae/via REUTERS)

While Ishiba does not question the importance of the security alliance with the U.S., he has said Japan needs to play a greater role in the alliance and have a larger say in how American troops are deployed in Japan.

For instance, he wrote in his 2024 memoir that “Japan is still not a truly independent country” because of the “asymmetry” of its dependence on America for its security.

Ishiba also announced he would consider revising the SOFA, or Status of Forces Agreement, which sets the rules for U.S. military operations in Japan. The agreement was concluded when the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty was revised in 1960 and has remained unchanged.

Ishiba said that as LDP president, and thus prime minister, he would seek to establish a base in the U.S. to train Japan’s Self-Defense Forces.

He argued that SOFA should be at the same level as an agreement that would be established upon the creation of such an SDF base in the U.S.

“If we are going to revise SOFA, it has to be something that will strengthen the alliance and improve the regional security environment,” said Ishiba.

RELATED STORIES

US, South Korea, Japan to finalize trilateral secretariat establishment

‘Too early’ for an Asian NATO: US official

Front-runner for next Japanese leader eyes better North Korean ties

Ishiba is known as a strong backer of Taiwanese democracy while also calling for deeper engagement with China.

He wrote in his memoir that conflating the Russian invasion of Ukraine and a possible Chinese attack on Taiwan was driven by emotion, not a pragmatic assessment of Chinese threats and the impact on Japan.

The nail-biter party election consisted of two rounds. In the first round, the 368 LDP members in the legislature and 368 rank-and-file members cast ballots. In a second runoff round between the top two candidates, 415 votes were cast.

Ishiba came second, after economic security minister Sanae Takaichi, in the first round but he beat Takaichi in the runoff by 21 votes.

“I want to protect Japan, protect the people, protect the local regions, and want to be the LDP that follows the rules,” Ishiba said after the first vote.

He will be officially announced as prime minister at a special legislative session on Oct. 1.

Edited by Mike Firn.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Taejun Kang for RFA.

Palestine’s Permament Observer at the United Nations, Riyad Mansour, has slammed the UN Security Council for failing to secure a ceasefire and bring an end to Israel’s genocidal war on the Gaza Strip reports Al Jazeera.

“We have collectively failed. This council has failed,” the Palestinian envoy said during a special council session on the humanitarian response in Gaza.

“We can continue counting aid trucks and speaking of routes and imagining alternatives, but the only true measure of our success is our ability to alleviate human suffering — and the suffering of Palestinians is Israel’s goal and desire,” Mansour said.

• READ MORE: Other Israeli war on Gaza reports

“Whatever solutions you come up with, [Israel] will continue ensuring they fail until it is forced to change course.

“And the first, indispensable step is an immediate ceasefire.”

Meanwhile, in Paris yesterday at the opening of the Olympic Games 2024, the Palestinian Palestine’s Olympic team made its entry into the Paris Games on a boat in the River Seine.

Much support was shared for Palestine during the Asian Cup in Qatar earlier this year and a similar response during Paris 2024 is expected.

Call for ban on Israel
Pro-Palestine activists have been calling for Israel to be banned from the Olympics, accusing the Games’ bosses of double standards by allowing Israel to participate while barring Russia.

Olympic double standards over Israeli.         Video:Al Jazeera

In Washington, a briefing by UNRWA is under way at the UN Security Council.

Members of the council wanted to highlight the humanitarian situation in Gaza and it is perhaps no coincidence that Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu is in the US at this time.

Russia, China and Algeria — with Russia holding the presidency at present — called for this meeting after Netanyahu’s speech to the US Congress this week.

Several UNRWA representatives outlined the latest updates on the dire situation for the people of Gaza, including people’s inability to satisfy their basic needs due to the continued displacement, insecurity and lawlessness.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

North Korea was drawn into Group A along with  Iran, Qatar, Uzbekistan, the United Arab Emirates, and Kyrgyzstan. Though the team, known by supporters as the Chollima, have the lowest world ranking among the six teams, Group A offers a chance for qualification, with only Iran ranked among the world’s top 30 teams. 

In drawing Group A, North Korea avoids an inter-Korean showdown, with South Korea heavily favored to dominate Group B, full of Middle Eastern minnows Iraq, Jordan, Oman, Palestine and Kuwait. Group C, meanwhile, is the “Group of Death,” with powerhouses Japan, Australia and Saudi Arabia drawn together, and Bahrain, China and Indonesia rounding out the group.

In the second round, North Korea finished second in its group behind Japan and ahead of Syria and Myanmar. They crushed Myanmar 6-1 in Yangon and 4-1 in a home match played in Vientiane, Laos. The campaign also featured a strong showing against 17th-ranked Japan in Tokyo, where they lost 1-0. But North Korea forfeited the home match because they refused to host.

North Korea hasn’t hosted a home match since the last World Cup cycle, playing South Korea to a 0-0 draw in Pyongyang in 2019.

The third round will kick off on Sep. 5, with North Korea set to face Uzbekistan in Tashkent. Should the Chollima finish in second place or higher after playing each member of Group A home and away, the team would advance to the 2026 FIFA World Cup in Canada, the United States and Mexico.

Finishing the group in third or fourth place would advance North Korea to a fourth round of qualifying, where six teams would vye for two more spots in 2026 or a berth in the inter-confederation playoffs.

Questions remain as to whether North Korea will host its own home matches or continue to coordinate them with third countries. Although the country has reopened its borders that had been shuttered since the beginning of the COVID pandemic in 2020, it may not be ready to welcome teams from other countries and their fans.

The Chollima are very popular among fans in their home country, but the team also has fans from outside its borders.

Should the team advance to the finals and play on U.S. soil, Paul Han, a North Korean escapee who lives in Indianapolis, would cheer for the North Korean players, he told RFA Korean.

“I cheer for North Korea especially when they play against South Korea, the United States, or Japan,” he said. “It’s a matter of the fate of those players, because they can be sent to a place where the sun and moon cannot be seen (if they lose).”

Translated by Claire S. Lee. Edited by Eugene Whong.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Park Jaewoo for RFA Korean.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Pacific Media Watch.

As we mark Asian American, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander Heritage Month in the United States, we’re joined by Mae Ngai to discuss the life and work of legendary Chinese American photographer Corky Lee, who documented the Asian American community in a career that spanned five decades before his death from the COVID-19 pandemic in 2021. Ngai is the co-editor of the new book Corky Lee’s Asian America: Fifty Years of Photographic Justice. We also play excerpts of the new documentary Dear Corky by filmmaker Curtis Chin, which features Lee himself discussing his activism and career. Lee “often said his aim in life was to break stereotypes of Asian Americans one photograph at a time. He wanted to make Asian Americans visible when we had been invisible, erased from American history,” says Ngai.

This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

The post Deadly Lack of Fresh Water Puts Nearly 350 Million South Asian Children at Risk appeared first on Project Censored.

This content originally appeared on Project Censored and was authored by Vins.

Rana was held in jail for a week after police arrested the journalist on March 5. Rana, who works for the Bangla-language newspaper Desh Rupantor, was arrested at a local government office in the northern Sherpur district after he filed a right to information (RTI) application regarding a government-run development program, according to news reports, the local press freedom group Bangladeshi Journalists in International Media, and Mustafa Mamun, acting editor of Desh Rupantor.

Later that day, an assistant land commissioner, who is also an executive magistrate, sentenced the journalist to six months in prison on charges of disobeying an order by a public servant and insulting the modesty of a woman. The action was taken through a mobile court, which is empowered to try offenses instantly.

Mohammad Ali Arafat, state minister for information and broadcasting, stated that the country’s information commission would investigate the incident and told CPJ that he would receive a copy of the commission’s investigative report on Monday, March 18.

Arafat did not immediately respond to CPJ’s subsequent requests for comment on the report’s findings. Mamun told CPJ that as of Wednesday, he had not received a copy of the report.

Separately, at around 12 p.m. on March 14, employees at an assistant land commissioner’s office in Lalmonirhat held Mahfuz Sazu, a correspondent for the broadcaster mytv and the newspaper The Daily Observer, after the journalist filmed a land dispute hearing allegedly conducted by an unauthorized official, according to news reports, Bangladeshi Journalists in International Media, and the journalist, who spoke to CPJ.

Twenty minutes later, four members of the Lalmonirhat Press Club arrived to help Sazu and were also confined within the premises. After a district revenue commissioner arrived at the scene, the five journalists were released around 12:50 p.m.

“CPJ welcomes a government investigation into the retaliatory jailing of Bangladeshi journalist Md Shofiuzzaman Rana. Journalists should not face reprisal merely for seeking information,,” said Beh Lih Yi, CPJ’s Asia program coordinator. “Authorities should launch a transparent probe into the confinement of five correspondents in a  government office in Lalmonirhat and ensure that journalists are not harassed with impunity.”

Rana’s arrest unfolded after an office assistant refused to provide the journalist with a receipt for his RTI application. Rana then called the Sherpur deputy commissioner, or district magistrate, to resolve the issue, Mamun told CPJ, citing Rana. The chief of the local government office arrived at the scene and shouted at Rana, saying, “You are a broker journalist” (an insult used to refer to a media member who makes money through one-sided stories).

Police then arrived at the scene, arrested the journalist, and seized his two mobile phones. Rana was held for one week in Sherpur District Jail and released on bail on March 12. A local magistrate court is scheduled to hear Rana’s appeal against the verdict on April 16.

Separately, Sazu told CPJ that after filming the land dispute hearing, he interviewed three people connected to the case in the corridor of the assistant land commissioner’s office when an official unsuccessfully attempted to confiscate his phone.

The official then called the assistant land commissioner. At the same time, the office staff escorted the three people he interviewed out of the building and locked the entrance, leaving the journalist confined within the premises, Sazu said.

Sazu told CPJ that the journalist’s four colleagues later entered the building with the assistance of a local ward councilor but were also locked inside the premises. The journalists were:

• Mazharul Islam Bipu, a correspondent for the broadcaster Independent Television
• SK Sahed, a correspondent for the newspaper Daily Kalbela
• Neon Dulal, a correspondent for the broadcaster Asian TV
• Liakat Ali, a correspondent for the newspaper Daily Nabochatona

The assistant land commissioner then arrived at the scene and shouted at the journalists, calling them “brokers” and threatening to send them to jail via a mobile court, Sazu said, adding that the journalists also heard him telling an unidentified individual on the phone that he would file legal cases against them.

Later that day, the divisional commissioner of Rangpur, which encompasses Lalmonirhat, issued an order transferring the assistant land commissioner to another locality. As of Wednesday, the order had not been executed, and no further legal or administrative action had been taken, Sazu told CPJ.

Arafat did not immediately respond to CPJ’s request for comment on the incident in Lalmonirhat.

This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

His whole fall from grace as deputy-prime minister was all the more revealing for being instigated by his politically insatiable mentor, Mahathir bin Mohammed, Southeast Asia’s wiliest, and most ruthless politician.  Eventually, that old, vengeful fox had to relent: his former protégé would have his day.

Anwar is in no mood to take sides on spats between the grumbly titans who seek their place in posterity’s sun.  And why should a country like Malaysia do so?  During last year’s visit to Beijing and the Boao Forum in Hainan, he secured a commitment from Chinese President Xi Jinping on foreign investment amounting to RM170.1 billion ($US35.6 billion) spanning 19 memoranda of understanding (MOU).  Greater participation in Malaysia’s 5G network plan by Chinese telecommunications behemoth Huawei was assured some weeks later.

In the Financial Times, the Malaysian PM levelled the charge against the United States that Sinophobia had become a problem, a fogging fixation.  Why should Malaysia, he asked, “pick a quarrel” with China, a country that had become its foremost trading partner?  “Why must I be tied to one interest?  I don’t buy into this strong prejudice against China, this China-phobia.”

Much of this middle-of-the-road daring was prompted by comments made by US Vice President Kamala Harris, who has been saddled with the task of padding out ties between Washington and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).  Rather than being diplomatic, the Veep has been irritatingly teacherly.

Last September, during her visit to the US-ASEAN summit in Jakarta, Harris beat the drum on the issue of promoting “a region that is open, interconnected, prosperous, secure, and resilient.”  Such openness was always going to be subordinate to Washington’s own interests.  “We have a shared commitment to international rules and norms and our partnership on pressing national and regional issues”.  An international campaign against “irresponsible behaviour in the disputed waters” would be commenced.

During her trip to the Philippines last November, Harris made the focus of concern clear to countries in the region.  “We must stand up for principles such as respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, unimpeded lawful commerce, the peaceful resolution of disputes, and the freedom of navigation and overflight in the South China Sea, and throughout the Indo-Pacific.”

The subtext for those listening was so obvious as to be scripted in bold font: Our values first; China’s a necessarily distant second.  This coarse directness did not fall on deaf ears, and Anwar was particularly attentive.  He had already found the views voiced by Harris at Jakarta about Malaysia’s leanings towards Beijing as “not right and grossly unfair”.

In remarks made during a joint press conference with Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese held at the current ASEAN summit, being hosted in Melbourne, Anwar expressed much irritation in being badgered by the United States and its allies on the subject of taking sides.  The virus of Sinophobia had been doing the rounds, causing sniffles and rumbles.  “[M]y reference to China-phobia is because the criticism levied against us for giving additional focus on China; my response is, trade investments is open and right now, China seems to be the leading investor and trade into Malaysia,” Anwar observed.  Malaysians, for the most part, “do not have a problem with China.”

Labouring, even flogging the “fiercely independent” standing of Malaysia, Anwar went on to state that his country remained “an important friend of the United States and Europe and here in Australia, they should not preclude us from being friendly to one of our important neighbours, precisely China.”

Nothing typifies this better than Malaysia’s policy towards the supply and manufacturing of semiconductors.  The emergence of a China Plus One Strategy, notably in the electronic supply chain, has seen companies diversify their risk through investing in alternative markets to mitigate risks.  Keep China on side but do so securely.  Anwar has established a task force dedicated to the subject, while also courting such entities as US chipmaker Micron Technology.  Last October, the company promised an investment of US$1 billion to expand its Penang operations, in addition to the previous allocation of $US1 billion to construct and fully equip its new facility.  In business, such promiscuity should be lauded.

Anwar’s concerns were solid statements of calculated principle, and inconceivable coming out of the mouth of an Australian politician.  Albanese, for his part, has tried to walk the middle road when it comes to security in the Indo-Pacific, even as China remains Australia’s largest trading partner.  He does so in wolf’s clothing supplied by Washington, with various garish labels such as “AUKUS” and “nuclear-powered submarines”.  For decades, Australia’s association with ASEAN has been ventriloquised, the voice emanating from the White House, Pentagon or US State Department.

Canberra’s middle road remains cluttered by one big power, replete with US road signs and tolls, accompanied by hearty welcomes from the US military industrial complex and its determination to turn Australia into a forward defensive position, a garrison playing war’s waiting game.  To his credit, Anwar has avoided the trap, exposing the inauthentic position of his Australian hosts with skill and undeniable charm.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Binoy Kampmark.

The findings from RFE/RL's Russian Service corroborate earlier statements from Ukrainian military officials, underscoring how Kyiv's ability to secure its command communications is potentially threatened.

It comes as Ukrainian forces grapple with depleted weaponry and ammunition, and overall exhaustion, with Russian forces pressing localized offensives in several locations along the 1,200-kilometer front line. The industrial city of Avdiyivka, in particular, is under severe strain with Russian forces making steady advances, threatening to encircle Ukrainian defenses there.

Ukraine has relied heavily on Starlink, a network for low-orbit satellites that provide high-speed Internet access. The network is owned by SpaceX, the private space company that is in turn owned by Musk, the American billionaire entrepreneur.

They are used on the front line primarily for stable communications between units, medics, and commanders. Ukrainian troops have also experimented with installing Starlink antennas on large attack drones, which are an essential tool for Ukrainian troops but are frequently jammed by Russian electronic-warfare systems.

However, a growing number of Ukrainian military sources and civilian activists have pointed to evidence that Russian troops are using the network, either for their own communications or to potentially monitor Ukraine's.

Live Briefing: Russia's Invasion Of Ukraine

RFE/RL's Live Briefing gives you all of the latest developments on Russia's full-scale invasion, Kyiv's counteroffensive, Western military aid, global reaction, and the plight of civilians. For all of RFE/RL's coverage of the war in Ukraine, click here.

On February 11, Ukraine's military intelligence service, known as HUR, said Russian forces were not only using Starlink terminals but also doing it in a "systemic" way. HUR also published an audio excerpt of what it said was an intercepted exchange between two Russian soldiers discussing how to set up the terminals.

Units like Russia's 83rd Air Assault Brigade, which is fighting in the partially occupied eastern region of Donetsk, are reportedly using the system, HUR spokesman Andriy Yusov was quoted as saying.

Ukraine's Defense Ministry, meanwhile, said on February 13 that Russia was acquiring Starlink terminals from unnamed Arab countries.

Starlink has said that it does not do business with Russia's government or its military, and Musk himself published a statement on his social-media company X, formerly Twitter, in response to the Ukrainian assertions.

"A number of false news reports claim that SpaceX is selling Starlink terminals to Russia. This is categorically false. To the best of our knowledge, no Starlinks have been sold directly or indirectly to Russia," Musk wrote on February 11.

Russian troops may have acquired Starlink terminals from one of potentially dozens of companies within Russia that claim to sell them alongside household products, RFE/RL found.

One Russian website, called Topmachines.ru, advertised a Starlink set for 220,000 rubles (about $2,200), and a $100 monthly subscription fee.

Starlink appears to have lax oversight on the type of personal data used by new Starlink clients when they register for the first time, as well.

One Moscow-based reseller told RFE/RL that new accounts were registered with random European first and last names and that there is no need to enter a valid European passport. The only important thing, the vendor said, is to have a valid bank card that uses one of the main international payment systems.

Another vendor told RFE/RL that the terminals he sold were brought in from Europe, though he declined to specify which country. The vendor said a terminal costs 250,000 rubles (about $2,400), and the monthly fee was 14,000 rubles.

Additionally, Starlink's technology appears to be incapable of precisely restricting signal access; independent researchers say Starlink's system only knows the approximate location of its terminals, meaning it would have to restrict access for Ukrainian frontline positions in order to limit Russian battlefield use.

IStories, an independent Russian news outlet, also identified at least three vendors in Moscow who claim to sell Starlink terminals.

Asked by reporters whether Russian troops might be using Starlink terminals, Peskov said: "This is not a certified system with us, therefore, it cannot be supplied and is not supplied officially. Accordingly, we cannot use it officially in any way."

This content originally appeared on News - Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News - Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

Football federations from a dozen Middle Eastern countries, including Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, have written to global governing body FIFA to demand that Israel be banned over its offensive in Gaza, Sky News reported on Thursday.

In a letter obtained by the British news outlet, the West Asian Football Federation, led by Prince Ali bin Al Hussein – half-brother of Jordan’s King Abdullah II – urged FIFA and member associations such as European governing body UEFA to form “a united front in isolating the Israeli Football Association from all football-related activities until these acts of aggression cease.”

It further called on the global governing body to take a “decisive stand against the atrocities committed in Palestine and the war crimes in Gaza by condemning the killing of innocent civilians including players, coaches, referees, and officials, [and] the destruction of the football infrastructure.”

The Israeli Football Association responded by calling the letter “cynical and shameless,” and urged football authorities to reject calls to ban its teams from international tournaments. “I am trusting FIFA not to involve politics in football,” Israeli FA CEO Niv Goldstein told Sky News.

“We are against involving politicians in football and being involved in political matters in the sport in general,” he added, stating that he is “looking forward to world peace.”

Meanwhile, UEFA general secretary Theodore Theodoridis told the outlet there are currently no discussions on excluding Israeli teams from European competitions. He also dismissed accusations of taking a special approach to Israel, given that UEFA has suspended all Russian teams over the Ukraine conflict.

“They are two completely different situations between the two countries,” he claimed.

While FIFA has yet to officially respond to the letter, the organization has also faced accusations of making a politically driven decision by banning Russian teams after the outbreak of the Ukraine conflict in 2022.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict flared up in October after Hamas fighters launched a surprise attack on Israeli territories that left 1,200 people dead and saw more than 200 others taken hostage. The Israel Defense Forces responded by launching a siege on the Palestinian enclave and vowing to eliminate all Hamas militants in the region. Gaza health officials have estimated that over 27,000 Palestinians have so far been killed in the Israeli response.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by RT.

Yandex, once dubbed Russia’s Google for becoming the country’s dominant online search engine, will exit Russia entirely, selling its assets there in a deeply discounted $5.2 billion deal that marks the end of an era.

Under the agreement announced on February 5 by Yandex’s Netherlands-based corporate parent, a “purchaser consortium” that includes the company’s management, an investment fund linked to Russian oil giant LUKoil, and three other businessmen will take over Yandex’s operations inside Russia.

The Russian entity, meanwhile, takes over the vast bulk of the company’s revenue-generating businesses, including the country’s dominant search engine, and also major operations in things like online shopping, advertising, food delivery, taxis, maps, and other things.

The Dutch parent is expected to retain control of several non-Russian businesses, including operations in cloud computing, self-driving cars, and a number of patents and other intellectual property licenses.

The price takes into account a 50 percent discount mandated by law on the sale of assets of companies from "unfriendly countries" when they exit the local market.

“Since February 2022, the Yandex group and our team have faced exceptional challenges. We believe that we have found the best possible solution for our shareholders, our teams, and our users in these extraordinary circumstances,” Yandex’s board Chairman John Boynton said in a statement.

February 2022 is when Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which sparked the exit of dozens of international companies from their Russian operations.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov welcomed news of the sale.

“Yandex is one of the economy’s national champions in high tech and one of the largest companies,” he told reporters. “It’s important for us that the company continues to work in the country.”

Yandex was a long-admired company, in and out of Russia, not only for its search-engine dominance but its innovations and fast-moving efforts to move into lucrative online businesses such as ride hailing and food delivery. Its shares, which traded on the U.S. Nasdaq exchange, were held by major Western institutional investors.

The announcement caps a tumultuous 18-month period since the Kremlin’s decision to launch its large-scale invasion of Ukraine. In the wake of the invasion, Russian lawmakers passed measures that amount to censorship of news and independent information about the war, which the Kremlin euphemistically calls a “special military operation.”

In the weeks that followed, Yandex, whose search engine and news portals were a major source of information for Russians, came under pressure to skew search results, and direct readers to only specified news outlets.

Two board members resigned; several top executives departed, along with thousands of employees; and the company’s American Depositary Receipts, traded on the U.S. Nasdaq exchange, were frozen. The company decided to sell its news and entertainment channels.

Months later, Yandex announced a plan for a wholesale reorganization, with a possible exit from Russia. Aleksei Kudrin, a former finance minister and longtime Kremlin confidant viewed as a “liberal” policymaker, was brought on to help negotiate the restructuring.

But the talks faltered as reports emerged that powerful Kremlin-linked oligarchs were in the running to take it over, and Yandex’s board feared Western sanctions imposed after the Russian invasion might pose legal problems. Kudrin himself ended up being sanctioned by the United States, while the company’s co-founder, Arkady Volozh, who resigned months after the invasion, was hit with European Union sanctions.

The negotiations were complicated further last August when Volozh publicly criticized the Ukraine war, calling it “barbaric.”

Aside from LUKoil and the stake to be held by management, the other three Russian members of the “purchaser consortium” are relatively unknown. One previously was an executive at Gazprom, the state-controlled natural gas giant.

None of the buyers are “a target of, or owned or controlled by a target of, sanctions in the U.S., EU, U.K., or Switzerland,” the company said.

This content originally appeared on News - Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News - Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

The Marriage Equality Bill, which saw multiple versions proposed by the ruling and opposition parties as well as through a public petition, received resounding support in the House of Representatives. As many as 369 MPs voted in favor of it versus 10 who voted against the proposed legislation.

“The benefits of this [bill] affirm the government’s commitment to human rights,” Deputy Prime Minister Somsak Thepsuthin said while presenting the government’s version of the bill to Parliament. “We are working to ensure everyone has equal access to family life, free from unfair discrimination.”

“This law should not be seen as belonging to any particular party. It should be a collective effort for the benefit of all Thai society,” he said.

Different versions of the bill proposed by the ruling and opposition parties had only minor differences and had agreement on key issues.

The core feature common to all versions of the bill is the alteration of the marriage definition from a union between “male and female” to “two individuals (of any gender).” 

This change grants “spouses” access to a host of legal rights that were previously exclusive to heterosexual couples.

If approved by the king, the Thai government will publish the bill in the Royal Gazette before it becomes law – a process that would make Thailand the first country in Southeast Asia and only the third in Asia to recognize same-sex marriage.

There is no timeline for completing the process.

Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin previously announced that the Cabinet had approved a draft amendment to the code regulating civil unions in Thailand.

“This law will enable same-sex couples to engage and marry under the Civil and Commercial Code, granting them rights and responsibilities equal to heterosexual married couples,” he told reporters.

Tunyawaj Kamolwongwat, a member of the LGBTQ community and an MP from the main opposition Move Forward Party, addressed Parliament to share a personal perspective.

“I was born a transgender. Whether I laugh or cry, my transgender identity always remains with me,” Tunyawaj said. “Transgender individuals have a place in society, have rights and dignity, and deserve to live life as they wish, including within a family setting.”

Public support

The bill enjoys overwhelming support in Thailand, with a survey during formal public consultation showing nearly 97% in favor. 

Thailand boasts one of the most vibrant LGBTQ communities in Asia, a region where only Taiwan and Nepal previously recognized the rights of same-sex couples to marry.

Annually, thousands of Thais participate in Pride Month celebrations and tourism authorities actively promote the country’s welcoming environment for LGBTQ travelers.

A recent survey by the Pew Research Center, an American think-tank, revealed that 60% of Thai adults support the legalization of same-sex marriage. This places Thailand behind only Japan (68%) and Vietnam (65%) in terms of support for such a measure in Asia.

However, discrimination against gay and lesbian individuals persists in Thailand, particularly in employment and health care, advocates say.

Same-sex couples were previously unable to adopt children, make emergency health care decisions for their partners, or access spousal benefits, including tax deductions and government pensions.

If enacted, the law is expected to address many of these issues, said Matcha Phorn-in, a rights activist and executive director of the Sangsan Anakot Yawachon Development Project, an advocacy group led by LGBTQ feminists.

“Looking at the current societal atmosphere, there’s hardly any concern. The principles of all drafts show no hidden discrimination,” she said. 

“However, once the law passes, our next step is genuine participation. The law must not lead to people of diverse sexual orientations becoming second-class citizens through its enforcement.”

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Nontharat Phaicharoen for BenarNews.

The Marriage Equality Bill, which saw multiple versions proposed by the ruling and opposition parties as well as through a public petition, received resounding support in the House of Representatives. As many as 369 MPs voted in favor of it versus 10 who voted against the proposed legislation.

“The benefits of this [bill] affirm the government’s commitment to human rights,” Deputy Prime Minister Somsak Thepsuthin said while presenting the government’s version of the bill to Parliament. “We are working to ensure everyone has equal access to family life, free from unfair discrimination.”

“This law should not be seen as belonging to any particular party. It should be a collective effort for the benefit of all Thai society,” he said.

Different versions of the bill proposed by the ruling and opposition parties had only minor differences and had agreement on key issues.

The core feature common to all versions of the bill is the alteration of the marriage definition from a union between “male and female” to “two individuals (of any gender).” 

This change grants “spouses” access to a host of legal rights that were previously exclusive to heterosexual couples.

If approved by the king, the Thai government will publish the bill in the Royal Gazette before it becomes law – a process that would make Thailand the first country in Southeast Asia and only the third in Asia to recognize same-sex marriage.

There is no timeline for completing the process.

Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin previously announced that the Cabinet had approved a draft amendment to the code regulating civil unions in Thailand.

“This law will enable same-sex couples to engage and marry under the Civil and Commercial Code, granting them rights and responsibilities equal to heterosexual married couples,” he told reporters.

Tunyawaj Kamolwongwat, a member of the LGBTQ community and an MP from the main opposition Move Forward Party, addressed Parliament to share a personal perspective.

“I was born a transgender. Whether I laugh or cry, my transgender identity always remains with me,” Tunyawaj said. “Transgender individuals have a place in society, have rights and dignity, and deserve to live life as they wish, including within a family setting.”

Public support

The bill enjoys overwhelming support in Thailand, with a survey during formal public consultation showing nearly 97% in favor. 

Thailand boasts one of the most vibrant LGBTQ communities in Asia, a region where only Taiwan and Nepal previously recognized the rights of same-sex couples to marry.

Annually, thousands of Thais participate in Pride Month celebrations and tourism authorities actively promote the country’s welcoming environment for LGBTQ travelers.

A recent survey by the Pew Research Center, an American think-tank, revealed that 60% of Thai adults support the legalization of same-sex marriage. This places Thailand behind only Japan (68%) and Vietnam (65%) in terms of support for such a measure in Asia.

However, discrimination against gay and lesbian individuals persists in Thailand, particularly in employment and health care, advocates say.

Same-sex couples were previously unable to adopt children, make emergency health care decisions for their partners, or access spousal benefits, including tax deductions and government pensions.

If enacted, the law is expected to address many of these issues, said Matcha Phorn-in, a rights activist and executive director of the Sangsan Anakot Yawachon Development Project, an advocacy group led by LGBTQ feminists.

“Looking at the current societal atmosphere, there’s hardly any concern. The principles of all drafts show no hidden discrimination,” she said. 

“However, once the law passes, our next step is genuine participation. The law must not lead to people of diverse sexual orientations becoming second-class citizens through its enforcement.”

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Nontharat Phaicharoen for BenarNews.

Photograph Source: Rikujojieitai Boueisho （陸上自衛隊 / Japan Ground Self-Defense Force) – CC BY 4.0

The United States, Japan, and South Korea will fully operationalize a missile warning system “by the end of December.” While justified as a means to counter North Korea’s missile launches, more worrisome, it escalates tensions in the region with China through the “NATOification” of all three countries, agreed upon in the “Spirit of Camp David” agreement.

The agreement was hailed as a “new era of trilateral partnership” during the August 18 press conference following a meeting between the heads of state of all three countries. Western media echoed the sentiment, calling it “historic” and “unprecedented.” China, listed in the agreement as a regional concern, accused the United States of creating a “mini NATO in Asia.” In response, United States National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan emphatically stated that the trilateral alliance is “nothing new” and certainly “not a new NATO for the Pacific.” Yet despite such dismissals, this meeting between the U.S. and its strongest allies in the region lays the foundations for NATO-level military cooperation—a common threat, interoperability, and security coordination—that threatens China and escalates tensions in the region.

‘Collective Interests and Security’

While the United States has had bilateral agreements under the San Francisco System with South Korea and Japan for decades, the August 18 Camp David meeting institutionalized trilateral cooperation among the three nations, changing the scope and nature of their relations from the hub-and-spoke bilateral alliances to trilateral annual summits (covering finance, commerce, industry, foreign policy, and defense) and joint military exercises. As Victor Cha of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) states: “This [unprecedented] institutionalization of the trilateral relationship… transforms these alliances into something quite new.” This was a historical breakthrough for the United States, which first pursued a NATO-level alliance built around Japan in the 1950s. Yet, unresolved grievances around Japan’s colonialism (enabled by the U.S. decision to prioritize its security interests over rectifying Japan’s war crimes and colonialism), and the different security interests between South Korea and Japan forced it to settle for bilateral agreements with governments it installed and propped up. Nonetheless, as noted in Foreign Policy magazine, this U.S. “military preeminence in the Pacific gave Washington the luxury of not needing a collective security agreement.” Today, as the U.S. “has lost its preponderance of military power in the maritime domain… [the U.S. and its allies face a] threat comparable to what NATO confronted in Europe during the Cold War.”

The conservative, pro-U.S. Yoon Suk Yeol administration’s 2023 decision to normalize relations with Japan (casting aside a South Korean Supreme Court ruling against Japanese companies for the wartime conscription of Koreans) paved the way towards establishing the trilateral alliance that the U.S. had sought for the past 70 years. While the Spirit of Camp David Agreement is not yet a full-fledged mini Asian-NATO, combining two of the United States’ closest allies in the region into military cooperation with each other is a step towards it. The agreement contains the seeds of a NATO-level trilateral alliance based on mutual self-defense. More specifically, it calls for consultation and coordinated responses “to regional challenges, provocations, and threats that affect our collective interests and security.” As Kurt M. Campbell, Biden’s Asia strategy architect, has stated: a “fundamental, foundational understanding” of the Spirit of Camp David statement is that “a challenge to the security of any one of the countries affects the security of all of them.”

‘Integrated Deterrence’

One of NATO’s strengths, which enhances and expands U.S. power projection in the region, is the synergy achieved by greater interoperability (i.e., the ability to effectively “achieve tactical, operational and strategic objectives”) between member countries. All of these are being built up and pursued through the trilateral security cooperation agreement.

This agreement lays the groundwork for trilateral interoperability to achieve “integrated deterrence” against China. This integrated deterrence is key in the U.S. containment of China. It allows the United States to carry out provocations (e.g., former U.S. House Speaker’s Nancy Pelosi August 2022 visit with Taiwan’s president) while limiting China’s response options.

A key component of integrated deterrence is joint military cooperation and coordination through a common operational picture. In other words, all parties need to be looking at the same operational picture informing their operational decisions. The recent normalization of the General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA) by the Yoon Administration lays the foundation for this. Previously, under the 2014 trilateral information sharing agreement, South Korean and Japanese intelligence would be shared between each other through the United States and would be limited to threats from North Korea. GSOMIA, first signed in 2016, and reinstated by Yoon (after former President Moon allowed it to expire in 2019), allows comprehensive intelligence sharing between South Korea and Japan directly, including “threats from China and Russia.” On August 29, the United States, South Korea, and Japan held joint ballistic missile defense drills to “detect and track a computer-simulated ballistic missile target, and share related information.” The system is expected to be fully operationalized by the end of December 2023. While ostensibly against North Korean intercontinental ballistic missiles, given the scope of GSOMIA, this missile defense system can just as well be applied to China.

At a time when regional power is maintained through an “extended deterrence” to determine the outcome without a bullet even fired against an adversary, the United States’ missile defense system allows it to project its power in the region by neutralizing China’s anti-access and area-denial capabilities. Furthermore, it threatens to neutralize China’s ability to respond to a first strike by the United States. The United States’ “extended deterrence” containing China and China’s “extended deterrence” safeguarding its economic rise leaves both jostling for military advantage. In effect, U.S. actions are triggering a set of actions and counteractions that are escalating tensions in the region.

Members of the Biden Administration extol the Camp David Agreement as historic and unprecedented and as a qualitative leap forward in the United States, Japan, and South Korea military cooperation and coordination. At the same time, they oppose its characterization as a mini-Asian NATO. And while the agreement has not yet reached NATO status, it is clearly laying the groundwork toward that objective. It has also driven China, North Korea, and Russia to strengthen their own coordination, effectively consolidating an opposing bloc. Ultimately, the fight to establish competing “extended deterrence” is the beginning of war. To stop war, we must shift from military posturing and escalation to diplomatic solutions and respect for the security concerns of all countries.

This article was produced by Globetrotter.

The post Trilateral Missile Defense System a Step Towards Asian NATO appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Jeffrey Wagner and Dae-Han Song.

In the aftermath of Palestinian group Hamas’ terror attack inside Israel on October 7 and the Israeli state’s even more terrifying attacks on Palestinian urban neighbourhoods in Gaza, the media across many parts of Asia tend to take a more neutral stand in comparison with their Western counterparts.

A lot of sympathy is expressed for the plight of the Palestinians who have been under frequent attacks by Israeli forces for decades and have faced ever trauma since the Nakba in 1948 when Zionist militia forced some 750,000 refugees to leave their homeland.

Even India, which has been getting closer to Israel in recent years, and one of Israel’s closest Asian allies, Singapore, have taken a cautious attitude to the latest flare-up in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

• READ MORE:  Israel-Gaza crisis: NZ must condemn atrocities but keep pushing for a two-state solution
• 7 journalists killed since beginning of Israeli aggression on Gaza
• Jakarta workers protest outside US Embassy, call for end to Hamas-Israeli war
• Other Hamas-Israel conflict reports
• Al Jazeera live news blog on the Hamas-Israel conflict

Soon after the Hamas attacks in Israel, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi tweeted that he was “deeply shocked by the news of terrorist attacks”.

He added: “We stand in solidarity with Israel at this difficult hour.” But, soon after, his Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) sought to strike a balance.

Addressing a media briefing on October 12, MEA spokesperson Arindam Bagchi reiterated New Delhi’s “long-standing and consistent” position on the issue, telling reporters that “India has always advocated the resumption of direct negotiations towards establishing a sovereign, independent and viable state of Palestine” living in peace with Israel.

Singapore has also reiterated its support for a two-state solution, with Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam telling Today Daily that it was possible to deplore how Palestinians had been treated over the years while still unequivocally condemning the terrorist attacks carried out in Israel by Hamas.

“These atrocities cannot be justified by any rationale whatsoever, whether of fundamental problems or historical grievances,” he said.

“I think it’s fair to say that any response has to be consistent with international law and international rules of war”.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has blamed the rapidly worsening conflict in the Middle East on a lack of justice for the Palestinian people.

Lack of justice for Palestinians
“The crux of the issue lies in the fact that justice has not been done to the Palestinian people,” Beijing’s top diplomat said in a phone call with Brazil’s Celso Amorim, a special adviser to Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, according to Japan’s Nikkei Asia.

The call came just ahead of an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council on October 13 to discuss the Israel-Hamas war. Brazil, a non-permanent member, is chairing the council this month.

Indonesian President Jokowi Widodo called for an end to the region’s bloodletting cycle and pro-Palestinian protests have been held in Jakarta.

“Indonesia calls for the war and violence to be stopped immediately to avoid further human casualties and destruction of property because the escalation of the conflict can cause greater humanitarian impact,” he said.

“The root cause of the conflict, which is the occupation of Palestinian land by Israel, must be resolved immediately in accordance with the parameters that have been agreed upon by the UN.”

Indonesia, which is home to the world’s largest Muslim population, has supported Palestinian self-determination for a long time and does not have diplomatic relations with Israel.

But, Indonesia’s foreign ministry said 275 Indonesians were working in Israel and were making plans to evacuate them.

Sympathy for the Palestinians
Meanwhile, Thailand said that 18 of their citizens have been killed by the terror attacks and 11 abducted.

In the Philippines, Foreign Affairs Secretary Enrique Manalo said on October 10 that the safety of thousands of Filipinos living and working in Israel remained a priority for the government.

There are approximately 40,000 Filipinos in Israel, but only 25,000 are legally documented, according to labour and migrant groups, says Benar News, a US-funded Asian news portal.

According to India’s MEA spokesperson Bagchi, there are 18,000 Indians in Israel and about a dozen in the Palestinian territories. India is trying to bring them home, and a first flight evacuating 230 Indians was expected to take place at the weekend, according to the Hindu newspaper.

It is unclear what such large numbers of Asians are doing in Israel. Yet, from media reports in the region, there is deep concern about the plight of civilians caught up in the clashes.

Benar News reported that Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has spoken with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan about resolving the Palestine-Israel conflict according to UN-agreed parameters.

Also this week, the Malaysian government announced it would allocate 1 million ringgit (US$211,423) in humanitarian aid for Palestinians.

Western view questioned
Sympathy for the Palestinian cause is reflected widely in the Asian media, both in Muslim-majority and non-Muslim countries. The Western unequivocal support for Israel, particularly by Anglo-American media, has been questioned across Asia.

Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post’s regular columnist Alex Lo challenged Hamas’ “unprovoked” terror attack in Israel, a narrative commonly used in Western media reporting of the latest flare-up.

“It must be pointed out that what Hamas has done is terrorism pure and simple,” notes Lo.

“But such horrors and atrocities are not being committed by Palestinian militants without a background and a context. They did not come out of nowhere as unadulterated and uncaused evil”.

Thus Lo argues, that to claim that the latest terror attacks were “unprovoked” is to whitewash the background and context that constitute the very history of this unending conflict in Palestine.

US media’s ‘morally reprehensible propaganda’
“It’s morally reprehensible propaganda of the worst kind that the mainstream Anglo-American media culture has been guilty of for decades,” he says.

“But the real problem with that is not only with morality but also with the very practical politics of searching for a viable peace settlement”.

He is concerned that “with their unconditional and uncritical support of Israel, the West and the United States in particular have essentially made such a peace impossible”.

Writing in India’s Hindu newspaper, Denmark-based Indian professor of literature Dr Tabish Khair points out that historically, Palestinians have had to indulge in drastic and violent acts to draw attention to their plight and the oppressive policies of Israel.

“The Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), under Yasser Arafat’s leadership, used such ‘terrorist’ acts to focus world attention on the Palestinian problem, and without such actions, the West would have looked the other way while the Palestinians were slowly airbrushed out of history,” he argues.

While the PLO fought a secular Palestinian battle for nationhood, which was largely ignored by Western powers, this lead to political Islam’s development in the later part of the 1970s, and Hamas is a product of that.

“Today, we live in a world where political Islam is associated almost entirely with Islam — and almost all Muslims,” he notes.

Palestinian cause still resonates
But, the Palestinian cause still resonates beyond the Muslim communities, as the reactions in Asia reflect.

Indian historian and journalist Vijay Prashad, writing in Bangladesh’s Daily Star, notes the savagery of the impending war against the Palestinian people will be noted by the global community.

He points out that Hamas was never allowed to function as a voice for the Palestinian people, even after they won a landslide democratic election in Gaza in January 2006.

“The victory of Hamas was condemned by the Israelis and the West, who decided to use armed force to overthrow the election result,” he points out.

“Gaza was never allowed a political process, in fact never allowed to shape any kind of political authority to speak for the people”.

Prashad points out that when the Palestinians conducted a non-violent march in 2019 for their rights to nationhood, they were met with Israeli bombs that killed 200 people.

“When non-violent protest is met with force, it becomes difficult to convince people to remain on that path and not take up arms,” he argues.

Prashad disputes the Western media’s argument that Israel has a “right to defend itself” because the Palestinians are people under occupation. Under the Geneva Convention, Israel has an obligation to protect them.

Under the Geneva Convention, Prashad argues that the Israeli government’s “collective punishment” strategy is a war crime.

“The International Criminal Court opened an investigation into Israeli war crimes in 2021 but it was not able to move forward even to collect information”.

Kalinga Seneviratne is a correspondent for IDN-InDepthNews, the flagship agency of the non-profit International Press Syndicate (IPS). Republished under a Creative Commons licence.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

In the aftermath of Palestinian group Hamas’ terror attack inside Israel on October 7 and the Israeli state’s even more terrifying attacks on Palestinian urban neighbourhoods in Gaza, the media across many parts of Asia tend to take a more neutral stand in comparison with their Western counterparts.

A lot of sympathy is expressed for the plight of the Palestinians who have been under frequent attacks by Israeli forces for decades and have faced ever trauma since the Nakba in 1948 when Zionist militia forced some 750,000 refugees to leave their homeland.

Even India, which has been getting closer to Israel in recent years, and one of Israel’s closest Asian allies, Singapore, have taken a cautious attitude to the latest flare-up in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

• READ MORE:  Israel-Gaza crisis: NZ must condemn atrocities but keep pushing for a two-state solution
• 7 journalists killed since beginning of Israeli aggression on Gaza
• Jakarta workers protest outside US Embassy, call for end to Hamas-Israeli war
• Other Hamas-Israel conflict reports
• Al Jazeera live news blog on the Hamas-Israel conflict

Soon after the Hamas attacks in Israel, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi tweeted that he was “deeply shocked by the news of terrorist attacks”.

He added: “We stand in solidarity with Israel at this difficult hour.” But, soon after, his Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) sought to strike a balance.

Addressing a media briefing on October 12, MEA spokesperson Arindam Bagchi reiterated New Delhi’s “long-standing and consistent” position on the issue, telling reporters that “India has always advocated the resumption of direct negotiations towards establishing a sovereign, independent and viable state of Palestine” living in peace with Israel.

Singapore has also reiterated its support for a two-state solution, with Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam telling Today Daily that it was possible to deplore how Palestinians had been treated over the years while still unequivocally condemning the terrorist attacks carried out in Israel by Hamas.

“These atrocities cannot be justified by any rationale whatsoever, whether of fundamental problems or historical grievances,” he said.

“I think it’s fair to say that any response has to be consistent with international law and international rules of war”.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has blamed the rapidly worsening conflict in the Middle East on a lack of justice for the Palestinian people.

Lack of justice for Palestinians
“The crux of the issue lies in the fact that justice has not been done to the Palestinian people,” Beijing’s top diplomat said in a phone call with Brazil’s Celso Amorim, a special adviser to Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, according to Japan’s Nikkei Asia.

The call came just ahead of an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council on October 13 to discuss the Israel-Hamas war. Brazil, a non-permanent member, is chairing the council this month.

Indonesian President Jokowi Widodo called for an end to the region’s bloodletting cycle and pro-Palestinian protests have been held in Jakarta.

“Indonesia calls for the war and violence to be stopped immediately to avoid further human casualties and destruction of property because the escalation of the conflict can cause greater humanitarian impact,” he said.

“The root cause of the conflict, which is the occupation of Palestinian land by Israel, must be resolved immediately in accordance with the parameters that have been agreed upon by the UN.”

Indonesia, which is home to the world’s largest Muslim population, has supported Palestinian self-determination for a long time and does not have diplomatic relations with Israel.

But, Indonesia’s foreign ministry said 275 Indonesians were working in Israel and were making plans to evacuate them.

Sympathy for the Palestinians
Meanwhile, Thailand said that 18 of their citizens have been killed by the terror attacks and 11 abducted.

In the Philippines, Foreign Affairs Secretary Enrique Manalo said on October 10 that the safety of thousands of Filipinos living and working in Israel remained a priority for the government.

There are approximately 40,000 Filipinos in Israel, but only 25,000 are legally documented, according to labour and migrant groups, says Benar News, a US-funded Asian news portal.

According to India’s MEA spokesperson Bagchi, there are 18,000 Indians in Israel and about a dozen in the Palestinian territories. India is trying to bring them home, and a first flight evacuating 230 Indians was expected to take place at the weekend, according to the Hindu newspaper.

It is unclear what such large numbers of Asians are doing in Israel. Yet, from media reports in the region, there is deep concern about the plight of civilians caught up in the clashes.

Benar News reported that Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has spoken with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan about resolving the Palestine-Israel conflict according to UN-agreed parameters.

Also this week, the Malaysian government announced it would allocate 1 million ringgit (US$211,423) in humanitarian aid for Palestinians.

Western view questioned
Sympathy for the Palestinian cause is reflected widely in the Asian media, both in Muslim-majority and non-Muslim countries. The Western unequivocal support for Israel, particularly by Anglo-American media, has been questioned across Asia.

Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post’s regular columnist Alex Lo challenged Hamas’ “unprovoked” terror attack in Israel, a narrative commonly used in Western media reporting of the latest flare-up.

“It must be pointed out that what Hamas has done is terrorism pure and simple,” notes Lo.

“But such horrors and atrocities are not being committed by Palestinian militants without a background and a context. They did not come out of nowhere as unadulterated and uncaused evil”.

Thus Lo argues, that to claim that the latest terror attacks were “unprovoked” is to whitewash the background and context that constitute the very history of this unending conflict in Palestine.

US media’s ‘morally reprehensible propaganda’
“It’s morally reprehensible propaganda of the worst kind that the mainstream Anglo-American media culture has been guilty of for decades,” he says.

“But the real problem with that is not only with morality but also with the very practical politics of searching for a viable peace settlement”.

He is concerned that “with their unconditional and uncritical support of Israel, the West and the United States in particular have essentially made such a peace impossible”.

Writing in India’s Hindu newspaper, Denmark-based Indian professor of literature Dr Tabish Khair points out that historically, Palestinians have had to indulge in drastic and violent acts to draw attention to their plight and the oppressive policies of Israel.

“The Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), under Yasser Arafat’s leadership, used such ‘terrorist’ acts to focus world attention on the Palestinian problem, and without such actions, the West would have looked the other way while the Palestinians were slowly airbrushed out of history,” he argues.

While the PLO fought a secular Palestinian battle for nationhood, which was largely ignored by Western powers, this lead to political Islam’s development in the later part of the 1970s, and Hamas is a product of that.

“Today, we live in a world where political Islam is associated almost entirely with Islam — and almost all Muslims,” he notes.

Palestinian cause still resonates
But, the Palestinian cause still resonates beyond the Muslim communities, as the reactions in Asia reflect.

Indian historian and journalist Vijay Prashad, writing in Bangladesh’s Daily Star, notes the savagery of the impending war against the Palestinian people will be noted by the global community.

He points out that Hamas was never allowed to function as a voice for the Palestinian people, even after they won a landslide democratic election in Gaza in January 2006.

“The victory of Hamas was condemned by the Israelis and the West, who decided to use armed force to overthrow the election result,” he points out.

“Gaza was never allowed a political process, in fact never allowed to shape any kind of political authority to speak for the people”.

Prashad points out that when the Palestinians conducted a non-violent march in 2019 for their rights to nationhood, they were met with Israeli bombs that killed 200 people.

“When non-violent protest is met with force, it becomes difficult to convince people to remain on that path and not take up arms,” he argues.

Prashad disputes the Western media’s argument that Israel has a “right to defend itself” because the Palestinians are people under occupation. Under the Geneva Convention, Israel has an obligation to protect them.

Under the Geneva Convention, Prashad argues that the Israeli government’s “collective punishment” strategy is a war crime.

“The International Criminal Court opened an investigation into Israeli war crimes in 2021 but it was not able to move forward even to collect information”.

Kalinga Seneviratne is a correspondent for IDN-InDepthNews, the flagship agency of the non-profit International Press Syndicate (IPS). Republished under a Creative Commons licence.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Most of the North Koreans were civilians and religious figures who were arrested while attempting to travel to South Korea from China, the sources added. 

According to the J.M. Missionary Union, which has been working to rescue North Koreans, the repatriation took place in the Chinese cities of Tumen, Hunchun, Changbai, Dandong, and Nanping. 

Beijing and Pyongyang had previously agreed that the repatriation would take place immediately after the Asian Games, it said. 

“At around 7:30 p.m. local time on the 9th of this month, after dark, the repatriation was secretly carried out through various Chinese customs offices along the border between North Korea and China,” an official at the J.M. Missionary Union told RFA on Oct. 11, adding that the people were arrested during the COVID pandemic and kept in Chinese detention centers.

“Previously, some North Koreans were repatriated as China began repatriating North Koreans on Aug. 29. Some defectors were also sent back to the North last month on Sept. 18, just before the Asian Games,” said the official. “Following this, a large-scale repatriation of more than 500 defectors was carried out on Sep. 9.”

Peter Jung, head of the North Korean Solidarity for Justice, also told RFA that a large number of North Koreans had been repatriated through the North Korean-Chinese border, including children, and that the repatriations had taken place simultaneously in several areas.

“Our sources told us that a North Korean defector, who was just hours away from being repatriated, called his family in China in a tearful voice, asking them to take care of his remaining children because he did not know what would happen to them if he was repatriated,” said Jung.

“North Korea had closed its borders and refused to repatriate defectors from China due to the COVID, but as both China and North Korea have relaxed their anti-COVID policies, we understand that Chinese authorities have urged North Korea to accept defectors,” he added. 

Separately, the U.S.-based civil society organization One Korea Network also said in a press release that the Chinese government secretly repatriated North Korean defectors on Monday through the cities of Tumen, Hunchun, Dandong, Nanping, and Sanjiang.

The repatriation was reportedly carried out under tight security and in secret, making it particularly noteworthy that it took place 10 days before North Korea’s party founding day on Oct. 10, and just after the end of China’s National Day holiday and the Hangzhou Asian Games.

“The detention center workers had not been informed of any information regarding the movement of the North Korean defectors in their custody,” a source in Yanji, China, told RFA on Nov. 11, citing a detention center worker. “Under these circumstances, the defectors were suddenly loaded into cars at dawn on the 9th and taken somewhere.”

Another China-based source said: “I understand that [Chinese authorities] make the North Koreans gather at night in certain places, such as Yanji, and then pick a time when the area goes quiet before sending them back to the North, while maintaining the highest possible monitoring.”

Meanwhile, South Korea’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said on Nov. 11 that it had no confirmation on whether China repatriated North Koreans immediately after the Asian Games.

“The South Korean government is making diplomatic efforts to ensure that North Koreans living abroad are not forcibly repatriated and can safely and quickly go to their desired destinations,” the ministry said.

Translated by Taejun Kang. Edited by Elaine Chan

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Mok Yongjae and Kim Ji Eun for RFA Korean.

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

Mr. Big had a problem. He needed to move what he called “fraud funds” back to China, but a crackdown was making that difficult. So in August, Mr. Big, who, needless to say, did not list his real name, posted an ad on a Telegram channel. He sought a “group of smuggling teams” to, as he put it, “complete the final conversion” of the stolen money by smuggling gold and precious stones from Myanmar into southern China, in exchange for a 10% cut.

It’s unclear whether Mr. Big ultimately succeeded; his ad has since been deleted, and ProPublica was unable to reach him. But the online forum where he posted his ad says a lot about why Americans and people around the world have found themselves targeted by an unprecedented wave of fraud originating out of Southeast Asia, whose vast scale is now becoming apparent. In a single recent criminal investigation, Singapore police seized more than $2 billion in money laundered from a syndicate with alleged ties to organized crime, including “scams and online gambling.”

The Telegram channel that featured Mr. Big’s plea for assistance was a Chinese-language forum offering access to “white capital” — money that has been laundered — “guaranteed” by a casino operator in Myanmar, Fully Light Group, that purports to ensure that deals struck on the forum go through. Fully Light also operates its own Telegram channels that advertise similar services. One such channel, with 117,000 participants, featured offers to swap cryptocurrency for “pure white” Chinese renminbi or “white capital” Singaporean dollars. (Telegram took down that channel after ProPublica inquired about it. Fully Light did not respond to requests for comment.)

The presence of a casino in facilitating such deals is no coincidence. A growing number of gambling operations across Southeast Asia have become key pillars in a vast underground banking system serving organized criminal groups, according to new research by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. The research has not been published, but the agency shared its findings with ProPublica.

There are now over 340 physical casinos across Southeast Asia (as well as countless online ones), and many of them show accelerating levels of infiltration by organized crime, according to the UNODC. The casinos function as “a shadow banking system that allows people to move money quickly, seamlessly, jurisdiction-to-jurisdiction, with almost no restriction,” Jeremy Douglas, UNODC’s top official in Southeast Asia, told ProPublica in September. That has made money laundering “easier than ever before,” he said, and it’s been “fundamental to the expansion of the transnational criminal economy” in the region — especially cybercrime.

As ProPublica reported in detail last year, Southeast Asia has become a major hub for cryptocurrency investment scams that often start as innocent-sounding “wrong number”-type text messages. The messages frequently originate from seedy casino towns in Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar, where criminal syndicates lure workers with the promise of lucrative jobs, only to force them to work as online scammers. UNODC’s map of known or suspected scam compounds shows a clear overlap with gambling hubs in Laos, Myanmar and Cambodia, where allegations of forced online scam labor have become so widespread that they recently prompted Interpol to issue a global warning about the problem, which the international police agency said was occurring on “an industrial scale.”

Gambling has long attracted organized crime, but never more than in Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos and the Philippines, where loose regulations and endemic corruption allow casinos to operate with little oversight or responsibility to report suspicious transactions. Before the COVID-19 pandemic began, officials in those countries wooed Chinese casino operators in an effort to attract foreign direct investment. Criminal bosses, facing a crackdown in China and sanctions imposed by the U.S., began investing in casinos and cutting deals to run their own special economic zones in Myanmar and elsewhere where they could operate unfettered.

When the pandemic struck in 2020, travel restrictions emptied newly built casinos, hotels and offices of workers and visitors across the region. Criminal syndicates repurposed the facilities to house online fraud operations and turned to human smugglers to staff them up. (For example, when Philippine authorities raided several online gambling operators between May and August, they discovered more than 4,400 laborers, most of them human trafficking victims forced to perpetrate online fraud.)

Online casinos can be easily used for money laundering: They often accept cryptocurrency deposits that can be converted to virtual chips and placed in bets or cashed out in currency, making them seem like proceeds of legitimate gambling. That method of money laundering is becoming increasingly common in Southeast Asia.

Physical casinos have their own attractions for money laundering. They have become a draw for a parallel industry of junket operators, who organize gambling trips for high-rollers. Those junkets also attract organized criminal groups that need to move money across borders and do so using junkets’ gambling accounts, according to recent prosecutions by Chinese authorities. Last year, 36 individuals connected to Suncity Group, once one of the biggest junket operators in the world, were convicted in China of facilitating about $160 million in illegal cross-border payments and transactions. The company’s ex-CEO, Alvin Chau, is in jail for running a criminal syndicate and other charges.

In northeast Myanmar, Fully Light Group has emerged as a “multi-billion-dollar business conglomerate and a key player” in casinos and illegal online gambling, according to research by Jason Tower, Myanmar country director for the United States Institute of Peace. “These are not normal casinos in any way,” Tower said, because they’re located in what he calls “criminal enclaves” that are more under the control of organized crime than any government authority. For instance, Tower found hundreds of criminal convictions by Chinese courts related to illegal casinos, fraud, kidnapping, drugs and weapons charges in the Kokang Special Administrative Zone, near Myanmar’s border with China, where Fully Light is based. In its review, UNODC found Kokang casinos — both those owned by Fully Light and by others — also played a major role in money laundering. They operate Telegram channels that openly advertise money laundering services, including some that link back to official Fully Light channels and offer the company’s guarantee to cross-border exchanges of cryptocurrencies. Some Fully Light-affiliated Telegram channels include solicitations to participate in what are known as money mule “motorcades” that move funds through multiple cryptocurrency wallets or bank accounts.

Billions of dollars more are likely flowing into the region, thanks to online scams that show no signs of abating. Nick Smart of the cryptocurrency analytics firm Crystal Blockchain has been tracing the flows of crypto funds deposited into online platforms that are set up to look like investing sites in order to fleece victims. Following the money trail from just one such website, which he suspects to be linked to criminal organizations in Myanmar, led him to a wallet that also pooled funds from 14 other known crypto scams. The wallet received about $44 million in various cryptocurrencies between December and July, when it ceased activity. With thousands of such websites popping up every day, victims’ losses are easily “in the billions,” said Smart, the director of blockchain intelligence at Crystal.

The global cybercrime spree has prompted countries across the region to take a bolder tack. In June, Thailand cut off electricity to two cyberfraud hot spots across its border with Myanmar (with disappointing results). More recently, Thai officials shut down six illegal cellular towers suspected of providing internet service to scam compounds in Myanmar. Chinese authorities have also arrested thousands of their own citizens in dramatic operations that included a humiliating perp walk of hundreds of suspected cybercriminals across a border crossing from Myanmar to China’s southern Yunnan Province on Sept. 6.

On Sept. 26, UNODC unveiled an agreement with China and the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations to jointly combat organized crime and human trafficking linked with casinos and scams. An action plan accompanying the agreement calls on the countries to “make anti-money laundering and wider anti-corruption efforts a higher priority.”

But the challenge is steep. Even as multiple countries crack down, Laos, one of the poorest nations in the region, is getting ready to allow online gambling operators to set up shop within its borders and target foreigners.

And governments need to broaden their focus. Anti-money-laundering regulations often zero in on bank cash transfers of $10,000 or more. The UNODC’s Douglas said governments will need to turn their attention to casinos and other nontraditional financial players. “Everyone’s been focusing on transactions of $10,000 going through banks and flagging suspicious transactions,” Douglas said, “and these guys are moving millions around the corner through the casino, laughing at the system.”

This content originally appeared on Articles and Investigations - ProPublica and was authored by by Cezary Podkul.

• Syrian president returns to China after almost 20 years
• 19th Asian Games started in Hangzhou
• Particle accelerator to produce semiconductors
• ‘Comfort women’ film debuts in Japan

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Dongsheng News.

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations has held joint drills with other countries, including the United States and China, but this ASEAN-only exercise is a sign of growing cooperation and unity on maritime security, analysts told BenarNews, an online news agency affiliated with Radio Free Asia.

The 10 ASEAN members will be joined by prospective 11th member, Timor Leste, during the five-day non-combat exercise. Officially called ASEAN Solidarity Exercise, it will take place around Batam and Natuna Islands near the South China Sea, Lt. Col. Abidin Tobba, media coordinator for the event, told BenarNews on Monday. 

“Eleven countries and hundreds of personnel will take part in the exercise,” including Myanmar, Abidin said without specifying why it was participating.

Myanmar’s military junta has been persona non grata at ASEAN meetings because of its failure to implement a regional peace plan agreed two months after the army seized power from an elected government in February 2021. 

The drills will include joint maritime patrols, medical evacuation, search and rescue and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief in simulated affected areas, the Indonesian military said.

Enhancing regional stability

They are expected to enhance regional stability and “boost our countries’ economy,” according to Indonesia’s military commander, Adm. Yudo Margono, who proposed the ASEAN exercise during a meeting of the bloc’s defense forces chiefs in Bali in June. 

Indonesia is this year’s holder of the rotating ASEAN chairmanship.

The exercise comes three weeks after Beijing released a new map including Taiwan and practically the entire South China Sea. But Southeast Asian countries and Taiwan rejected the map.

China claims almost all of the South China Sea, including waters within the exclusive economic zones of Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Vietnam, which are ASEAN members, and Taiwan. Indonesia is not a claimant in the dispute, but has repeatedly protested against Chinese fishing boats and coast guard vessels entering its waters near the Natuna Islands.

A U.N. arbitration court in 2016 ruled that China’s nine-dash line, a boundary used by Beijing on Chinese maps to illustrate its claim, was invalid. But Beijing has rejected the ruling and insisted it has jurisdiction over all areas within the dashed line.

In the latest incident, Chinese ships sailed uncomfortably close to and hemmed in a Philippine Coast Guard ship as it escorted civilian supply boats Manila’s military outpost in Ayungin (Second Thomas) Shoal.

A BenarNews correspondent and other reporters, who were given special permission to travel aboard two Philippine Coast guard Ships for a resupply mission, witnessed the tense moments at sea. 

ASEAN members Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand and Singapore have no connection to the dispute but are participating in the exercise because it is valuable and sends a message to the superpowers, said Vinsensio Dugis, head of the ASEAN Studies Center at Airlangga University in Surabaya.

“Not all are involved in the South China Sea dispute, but this [exercise] shows that even those who do not have direct claims are also concerned about this issue,” he told BenarNews.

He said the exercise also signals that ASEAN does not want to be seen as siding with either China or the United States, which have been engaged in a strategic rivalry in the Indo-Pacific region.

Internal conflict

However, the South China Sea issue has caused conflict within ASEAN before, including, media reports said, on the location of the joint exercise.

Cambodia and Myanmar, which have strong ties to China, had initially not confirmed participation in the exercise when it was announced in June. 

Some media reports said Cambodia had opposed the earlier planned location in the North Natuna Sea, which lies within Indonesia’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) but parts of which China claims. 

Later in June, Indonesia changed the ASEAN exercise location to Batam near Singapore and the waters of South Natuna, citing their suitability for non-combat drills such as joint maritime patrols, medical evacuation and disaster relief.

Indonesia renamed the southern reaches of the South China Sea the North Natuna Sea in 2017 to emphasize its sovereignty over those waters, which encompass natural gas fields. Indonesia, as well as Malaysia and Vietnam have accused China of disrupting their oil and gas exploration activities with frequent incursions by China Coast Guard and maritime militia ships.

The U.S., which is not a South China Sea claimant but is in a defense treaty with ASEAN member Philippines, has challenged China’s claims by conducting “freedom of navigation” operations in the waterway.

And with Beijing renewing its warning about invading U.S. ally Taiwan, which China considers a renegade province, the strife between the two superpowers has made Southeast Asia a geopolitical tinderbox, analysts have said.

ASEAN’s decision to hold this members-only exercise is an effort to maintain regional stability amid this superpower rivalry, analysts said.

The intention of the exercise is to “show joint agency, regardless of the contention and rivalry between great powers,” Muhammad Waffaa Kharisma, a researcher at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Jakarta, told BenarNews. 

“It still has high value because it practically addresses actual needs such as disaster response, search and rescue, etc. that have been overshadowed by the U.S.-China relations and high politics issues,” he said. 

BenarNews is an online news outlet affiliated with Radio Free Asia.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Tria Dianti for BenarNews.

“Having already banned domestic media from reporting anything but state-sanctioned information, Russia’s censorship of international media outlets only shows how desperate it is to prevent its own people from accessing independent news about its invasion of Ukraine,” said Gulnoza Said, CPJ’s Europe and Central Asia program coordinator, in New York. “Takedown demands and blocks on Central Asian media outlets, which often have significant audiences in Russia, are unacceptable. All censorship of foreign media should end immediately.”

Roskomsvoboda, a Russian independent internet freedom group, reported that on September 12 an unspecified government agency blocked four of 24.kg’s web pages from October 2022 about the Ukraine war and two of Payom’s articles—a November 2022 speech by a Tajik politician in support of Ukraine and a February 2023 report about Russia potentially drafting individuals of Central Asian origin into the military.

A database maintained by Russian state media regulator Roskomnadzor said that individual pages of those outlets also were blocked.

However, according to Payom’s head of broadcasting Shavkatjon Sharipov and a 24.kg report, both websites were entirely blocked in Russia.

The decisions to restrict access to 24.kg and Payom were taken in November 2022 and May 2023, respectively, but were only implemented on September 12, Roskomsvoboda said.

In its report, 24.kg said that it refused several requests in 2022 from Roskomnadzor to remove articles on the Ukraine war because the articles did not violate Kyrgyz law.  

Sharipov told CPJ by messaging app that his Europe-based outlet, which is blocked in Tajikistan but broadcasts to Tajik nationals in Russia, did not receive any takedown demands and did not plan to remove any of its war coverage.

Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Russian authorities have blocked several Central Asia media outlets over their reporting on the war, including services affiliated with the U.S. Congress-funded broadcaster Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, the Kyrgyz independent news outlet Kloop, independent Kazakh news websites Ratel.kz and Arbat.Media, and the Central Asian service of independent Russian news outlet Mediazona.

Russian authorities have also requested that at least nine Kazakh outlets remove war-related content, according to data Kazakh media freedom organization Adil Soz sent to CPJ, while independent news website Arbat.Media was summoned to a hearing in February for publishing allegedly false information about the Ukraine war.

This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

The upcoming general election in Aotearoa New Zealand is poised to witness an unprecedented influx of around 250,000 first-time voters.

Data from the Electoral Commission shows that around 60,000 individuals will be eligible to vote for the first time this year after turning 18 since the 2020 election.

However, a more sizeable chunk of voters is expected to come from the roughly 200,000 individuals who will be eligible to vote for the first time after being issued fast-track residency visas in 2021.

• READ MORE: Other NZ election reports

Forty-nine-year-old Deepa Tripathi Chaturvedi is one such voter.

Having arrived in New Zealand in 2017 after a 20-year career as a broadcast journalist in India, Chaturvedi is looking forward to voting for the first time outside of India.

“I’m really excited to vote,” she says. “It’s my first time voting outside India. Secondly, I’d really like to see a change.”

Chaturvedi is concerned about the mounting cost of living in New Zealand, describing it as an increasingly arduous endeavor.

“Living in New Zealand is becoming incredibly difficult,” she says.

Home hopes look dim
Despite her reasonably steady income, the prospect of being able to purchase a home of her own looks dim.

“I believe in having my own place, but I just can’t afford it,” she says.

Chaturvedi is also concerned about the government’s immigration policies.

“I think it’s important to value your migrants and the current policies don’t reflect that,” she says.

Chaturvedi understands the importance of participating in the election.

Although Chaturvedi is unfamiliar with New Zealand’s mixed member proportional (MMP) electoral system, she wishes to educate herself about it before voting.

Chaturvedi also draws comparisons between voting in India and New Zealand.

Long queues in India
“There are voting booths in India I think every 2km, so it’s very convenient,” she says. “But the queues can be quite long. ”

Unlike New Zealand, which allows advance votes to be submitted, voters can only cast their ballots on election day in India.

She hopes that she won’t have to stand in long queues when she votes in Auckland for the upcoming October election.

Aravind Narayan Suresh, a 28-year-old IT professional and 2021 resident visa holder, shares Chaturvedi’s excitement about the upcoming election.

Having migrated to New Zealand as a student, Suresh is eager to take part in the democratic process once again.

“I have only voted in India and, now that I have an opportunity here, I’d love to participate in the democratic process again,” he says.

His optimism is tempered by the economic challenges he currently faces, including the high cost of living and petrol prices.

“I have my wife over here and I can’t support her with one job, so I’m thinking of doing two,” he says.

Awaiting a work visa
Suresh’s wife is a civil engineer but cannot work in New Zealand because she is still waiting to receive a work visa.

“We have been waiting for seven months,” he says.

Suresh understands his right to vote gives him an opportunity to effect change – whether his preferred choices win or lose.

He also emphasizes the importance of diverse and inclusive representation among candidates in Parliament, believing it reflects the values of the community.

“I think it’s really important to see representatives of the community at the parliament.”

Like Chaturvedi, Suresh is also educating himself about New Zealand’s MMP electoral system but says he has found the overall enrollment process to be relatively straightforward.

Jaikrishna Anil Kanmani, another first-time voter, is looking forward to the election with a touch of nostalgia for the vibrant electoral atmosphere in India.

NZ elections ‘a little dull’
“I feel like the elections in New Zealand are a little dull compared to India,” he says. “It’s a public holiday (in India) and everybody is on the streets.”

He describes New Zealand’s MMP system as confusing and wishes to learn more about the mechanics of it as the election draws near.

“There are members in Parliament who didn’t win their electorates,” he says. “That seemed weird at first to me.”

He says he’s learning more about the electoral system to better understand how it all works.

Concerns about New Zealand’s housing crisis resonate with Kanmani, prompting him to dismiss the idea of purchasing a home due to exorbitant costs.

“I’ve completely dropped the idea of buying a house,” he says. “With the current living costs and the wages, we earn, there’s no way I would be able to put a down payment for a house.”

Serena Wei, who arrived in New Zealand from China in 2018, confesses to being overwhelmed by the array of political parties and candidates.

“I’m still a little confused now,” Wei says. “On the day of the general election, should I vote for a political party or a person? Because I have never experienced it, and I don’t know how to vote.”

As a mother of two, she worries about the country’s education system and its recent reforms.

“The current reforms make the curriculum and exams less difficult,” she says. “If everyone is moving forward, our country is stagnant, and we may lose touch with the progressing countries.”

Emma Chan has recently obtained her New Zealand residency and is looking forward to the election.

“I believe that actively engaging in democratic voting is a fundamental responsibility as a member of the community, contributing to both my own future and the collective well-being of everyone,” Chan says, speaking on condition of using a pseudonym to protect her identity.

Chan highlights the inherent relationship between key issues such as safety, economic development, education and race relations. She emphasises the government’s role in formulating holistic, long-term policies to address these concerns.

Snowee Jiang, who has previously volunteered for elections but has never voted, wants to vote this year to have a say on social issues.

Jiang, who received the fast-track residency visa in 2021, seeks genuine representation in elected officials rather than a political spectacle. She also urges greater Chinese voter participation through enhanced awareness campaigns.

“I hope that the Chinese can increase the proportion of voting,” she says. “Many people will not vote, and many people don’t care. I hope there will be more publicity in this regard.”

According to the Electoral Commission, 3,871,418 Kiwis are eligible to vote on both the general and Māori rolls in this year’s election and, as of August 2023, about 88 percent had already enrolled.

Advance voting starts on October 2, and election day is Saturday, October 14.

Official results for the general election will be declared on November 3.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

The upcoming general election in Aotearoa New Zealand is poised to witness an unprecedented influx of around 250,000 first-time voters.

Data from the Electoral Commission shows that around 60,000 individuals will be eligible to vote for the first time this year after turning 18 since the 2020 election.

However, a more sizeable chunk of voters is expected to come from the roughly 200,000 individuals who will be eligible to vote for the first time after being issued fast-track residency visas in 2021.

• READ MORE: Other NZ election reports

Forty-nine-year-old Deepa Tripathi Chaturvedi is one such voter.

Having arrived in New Zealand in 2017 after a 20-year career as a broadcast journalist in India, Chaturvedi is looking forward to voting for the first time outside of India.

“I’m really excited to vote,” she says. “It’s my first time voting outside India. Secondly, I’d really like to see a change.”

Chaturvedi is concerned about the mounting cost of living in New Zealand, describing it as an increasingly arduous endeavor.

“Living in New Zealand is becoming incredibly difficult,” she says.

Home hopes look dim
Despite her reasonably steady income, the prospect of being able to purchase a home of her own looks dim.

“I believe in having my own place, but I just can’t afford it,” she says.

Chaturvedi is also concerned about the government’s immigration policies.

“I think it’s important to value your migrants and the current policies don’t reflect that,” she says.

Chaturvedi understands the importance of participating in the election.

Although Chaturvedi is unfamiliar with New Zealand’s mixed member proportional (MMP) electoral system, she wishes to educate herself about it before voting.

Chaturvedi also draws comparisons between voting in India and New Zealand.

Long queues in India
“There are voting booths in India I think every 2km, so it’s very convenient,” she says. “But the queues can be quite long. ”

Unlike New Zealand, which allows advance votes to be submitted, voters can only cast their ballots on election day in India.

She hopes that she won’t have to stand in long queues when she votes in Auckland for the upcoming October election.

Aravind Narayan Suresh, a 28-year-old IT professional and 2021 resident visa holder, shares Chaturvedi’s excitement about the upcoming election.

Having migrated to New Zealand as a student, Suresh is eager to take part in the democratic process once again.

“I have only voted in India and, now that I have an opportunity here, I’d love to participate in the democratic process again,” he says.

His optimism is tempered by the economic challenges he currently faces, including the high cost of living and petrol prices.

“I have my wife over here and I can’t support her with one job, so I’m thinking of doing two,” he says.

Awaiting a work visa
Suresh’s wife is a civil engineer but cannot work in New Zealand because she is still waiting to receive a work visa.

“We have been waiting for seven months,” he says.

Suresh understands his right to vote gives him an opportunity to effect change – whether his preferred choices win or lose.

He also emphasizes the importance of diverse and inclusive representation among candidates in Parliament, believing it reflects the values of the community.

“I think it’s really important to see representatives of the community at the parliament.”

Like Chaturvedi, Suresh is also educating himself about New Zealand’s MMP electoral system but says he has found the overall enrollment process to be relatively straightforward.

Jaikrishna Anil Kanmani, another first-time voter, is looking forward to the election with a touch of nostalgia for the vibrant electoral atmosphere in India.

NZ elections ‘a little dull’
“I feel like the elections in New Zealand are a little dull compared to India,” he says. “It’s a public holiday (in India) and everybody is on the streets.”

He describes New Zealand’s MMP system as confusing and wishes to learn more about the mechanics of it as the election draws near.

“There are members in Parliament who didn’t win their electorates,” he says. “That seemed weird at first to me.”

He says he’s learning more about the electoral system to better understand how it all works.

Concerns about New Zealand’s housing crisis resonate with Kanmani, prompting him to dismiss the idea of purchasing a home due to exorbitant costs.

“I’ve completely dropped the idea of buying a house,” he says. “With the current living costs and the wages, we earn, there’s no way I would be able to put a down payment for a house.”

Serena Wei, who arrived in New Zealand from China in 2018, confesses to being overwhelmed by the array of political parties and candidates.

“I’m still a little confused now,” Wei says. “On the day of the general election, should I vote for a political party or a person? Because I have never experienced it, and I don’t know how to vote.”

As a mother of two, she worries about the country’s education system and its recent reforms.

“The current reforms make the curriculum and exams less difficult,” she says. “If everyone is moving forward, our country is stagnant, and we may lose touch with the progressing countries.”

Emma Chan has recently obtained her New Zealand residency and is looking forward to the election.

“I believe that actively engaging in democratic voting is a fundamental responsibility as a member of the community, contributing to both my own future and the collective well-being of everyone,” Chan says, speaking on condition of using a pseudonym to protect her identity.

Chan highlights the inherent relationship between key issues such as safety, economic development, education and race relations. She emphasises the government’s role in formulating holistic, long-term policies to address these concerns.

Snowee Jiang, who has previously volunteered for elections but has never voted, wants to vote this year to have a say on social issues.

Jiang, who received the fast-track residency visa in 2021, seeks genuine representation in elected officials rather than a political spectacle. She also urges greater Chinese voter participation through enhanced awareness campaigns.

“I hope that the Chinese can increase the proportion of voting,” she says. “Many people will not vote, and many people don’t care. I hope there will be more publicity in this regard.”

According to the Electoral Commission, 3,871,418 Kiwis are eligible to vote on both the general and Māori rolls in this year’s election and, as of August 2023, about 88 percent had already enrolled.

Advance voting starts on October 2, and election day is Saturday, October 14.

Official results for the general election will be declared on November 3.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) held its annual summit on 11–12 July in Vilnius, Lithuania. The communiqué released after the first day’s proceedings claimed that ‘NATO is a defensive alliance’, a statement that encapsulates why many struggle to grasp its true essence. A look at the latest military spending figures shows, to the contrary, that NATO countries, and countries closely allied to NATO, account for nearly three-quarters of the total annual global expenditure on weapons. Many of these countries possess state-of-the-art weapons systems, which are qualitatively more destructive than those held by the militaries of most non-NATO countries. Over the past quarter century, NATO has used its military might to destroy several states, such as Afghanistan (2001) and Libya (2011), shattering societies with the raw muscle of its aggressive alliance, and end the status of Yugoslavia (1999) as a unified state. It is difficult, given this record, to sustain the view that NATO is a ‘defensive alliance’.

Currently, NATO has thirty-one member states, the most recent addition being Finland, which joined in April 2023. Its membership has more than doubled since its twelve founding members, all countries in Europe and North America that had been part of the war against the Axis powers, signed its founding treaty (the Washington Treaty or the North Atlantic Treaty) on 4 April 1949. It is telling that one of these original members – Portugal – remained under a fascist dictatorship at the time, known as Estado Novo (in place from 1933 until 1974).

Article 10 of this treaty declares that NATO members – ‘by unanimous agreement’ – can ‘invite any other European state’ to join the military alliance. Based on that principle, NATO welcomed Greece and Turkey (1952), West Germany (1955), and Spain (1982), expanding its membership at the time to include sixteen countries. The disintegration of the USSR and communist states in Eastern Europe – the purported threat that compelled the need for NATO to begin with – did not put an end to the need for the alliance. Instead, NATO’s increasing membership has doubled down on its ambition to use its military power, through Article 5, to subdue anyone who challenges the ‘Atlantic Alliance’.

Nino Morbedadze (Georgia), Strolling Couple, 2017.

The ‘Atlantic Alliance’, a phrase that is part of NATO’s name, was part of a wider network of military treaties secured by the US against the USSR and, after October 1949, against the People’s Republic of China. This network included the Manila Pact of September 1954, which created the Southeast Asian Treaty Organisation (SEATO), and the Baghdad Pact of February 1955, which created the Central Treaty Organisation (CENTO). Turkey and Pakistan signed a military agreement in April 1954 which brought them together in an alliance against the USSR and anchored this network through NATO’s southernmost member (Turkey) and SEATO’s westernmost member (Pakistan). The US signed a military deal with each of the members of CENTO and SEATO and ensured that it had a seat at the table in these structures.

At the Asian-African Conference held in Bandung, Indonesia in April 1955, India’s Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru reacted strongly to the creation of these military alliances, which exported tensions between the US and the USSR across Asia. The concept of NATO, he said, ‘has extended itself in two ways’: first, NATO ‘has gone far away from the Atlantic and has reached other oceans and seas’ and second, ‘NATO today is one of the most powerful protectors of colonialism’. As an example, Nehru pointed to Goa, which was still held by fascist Portugal and whose grip had been validated by NATO members – an act, Nehru said, of ‘gross impertinence’. This characterisation of NATO as a global belligerent and defender of colonialism remains intact, with some modifications.

Slobodan Trajković (Yugoslavia), The Flag, 1983.

SEATO was disbanded in 1977, partly due to the defeat of the US in Vietnam, and CENTO was shuttered in 1979, precisely due to the Iranian Revolution that year. US military strategy shifted its focus from wielding these kinds of pacts to establishing a direct military presence with the founding of US Central Command in 1983 and the revitalisation of the US Pacific Command that same year. The US expanded the power of its own global military footprint, including its ability to strike anywhere on the planet due to its structure of military bases and armed flotillas (which were no longer restricted once the 1930 Second London Naval Treaty expired in 1939). Although NATO has always had global ambitions, the alliance was given material reality through the US military’s force projection and its creation of new structures that further tied allied states into its orbit (with programmes such as ‘Partnership for Peace’, set up in 1994, and concepts such as ‘global NATO partner’ and ‘non-NATO ally’, as exemplified by Japan and South Korea). In its 1991 Strategic Concept, NATO wrote that it would ‘contribute to global stability and peace by providing forces for United Nations missions’, which was realised with deadly force in Yugoslavia (1999), Afghanistan (2003), and Libya (2011).

By the Riga Summit (2006), NATO was confident that it operated ‘from Afghanistan to the Balkans and from the Mediterranean Sea to Darfur’. Nehru’s focus on colonialism might seem anachronistic now, but, in fact, NATO has become an instrument to blunt the global majority’s desire for sovereignty and dignity, two key anti-colonial concepts. Any popular project that exerts these two concepts finds itself at the end of a NATO weapons system.

Shefa Salem al-Baraesi (Libya), Kaska, Dance of War, 2020.

The collapse of the USSR and the Eastern European communist state system transformed Europe’s reality. NATO quickly ignored the ‘ironclad guarantees’ offered by US Secretary of State James Baker to Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze in Moscow on 9 February 1990 that NATO’s ‘forces would not move eastward’ of the German border. Several states that bordered the NATO zone suffered greatly in the immediate period after the fall of the Berlin Wall, with economies in the doldrums as privatisation eclipsed the possibility for their populations to live with dignity. Many states in Eastern Europe, desperate to enter the European Union (EU), which at least promised access to the common market, understood that entry into NATO was the price of admission. In 1999, Czechia, Hungary, and Poland joined NATO, followed in 2004 by the Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania), Bulgaria, Romania, Slovenia, and Slovakia. Eager for investments and markets, by 2004 many of these countries waltzed into the Atlantic Alliance of NATO and the EU.

NATO continued to expand, absorbing Albania and Croatia in 2009, Montenegro in 2017, and North Macedonia in 2020. However, the breakdown of some US banks, the waning attraction of the US as the market of last resort, and the entry of the Atlantic world into a relentless economic depression after 2007 changed the context. No longer were Atlantic states reliable as investors or as markets. After 2008, infrastructure investment in the EU declined by 75% due to reduced public spending, and the European Investment Bank warned that government investment would hit a twenty-five-year low.

ArtLords (including Kabir Mokamel, Abdul Hakim Maqsodi, Meher Agha Sultani, Omaid Sharifi, Yama Farhard, Negina Azimi, Enayat Hikmat, Zahid Amini, Ali Hashimi, Mohammad Razeq Meherpour, Abdul Razaq Hashemi, and Nadima Rustam), The Unseen Afghanistan, 2021.

The arrival of Chinese investment and the possibility of integration with the Chinese economy began to reorient many economies, particularly in Central and Eastern Europe, away from the Atlantic. In 2012, the first summit between China and central and eastern European countries (China–CEEC summit) was held in Warsaw (Poland), with sixteen countries in the region participating. The process eventually drew in fifteen NATO members, including Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, North Macedonia, Montenegro, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia (in 2021 and 2022, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania withdrew from the initiative). In March 2015, six then-EU member states – France, Germany, Italy, Luxemburg, Sweden, and the UK – joined the Beijing-based Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Four years later, Italy became the first G7 country to join the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Two-thirds of EU member states are now part of the BRI, and the EU concluded the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment in 2020.

These manoeuvres towards China threatened to weaken the Atlantic Alliance, with the US describing the country as a ‘strategic competitor’ in its 2018 National Defense Strategy – a phrase indicative of its shifting focus on the so-called threat of China. Nonetheless, as recently as November 2019, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said that ‘there [are] no plans, no proposal, no intention to move NATO into, for instance, the South China Sea’. However, by 2020, the mood had changed: a mere seven months later, Stoltenberg said, ‘NATO does not see China as the new enemy or an adversary. But what we see is that the rise of China is fundamentally changing the global balance of power’. NATO’s response has been to work with its partners – including Australia, Japan, New Zealand, and South Korea – ‘to address… the security consequences of the rise of China’, Stoltenberg continued. The talk of a global NATO and an Asian NATO is front and centre in these deliberations, with Stoltenberg stating in Vilnius that the idea of a liaison office in Japan is ‘on the table’.

The war in Ukraine provided new life to the Atlantic Alliance, driving several hesitant European countries – such as Sweden – into its ranks. Yet, even amongst people living within NATO countries there are groups who are sceptical of the alliance’s aims, with the Vilnius summit marked by anti-NATO protests. The Vilnius Summit Communiqué underlined Ukraine’s path into NATO and sharpened NATO’s self-defined universalism. The communiqué declares, for instance, that China challenges ‘our interests, security, and values’, with the word ‘our’ claiming to represent not only NATO countries but the entire international order. Slowly, NATO is positioning itself as a substitute for the UN, suggesting that it – and not the actual international community – is the arbiter and guardian of the world’s ‘interests, security, and values’. This view is contested by the vast majority of the world’s peoples, seven billion of whom do not even reside in NATO’s member countries (whose total population is less than one billion). Those billions wonder why it is that NATO wants to supplant the United Nations.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Vijay Prashad.

From today readers of rnz.co.nz will see a change to the home page, and a new initiative to tell the stories of Aotearoa New Zealand’s Asian community.

RNZ.co.nz has added a lineup of four sections which focus on the growing communities of Aotearoa and are placed right at the top of the home page.

Elevated links have been added to RNZ’s existing Te Ao Māori and Pacific sections.

RNZ has also launched two new sections for Chinese and Indian New Zealanders and added them at the top of the home page as well.

• READ MORE:
• RNZ Chinese
• IndoNZ

The sections are part of a new initiative to speak to and report on issues in the growing Asian communities of New Zealand.

The new Indian section features original stories in English by specialist reporters.

The Chinese section has stories in the simplified Chinese script. Original stories are there as well as translations of RNZ news stories of interest to the Chinese community.

NZ On Air survey
RNZ is starting with the simplified script and will then scope whether it is feasible and useful to translate using the traditional script as well.

The different approaches are a response to a NZ On Air survey which found the Indian and Chinese communities had different language needs and approaches to seeking out news.

This is one of RNZ’s first steps into daily translated news. Before the launch, RNZ put systems in place to make sure it is getting translations right. The stories are double, and triple checked.

RNZ is also asking for feedback to make sure it is getting it right on each story and will conduct regular independent audits to make sure our translations are on track. RNZ is keen for feedback.

The new Indian and Chinese sections are a result of a two-year collaboration with NZ On Air. The unit of reporters and translators is being funded for the first year through the Public Interest Journalism Fund; the second year will be funded by RNZ, with a right of renewal after that.

Stories from the Asian unit will also be made available to more than 40 media organisations across the country and the Pacific.

RNZ believes that it is vital that RNZ supplies news to many different communities within Aotearoa New Zealand.

The Asian population in New Zealand is growing fast, particularly in Auckland.

In 2018, Asian New Zealanders made up 15 percent of the New Zealand population. The two largest groups are the Chinese and Indian New Zealanders, with about 250,000 people each.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Pacific Media Watch.

From today readers of rnz.co.nz will see a change to the home page, and a new initiative to tell the stories of Aotearoa New Zealand’s Asian community.

RNZ.co.nz has added a lineup of four sections which focus on the growing communities of Aotearoa and are placed right at the top of the home page.

Elevated links have been added to RNZ’s existing Te Ao Māori and Pacific sections.

RNZ has also launched two new sections for Chinese and Indian New Zealanders and added them at the top of the home page as well.

• READ MORE:
• RNZ Chinese
• IndoNZ

The sections are part of a new initiative to speak to and report on issues in the growing Asian communities of New Zealand.

The new Indian section features original stories in English by specialist reporters.

The Chinese section has stories in the simplified Chinese script. Original stories are there as well as translations of RNZ news stories of interest to the Chinese community.

NZ On Air survey
RNZ is starting with the simplified script and will then scope whether it is feasible and useful to translate using the traditional script as well.

The different approaches are a response to a NZ On Air survey which found the Indian and Chinese communities had different language needs and approaches to seeking out news.

This is one of RNZ’s first steps into daily translated news. Before the launch, RNZ put systems in place to make sure it is getting translations right. The stories are double, and triple checked.

RNZ is also asking for feedback to make sure it is getting it right on each story and will conduct regular independent audits to make sure our translations are on track. RNZ is keen for feedback.

The new Indian and Chinese sections are a result of a two-year collaboration with NZ On Air. The unit of reporters and translators is being funded for the first year through the Public Interest Journalism Fund; the second year will be funded by RNZ, with a right of renewal after that.

Stories from the Asian unit will also be made available to more than 40 media organisations across the country and the Pacific.

RNZ believes that it is vital that RNZ supplies news to many different communities within Aotearoa New Zealand.

The Asian population in New Zealand is growing fast, particularly in Auckland.

In 2018, Asian New Zealanders made up 15 percent of the New Zealand population. The two largest groups are the Chinese and Indian New Zealanders, with about 250,000 people each.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Pacific Media Watch.

"The door of each room in the hotel is equipped with a public security system networked cat's eye [camera]," according to a notice displayed in a hotel lobby that was shared on Twitter.

The notice said that the number of occupants in the room must be the same as the number registered with their real name. Any visitors entering the room must also be registered with their real name. "If not, a warning will be issued,” it said.

"After a warning is issued, the personal details of the person who booked the room will be transmitted to the local police station," the notice reads.

The notice also warns guests not to try covering up the peephole.

“Immediate measures will be taken in the event of any abnormal activity," it says.

The Hangzhou Asian Games run from Sept. 23 through Oct. 8, while the Asian Paralympic Games run from Oct. 22-28, with real-name registration required to enter all events.

‘Cat’s eye’

An employee who answered the phone at Hangzhou's Jindi Business Hotel said "cat's eye" facial recognition systems have been installed in hotel room spyholes in that hotel, and in hotels across the city.

"That's right, yes, they installed them ahead of the Games, and they are connected to the internet," the staff member said. "It compares you with the ID card used to register, and will only let you in if they match."

Asked if all hotels now have this system installed, she replied: "Yes, that's right, it's the same everywhere."

A member of staff at Hangzhou's Jun Ting Yilian Hotel said the hotel had been notified by police that all guests and visitors must register with their ID cards.

"The police station requires that we have any visitors to guest rooms register with their ID cards," the staff member said. 

"If they don't register and the police station finds out, they will shut us down."

The new high-tech security measures have appeared as local officials called in a July 6 security meeting for "dynamic investigation and management of hidden dangers" ahead of the Asian Games.

"[We must] carefully implement risk prevention and control measures ... and make good use of digital and intelligent management methods," Zhang Zhenfeng, who heads preparations for the portion of the Games being held in the coastal city of Wenzhou, told the meeting.

Zhang also called for planning for "extreme" scenarios and a focus on "key groups," without elaborating, according to a report on the Hangzhou municipal government website.

A netizen surnamed Mao said the measures are overkill as the Games are unlikely to be targeted for attacks or sabotage.

"The fact that they are installing these kinds of cameras just exposes their own fears," Mao said. "It's an overreach of police power."

Jiangsu-based current affairs commentator Zhang Jianping said such security measures aren't normal.

"This sort of thing wouldn't happen in a normal country," Zhang said. "Usually when there is a big meeting or event, the people they go after are petitioners, but if they're targeting everyone now, that's not normal."

Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Malcolm Foster.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Gu Ting for RFA Mandarin.

Fifteen artists have been selected as the inaugural beneficiaries of NZ On Air’s New Music Pan-Asian funding.

The initiative, the first of its kind, aims to support the Asian music community in New Zealand.

The fund was established due to a lack of equitable representation of Asian musicians in the country’s music sector, says Teresa Patterson, head of music at NZ On Air.

• READ MORE: Other Blessen Tom articles

“Our Music Diversity Report clearly showed the under-representation of Pan-Asian New Zealand musicians in the Aotearoa music sector,” she said.

“This is reflected in the number of funding applications we received for this focus round.”

The funding provides musicians with up to $10,000 for recording, mixing and mastering a single, some of which can be set aside for the promotion and creation of visual content to accompany the song’s release.

“We received 107 applications for 15 grants, which is outstanding,” Patterson said.

‘Wonderful range’
“The range of genre, gender and ethnicity among the applicants was wonderful. We received applications from artists who identify as Chinese, Indian, Filipino, South Korean, Japanese, Indonesian, Sri Lankan, Malaysian, Thai and Iraqi.

“The genres varied from alternative/indie and pop to hip-hop/RnB, dance/electro and folk/country.”

Six of the 15 songs that secured funding are bilingual, featuring Asian languages such as Cantonese, Korean, Japanese, Malay and Punjabi.

Patterson believed this variety would “really help to reflect the many voices of Aotearoa New Zealand” and add to the vibrant cultural music mix experienced by local audiences.

Swap Gomez, a drummer, visual director and academic lecturer, was one of the panel members responsible for selecting the musicians for the funding. He emphasised the challenges faced by Asian musicians in New Zealand.

“What was awesome to see was so many Pan-Asian artists applying; artists we had never heard of coming out of the woodwork now that a space has been created to celebrate their work,” Gomez said.

“This is the time we can celebrate those Pan-Asian artists who have previously felt overlooked by the wider industry.

“Now there is an environment and sector where they can feel appreciated for their success in music. As a multicultural industry, developing initiatives such as this one is more crucial than ever.”

NZ On Air has announced that funding opportunities for Asian musicians will continue in the next financial year.

“The response we have had to this inaugural NZ On Air New Music Pan-Asian focus funding round has been phenomenal,” Patterson said.

“It tells us that there is a real need, so NZ On Air is excited to confirm that it will return in the new financial year.”

The full NZ On Air’s Pan-Asian New Music recipient list:

• Amol; cool asf
• Charlotte Avery; just before you go
• Crystal Chen; love letter
• hanbee; deeper
• Hans.; Porcelain
• Hugo Chan; bite
• Julius Black; After You
• LA FELIX; Waiting
• Lauren Gin; Don’t Stop
• Memory Foam; Moon Power
• Phoebe Rings; 아스라이
• RESHMA; Kuih Lapis (Layer Cake)
• tei.; sabre
• Terrible Sons; Thank You, Thank You
• Valere; Lily’s March

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Janine Jackson interviewed cultural critic Jeff Chang about Asian Americans and affirmative action for the June 2, 2023, episode of CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript.

ACLU (10/18/18)

Janine Jackson: After the Supreme Court failed to find that Abigail Fisher had been denied admission to the University of Texas due to racial discrimination against white people, anti-equity activist Ed Blum announced that he “needed Asian plaintiffs” to further the mission of eliminating affirmative action policies from college admissions.

That’s the short version, and the basic context for the cases Blum’s group, Students for Fair Admissions, Inc., is bringing against Harvard and the University of North Carolina, cases the Trump-stacked Court will likely rule on in June.

Affirmative action has always been a difficult topic for a press corps more comfortable talking about individual racists than systemic white supremacy, and worlds more happy to gesture towards buying the world a Coke than to unpack the particulars of what actually needs to happen to get to anything like equity or reparation for marginalized people.

So these are things we should look out for in the coverage we may see on the Court’s possible upcoming ruling.

Jeff Chang is a writer and cultural critic, and author of, most recently, We Gon’ Be Alright: Notes on Race and Resegregation, and of course 2005’s Can’t Stop Won’t Stop: A History of the Hip-Hop Generation. He was a co-founder of the Student Coalition for Fair Admissions, organized at UC Berkeley in 1987, and he joins us now by phone. Welcome to CounterSpin, Jeff Chang.

Jeff Chang: Thank you so much for having me, Janine.

Guardian (4/13/23)

JJ: People may see that Asian Americans are being used here in this fight, and kind of used as a wedge between Black people and white people, and they may understand that stereotypes are being employed to advance an anti–equal opportunity argument. But I still think that folks might not understand the subversion or the distortion that this all represents of Asian Americans’ historical role in the creation, in the beginning, of affirmative action policies.

And in your super useful April piece for the Guardian, you talk about this erased history. Would you fill us in on some of that missing history?

JC: First of all, Asian Americans have been consistently polling in favor of affirmative action, by really two to one. And that’s, I think, a fact that’s often overlooked in media coverage of Asian Americans’ perspectives on affirmative action.

The history of affirmative action has Asian-American influence all over it. If you look at the post–World War II period and this rising period of civil rights, Japanese-American civil rights leaders were working alongside African-American leaders in arguing for equal opportunity and affirmative action.

And they were doing it in the context of looking at reparations, which were eventually granted the Japanese-American community for what had been done to them in terms of incarcerating them during World War II.

But all the way through the 1960s, what you see is steady and powerful advocacy on the part of Asian Americans to have them included in programs around equal opportunity.

Center for American Progress (8/29/18)

And what we begin to see in the universities is this bearing fruit in the 1970s and the 1980s. What you see, though, is by the 1980s, because of immigration, there’s a much larger population of Asian-American students who are applying for elite universities.

And so at that time, universities begin to quietly, and sometimes loudly, take Asian Americans off of equal opportunity programs, despite the fact that there are a number of Asian-American ethnicities, such as Filipino Americans and Southeast Asian Americans, who were still deeply underrepresented.

And, of course, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders continue to be deeply underrepresented in college admissions and university admissions all across the US.

So at that particular time, what we also see is a surge of applications from this new generation of immigrants, and universities are also experiencing concern from white alumni about the competition that these Asian-American immigrants, this new generation, is providing against their sons and daughters at elite universities, where, in the past, legacy admissions have preserved their entitlement to slots at universities like Harvard, Yale and Princeton.

So in the beginning of the ’80s, what we begin to see is this plateauing of the number of Asian Americans who are actually admitted to these universities, and community advocates in the Asian-American community begin to get really concerned, because the number of applications is still skyrocketing, but the number of admissions is plateaued.

SF Gate (5/3/06)

And so there’s this huge gap that they want to explore. And when they do, especially at UC Berkeley, under the leadership of a group of community leaders there and a professor named Ling-Chi Wang, they find that there have been a number of different types of changes that have been made in the admissions process that have actually discriminated against Asian Americans disproportionately and excluded them from admissions.

And as studies pop up all across the country at Brown University, at UCLA, at a number of other universities around the country, folks begin to find the same kinds of things happening.

JJ: And then the idea that there could be anti–Asian American bias in college admissions, but that that is not due to affirmative action policies, here’s where the conflation occurs, and where the co-optation of the narrative occurs.

JC: That’s exactly right. What Asian Americans are arguing for at this particular point is a sense of fairness in what is supposed to be meritocratic competition between white and Asian students for these slots.

Affirmative action is a completely different track, and students are judged for affirmative action by a different set of standards, because of the importance of increasing diversity in these elite universities. That’s what the Supreme Court has ruled, over and over again.

And really, actually, if we go back, affirmative action was begun as a remedy for historic discrimination. And so that’s the way that I think a lot of communities of color are seeing the need for these affirmative action programs, despite the fact that before the court, the only justification for affirmative action programs now, because of the Bakke case in 1978, is this idea of “diversity.”

Now, getting to a lot of different types of things, but the main point here is to note that the Supreme Court, by getting rid of the historic discrimination standard for affirmative action programs, has moved to this much lighter…

JJ: Mushier.

JC: …much more white-friendly idea of diversity. That is the main justification now before the law for these affirmative action programs to exist.

But what happens with Asian Americans is, you have Asian Americans here aiding diversity, right? And at the same time, you have white admissions officers, in order to please white alumni concerned about their children getting into these universities, tweaking the system, so that Asian Americans are less competitive in comparison to white candidates, in this supposedly pure, meritocratic, color-blind system.

JJ: Absolutely. And when I hear “diversity” as a goal, it sounds to me like a perk for white people, like sprinkles on the sundae. White people deserve to be on top, but to be surrounded by and “learn from” the people they’re on top of.

Diversity is something that is a good thing; and this just leads directly to–and listeners may know this, but it doesn’t appear, particularly, in a lot of media conversations–you hear Harvard’s very “competitive,” and Asian people and Black and brown people are fighting for spots at Harvard. And it’s like, those are the spots that are left over after we get through ALDC. And maybe you could explain what that is.

New Yorker (11/4/22)

JC: First, to go back, the main question becomes “who is diversity for?” And the diversity standard really was developed by Harvard as an alternative justification for the equal opportunity programs that they were instituting in the 1960s and the 1970s, as an alternative to recognizing that, historically, they’d excluded women, they’d excluded non-Protestant people–Catholics and Jewish people–and that this was really a way for them to preserve a sort of elite student body that they wanted to sculpt in their own image.

And so we have to kind of go back to that. We have to mention that, we have to note that, when we’re talking about the programs that we’re talking about now.

And what they created, at the same time, was this notion of legacy admits, right? The technical term for it are ALDC admits, and this includes athletes, legacy admits, the Dean’s preferred lists, children of faculty and staff.

These are all preferential treatment slots that were given out, even before equal opportunity programs had come into play in the 1960s. This is, again, to preserve privilege and wealth for a certain class of folks.

And even now, when we look at white admissions to Harvard, 43% of them are noncompetitive ALDC admits. And so the idea of preferential programs being just for Black and brown students, for poor students, that’s a recent development.

Even now, right, we’re talking about the large proportion of white students being admitted to Harvard via preferential treatment.

Jeff Chang: “We’d be going back a century or more in time, to a period in which campuses were less diverse than we could even imagine.”

And so now, when we talk about what should these classes look like, and we have a case before the Supreme Court which would basically make it impossible for elite universities to be able to bring in students who are not white, we have a situation in which we’re solving a problem that’s just for elite universities, and, in fact, inflicting that on the rest of society. And the results would be disastrous.

The results would be the resegregation of higher education. We’d be going back a century or more in time, to a period in which campuses were less diverse than we could even imagine at this particular point.

JJ: And not to put too fine a point on it, but I think when people hear about Ed Blum and plaintiff-shopping and knowing that, oh, on the other days of the week, he’s opposing voting rights, he is obviously, and his group, are clearly not really concerned about equity across difference.

But even besides that consider-the-source argument, if this case wins in the Court, it really doesn’t mean anything extra good for Asian Americans. The people who are nominally the plaintiffs here, the cases themselves don’t have anything in particular to do with Asian Americans, in terms of their likely outcome.

JC: We’re talking about a group that calls itself Students for Fair Admissions. And the important thing to note is that they’ve never produced any students in any of the testimony, and they’ve never presented any Asian Americans in their testimony. And so that goes to tell you, at least on the surface….

JJ: It’s not a class action, it’s not a class action.

JC: It’s not a class action suit. And the other thing to note is that, look, there’s more Asian Americans who are enrolled in San Francisco City College than there are in the entirety of the Ivy Leagues.

And so if the argument here is that this is going to support opportunity for Asian Americans in the main, that’s not the case. We’re talking about a small number of Asian Americans who are applying to this elite university, in numbers below a thousand, probably, every year, or in the low thousands, probably, across the Ivy Leagues every year. So, very much not the majority of Asian Americans.

JJ: And that leads me to media coverage, because, media are certainly tossing around, and we can expect more of it, just “Asian American” as a term, as though they’re a monolith, and that there was nothing of particular value in exploring different communities.

And I just wonder, what would you ask for from media in terms of addressing this? I mean, maybe hope for, maybe dream of, but what would good coverage look like?

JC: Yeah, I think good coverage would include this long, long history that Asian Americans have had of participating in arguing for equal opportunity programs, for affirmative action programs, for civil rights programs.

It would be much more, I think, realistic about the way that Asian Americans actually feel about affirmative action in this particular moment in history, which is that they support it. And I think it would be much fairer about looking at what the real needs are of Asian Americans across the board.

Asian Americans are standing against Ed Blum and his anti–affirmative action cohort, because they know that what’s best is equal opportunity for all, right?

And I think that that’s something that is really downplayed in the media, where there’s a focus instead on the minority of Asian Americans who have been advocating against affirmative action, and against desegregation in public schools and public high schools in a select number of cities on the coast.

And so that, I think, would be a much more realistic view of where Asian Americans stand in relationship to this issue.

JJ: So it has to do with who they talk to, really.

JC: Yeah. And I think it also has to do with the lack of understanding of what Asian Americans have been through historically in the US, and how our communities have been shaped. And so it’s really part of a larger thing about representation of Asian Americans in our true light, in our full humanity.

JJ: We’ve been speaking with Jeff Chang. You can find his piece, headed “Asian Americans Spent Decades Seeking Fair Education. Then the Right Stole the Narrative,” online at TheGuardian.com. Jeff Chang, thank you very much for joining us this week on CounterSpin.

JC: Thank you so much.

The post ‘The History of Affirmative Action Has Asian-American Influence All Over It’ appeared first on FAIR.

This content originally appeared on FAIR and was authored by Janine Jackson.

NBC (11/2/22)

This week on CounterSpin: Corporate media have never been the right place to look for thoughtful, inclusive consideration of affirmative action. For them it’s an “issue,” a political football, rather than a long effort to address the real historical and ongoing discrimination against non-white, non-male people in multiple aspects of US life.

But when it comes to the role that anti-discrimination, pro-equity efforts have had on Asian-American communities, there are particular layers of mis- and disinformation that benefit from exploring. Listeners will know that Asian-American students are being used as the face of attempts to eliminate affirmative action or race-consciousness in college admissions. It looks like the Supreme Court will rule on a watershed case this month. We talk about it with writer and cultural critic Jeff Chang, author of We Gon’ Be Alright: Notes on Race and Resegregation, among other titles.

We also hear some of an earlier discussion of the case Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. vs. Harvard that CounterSpin had with Jeannie Park, founding president of the Asian American Journalists Association in New York, and co-founder of the Coalition for a Diverse Harvard.

Transcript: “This Case Was Never About Defending Asian Americans”

The post Jeff Chang & Jeannie Park on Asian Americans and Affirmative Action appeared first on FAIR.

This content originally appeared on FAIR and was authored by CounterSpin.

The expanded Aman Youyi-2023 (Peace and Friendship -2023) drills, however, would “remain a far cry from the more established slate of engagements by the U.S.” in the region, said an analyst.

Military delegations from China, Cambodia, Laos, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam had an initial planning conference for Exercise Aman Youyi-2023 in Guangzhou last week, said the Southern Theater Command of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) on microblogging site Weibo.

Delegates from the six countries “reached consensus” on several topics including the theme, date, location, preset background and approaches of the exercise, said the Command.

The announcement on Weibo didn’t come with a date but sources told RFA the exercise would be held this November.

This will be the first time Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia take part together in combined drills with China. The official media in Vietnam, which has territorial disputes with China in the South China Sea, have not mentioned the event.

China’s Global Times quoted an analyst as saying that with more Southeast Asian members participating, “the Aman Youyi-2023 exercise will serve as a stabilizer for regional security.”

Zhuo Hua, an international affairs expert at the School of International Relations and Diplomacy of Beijing Foreign Studies University, said it proved that “more countries come to understand and agree with China's views in cooperative, comprehensive and sustainable security.”

U.S.-China rivalry

Another analyst, Collin Koh from the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore, said that “China has always wanted to have military engagements in Southeast Asia that are on par with those by the U.S.”

However, “it remains a relatively new player in the field of defense diplomacy,” Koh told RFA. 

“The scale and depth of such engagements remain a far cry from the more established slate of engagements by the U.S.,” he added.

China and Laos have just completed a joint military exercise called Friendship Shield 2023 in Laos with a combined force of nearly 1,000 troops.

In March, Cambodia and China carried out exercise Golden Dragon 2023 in Cambodia's Kampong Chhnang province.

To compare, in April more than 17,600 members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the U.S. military took part in Balikatan 2023, an annual bilateral exercise between the two allies and the largest iteration of Balikatan to date.  

A month earlier, a U.S.-led multinational exercise – Cobra Gold 2023 – was held in Thailand with more than 7,000 service members from seven full participating nations and more than 20 other nations attending as observers.

And next year, the world’s largest international maritime exercise Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) will be held with even more than the 25,000 personnel in the 2022 RIMPAC.

“Southeast Asian countries engage in these exercises to demonstrate their willingness to engage China in the defense and security realm, but this also reflects the regional countries’ desire to exercise strategic autonomy,” Collin Koh said.

“I see Aman Youyi as more geopolitically symbolic for some Southeast Asian countries, even if the objective might differ from that of Beijing,” the Singapore-based military analyst said.

Strengthening bonds

The first Aman Youyi joint exercise was held in 2014 between Malaysian armed forces and the PLA but as a tabletop exercise.

With a theme of humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, it was conducted “successfully” in the Paya Indah Wetlands in Selangor, Malaysia, two years later.

The bilateral drills expanded to include Thailand in 2018 but were disrupted by the COVID pandemic in the years after.

“Enhancing military cooperation with countries including those in Southeast Asia is an important aspect of China's military diplomacy,” the Global Times quoted Song Zhongping, a Chinese military expert, as saying.

It is unclear how many military personnel from each country will take part in Aman Youyi-2023 and which drills will be conducted.

The recent Laos-China exercise Friendship Shield 2023 included “strikes on armed positions in mountainous and forest areas in order to boost joint operational capabilities in counterterrorism and the safeguarding of borders,” according to Chinese state media.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Staff.

In a significant step toward preserving and commemorating Fiji’s rich history, efforts are underway to establish the country’s first living museum.

This unique institution will focus on capturing the era of the British colonial government’s indentured system in Fiji, shedding light on the arrival of Fijians of Indian descent to the Pacific Ocean.

The initiative aims to honour the contributions and struggles of the indentured labourers, known as Girmitiyas, who played a pivotal role in shaping Fiji’s economy.

• LISTEN TO RNZ PACIFIC WAVES: The Girmitiya museum
• READ MORE: Other Girmitiya reports

Behind the vision is the Global Girmit Institute, whose board of trustees chair Dr Ganesh Chand told RNZ Pacific the museum had great significance for Fiji.

Dr Chand said that many Fijians were unaware of their country’s history and the way of life under British rule in Fiji, noting that Fiji-Indians were even unaware of their origins — the Girmitiyas.

Fijian-Indians make up about 37 percent of the country’s population.

“For Girmitiyas, there has been a total silence of material in our curriculum all the way up to now,” Dr Chand lamented.

“There is nothing in the texts, and students don’t learn their history.”

He said that if schools fail to teach local history, it could be detrimental to that nation as a whole.

“If they don’t learn in these in schools, then they grow up thinking that their house and day-to-day life is their entirety in the country.

“But that is not a very good state for nation-building. For nation-building, people need to know the history,” Dr Chand said.

The museum aims to rectify this by providing a “comprehensive and immersive experience” that educates visitors about the Girmit era.

The Global Girmit Institute living museum will be co-located within the GGI Library at its headquarters in Saweni, Lautoka, on the country’s main island.

Work has already begun, with the collection of artefacts intensifying in preparation for the anticipated opening of phase one next year.

Travellers who crossed two oceans
The gallery will feature a range of artefacts and recordings of the oral history of people from different linguistic backgrounds and cultures.

Objects relating to farming and the sugar industry, lifestyle, music, food, clothing and religious events will also be displayed, along with objects that record the impact of colonialism on the islands.

Dr Chand said visitors will have the opportunity to witness and understand first hand the living conditions and lifestyle of the Girmitiyas.

“The living museum will feature a fully furnished residence from the era, and our workers will live there and depict how life was in those days under British rule,” he said.

So, how did a group of South Asian people — the Girmitiyas — arrive in the Pacific Ocean?

It was the abolition of slave labour in the early 19th century that gave rise to the Indian indenture system.

This saw an influx of labourers transported from India to various European colonies, including Fiji, to work in plantations.

The system was established to address the labour shortage that followed, explained academic and linguist Dr Farzana Gounder, a direct Girmitiya descendant and a representative of Fiji on the UNESCO International Indentured Labour Route Project.

“The term ‘Girmit’ is derived from the word ‘agreement’ and was used to refer to the system of indentured labour that brought Indians to Fiji between 1879 and 1916,” she said.

“Under this system, Indian labourers were recruited from British India to work on sugar plantations in Fiji, which was then a British colony. During this period, more than 60,000 Indians were brought to Fiji under indenture and became known as Girmitiyas.”

The indenture was seen as an agreement between the workers and the British government, and over the next three decades Girmitiyas were shipped across two oceans to work the lands in Fiji, where a jarring reality awaited them, explained Dr Gounder.

“The Girmitiyas faced many challenges when they arrived in Fiji, including harsh working conditions, cultural and linguistic barriers, and discrimination from both European and indigenous Fijian populations.

“They worked long hours in difficult and often dangerous conditions on the sugar plantations and were paid very low wages.”

The Girmitiyas were instrumental in the development of Fiji’s sugar industry, and this museum aims to tell these stories.

Fiji’s Peace Village to host historical stories
The government of Fiji is also commissioning a living museum in the central province of Navilaca village in Rewa.

Assistant Women’s Minister Sashi Kiran announced that this gallery would pay homage to the relationship between the Girmitiyas and iTaukei people.

“Navilaca village is significant to the history of both the indigenous people and the Indo-Fijians,” she said.

Kiran recounts the heroic efforts of the indigenous people in 1884 who, in the absence of immediate assistance from the colonial authorities, led the rescue operations, saving many lives when a ship named Syria, carrying around 500 Girmitiyas, became wrecked on the Nasilai Reef.

This village thus served as an apt location for the museum, paying homage to the resilience and humanity displayed during that challenging time, she said.

“The village of Navilaca had done the rescue when the Syria was wrecked, and villages there had not only rescued the people but buried the dead in their chiefly ground. They had also looked after all the injured until they healed.

“The fisherfolk had been rescuing people, and the archives also say that there were only about 100 out of almost 500 passengers left by the time the colonials came, so most of the rescue was actually done by the indigenous people.”

The village has since been declared a place of peace with an offer extended to host teaching of each other’s rituals, ceremonies, and customs.

“It will be a space where both cultures can be taught through artefacts and storytelling,” she added.

It will also be open to tourists and the diaspora.

Both living museums promise to be vital cultural institutions, providing a platform to remember and honour Fiji’s history.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

• News

Four Wrongly Convicted Asian Americans You Should Know

For AAPI Heritage Month, we’re highlighting the stories of four wrongly convicted Asian American individuals.

05.24.23 By Meghan Nguyen

Supporters of Chol Soo Lee at the Hall of Justice in San Francisco in 1982. (Image: Jerry Telfer/San Francisco Chronicle via AP)

(Image: AP Photo/Marc Levy⁠)

Han Tak Lee

Han Tak Lee was a Korean American man who was wrongly convicted of murder and arson in the death of his eldest daughter Ji Yun Lee. In July 1989, a fire erupted in a cabin Han Tak was sharing with his daughter at a religious retreat in Pennsylvania, killing the 20-year-old Ji Yun. Investigators concluded that the fire was deliberately set, and police arrested Han Tak, citing the inconsistent statements they said he made about his attempts to rescue his daughter.  

At Han Tak’s trial, the prosecution called three witnesses, who testified that the fire could only have been caused by the intentional use of accelerants and that the chemical analysis showed the presence of fuel oil, although there was no credible scientific evidence of arson. Han Tak was convicted and sentenced to life in prison without parole. After his arrest, members of the Korean American community in New York formed the Free Han Tak Lee Committee, which raised money to help pay his legal fees.

Han Tak spent nearly 25 years incarcerated, where he told NBC News he experienced racial discrimination. He kept fighting to clear his name and in 2014 the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit granted him a new trial. With the assistance of the Pennsylvania Innocence Project, Han Tak was finally exonerated in December 2015.

In 2016, Han Tak told reporters that the lack of support he felt from his community had made rebuilding his life after more than two decades of wrongful incarceration challenging, but said that he wanted to be more optimistic. In an interview with NBC, Han Tak said he relishes the freedom and the “fresh air” he now enjoys in his sunset years.

(Image: AP Photo/Marc Levy⁠)

(Image: Courtesy of the Boston College Innocence Program)

Frances Choy

Chinese American Frances Choy was only 17 when she was charged with murder and arson after a house fire in her Massachusetts home killed her parents Jimmy and Anne Choy. Prosecutors alleged that Frances and her nephew, then-16-year-old Kenneth Choy, had intentionally started the fire to murder her parents. Frances was tried three times for the crime, with the first two trials ending in hung juries and the third trial, in 2011, ending in her conviction and a life sentence without the possibility of parole. Kenneth was charged with murder and spent five years in jail awaiting trial until a jury acquitted him in 2008. After being granted immunity, he testified for the prosecution, placing the blame on Frances.

In 2015, the prosecution disclosed evidence that showed that the trial prosecutors had exchanged numerous emails that made racist and sexually discriminatory remarks about Frances, members of her family, and Asians in general. After discovering this, Frances’ attorney John J. Barter spent nearly five years trying to get access to all of the emails with the help of the Boston College Innocence Program. In the spring of 2019, hundreds of pages of emails and other documents were finally released.

“This may be the first case in the U.S. where a murder conviction has been thrown out because of racism on the part of prosecutors,” Mr. Barter told WBUR News.

In 2020, Frances’ attorneys filed a motion seeking her release on bail after uncovering numerous problems in her third trial, including evidence that Kenneth had set the fire and then blamed Frances. The judge then released Frances from prison in April, and she was finally exonerated in September 2020.

“Nothing can erase the pain of losing my parents and how they suffered. I miss them every day. Even in prison I tried to live my life in a way that honored them,” Frances, now 34, said in a statement provided by her lawyers. “I’m relieved that the truth has been revealed and to have my life back beyond prison walls.”

According to her lawyers, Frances is one of the few women of color to be exonerated in Massachusetts.

(Image: Courtesy of the Boston College Innocence Program)

Related News

Four Wrongly Convicted Asian Americans You Should Know

News

Tyrone Day Exonerated in Dallas, 33 Years After Wrongful Conviction

News

12 Inspiring Photos of Mothers Who Have Fought Wrongful Conviction and Never Given Up

News

The post Four Wrongly Convicted Asian Americans You Should Know appeared first on Innocence Project.

This content originally appeared on Innocence Project and was authored by Meghan Nguyen.

On the afternoon of Monday, May 22, soldiers with the Indian Army’s Jat Regiment assaulted the three journalists while they were covering a fire in the New Checkon area of Imphal, the state capital, according to multiple news reports and Bijoy Kakchingtabam, president of the All Manipur Working Journalists’ Union, who spoke to CPJ.

Soldiers dragged the three journalists from the building where they were reporting, tore their vests emblazoned with the word “Press,” and beat them with batons, according to those sources.

“Authorities in India’s Manipur state must thoroughly investigate the recent attack on three journalists by security forces, and ensure that those responsible are held to account,” said Beh Lih Yi, CPJ’s Asia program coordinator. “Journalists in Manipur must be able to do their work safely and without fear of harassment and abuse by soldiers.”

The three journalists were treated at the Remedy Hospital in Imphal after the attack. Inaoba, a reporter for the Manipuri-language news broadcaster Mami TV, suffered injuries on his head and right hand. Johnson, a camera operator for Mami TV, also received a head injury, according to Kakchingtabam and those reports.

Dayananda, a camera operator with the Asian News International news agency, sustained minor injuries.

The soldiers accused the journalists of throwing stones at a government-operated drone, those news reports said. However, the journalists denied that allegation, saying they were waving off the drone as it had gotten too close to them while they were reporting, according to a joint statement by the All Manipur Working Journalists’ Union, the Editors’ Guild Manipur, and the Manipur Hill Journalists Union, which CPJ reviewed.

Indian Army soldiers were recently deployed to Manipur to restore peace after days of deadly rioting and ethnic clashes.

CPJ texted Irengbam Arun, the media adviser to Manipur Chief Minister Nongthombam Biren Singh, and Kuldiep Singh, a security adviser to the Manipur government who is currently overseeing the military presence in the state, but did not receive any replies.

This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Erik Crouch.

The post Asian Americans Have the Lowest Incomes in Mississippi; Highest in New Jersey appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Algernon Austin.

Reporters Without Borders described China as "the world’s biggest jailer of journalists and one of the biggest exporters of propaganda content." The People's Republic of China fell to 179th place on the index, just one place above bottom-of-the-class North Korea.

“Independent journalists and bloggers who dare to report ‘sensitive’ information are often placed under surveillance, harassed, detained, and, in some cases, tortured,” said the group, which uses its French acronym RSF.

The report noted that the Asia-Pacific “continues to have some of the world’s worst regimes for journalists.” But press conditions around the world are deteriorating, including in the United States, which dropped three places to 45th amid legal challenges and widespread threats of violence.

"The last three places are occupied [by] Vietnam (178th), which has almost completed its hunt of independent reporters and commentators; China (down 4 at 179th) ... and, to no great surprise, North Korea (180th)," RSF said.

In Vietnam – like China, a one-party state that adapted its media governance model from the Soviet Union – “traditional media are closely controlled by the single party” and “independent reporters and bloggers are often jailed,” RSF said.

“The many topics subject to censorship include political dissidents, cases of corruption involving senior officials, the single party’s legitimacy, relations with China and, of course, human rights issues,” the report said, calling Vietnam the world’s third largest jailer of journalists, with 40 now behind bars.

Strongmen in Cambodia, Myanmar

North Korea, a near perennial bottom dweller in the index, is “a totalitarian regime that bases its power on surveillance, repression, censorship and propaganda,” said RSF.

“North Koreans can still be sent to a concentration camp for looking at an online media outlet based outside the country,” it said.

RSF said the strongmen rulers of Cambodia, which slid five places to 147th, and Myanmar, which edged up three slots to 173rd, played a key role in their countries’ low rankings with attacks on their critics.

“The democratic transition that started at the end of the 1980s allowed the emergence of a press that flourished until the long-serving Prime Minister Hun Sen launched a ruthless war against independent journalism before the 2018 elections,” the report said of Cambodia.

“Radio stations and newspapers were silenced, newsrooms purged, journalists prosecuted – leaving the independent media sector devastated,” said RSF, adding that Hun Sen has used similar tactics ahead of elections this year.

The Myanmar military junta formed by Senior Gen. Ming Aung Hlaing after coup d’état on Feb. 1, 2021, “obliterated the fragile progress towards greater press freedom that had been seen since the previous military junta disbanded in 2011,” the watchdog group said.

The junta “tolerates no alternative to its narrative” and has revived prior censorship policies toward local media, while “Min Aung Hlaing openly promotes a policy of terror towards journalists who do not toe the junta’s line,” said RSF.

Quitting journalism in China

The index was released as journalists in China told Radio Free Asia that many in the business are now changing careers, at least in part because of all-encompassing controls on media reporting by the propaganda arm of the ruling Chinese Communist Party.

"My former classmates in journalism school and all of my colleagues from when I was a reporter [have changed jobs]," Fudan University journalism school graduate Zhang Jia said.

"One reason is that you don't make enough, as the media has gone into decline," Zhang said. "Another is that there is no longer any freedom of the press.

"Journalists tend to go and work in corporate public relations, or marketing departments, or live streaming," Zhang said.

"I was a journalist in the 1980s," Zhao said. "When I first started working in news, I felt that I was still allowed to say stuff, that I was still in the game” despite existing censorship at the time.

Zhao said the media environment went rapidly downhill in the political crackdown that followed the 1989 Tiananmen massacre that ended weeks of student-led mass protests in and around Tiananmen Square and in other Chinese cities.

"Two general secretaries later, it's all gone," he said in a reference to former leaders Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao, who practiced a less comprehensive form of censorship than the current leadership under Xi Jinping.

Hong Kong press freedom ‘extinguished’

Xi, in power since 2012, “has restored a media culture worthy of the Maoist era, in which freely accessing information has become a crime and to provide information an even greater crime,” the RSF report said.

“China’s state and privately owned media are under the Communist Party’s ever-tighter control, while the administration creates more and more obstacles for foreign reporters,” it added.

State media made no visible mention of World Press Freedom Day, which comes as Wuhan citizen journalist Fang Bin was released from a three-year jail term for reporting on the emerging COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.

Fellow citizen journalist Zhang Zhan, also sentenced for reporting on pandemic-struck Wuhan, is still serving a four-year jail term in Shanghai.

The campaign group Hong Kong Media Overseas called on the international community to pay attention to the ongoing criminalization of independent journalism in the once-freewheeling city under a draconian national security law imposed by Beijing in 2020.

"Once home to one of the freest media centers in Asia, Hong Kong has joined the dismal roll call of places where press freedom has largely been extinguished," the group said in a statement.

It said 28 journalists have been arrested and charged with offenses, some carrying heavy penalties, since the crackdown began in the wake of the 2019 protest movement.

Hong Kong journalists are frequently subjected to "physical intimidation ... by unidentified persons, which contributes to the atmosphere of fear surrounding the practice of journalism," said Hong Kong Media Overseas.

Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Additional editing by Paul Eckert and Jim Snyder.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Gu Ting for RFA Mandarin and Chingman for RFA Cantonese.

This year’s theme, “Freedom of expression as a driver for all other human rights,”  highlights the relationship between threats to media freedom, journalist safety, and increasing attacks on other key human rights.

The concerns are valid, as the jailing of RFA reporters and bloggers, and their BBC and Voice of America colleagues, occurred in countries and territories that have experienced a decline in broader freedoms–if they had such liberties to begin with.

Edmund Wan

Edmund Wan Yiu-sing, known by his DJ name “Giggs,” was sentenced by a court in Hong Kong in October 2022 to two years and eight months in prison for sedition and money laundering, charges he confessed to in a plea deal.

Prior to his February 2021 arrest, he hosted programs that reported and commented on Hong Kong and Chinese politics for D100, an independent online radio station. Wan also hosted a program for Radio Free Asia’s Cantonese Service from 2017 to 2020.

Authorities charged that Wan hosted programs that “incited others to resist or overthrow the Chinese Communist Party” and “promoted Hong Kong independence,” the Hong Kong Free Press independent news outlet reported.

Wan had pleaded guilty to one charge of seditious intent for on-air comments he made in 2020, and three charges of money laundering related to crowd funding transactions. In exchange, six other charges were left on file, which means they cannot be pursued without the court’s permission.

The charges come under a law, created when Hong Kong was under British rule, that defines sedition as "intent to arouse hatred or contempt of the Hong Kong [government] or to incite rebellion, and cause dissatisfaction with it."

The sedition law was revived by the Hong Kong government during the 2019 protest movement and has been used to arrest pro-democracy activists.
In addition to the time in prison, the court also ordered Wan to hand over HK$4.87 million (about U.S. $620,000) in assets.

Yeang Sothearin

Former Radio Free Asia Khmer news anchor Yeang Sothearin was taken into custody in November 2017, along with Uon Chhin, an RFA photographer and videographer.

They were charged with “illegally collecting information for a foreign source” after RFA closed its bureau in the capital of Phnom Penh in September of that year amid a government crackdown on independent media.

They were slapped with additional charges for illegally produced pornography in March 2018. If convicted of the first charge, they could face a jail term of between seven and 15 years.

Yeang Sothearin and Uon Chhin are out on bail, but they remain in legal limbo after several courts have rejected a series of appeals.

In October 2022, Cambodia’s Supreme Court returned Yeang Sothearin’s passport, allowing him to visit his ailing father and sister in Vietnam.

Cambodia ranks 140 out of 180 in the 2022 Reporters without Borders (RSF) World Press Freedom Index, between Equatorial Guinea and Libya.

After Cambodia’s emergence from decades of warfare in the 1990s, the country’s press had “flourished until the long-serving Prime Minister Hun Sen launched a ruthless war against independent journalism before the 2018 elections,” RSF said.

Uon Chhin

Former Radio Free Asia Khmer photographer and videographer Uon Chhin and RFA news anchor Yeang Sothearin were taken into custody in November 2017, amid a gathering crackdown on independent media by long-ruling Prime Minister Hun Sen.

The pair were charged with “illegally collecting information for a foreign source” after RFA closed its bureau in the capital of Phnom Penh in September of that year.

They were slapped with additional charges for illegally produced pornography in March 2018. If convicted of the first charge, they could face a jail term of between seven and 15 years.

Yeang Sothearin and Uon Chhin are out on bail, but they remain in legal limbo and their media careers frozen after several courts have rejected a series of appeals.

Cambodia ranks 140 out of 180 in the 2022 Reporters without Borders (RSF) World Press Freedom Index, between Equatorial Guinea and Libya.

“Hun Sen went after the press mercilessly ahead of parliamentary elections in July 2018. Radio stations and newspapers were silenced, newsrooms purged, journalists prosecuted – leaving the independent media sector devastated,” said RSF.  “Since then, the few attempts to bring independent journalism back to life have drawn the wrath of ruling circles.”

Htet Htet Khine

Htet Htet Khine, a former BBC television presenter, was sentenced in September 2022 to three years in prison with hard labor for “incitement” and “illegal association” for her reporting work.

The face of BBC Media Action's national television peace program Khan Sar Kyi (Feel It) from 2016 to 2020, which documented the impact of war on Myanmar society, the freelance journalist and video producer had been in detention in Yangon’s notorious Insein Prison awaiting trial since Aug. 15, 2021, when she was arrested with fellow reporter Sithu Aung Myint.

Htet Htet Khine was arrested six months after the Feb. 1, 2021 military coup by junta security forces, one of some 150 journalists detained by junta authorities.

Family members expressed concern over Htet Htet Khine’s well-being in prison amid the COVID-19 pandemic and the prospect of physical abuse by jailers.

Veteran journalists told Radio Free Asia that her case underscored the fact that reporters face serious personal risk to carry out their work under military rule in Myanmar.

Sithu Aung Myint

A special court in Yangon’s Insein Prison in December 2022 sentenced veteran journalist Sithu Aung Myint to seven years in prison, which came on top of two earlier sentences totaling five years for allegedly inciting sedition in the army, meaning he will have to spend 12 years in prison.

The sentence by a court set up by the junta that took power in a Feb. 1, 2021, military coup was for attempting to incite hatred or contempt against military personnel or civil servants, a crime which carries a maximum 20-year term.

Sithu Aung Myint had written critically of the current junta – as he had since the 1988 People Uprising, a series of nationwide protests against military rule in a country that has been run by the army for most of the 76 years since independence from Britain.

Sithu Aung Myint was arrested in August 2021 at an apartment in Yangon, where he was in hiding along with former BBC television presenter and freelance journalist Htet Htet Khine, who is serving a six-year prison term.

He wrote and presented reports for the Democratic Voice of Burma in the late 2000s and later worked as editor-in-chief of Skynet Up to Date news, and was writing and presenting reviews as a columnist for Voice of America’s Burmese Service up to the time of his arrest.

After the coup, global media watchdog Reporters without Borders dropped Myanmar to 175th out of 180 countries in its 2022 World Press Freedom Index from 140th a year earlier. The NGO said Myanmar had become “one of the world’s biggest jailer of journalists, second only to China.”

Nguyen Lan Thang

Nguyen Lan Thang, a long-time contributor of blog posts on politics and society to Radio Free Asia’s Vietnamese service, was sentenced in April to six years in prison and two years of probation.

He was arrested in July 2022 on allegations that he posted videos on Facebook and YouTube that were said to “oppose” the Vietnamese Communist Party.

He is one of four jailed Radio Free Asia contributors in Vietnam, and his conviction is the latest of a string of judgments against dissidents under Article 117 of Vietnam’s Penal Code, frequently used by authorities to restrict freedom of expression and opinions deemed critical of the regime.

“Although we disagree (if not oppose) with the trial and the verdict, our hearts feel warm because humanity is still alive,” wrote Thang’s wife Le Thi Bich Vuong, who added that her family still believes that Thang is “a patriot who has never done anything wrong with the country and his conscience.”

Thang’s arrest and conviction was widely condemned by human rights and media freedom advocates, who said his case was riddled with flaws and a miscarriage of justice.

Nguyen Van Hoa

Nguyen Van Hoa, who has blogged and produced videos for Radio Free Asia, was arrested in January 2017 for “abusing democratic freedoms to infringe upon the interests of the state” after filming protests outside a Taiwan-owned steel plant, whose spill of toxic waste the year before had left fishermen and tourism workers jobless in four coastal provinces.

Hoa is an environmentalist, blogger and digital security trainer from Ha Tinh province who expressed sympathy for the fishermen hurt by the massive disaster. He received a seven-year jail term in November 2017 on charges that also included “conducting propaganda against the state.”

Amnesty International has said that Hoa was tortured by the authorities to confess to his alleged crime and in May 2019 was being held in solitary confinement as punishment for his refusal to cooperate.

Hoa wrote in letters smuggled to his family from prison that police had “hung him upside down from the ceiling and then beaten him,” London-based human rights activist Son Tran told RFA in early 2020.

Nguyen Tuong Thuy

Nguyen Tuong Thuy — a regular blogger for Radio Free Asia on democracy, human rights, and social issues — is serving 11 years in prison for "propaganda against the state."

Thuy, 72, co-founded the Independent Journalists Association of Vietnam in 2014. He served as vice president of the organization until his arrest in May 2020.

In November 2020, Thuy and two other IJAVN members were indicted for “making, storing, and disseminating documents and materials for anti-state purposes” under Article 117 of Vietnam’s Penal Code, frequently used by authorities in the Communist country to silence critics.

In 2021, Thuy’s wife, Pham Thi Lan, told RFA that Thuy was in failing health with limited access to medical treatment for ailments including back pain, high blood pressure, scabies and inflammatory bowel disease, after visiting him on May 14.

According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, a media freedom watchdog group, Vietnam had detained 21 journalists for their professional activities as of Dec. 1, 2022.

Truong Duy Nhat

Truong Duy Nhat, who had been a weekly contributor to Radio Free Asia before his abduction by police in Thailand in January 2019, was convicted in March 2020 of “abusing his position and authority” in a decade-old land fraud case and jailed for 10 years.

Nhat, who described his case as politically motivated, said at his trial that after seeking political asylum in Thailand at the beginning of 2019, he was arrested by Thai Royal Police and handed over to Vietnamese police, who took him across the border into Laos, and from there back to Vietnam.

After a December 2020 visit to Nhat in prison, a friend said he was being forced to work eight hours a day making paper money for sale as temple offerings, and that working long hours in a seated position had aggravated the pain he was suffering from herniated discs.

Nhat was jailed before in Vietnam from 2013 to 2015 for his writings criticizing the one-party government.

Vietnam has been consistently rated “not free” in the areas of internet and press freedom by Freedom House, a U.S.-based watchdog group, while another press freedom group said journalists jailed in the country are often subject to mistreatment.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Radio Free Asia.

This year’s theme, “Freedom of expression as a driver for all other human rights,”  highlights the relationship between threats to media freedom, journalist safety, and increasing attacks on other key human rights.

The concerns are valid, as the jailing of RFA reporters and bloggers, and their BBC and Voice of America colleagues, occurred in countries and territories that have experienced a decline in broader freedoms–if they had such liberties to begin with.

Edmund Wan

Edmund Wan Yiu-sing, known by his DJ name “Giggs,” was sentenced by a court in Hong Kong in October 2022 to two years and eight months in prison for sedition and money laundering, charges he confessed to in a plea deal.

Prior to his February 2021 arrest, he hosted programs that reported and commented on Hong Kong and Chinese politics for D100, an independent online radio station. Wan also hosted a program for Radio Free Asia’s Cantonese Service from 2017 to 2020.

Authorities charged that Wan hosted programs that “incited others to resist or overthrow the Chinese Communist Party” and “promoted Hong Kong independence,” the Hong Kong Free Press independent news outlet reported.

Wan had pleaded guilty to one charge of seditious intent for on-air comments he made in 2020, and three charges of money laundering related to crowd funding transactions. In exchange, six other charges were left on file, which means they cannot be pursued without the court’s permission.

The charges come under a law, created when Hong Kong was under British rule, that defines sedition as "intent to arouse hatred or contempt of the Hong Kong [government] or to incite rebellion, and cause dissatisfaction with it."

The sedition law was revived by the Hong Kong government during the 2019 protest movement and has been used to arrest pro-democracy activists.
In addition to the time in prison, the court also ordered Wan to hand over HK$4.87 million (about U.S. $620,000) in assets.

Yeang Sothearin

Former Radio Free Asia Khmer news anchor Yeang Sothearin was taken into custody in November 2017, along with Uon Chhin, an RFA photographer and videographer.

They were charged with “illegally collecting information for a foreign source” after RFA closed its bureau in the capital of Phnom Penh in September of that year amid a government crackdown on independent media.

They were slapped with additional charges for illegally produced pornography in March 2018. If convicted of the first charge, they could face a jail term of between seven and 15 years.

Yeang Sothearin and Uon Chhin are out on bail, but they remain in legal limbo after several courts have rejected a series of appeals.

In October 2022, Cambodia’s Supreme Court returned Yeang Sothearin’s passport, allowing him to visit his ailing father and sister in Vietnam.

Cambodia ranks 140 out of 180 in the 2022 Reporters without Borders (RSF) World Press Freedom Index, between Equatorial Guinea and Libya.

After Cambodia’s emergence from decades of warfare in the 1990s, the country’s press had “flourished until the long-serving Prime Minister Hun Sen launched a ruthless war against independent journalism before the 2018 elections,” RSF said.

Uon Chhin

Former Radio Free Asia Khmer photographer and videographer Uon Chhin and RFA news anchor Yeang Sothearin were taken into custody in November 2017, amid a gathering crackdown on independent media by long-ruling Prime Minister Hun Sen.

The pair were charged with “illegally collecting information for a foreign source” after RFA closed its bureau in the capital of Phnom Penh in September of that year.

They were slapped with additional charges for illegally produced pornography in March 2018. If convicted of the first charge, they could face a jail term of between seven and 15 years.

Yeang Sothearin and Uon Chhin are out on bail, but they remain in legal limbo and their media careers frozen after several courts have rejected a series of appeals.

Cambodia ranks 140 out of 180 in the 2022 Reporters without Borders (RSF) World Press Freedom Index, between Equatorial Guinea and Libya.

“Hun Sen went after the press mercilessly ahead of parliamentary elections in July 2018. Radio stations and newspapers were silenced, newsrooms purged, journalists prosecuted – leaving the independent media sector devastated,” said RSF.  “Since then, the few attempts to bring independent journalism back to life have drawn the wrath of ruling circles.”

Htet Htet Khine

Htet Htet Khine, a former BBC television presenter, was sentenced in September 2022 to three years in prison with hard labor for “incitement” and “illegal association” for her reporting work.

The face of BBC Media Action's national television peace program Khan Sar Kyi (Feel It) from 2016 to 2020, which documented the impact of war on Myanmar society, the freelance journalist and video producer had been in detention in Yangon’s notorious Insein Prison awaiting trial since Aug. 15, 2021, when she was arrested with fellow reporter Sithu Aung Myint.

Htet Htet Khine was arrested six months after the Feb. 1, 2021 military coup by junta security forces, one of some 150 journalists detained by junta authorities.

Family members expressed concern over Htet Htet Khine’s well-being in prison amid the COVID-19 pandemic and the prospect of physical abuse by jailers.

Veteran journalists told Radio Free Asia that her case underscored the fact that reporters face serious personal risk to carry out their work under military rule in Myanmar.

Sithu Aung Myint

A special court in Yangon’s Insein Prison in December 2022 sentenced veteran journalist Sithu Aung Myint to seven years in prison, which came on top of two earlier sentences totaling five years for allegedly inciting sedition in the army, meaning he will have to spend 12 years in prison.

The sentence by a court set up by the junta that took power in a Feb. 1, 2021, military coup was for attempting to incite hatred or contempt against military personnel or civil servants, a crime which carries a maximum 20-year term.

Sithu Aung Myint had written critically of the current junta – as he had since the 1988 People Uprising, a series of nationwide protests against military rule in a country that has been run by the army for most of the 76 years since independence from Britain.

Sithu Aung Myint was arrested in August 2021 at an apartment in Yangon, where he was in hiding along with former BBC television presenter and freelance journalist Htet Htet Khine, who is serving a six-year prison term.

He wrote and presented reports for the Democratic Voice of Burma in the late 2000s and later worked as editor-in-chief of Skynet Up to Date news, and was writing and presenting reviews as a columnist for Voice of America’s Burmese Service up to the time of his arrest.

After the coup, global media watchdog Reporters without Borders dropped Myanmar to 175th out of 180 countries in its 2022 World Press Freedom Index from 140th a year earlier. The NGO said Myanmar had become “one of the world’s biggest jailer of journalists, second only to China.”

Nguyen Lan Thang

Nguyen Lan Thang, a long-time contributor of blog posts on politics and society to Radio Free Asia’s Vietnamese service, was sentenced in April to six years in prison and two years of probation.

He was arrested in July 2022 on allegations that he posted videos on Facebook and YouTube that were said to “oppose” the Vietnamese Communist Party.

He is one of four jailed Radio Free Asia contributors in Vietnam, and his conviction is the latest of a string of judgments against dissidents under Article 117 of Vietnam’s Penal Code, frequently used by authorities to restrict freedom of expression and opinions deemed critical of the regime.

“Although we disagree (if not oppose) with the trial and the verdict, our hearts feel warm because humanity is still alive,” wrote Thang’s wife Le Thi Bich Vuong, who added that her family still believes that Thang is “a patriot who has never done anything wrong with the country and his conscience.”

Thang’s arrest and conviction was widely condemned by human rights and media freedom advocates, who said his case was riddled with flaws and a miscarriage of justice.

Nguyen Van Hoa

Nguyen Van Hoa, who has blogged and produced videos for Radio Free Asia, was arrested in January 2017 for “abusing democratic freedoms to infringe upon the interests of the state” after filming protests outside a Taiwan-owned steel plant, whose spill of toxic waste the year before had left fishermen and tourism workers jobless in four coastal provinces.

Hoa is an environmentalist, blogger and digital security trainer from Ha Tinh province who expressed sympathy for the fishermen hurt by the massive disaster. He received a seven-year jail term in November 2017 on charges that also included “conducting propaganda against the state.”

Amnesty International has said that Hoa was tortured by the authorities to confess to his alleged crime and in May 2019 was being held in solitary confinement as punishment for his refusal to cooperate.

Hoa wrote in letters smuggled to his family from prison that police had “hung him upside down from the ceiling and then beaten him,” London-based human rights activist Son Tran told RFA in early 2020.

Nguyen Tuong Thuy

Nguyen Tuong Thuy — a regular blogger for Radio Free Asia on democracy, human rights, and social issues — is serving 11 years in prison for "propaganda against the state."

Thuy, 72, co-founded the Independent Journalists Association of Vietnam in 2014. He served as vice president of the organization until his arrest in May 2020.

In November 2020, Thuy and two other IJAVN members were indicted for “making, storing, and disseminating documents and materials for anti-state purposes” under Article 117 of Vietnam’s Penal Code, frequently used by authorities in the Communist country to silence critics.

In 2021, Thuy’s wife, Pham Thi Lan, told RFA that Thuy was in failing health with limited access to medical treatment for ailments including back pain, high blood pressure, scabies and inflammatory bowel disease, after visiting him on May 14.

According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, a media freedom watchdog group, Vietnam had detained 21 journalists for their professional activities as of Dec. 1, 2022.

Truong Duy Nhat

Truong Duy Nhat, who had been a weekly contributor to Radio Free Asia before his abduction by police in Thailand in January 2019, was convicted in March 2020 of “abusing his position and authority” in a decade-old land fraud case and jailed for 10 years.

Nhat, who described his case as politically motivated, said at his trial that after seeking political asylum in Thailand at the beginning of 2019, he was arrested by Thai Royal Police and handed over to Vietnamese police, who took him across the border into Laos, and from there back to Vietnam.

After a December 2020 visit to Nhat in prison, a friend said he was being forced to work eight hours a day making paper money for sale as temple offerings, and that working long hours in a seated position had aggravated the pain he was suffering from herniated discs.

Nhat was jailed before in Vietnam from 2013 to 2015 for his writings criticizing the one-party government.

Vietnam has been consistently rated “not free” in the areas of internet and press freedom by Freedom House, a U.S.-based watchdog group, while another press freedom group said journalists jailed in the country are often subject to mistreatment.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Radio Free Asia.

Researchers mapped sea level hotspots worldwide and combined the effects of climate change on sea levels with natural oceanic fluctuations to show how millions of people in coastal cities could be impacted. The study was published on March 2 in the scientific journal Nature Climate Change.

The research showed that internal climate variability could amplify or reduce the impact of climate change on sea level rise along certain coastlines by up to 30% more than would result from climate change alone, exponentially increasing extreme flooding. 

By 2100, if variability reaches its upper limit due to high levels of greenhouse gasses, new sea level rise hotspots would appear in Southeast Asian megacities, including Yangon, Bangkok, Ho Chi Minh City, and Manila, as well as Chennai and Kolkata in India.

The population of Metro Manila is 13 million; Bangkok has at least 11 million; Ho Chi Minh City surpasses 9 million; and Yangon has roughly 5 million inhabitants.

The study differs from previous research by incorporating naturally occurring sea level fluctuations, such as El Nino, along with changes in the water cycle, known as internal climate variability, to determine the impact of climate change on sea level rise. 

Internal climate variability refers to the natural fluctuations in the earth’s climate system that arise from internal processes such as ocean currents, atmospheric circulation patterns and variations in the earth’s orbit and tilt. 

That could result in changes in temperature, precipitation and other climate variables lasting from months to decades. 

Variability is not influenced by external factors, including human activities like greenhouse gas emissions.

“The internal climate variability can greatly reinforce or suppress the sea level rise caused by climate change,” said Aixue Hu, a co-author of the paper. 

“In a worst-case scenario, the combined effect of climate change and internal climate variability could result in local sea levels rising by more than 50% of what is due to climate change alone, thus posing significant risks of more severe flooding to coastal megacities and threatening millions of people.” 

Massive risk for Southeast Asia

Southeast Asia has one of the longest coastlines in the world at 234,000 kilometers (154,400 miles), with an estimated 77% of the population living in coastal areas, making it one of the world’s most vulnerable regions, according to a 2021 ASEAN State of Climate Change report.

Last year, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said in a report that Southeast Asia is at serious risk of losing infrastructure and low-lying coastal settlements due to flooding caused by unavoidable sea level rise.

Sea levels are already on the rise due to an increase in ocean temperatures and melting ice sheets caused by global warming, according to scientists and climate change experts. 

Previous studies said coastal flooding in Manila is predicted to occur 18 times more often by 2100 than in 2006, based solely on climate change. 

However, the new study showed that in a worst-case scenario, such floods could occur 96 times more often based on climate change and internal climate variability.

Similarly, Yangon was projected to see such rare events rise from 148 to 471 times more frequently, while in Ho Chi Minh City, the increase was from 77 times to 2,882 times more often. 

The study said that, considering the internal climate variability impact, “significant changes in frequency of episodic floodings by the end of the century are expected” in low-lying areas that are less than 10 meters (33 feet) above sea level and densely populated regions, such as the Ayeyarwady (Irrawaddy) delta, the Mekong delta, and on the low-lying islands in the tropical Pacific, placing millions of people at risk.

The researchers drew on a set of simulations and statistical analysis with the assumption that greenhouse gasses are emitted at a high rate. The estimates come with considerable uncertainty due to the earth’s complex and unpredictable climate system, they said. 

However, they warned, it's still important to be aware of the potential risks to coastal megacities of rising sea levels in order to develop effective adaptation strategies based on projections from continuously improving climate models. 

Last year, climate change triggered unprecedented extreme flooding in the Asia-Pacific region, according to an analysis by the European Union’s Copernicus Climate Change Service. The report dubbed 2022 a year of climate extremes, which included deadly floods in Pakistan and large parts of Southeast Asia. 

Ocean temperatures have reached their highest-ever level and are expected to continue rising. The world’s oceans “were again the hottest in the historical record and exceeded the previous 2021 record maximum,” according to a study published in January in the journal Advances in Atmospheric Sciences. 

It said the five hottest years for oceans were in the past six years.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Subel Rai Bhandari for RFA.

Progressives pushed back strongly Thursday to reports that Nancy Pelosi is lobbying the Biden administration to nominate former congressman Sean Patrick Maloney for U.S. labor secretary, with one critic accusing the former House speaker of "doing a last bit of Silicon Valley donor service" for someone who "has no real relationship with labor."

According toNBC News, Pelosi (D-Calif.) has been making calls on behalf of Maloney urging the White House and union leaders to back the former five-term corporate Democrat for labor chief. Current Labor Secretary Marty Walsh is expected to resign in the near future so he can take a job heading the National Hockey League Players Association, although the White House has not yet confirmed his departure.

While Deputy Labor Secretary Julie Su, a progressive who formerly headed California's labor agency, is believed to be the favorite to replace Walsh, Pelosi's push for Maloney—an adept fundraiser who led the Democrats' campaign arm in the House and was a member of the corporate-friendly New Democrat Coalition—is a cause for concern and consternation among worker advocates.

Opponents of Maloney's nomination noted he's a corporate-friendly centrist who not only lost his midterm reelection bid in "humiliating" fashion but, as ex-chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, was widely blamed for his party's failure to hold control of the House.

"Make no mistake, Maloney is a corporate hack: he was a member of the New Democrat Coalition, the caucus of Congressional Democrats that exists to do the bidding of giant companies under a pretense of being 'moderate,'" Max Moran, the personnel team research director at the Revolving Door Project, said in a statement Thursday. "Nothing in his record indicates any unique relationship with labor, but he has quite strong relationships with the CEOs and executives who often try to undermine labor."

"There's no reason for Maloney to wield power or influence over federal politics for the foreseeable future, and certainly no reason to promote him to labor secretary," Moran argued.

Two words dominated the social media conversation surrounding Maloney's prospective nomination: failing upwards.

"If your boss gave you an important assignment that you failed to accomplish, and it made your boss' job immensely harder, would you expect a promotion?" Moran asked rhetorically.

As Moran explained:

As the leader of House Democrats' campaign arm in 2022, Sean Patrick Maloney failed to hold the Democratic majority. He is the first Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair to lose his own race in 40 years. Some of his biggest failures were in his home state of deep-blue New York! This was the guy who was supposed to keep Rep. George Santos [R-N.Y.] from winning! His failure has all but demolished any hopes of major new legislation for the remainder of this Presidential term.

He wasn't trying especially hard at this crucial job: Maloney spent part of October partying with European millionaires under the auspices of fundraising, instead of pumping money into battleground races and campaigning. Imagine promoting a DCCC chair who didn't even campaign in his own district, let alone for his colleagues. Imagine promoting a politician who wasn't even in the country in the home stretch of an election!

"If after his excellent, blue-collar State of the Union, President [Joe] Biden lets a corporate hack fail upwards into the Labor Department, it would send a message to the public to believe exactly none of what he said," Moran added.

On Wednesday, the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus endorsed Su for labor secretary, noting there are no Asian American, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander cabinet secretaries in the Biden administration.

"Deputy Secretary Su has dedicated her career to the promotion of workers' rights and fair labor practices and to advancing equity and opportunities for all workers, including ones from historically underserved communities," the caucus said in a statement." She would be a stellar, exceptionally qualified candidate to be secretary of labor and would deliver results for American workers and the Biden-Harris administration immediately upon her confirmation."

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Brett Wilkins.

The dispute over the proper name for the sport, which involves punching, kicking and jabbing one’s knees into an opponent’s stomach, has raged for years.

Muay Thai is the national sport of Thailand, and the sport is widely known around the world by that name. But the Cambodian organizing committee for the games claimed Cambodia has cultural ownership of Kun Khmer and it would use that term to avoid confusion.

The dispute got so heated that the Thailand-based International Federation of Muaythai Associations threatened that it would fine and ban other countries from future Muay Thai events if they participate in what is often called the SEA Games, scheduled for May 5-17.

Thailand withdrew its protest after the Cambodian side explained that using a Khmer language name for the name of a Khmer martial art had no effect on the name or the form of any Thai sport, said Vath Chamroeun, secretary-general of the Cambodian Southeast Asian Games Organising Committee and the National Olympic Committee of Cambodia.

He also said that even if Thailand had kept its kickboxers out of the event, it would still go on as planned, and under the name Kun Khmer because in addition to Cambodia, six countries – Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam – had already agreed to participate, and only four are necessary to keep it on the schedule.

"We are following the rules of the sport, which states that the host country has the right to participate in the tournament, but must have four countries agree to also participate, and we were able to resolve this peacefully,” said Vath Chamroeun.

He called for restraint among the heated factions, asking that they calm down and refrain from accusing each other of causing problems.

“Instead, we should develop what is ours, and they should develop what is theirs,” he said.

Cultural rivalry

The dispute over the name of the sport is more than simple linguistic difference. The opposing names stoke the flames of nationalism and rivalry in both countries, which have seen friction in many other arenas, including a decades old border dispute over the area surrounding an ancient temple and World Heritage Site that resulted in bloody skirmishes as recently as 2011.

Asian MMA, a media outlet that covers mixed martial arts news in the region, treats them as if they are the same sport.

“The two sports are basically identical but while Muay Thai is globally recognized, Kun Khmer is completely unknown outside of Cambodia,” said an Asian MMA report about the Southeast Asian Games dispute published Wednesday.

A 2019 Phnom Penh report said that “there are no major differences between the two combat sports – the rules are the same, with a slight difference in how they score the match,” it said. “Also, Thai fighters are more technical while their Cambodian counterparts are known for their brutal elbows and knees.”  

The name has caused conflicts at previous SEA Games, according to Asian MMA. 

In 2005, Cambodia refused to send its team in protest that the kickboxing event was called Muay Thai, and in 1995, at an ASEAN meeting, Cambodia petitioned unsuccessfully to change the official name of the sport to the more neutral “Sovannaphum Boxing” or “SEA Boxing,” arguing that the sport has origins in Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar, in addition to Thailand. 

Translated by Sum Sok Ry. Written in English by Eugene Whong. Edited by Malcolm Foster.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Khmer.

As California is reeling after three mass shootings over the past three days, we go to Oakland to speak with Connie Wun, co-founder of the AAPI Women Lead organization and a researcher on race and gender violence, and look at the state of gun control with Nick Suplina, managing director for law and policy at Everytown for Gun Safety.

This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

In an open letter addressing the summit, the five European and five Southeast Asian current and former parliamentarians recommended human rights cooperation between the two regional blocs and highlighted several ways that countries in ASEAN are not living up to international standards, particularly in ensuring the safety of human rights defenders.

The letter requested that ASEAN take steps to protect rights defenders, including by immediately releasing and dropping charges against “all human rights defenders arbitrarily imprisoned for their legitimate human rights work, including Tran Huynh Duy Thuc, Pham Doan Trang and Nguyen Lan Thang in Viet Nam; Victor Yeimo in Indonesia; Houayheuang Xayabouly, Lodkham Thammavong, Soukane Chaithad and Somphone Phimmasone in Lao PDR.”

It also asked ASEAN countries to publicly acknowledge the importance of rights defenders, refrain from smear campaigns intended to stigmatize them and to ensure that rights organizations are able to function “independently and effectively.” 

The three prominent Vietnamese human rights defenders mentioned in the letter are among more than 200 human rights activists who are being held in prison, according to domestic and international rights organizations' statistics. 

Tran Huynh Duy Thuc, a former businessman, is arguably the most famous human rights activist in Vietnam, known for blogging about economic and social reform. He was arrested in 2009 on the charge of "carrying out activities to overthrow the people's government" and then sentenced to 16 years in prison. 

Pham Doan Trang is an internationally acclaimed human rights activist and political journalist who was arrested on the charge of "propagandizing against the State" in October 2020 and sentenced to nine years in prison in December 2021. She had been accused of speaking with foreign media, including Radio Free Asia and the BBC, allegedly to defame the government with “fake news.”

Nguyen Lan Thang was a contributor to RFA’s Vietnamese Service since 2013 until his arrest in early July 2022 on the charge of "conducting propaganda against the State" and is likely to receive a jail term of seven to 12 years if convicted. 

The parliamentarians' open letter will have a positive impact on the summit, said former prisoner of conscience Nguyen Van Dai, who was set free in 2018 after Hanoi received many calls for his release from EU and German politicians and currently lives in exile in Germany.

“If the EU leaders raise their voices, it will greatly impact the freedom of the activists from Vietnam, Thailand, and Myanmar," he said.

Almost all Vietnamese political prisoners are human rights defenders jailed for exercising their rights, Phil Robertson, deputy director of New York-based Human Rights Watch’s Asia Division, told RFA.   

"They have been hit with a rights abusing, so-called 'national security' law that has nothing to do with improving national life and everything to do with protecting the ruling Communist Party's hold on power,” said Robertson.

He said dubious charges for rights defenders, such as tax evasion, were part of Vietnam’s attempt to fool the international community into thinking the detentions were legitimate.

“But as can be seen from this letter, it's clear that people have caught on already and realize the rights abusing game the Vietnam government is playing here," he said.

Translated by Anna Vu. Written in English by Eugene Whong.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Vietnamese.

The Chinese Ministry of Defense said in a brief statement that the two countries “conducted routine joint aerial strategic patrol in the air space over the waters of the Sea of Japan, the East China Sea and the west Pacific Ocean,” on Wednesday.

Russia’s Ministry of Defense meanwhile disclosed that several Russian Tu-95MS strategic bombers accompanied by Su-30SM and Su-35S fighter jets, and Chinese H-6K strategic bombers flew over the Sea of Japan and the East China Sea during an eight-hour mission.

Tu-95MS is a new variant of the Russian Air Force’s Tupolev Tu-95 strategic bomber and missile platform. It is capable of carrying modern Russian-made long-range and stealth cruise missiles.

Russia said the two countries’ warplanes did not violate the airspace of any foreign states. 

South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff issued a statement Wednesday saying its military scrambled jets after eight planes entered the Korea Air Defense Identification Zone (Kadiz). It said they included two Chinese H-6 bombers and Russian Tu-95s and Su-35s which later reentered the zone but did not violate South Korean airspace.

The joint patrol was the second such operation this year and the fifth since the two air forces began their joint aerial activities in July 2019. 

In the course of the joint patrol Russian aircraft also landed in China and Chinese bombers landed in Russia in the first aircraft exchange between the two air forces.

“These joint aerial patrols serve mainly as a symbolic act designed to send a message of Sino-Russian strategic unity to the U.S. and its Northeast Asian allies - Japan and South Korea,” said Artyom Lukin, Deputy Director for Research at the School of Regional and International Studies at Russia's Far Eastern Federal University.

“Despite remaining largely a symbolic exercise, joint patrols do show an incremental increase in the level of interoperability between the two air forces,” Lukin told RFA.

Mutual trust

Chinese media said the patrol and the exchange “demonstrate further growth in high-level military cooperation and mutual trust between China and Russia” as they both face challenges from the West, especially the U.S.

The U.S. Defense Department released its 2022 National Defense Strategy in October, identifying China as “the overall pacing challenge” and Russia as “an acute threat” to the United States.

In September China sent more than 2,000 troops, 300 vehicles of various types, 21 fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters, and three ships to take part in the Vostok-2022 wargame in Russia.

It was the first time the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) sent all three of its forces, the infantry, navy and air force, to participate in a single exercise in a foreign land.

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin and Chinese leader Xi Jinping held a summit in February, in which they praised the bilateral partnership as having "no limits" and "no forbidden areas of cooperation."

The Russia-initiated war in Ukraine has pushed the two countries even closer and Beijing has so far refused to condemn the Russian invasion.

In turn, Russia has backed China’s protests over the visit to Taiwan by U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi in August, calling it “provocative.”

China retaliated at the time by holding a large-scale military exercise around Taiwan.

Military alliance?

The U.S.’s main ally in East Asia, Japan, has also expressed concern about growing Russia-China ties as both Beijing and Moscow increase military activities near Japan.

On Aug. 24 Tokyo released its defense white paper, titled ‘Defense of Japan 2022’, in which it said that in recent years, “China and Russia have deepened their military cooperation.”

The two countries have conducted “long-distance joint flights from the East China Sea to the Sea of Japan and the Pacific Ocean every year since 2019,” the paper said. 

On Tuesday, one day before the joint aerial patrol with Russia, Chinese Type 054A frigate Huanggang (577) and Type 956EM destroyer Taizhou (138) transited Tsushima Strait northbound from the East China Sea to the Sea of Japan, according to the Japanese Defense Ministry’s Joint Staff Office.

The coincidence in timing “hinted at joint aerial and naval operations by China and Russia,” said Artyom Lukin from the Russian Far Eastern Federal University.

In his opinion, questions remain over how far Moscow and Beijing are planning to take their military cooperation in terms of scale, integration, and geographic scope. 

“Given the current trends, it can’t be ruled out that by the late 2020s or early 2030s the Pacific will see the emergence of a de facto, or perhaps even de jure, Sino-Russian military alliance,” the analyst said.

Currently China and Russia do not have a formal military alliance.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Staff.

Janine Jackson interviewed Coalition for a Diverse Harvard‘s Jeannie Park about affirmative action at Harvard University for the November 4, 2022, episode of CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript.

Janine Jackson:  You’d have to read the news fairly closely to know about the Supreme Court case about Harvard, where the college is defending its ability to consider race as a factor—among many—in admissions, in an effort to address decades in which simply being Black was enough to deny you admission. 

ACLU (10/18/18)

The group called Students for Fair Admissions, Inc., founded by white male conservative activist Ed Blum, sued Harvard on the pretense that its effort to end discrimination against African Americans was discriminating against Asian Americans. 

Two lower courts ruled for Harvard on all counts, rejecting SFFA’s arguments, before the Supreme Court accepted the case.

Jeannie Park is founding president of the Asian American Journalists Association in New York, and she’s co-founder of the Coalition for a Diverse Harvard, advocating for diversity and inclusion in higher education. She joins us now by phone. Welcome to CounterSpin, Jeannie Park. 

Jeannie Park: Thank you so much for having me here, Janine.

JJ: Let’s just be a little basic. Can you set us up on why there was a presumed need for Students for Fair Admissions, and the whole context of this idea that Asian Americans in particular should not just be mad, but should be the most aggrieved by the idea of affirmative action in education? What is the storyline there that you think needs countering?

JP: Yes, this narrative that SFFA has set up has been very difficult to counter, but there is so much disinformation out there that I really appreciate this opportunity to talk about it. 

The case is brought by someone named Ed Blum, as you mentioned. He has an organization, but the organization, we don’t even really know how many members there are; none of the plaintiffs in this case have ever been named. They did not testify in court. They are all a complete mystery. 

But what’s important to know is that he has been bringing cases against affirmative action, and against race-conscious policies, for decades. This is a mission of his, but not just his. It is a mission of the right wing. 

So he first went after it in a big way with a case called Fisher v. University of Texas, 10 years ago, where he sued the University of Texas with a white plaintiff. 

He lost. He got all the way to the Supreme Court and essentially lost twice, and he then decided that he might have a more favorable case if he used Asian-American plaintiffs. 

So he went advertising for Asian Americans who didn’t get into Harvard and UNC [University of North Carolina], because he is also doing UNC right now; that case is also at the Supreme Court. 

And he is really preying on a lot of stereotypes, a lot of model minority stereotypes, about how Asian Americans get really high test scores and grades, and trying to essentially use them as a wedge to divide communities of color, and to reduce equity opportunities for all people of color. 

And, as an Asian American, I completely reject this attempt, as do many Asian Americans, most Asian Americans, in this country. So this is the fight that we’re in. 

JJ: I think it’s so important to realize that Ed Blum didn’t have folks knock down his door and say, “We feel that we were unfairly treated on the basis of our race, in terms of admission to colleges.” 

In other words, the idea that it isn’t that there’s a large body of harmed people who are seeking redress, but instead a lawyer who is seeking something else. I just feel that that is not necessarily the idea that you would get from news media coverage.

JP: Yes. I think people have this idea that it’s some big class action lawsuit, and in fact it’s not. In fact, there’s a videotape of him speaking to, I believe, a Chinese-American group in Houston, and he says, I failed with Fisher v. University of Texas. And so I “needed Asian plaintiffs.” 

“I needed Asian plaintiffs,” said Edward Blum the force behind several failed lawsuits challenging the consideration of race in university admissions by pitting #peopleofcolor against one another. #NotYourCover #HarvardLawsuit pic.twitter.com/L2okJsTSgu

— Legal Defense Fund (@NAACP_LDF) August 2, 2018

He actively goes out and seeks people from a certain race and, in the original trial, in the suit against Harvard, he and his team had access to the data from 150,000 admissions cases, and actual files from hundreds of actual admissions cases. They did not introduce a single file or a single case where they pointed to discrimination. 

So this is all very manufactured. Again, there is this stereotype out there, and so people have bought into it. And so when he feeds this information, people tend to believe it.

But the thing is, all along, this case was never about defending Asian Americans. Never. In his case that he filed, the remedy that he sought was not to, say, make sure the admissions offices had more Asian Americans admissions officers, or to make sure that the admissions office had training in implicit bias, or how do you counter implicit bias against Asian Americans. 

Nothing that was specifically about Asian Americans. All he asked for was that he wanted the admissions process to be completely devoid of race. He did not want admissions officers to even know the race of any student who applied. 

And can you imagine how that would work? That would mean that, essentially, you wouldn’t be able to know the student’s name. And let’s say a student was a head of the Black Students Association at their high school, or the Chinese Students Association at their high school, or let’s say they worked on behalf of immigrant rights, or wanted to talk about the struggles of their community of color, or their family’s immigration story. 

You wouldn’t be able to do that as a student. And so that would mean that students could not bring their whole self to the admissions process. 

Jeannie Park: “Media need to do a better job of covering the solidarity among Asian Americans and other communities of color in standing against this lawsuit.”

JJ: Let me ask you: It’s such a deep narrative conversation, and news media aren’t good at having it. The very thing that you’re talking about, about people being able to bring their whole selves to conversations—it’s not the kind of thing that news media are great at representing. 

And I just want to ask you, if you were trying to talk in a positive way to reporters who were trying to present the idea of affirmative action, in higher education and elsewhere, but just the whole idea of seeing the Ed Blums for what they are, and looking towards a positive future, are there things that you would ask reporters to do or to not do, or stories you’d like them to cover, or things you’d like them to avoid? Any thoughts about media?

JP: I think certainly the media need to do a better job of covering the solidarity among Asian Americans and other communities of color in standing against this lawsuit, and in standing against all sorts of efforts to hold back racial justice. 

And this is very much an effort to roll back rights, as we’ve seen over and over again with the Supreme Court. Affirmative action has been legal and affirmed by the Court numerous times for more than four decades.

And so this is, again, a retrenchment, a rolling back. And I think it’s important also for the media to not just take things that are fed to them by one side, and not dig deeper into seeing what is misinformation versus what is truth. 

And I have to say, another part of this story that’s been really overlooked by the media is who is behind this lawsuit. So a piece that I and my colleague, Kristin Penner, who also works for the African American Policy Forum, wrote recently exposes who’s behind the lawsuit. 

Slate (10/25/22)

So Ed Blum has made himself out to be the face of this effort, and the media have really covered him as being sort of a “one-man band,” a “one-man legal factory.” You know, just a guy who’s doing this in his living room. 

In fact, he’s been funded with millions of dollars from the far right, and he’s been supported by lawyers and think tanks and media that are also connected to other fights. He also is responsible for the gutting of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which has led to all this attempted voter suppression. That happened, I believe, in 2013.

And so he is connected to a lot of concerted efforts to take back the rights of people of color, or just to not even allow them to fully enjoy the rights that they’re promised in the first place.

And by attacking voting rights, it leaves us with no way even to address the other attacks, because if we don’t have representation in our government, we then don’t have representation on the Supreme Court, or…. You see the direction in which the Supreme Court has turned. 

So I think it’s digging deeper into understanding that a lot of these fights are connected, these fights for climate justice, environmental justice, LGBTQ+ rights, rights for people of color, and movements for racial justice, reproductive rights, immigrant rights.

It is a very connected conservative movement, and if we’re not aware of that, we can’t fight it properly and as fiercely as we need to. 

JJ: We’ve been speaking with Jeannie Park, founding president of the Asian American Journalists Association in New York, and co-founder of the Coalition for a Diverse Harvard. Thank you so much, Jeannie Park, for joining us this week on CounterSpin. 

JP: Thank you so much, Janine. I really appreciate this time.

The post ‘This Case Was Never About Defending Asian Americans’ appeared first on FAIR.

This content originally appeared on FAIR and was authored by Janine Jackson.

Asian American voters, who could decide close elections in states like Pennsylvania, are being deluged with incendiary, misleading ads sent to their mailboxes, phones, and screens by former Trump aides, including Stephen Miller, in the closing days of the campaign.

Leaders of the Asian American and Pacific Islander community in Pennsylvania have denounced the flood of digital ads and direct mail from Republican groups — which seek to blame Democrats for the spike in anti-Asian hate crimes since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic and cast efforts to combat anti-Black racism as a form of discrimination against white and Asian communities.

“Asian Americans, like many other communities of color and immigrant and refugee communities have had to fight through many barriers to vote — especially misinformation,” Wei Chen, an organizer in the Chinese American community in Philadelphia said in an interview on Friday. “The ads are new; the tricks are not.”

Chen, who co-founded the state’s Asian Pacific Islander Political Alliance, or API PA, said that mailers from Miller’s group America First Legal, falsely claiming that the Biden administration discriminates against Asian Americans, have started appearing in the Philadelphia suburbs.

Related

▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​▄​

This content originally appeared on The Intercept and was authored by Robert Mackey.

This content originally appeared on openDemocracy RSS and was authored by openDemocracy RSS.

Women now make up well over half of New Zealand’s journalism workforce, but they have serious concerns about their safety on the job, a new survey shows.

Conducted by Massey University, the Worlds of Journalism Study 2.0: Journalists in Aotearoa/New Zealand garnered responses from 359 of the country’s estimated 1600 full-time journalists.

Women make up 58 percent of the profession but are seriously concerned about their safety at work due to public discrediting, threats, surveillance, physical attack, sexual harassment, and stalking.

• READ MORE: Worlds of Journalism: Mapping journalism’s hostile environment

Journalists reported threats, bullying, stalking and rape and death threats. One had a faux Facebook page set up in their name.

Sexual abuse included “public speculation or commentary about my body, mental health, sex like, marriage, which political commentators/etc I must have had sex with.”

Since the last survey in 2015, women have closed the pay gap and are now equally represented at all levels.

Pay across the board has increased in real terms since then, adjusted for inflation.

Māori journalists now a tenth
There has been a 20 percent increase in Māori journalists, who now make up a tenth of the workforce. But Pasifika and Asian communities remain under-represented.

For the first time, New Zealand journalists were asked about their attitudes to the Treaty of Waitangi; three quarters said it applied to all or most things they wrote.

Journalists are still committed to the traditional non-biased observer role of journalists, but now feel their most important role is to educate the public.

They are less influenced by commercial considerations than they were seven years ago, and more concerned to uphold journalism ethics.

Their political views are slightly left of centre, on average.

Massey University Associate Professor Dr James Hollings said the survey showed that employers needed to do more to keep their female employees safe.

“Journalists are under a lot of strain due to shrinking newsrooms and other pressures, but they’re doing a remarkable job of holding to their core values despite that.

‘Making great diversity efforts’
“It also shows that profession is making great efforts to adapt to become more equal and more diverse, although there’s some way to go in some areas.”

The survey is New Zealand’s contribution to the Worlds of Journalism Study (WJS). It has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.25 percent and a confidence level of 95 percent.

The first global survey, undertaken 2012-2016, mapped journalists in 66 countries and provided the first statistically robust picture of journalists worldwide ever undertaken.

This second global survey, which is still underway, will extend the coverage to up to 120 countries, mapping changes since 2016. The first global results will be available in 2024.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

As we reflect on the disastrous Supreme Court term of 2022, we must acknowledge that this Supreme Court is a threat to the rights of Asian American communities and must be reformed.

Fortunately, there is a solution—the Judiciary Act of 2021, a bill that would add four seats to the Supreme Court.

The Court's overturning of Roe v. Wade set reproductive freedom back by decades and put many of our most fundamental rights at risk. Asian American communities already face disproportionate barriers when accessing health care—including language, economic and legal obstacles—particularly in regard to contraception and family planning care. This ruling just further endangers the lives of Asian American women and families. Another, Patel v. Garland, flew under the radar, but should also spark concern—five Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices ruled in favor of deporting a man simply because he had checked the wrong box on a form years ago.

These decisions are a reminder that Asian American communities are poised to suffer from the right-wing hijacking of the Supreme Court by Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump. Fortunately, there is a solution—the Judiciary Act of 2021, a bill that would add four seats to the Supreme Court. It is something that has been done on seven different occasions to ensure that the number of judges reflects the number of federal circuit courts across the country.  As Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, I am proud to support this bill, as recent polling shows Asian American voters also support Court expansion proposals by a wide margin. The Constitution never set a specific number of judges because it was designed to grow with the country.

Supreme Court opinions harming Asian American communities are nothing new. Asian Americans have first-hand experience with its long history of embracing white supremacy. In 1889, the Court upheld the Chinese Exclusion Act, the first time Congress prohibited immigration based on ethnicity or nationality. And during World War II, the Supreme Court enabled the incarceration of thousands of Japanese Americans in Korematsu v. United States. Furthermore, in the 1922 case Ozawa v. United States, the Court approved a law making Asian Americans ineligible for naturalization because they were not "white."

The Court continues to turn a blind eye to racism and discrimination. In 2013, under the Shelby County v. Holder ruling, the conservative majority on the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act—a critical tool for defending Asian American voters against discrimination.

Frequent and heinous racialized violence against Asian American communities have proven over and over again that our community is at risk from America's gun violence epidemic, and polling shows overwhelming support among Asian American communities for common sense gun safety laws. We recently marked the one-year anniversary of the horrific Atlanta spa shootings, where a gunman killed 8 individuals, including 6 Asian women, at 3 Asian-owned spas, after purchasing a handgun just hours before his rampage. However, the Supreme Court has gone out of its way to roll back anti-gun violence measures—further evidenced by the recent ruling on a New York gun law, striking down concealed carry requirements.

Asian Americans also overwhelmingly support reproductive freedom, with nearly three-quarters expressing support for legal abortion in polling, yet the Court did not hesitate to turn back the clock by overturning Roe v. Wade. And in his dissent, Justice Thomas clearly outlined the other rights that are on the chopping block, such as the right to contraception, and the right to marry the person you love. While I am the lead sponsor of the Women's Health Protection Act, which would create a federal right to abortion care,  I know Supreme Court expansion has to be part of a lasting solution.

To achieve justice, we need to ensure Asian Americans are fully represented in the judiciary.

Our rights are on the line and are inextricably linked with workers' rights, environmental protections and consumers rights, all of which are under threat from this far-right Court. Everything we care about is at risk.

To achieve justice, we need to ensure Asian Americans are fully represented in the judiciary. There has never been an Asian American Supreme Court Justice, but President Biden has made a down payment on ensuring more Asian representation on the federal courts by nominating 23 phenomenally qualified AAPI lawyers. They are breaking many barriers; one would be the first Bangladeshi American and first Muslim American woman to ever serve as an Article III federal judge, and three more are the first ever AAPI women with experience as public defenders to serve as lifetime federal judges.

However, representation at the circuit and district court level cannot fix the problem alone—we must first deal with the radical majority on the Supreme Court.

We did not get here by accident. Mitch McConnell stole a Supreme Court seat from President Obama and confirmed another Supreme Court justice in the middle of an election so President Trump, an openly racist man, would have a path wide enough to install a far-right supermajority on the Court.

To address the problem, we need a pro-justice campaign that is just as intentional. We need more Democrats to follow the lead of many of my fellow Asian American leaders in Congress and expand the Court. History explicitly tells us that without action, Asian American communities will pay an enormous price.

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams - Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community and was authored by Judy Chu.

On September 25, 2022, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) verified a total of 5,996 civilian deaths during Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. 382 were children, 8,848 people were reported to have been injured.

Intense media coverage showing compassion for the six thousand lives taken by Russian military in the Ukraine is very humane. Little or no Western media attention for the many millions of lives taken by US/NATO in Asia, Africa, MidEast and Latin America is cruel and heartless.

The 2003 US invasion and war that utterly destroyed the prospering Iraqi society caused between 184,382 and 207,156 civilian deaths. [Many would consider these estimates of Iraqi fatalities as too low. E.g., Gideon Polya reported in 2007 “Four Years: One Million Iraqi Deaths” — DV Ed]

In 1995, Vietnam released its official estimate of the number of people killed during the US-Vietnam War: as many as 2,000,000 civilians.

For nine years, the United States dropped bombs every eight minutes, 24 hours a day over the territory of Laos. By the end of the Laotian Civil War in 1975, one-tenth of Laos’ population, or 200,000 civilians and military personnel, had been killed.

Up to a third of the bombs dropped on Laos did not explode, leaving Laos contaminated with vast quantities of unexploded ordnance (UXO). Over 25,000 people have been killed or injured by UXO in Laos since the bombing ceased, 98 percent of them civilians.

From 1965 to 1968, 2,565 bombing sorties took place over Cambodia,. Early strikes and later carpet bombing were likely tactical, designed to support the nearly two thousand secret ground incursions conducted by the CIA and US Special Forces during that period. Those carpet bombing attacks by B-52s were totally devastating, nothing could survive. Cambodia may well be the most heavily bombed country in history. All the above received no media attention.

Is there not an element of racism in not reporting US/NATO crimes against civilians in the Third World? (The civilian deaths from US bombing of European Serbia did receive a modest amount of media coverage.)

In Central America

In 1954, a coup against Guatemala’s democratically elected president, Jacobo Árbenz, was orchestrated by the US. Washington backed the Guatemalan military, which was responsible for a genocide² against the indigenous population. An estimated 200,000 people were killed between 1960 and 1996. There was little or no media coverage.

The United Nations General Assembly and the Organization of American States condemned the invasion as a violation of international law.

El Salvador was also trapped in a cycle of violence that can be traced back to a civil conflict in which the US was a protagonist, training and funding right-wing death squads in the name of fighting communism. Over 75,000 civilians died. (1980-1992).

In Africa: Somalia (time and space made for one country as an example of US/NATO genocide in Africa)

During the 1980s, the US backed a brutal dictatorship without regard to a massive starvation. 300,000 Somalis, mostly children died.³

In 2011, Kenyan armed forces entered Somalia, with US/NATO attack aircraft support, to combat al-Shabaab (“Youths’ in Arabic language), who had taken up leading the fight against US supported warlords, when the popular conservative Islamic Courts Union government of their elders was overthrown by the deadly and brutal US proxy Ethiopian Army and Air Force invasion, which brought back those defeated US backed warlords resulting in more death, maiming, destruction and more importantly creating starvation. Oxfam reported “between 2010 and 2012, more than a quarter of a million people died in the famine in Somalia.”⁴

Had the public in Europe and America become aware this disparity in their media, would they have made some effort to correct it.

Addendum

Comparison of the number of people displaced by war:

The United Nations says at least 12 million people have fled their homes since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. More than five million have left for neighboring countries, while as of July 4, 2022, seven million people are still thought to be displaced inside Ukraine itself.

U.S. post-9/11 wars have forcibly displaced at least 38 million people in and from Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and Syria.

Post Script

It is appropriate to mention that Western media does not report the more than 16,000 Russian Ukrainians⁵ of the Donetsk and Lugansk republics that have been killed by Ukrainian armed forces since 2014 when Donetsk and Lugansk oblasts voted to secede from the Ukraine proper after a US supported fascist led coup overthrew Ukraine’s democratic government. Crimea had voted to secede as well.

1. “Worldwide Propaganda Network Built by the C.I.A,” December 26, 1977, New York Times.
2. The UN definition of genocide (recognized by 142 states) is: “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

   (a) Killing members of the group;

   (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

   (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

3. In the 1980s, despite warnings by Africa specialists, human rights groups and humanitarian organizations that continued American aid to the dictatorial government of Siad Barre would eventually plunge Somalia into chaos. US poured in more than $50 million of arms annually to prop up this disastrous Barre dictatorship while offering virtually no assistance that would have helped build a self-sustaining economy which could feed Somalia’s people. In addition, the United States pushed a structural adjustment program through the International Monetary Fund severely weakening the local agricultural economy. Combined with the breakdown of the central government, drought conditions and rival militias disrupting food supplies, there was famine on a massive scale, resulting in the deaths of more than 300,000 Somalis, mostly children.
4. The study, which covered the period from October 2010 to April 2012, suggests that an estimated 4.6% of the total population and 10% of children younger than 5 died in southern and central Somalia” International humanitarian organization Oxfam said, “Famines are not natural phenomena, they are catastrophic political failures,” it said in a statement in Feb, 2013. Because the US destroyed Somalia’s chosen government, which is normal colonial procedure, for decades famine relief took second priority to Western exploitative business interests in Somalia with genocidal consequences.
5. The overall number of confirmed deaths in the War in Donbas, which started on 6 April 2014, was estimated at 14,200–14,400 through 31 December 2021, including non-combat military deaths. Wikipedia

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Jay Janson.

The post Australia’s Asian Pivot Towards War appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by John Kendall Hawkins.

From Manila to Jakarta, Bangkok, Hanoi and other capitals, governments across the region reiterated their support for the One China Policy, under which Beijing is recognized as the sole government of China.

The United States also holds this policy, but maintains close unofficial ties with Taiwan and is obligated to provide defense support. Washington only acknowledges China’s sovereignty claim over Taiwan rather than endorsing it.

The foreign ministry of Indonesia, Southeast Asia’s largest country, expressed grave concern about the “increasing rivalry among major powers,” without naming the U.S. and China. 

“If not managed well, it may lead to open conflict and disrupt peace and stability, including in the Taiwan [S]trait,” Jakarta said in a statement as it called on “all parties to refrain from provocative actions that may worsen the situation.”

“The world is in dire need of wisdom and responsibilities of all leaders to ensure peace and stability are maintained,” said Indonesia, which has faced its own territorial tensions with China in waters around the Natuna Islands in the far southwestern reaches of the South China Sea.

In Bangkok, Thailand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressed similar concern in the wake of Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan.

“We do not wish to see any actions that would aggravate tensions and undermine peace and stability in the region,” ministry spokesman Tanee Sangrat said. 

“We hope that all parties concerned exercise utmost restraint, abide by international law and principles of respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity and resolve their differences through peaceful means.”

As the military jet carrying Pelosi and her delegation touched down in Taipei on Tuesday evening after a flight from their previous stop in Kuala Lumpur, China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) announced live-fire drills at six locations around Taiwan, some overlapping the island’s sovereign territorial waters.

In addition, 21 Chinese military aircraft, including 10 J-16 fighter-jets and two reconnaissance airplanes, flew into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone (ADIZ).

While in Taipei, Pelosi visited Taiwan’s parliament before meeting with President Tsai Ing-wen who called her “one of Taiwan’s most devoted friends.”

During a brief speech following their meeting, Pelosi praised Taiwan for its resilience.

“America’s determination to preserve democracy here in Taiwan and around the world remains ironclad,” the house speaker said, adding that the U.S. “will not abandon our commitment to Taiwan.” 

Pelosi was the first senior-most American official to visit Taiwan in 25 years. In the days leading up to her visit, Beijing had issued stern warnings against it, claiming that the trip would encroach on Chinese sovereignty. 

The Philippines, which has also had confrontations with China in the South China Sea and maintains a Mutual Defense Treaty with the United States, said it was tracking Pelosi’s visit over concerns that it could escalate tensions with Beijing. The Pelosi-led U.S. delegation left Taiwan Wednesday evening and traveled on to South Korea.

“Our military and our DFA (Department of Foreign Affairs) are closely monitoring the situation as they would in any other similar circumstance,” said Trixie Cruz-Angeles, spokeswoman for President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.

“On matters of international relations, reactions are studied. We don’t make knee-jerk reactions because they could adversely affect international relations,” she said, stressing that “loose words” could impact Philippine-China relations.

Cruz-Angeles said China’s envoy to Manila, Huang Xilian, had reminded officials to adhere to the One China Policy.

“There is only one China in the world. Taiwan is an inalienable part of China’s territory,” Huang said Tuesday ahead of Pelosi’s visit.

The Chinese ambassador said he hoped the Philippines would “handle all Taiwan-related issues with prudence to ensure sound and steady development of China-Philippines relations.”

Malaysia’s foreign minister, meanwhile, said his government wanted to ensure peace, stability and prosperity in the region as officials in Kuala Lumpur seek to maintain good relations with their counterparts in Beijing and Washington.

“[W]e want everyone concerned to look at the situation and address it in the best way because we appreciate and we’ve put a lot of value in both the U.S. and China when it comes to trade and technology in the region and want to be friends to both,” Minister Saifuddin Abdullah said from Phnom Penh, where foreign ministers from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations were assembling for the ASEAN Regional Forum Meeting and meetings this week with the top Chinese, American and Russian diplomats, among others.

Late on Wednesday, the foreign ministers of the 10 ASEAN members-states prepared a collective statement about “the cross strait development.”

The bloc, it said, was “concerned with the international and regional volatility, especially in the recent development […] adjacent with the ASEAN region.”

That situation “could destabilize the region and eventually could lead to miscalculation, serious confrontation, open conflicts and unpredictable consequences among majors powers,” the top ASEAN diplomats said.

Elsewhere, officials in Cambodia, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Myanmar and Vietnam reaffirmed support for One China policy while also calling for peace and stability in the region.

“The Lao PDR reiterates its support for the policy of the government of the People’s Republic of China on the national reunification by peaceful means,” it said in a Facebook post.

The military government in Myanmar, for its part, reaffirmed its belief that Taiwan is “an integral part of the People’s Republic of China” while expressing concern over Pelosi’s visit, “which is causing escalation of tensions on the Taiwan Straits.”

“Myanmar calls all concerned parties to deescalate the tensions through constructive dialogue and peaceful negotiation for peace and stability across the Taiwan Straits,” the junta said in a Facebook post.

China has become the largest source of foreign investment in Myanmar since Western businesses pulled out after the February 2021 military coup.

Like a frontline soldier

In northern Thailand, an analyst at Chiang Mai University lauded Pelosi while casting doubt on some media reports suggesting that her Taiwan visit could have ignited a new cold war.

“As the U.S.’s third most influential figure after President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, Pelosi could have laid a milestone on the U.S.’s new approach in Asia. Her trip to Taiwan is a strong political gesture and is vitally important for the relationship of the U.S. and East Asia in the future,” Isa Gharti told BenarNews. “She is like the first U.S. soldier who lays milestones to locate flash points.

“By reading some analysis lately, I am surprised that they think this is the start of a new cold war,” he said. “I don’t think so because the superpowers have yet to get their economies recovered and cannot afford to lose any partners.” 

Tria Dianti in Jakarta, Jason Gutierrez in Manila, Nontarat Phaicharoen and Wilawan Watcharasakwet in Bangkok, Kunnawut Boonreak in Chiang Mai, Thailand, and RFA contributed to this report by BenarNews, an RFA-affiliated online news service.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By BenarNews Staff.

Frontline investigative articles on Aotearoa New Zealand’s 23-day Parliament protester siege, social media disinformation and Asia-Pacific media changes and adaptations are featured in the latest Pacific Journalism Review.

The assault on “truth telling” reportage is led by The Disinformation Project, which warns that “conspiratorial thought continues to impact on the lives and actions of our communities”, and alt-right video researcher Byron C Clark.

Several articles focus on the Philippines general election with the return of the Marcos dynasty following the elevation of the late dictator’s son Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr and the crackdown on independent media, including Nobel Peace Prize co-laureate Maria Ressa’s Rappler.

• READ MORE: Pacific Journalism Review archives

Columbia Journalism School’s Centre for Investigative Journalism director Sheila Coronel writes of her experiences under the Marcos dictatorship: “Marcos is a hungry ghost. He torments our dreams, lays claim to our memories, and feeds our hopes.”

But with Marcos Jr’s landslide victory in May, she warns: “You will be in La-La Land, a country without memory, without justice, without accountability. Only the endless loop of one family, the soundtrack provided by Imelda.”

The themed section draws on research papers from a recent Asian Congress for Media and Communication conference (ACMC) hosted by Auckland University of Technology (AUT) introduced by convenor Khairiah A Rahman with keynotes by Asia Pacific Report editor David Robie and Rappler executive editor Glenda Gloria.

In the editorial titled “Fighting self-delusion and lies”, Philip Cass writes of the surreal crises in the Ukraine War and the United States and the challenges for journalists in the Asia-Pacific region:

“Similarly, there are national leaders in the Pacific who seem to truly want to believe that China really is their friend instead of being an aggressive imperialist power acting the same way the European powers did in the 19th century.”

With the Photoessay in this edition, visual storyteller and researcher Todd Henry explores how kava consumption has spread through the Pacific and into the diasporic community in Aotearoa New Zealand.

His “Visual peregrinations in the realm of kava” article and images also examine the way Pasifika women are carving their own space in kava ceremonies.

Unthemed topics include Afghanistan, the Taliban and the “liberation narrative” in New Zealand, industrial inertia among Queensland journalists, and Chinese media consumption and political engagement in Aotearoa.

Pacific Journalism Review, founded at the University of Papua New Guinea, is now in its 28th year and is New Zealand’s oldest journalism research publication and the highest ranked communication journal in the country.

The latest edition is published this weekend.

• Pacific Journalism Review fulltext articles at the Informit database

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Pacific Media Watch.

The post Beyond Crisis: The Possibilities and Growing Challenges in Building a Left Asian American Politics appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Sudip Bhattacharya.

In a speech in Jakarta, Wang Yi appeared to position Beijing as being on the side of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, a stance that critics have questioned over frequent Chinese incursions into Asian claimant states’ waters in the disputed South China Sea.

“We should insulate this region from geopolitical calculations and the trap of the law of the jungle, from being used as chess pieces in major power rivalry, and from coercion by hegemony and bullying,” Wang said during his policy speech at the ASEAN Secretariat. 

“The future of our region should be in our own hands.”

Wang called on the region to reject attempts to divide it into “confrontational and exclusive groups,” an apparent reference to U.S.-led security initiatives such as the Quad and AUKUS.

The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, or Quad, comprises the United States, Japan, Australia and India. AUKUS is a security pact under which the United States and Britain will help Canberra build nuclear-powered submarines.

“We should uphold true regional cooperation that unites countries within the region and remain open to countries outside, and reject the kind of fake regional cooperation that keeps a certain country out and targets certain side,” Wang said.

But, critics say, alleged incursions by Chinese vessels in the exclusive economic zones of Indonesia, the Philippines and Malaysia in the South China Sea have threatened stability in Southeast Asia.

China has never accepted a 2016 ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague that found Beijing’s expansive “historical claims” in the South China Sea to have no legal basis.

And for the Biden administration, Southeast Asia is a top priority, it has stressed time and again. It sees the area as crucial, and analysts said Washington scored a win in its efforts to counter Beijing’s influence by getting most members of the ASEAN bloc to join the new Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity deal in May.

Now, Wang is on a tour of the region to promote China’s Global Development Initiative, and the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

On Monday he described the former as a solution to “the global peace deficit and security dilemma.” BRI is an estimated $1 trillion-plus infrastructure initiative to build a network of railways, ports and bridges across 70 countries, which critics say has led many countries into a debt trap, a charge Beijing has hotly denied. 

Wang’s visit to Jakarta followed the G7 summit in Germany late last month, where leaders announced that their governments together would raise $600 billion funds over five years to finance infrastructure in developing nations to counter the BRI.

On Saturday, Blinken said that Washington was not asking others to choose between the United States and China, “but giving them a choice, when it comes to things like investment in infrastructure and development systems.”

“What we want to make sure is that we’re engaged in a race to the top, that we do things to the highest standards, not a race to the bottom where we do things to the lowest standards.”

While in Thailand, Blinken and his Thai counterpart, Don Pramudwinai, signed the U.S.-Thailand Communiqué on Strategic Alliance and Partnership on Sunday.

“Our countries share the same goals – the free, open, interconnected, prosperous, resilient and secure Indo-Pacific. In recent years, we worked together even more closely toward that vision,” Blinken said.

According to Agus Haryanto, an analyst at Jenderal Soedirman University in Purwokerto, China is concerned about U.S. reengagement with Southeast Asia after being perceived as lacking interest in the region during the years of the Trump administration (2017-2021).

“The United States under President Biden is paying attention again to Southeast Asia, including a focus on democracy issues in Myanmar and strengthening cooperation with Thailand,” Agus told BenarNews.  

China ‘supported Russia in the UN’

On Sunday, Blinken urged ASEAN members and China to push Myanmar’s junta to end violence against its people and move back toward democracy.

More than 2,065 civilians have been killed in Myanmar since the military overthrew the democratic government in February 2021, according to Thailand’s Assistance Association for Political Prisoners.

Blinken also accused China of supporting Russia in its invasion of Ukraine, despite Beijing’s professed neutrality.

“We are concerned about the PRC’s alignment with Russia,” Blinken told reporters after a meeting with Wang in Bali, where they had attended the G20 Foreign Ministers’ meeting.

“I don’t think that China is in fact engaging in a way that suggests neutrality. It’s supported Russia in the U.N. It continues to do so. It’s amplified Russian propaganda,” he said.

Meanwhile on Monday, Wang met with Indonesian President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo and praised Jakarta for its initiative to broker peace between Russia and Ukraine, Indonesian Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi said.

“The PRC once again appreciates Indonesia’s various efforts to seek a peaceful settlement to ongoing situation in Ukraine, including specifically mentioning the President’s visits to Kyiv and Moscow,” Retno said in a statement released by Jokowi’s office.

Retno said Wang and Jokowi discussed “priority projects,” including the China-backed Jakarta-Bandung high-speed railway, the country’s first, and part of the BRI projects.

In a statement following a meeting between with Indonesia’s most senior minister Luhut Pandjaitan on Saturday, Wang said Beijing and Jakarta agreed on building a community “with a shared future” and forging “a new pattern of bilateral cooperation” covering the political, economic, cultural and maritime sectors. 

“Indonesia supports and stands ready to actively participate in the Global Development Initiative and the Global Security Initiative, both put forward by President Xi Jinping,” the Chinese Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

“China is ready to work with Indonesia to continue taking the lead in solidarity and cooperation among regional and developing countries, and forge an exemplary model of mutual benefit, win-win results and common development, as well as a vanguard of South-South cooperation, so as to make greater contributions to maintaining regional stability and promoting world peace,” it said.

BenarNews is an RFA-affiliated online news service.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Dandy Koswaraputra and Alvin Prasetyo for BenarNews.

Janine Jackson interviewed Helen Zia about the legacy of Vincent Chin for the June 17, 2022, episode of CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript.

Vincent Chin (1955-1982)

Janine Jackson: Vincent Chin was beaten to death in Detroit in June 1982, by two white auto workers who reportedly said it was because of him that they had lost their jobs. At the time, listeners may recall, Japan was being widely blamed for the collapse of the Detroit auto industry. Chin was Chinese-American.

Elite media, as reflected by the New York Times, didn’t seem to come around to the story until April 1983, with reporting on the protests emanating from Detroit’s Asian-American community about the dismissive legal response to the murder. Chin’s killers, Ronald Ebens and Michael Nitz, were given probation and fines, with Wayne County Circuit Court Judge Charles Kaufman infamously saying they “weren’t the kind of people you send to jail.”

It took protest for big media to attend to that legal perversity, and the broader context of anti-Asian hatred and scapegoating. And it’s civil rights activism that has been the legacy of Chin’s death, 40 years ago this week, activism of which our guest is a key part. Helen Zia is co-founder of American Citizens for Justice, and author of Asian-American Dreams: The Emergence of an American People, among other titles. She joins us now by phone from Detroit. Welcome back to CounterSpin, Helen Zia.

Helen Zia: Well, it’s my honor to be with you, Janine.

JJ: I saw you speak recently in Detroit and say that Vincent Chin’s horrific murder, its circumstances and then the legal failures, are all extremely important, but that that’s not the whole story that’s being acknowledged right now with this 40th remembrance and rededication. The story of Vincent Chin’s killing is also about what came after, what grew from it. Can you talk a little about what that was, and is?

HZ: Oh, absolutely. It was a horrific killing, and not only that, but a continued miscarriage of justice, where the justice system failed at every turn, for a young man who was killed and attacked on the night of his bachelor party, because of how he looked, at a time of intense anti-Asian hate. And all of that was very important. It brought attention to the whole idea that Asian Americans are people, that we are humans, that we are Americans, and that we experience racism and discrimination.

But that’s not all that was important, because that event and the miscarriage of justice catalyzed a whole movement, a civil rights movement led by Asian Americans, with Detroit, Michigan, as the epicenter of that civil rights movement that reached all across America for Asian Americans, and also had a huge impact on, really, democracy in this country, in many, many different ways. And it represented the solidarity of people from all walks of life.

Helen Zia: “An injury to one is an injury to all, and we have a basic interest in joining together to ensure each other’s safety.”

We were in Detroit, now a majority Black city, back then was a majority Black city, and we had incredible support from the Black community, as well as the Arab-American community, multi-faith, multi-class, people from all walks of life, not only in Detroit. And then it became a national movement, really sparked a discussion, a movement that took the moment of the killing of Vincent Chin, and then the injustice that followed, but turned it into a civil rights movement, a human rights movement, that has still an impact today.

And that’s why we’re talking about this. It’s to remember that moment, but the legacy as well—of people coming together in solidarity, with the idea that an injury to one is an injury to all, and we have a basic interest in joining together to ensure each other’s safety. That we are part of a beloved community, that no community should live in fear of violence or hate. And this notion of all our communities being so divided, can we ever be allies, let alone come together…

And so that’s what we’re remembering: Let’s not forget that, actually, we have been in solidarity. And let’s take the lessons of that and move it forward to today, because we need that desperately.

JJ: When you say remembrance and rededication, which is what this event series is about, I really like that rededication part, which has to do with acknowledging that, as you say, an injury to one is an injury to all.

HZ: And that’s completely right. And that’s why we are saying it’s more than remembrance, it’s about rededication. It’s about taking the hard work that happened, and coming together in unity and in solidarity and building a movement. There’s nothing simple about that; there’s no Kumbaya. It really takes people working hard together to bridge understandings and undo misunderstandings, break down stereotypes and build a common understanding and a common bond between communities.

And so when, as you say, communities are portrayed in the news or in TV or in movies, that this is just that community’s concern; it doesn’t involve other people… Anti-Asian violence, well, hey, “that’s just Asians. And we don’t even know that they’re Americans. We don’t even know that they were on this continent for several hundred years.”

And so I think you’re right, that’s a way of sort of pigeonholing people and keeping us apart, instead of looking at the true commonality. If we talk about Vincent Chin or violence against Asian Americans, we also talk about Buffalo and we talk about Coeur d’Alene, and how ideas of white supremacy and even active white supremacist groups, they lump us together. They don’t see us as separate groups. They connect the dots in a very negative way. And so it’s really incumbent on all thinking people, and especially our media, to be able to connect those dots too, and not keep us separate.

And it is often, I think, an unconscious way of saying, “Well, that’s this group’s problem, then the other group has this problem, and never the twain should meet.” And, unfortunately, that’s part of what, on the ground, we have to overcome, and do that education, to say no, actually, we’re all in this together. And media has such an important role to play in that, if we can break through that as well.

New York Times (9/10/83)

JJ: Yeah, and I just wanted to add, it did seem from my looking into it that it took the protests for big media to attend to Chin’s murder, but even then, some of what we saw was—here’s this Times piece from September 10, 1983, “Asian-Americans See Growing Bias.” And then the opening is, “Asian-American leaders say they are alarmed by what they regard as rising discrimination against their people.” So even there, there’s kind of a “maybe it’s not true. Maybe it’s just a perception.”

I wonder, have you seen shifts in media? You’ve obviously been working on this for a long time. Are there more openings now? Do you have to explain things less? Have you seen shifts in the way that media approach this set of issues?

HZ: You know, there are shifts, there has been progress. But I have to say, we still have to do that basic “Asian Americans 101” all the time. Back in 1982, ’83, Asian Americans were so invisibilized, and so minoritized, that the whole country really had no concept of who Asian Americans are. So when we started first trying to raise this as an issue, and have our press conferences and things like that, we were asked questions like, “Well, where did you all come from? Did you all just sort of land in America?” More or less saying, “Are you all fresh off the boat?” And we would have to say, “Well, many Asian Americans are immigrants, but, actually, we have been also on this continent for hundreds of years, fighting in the Civil War, having records that go back to the 1500s in the Spanish archives of Mexico and ‘New Spain’ of that time.”

And it was all about an education to say, you know what, we are not this foreign invader that just landed here. And that’s what we had to do over and over again. Questions like, “Do you all speak English?” And you would just have to say, “What do you think I’m speaking with you now?” And then, “Why do you speak such good English?” And I have to answer it more grammatically, saying “Well, I speak English well because I was born and raised here.”

And, yes, we’ve progressed from that time. But, unfortunately, even as we see in this terrible pandemic, the dual pandemic of Covid and hate, that includes the anti-Asian hate that’s been going on, when those were first reported by people who were attacked in different incidents, and they put it on social media, the first response, overall, was, “Wow, this happens to Asian Americans? Who knew that?” It was more surprise, and eye-opening.

And so that was, in a way, the news. And we see that not being challenged by media. When, for example, in Atlanta eight people were killed as the killer went in search of Asian Americans, and killed six Asian women who were working, and the police immediately say, “Oh, this has nothing to do with race.” And we don’t see the pushback on that, querying that. It’s sort of like it’s almost accepted — until, now, what makes a difference is the communities, the grassroots, the people on the ground, saying, hey, what do you mean? This has everything to do with race, it has everything to do with gender and how Asian Americans are viewed.

So the difference is that there’s more of a voice, there’s more of a community, and organizations that actually can correct failings, or just where the ball is dropped, and the questions that should be asked or followed up on aren’t. So that’s a difference. Maybe we have to explain a little less. But, really, we have to explain over and over again.

And to your point about this being seen as, “Well, it’s just an Asian-American issue.” Part of the teaching constantly has to be, no, this is really connected. Hate crimes are connected. The Vincent Chin case had a big role to play in the Hate Crimes Prevention Act that was signed in 2010 by President Obama, that also included gender and sexual orientation and disability.

The broadening of the concept of civil rights, and who’s protected, really was argued in 1983 by Asian Americans to say that immigrants and Asian Americans should be protected by federal civil rights law, because that was not a given. There were a lot of racism deniers back then, and even today, so unfortunately we do have to counter kind of the same misconceptions that existed then and today. The fight and the education never ends.

JJ: We’ve been speaking with Helen Zia, co-founder of American Citizens for Justice. You can learn about the 40th remembrance and rededication at VincentChin.org. Thank you so much, Helen Zia, for joining us this week on CounterSpin.

HZ: Thank you, Janine. Thank you and FAIR for all the work you do.

The post ‘The Miscarriage of Justice Catalyzed a Whole Movement Led by Asian Americans’ appeared first on FAIR.

This content originally appeared on FAIR and was authored by Janine Jackson.

Austin spoke for half an hour at the First Plenary Session of the Shangri-La Dialogue 2022 security forum in Singapore.

While reiterating that the U.S. stays “deeply invested” and committed to a free and open Indo-Pacific, the defense secretary said: “We do not seek confrontation and conflict and we do not seek a new Cold War, an Asian NATO or a region split into hostile blocs.”

The United States and its allies in the Indo-Pacific have recently expressed concern over China’s increasingly assertive military posture in the region.

Beijing, on its part, has been complaining about what it sees as attempts by the U.S. and its partners to form a defense alliance in the region.

When leaders from the U.S., Japan, India and Australia met last month for a summit of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, or Quad, China cried foul. Foreign Minister Wang Yi said Washington was “keen to gang up with ‘small circles’ and change China’s neighborhood environment,” making Asia-Pacific countries serve as "pawns" of the U.S. hegemony.

“I think Secretary Austin made it very clear that there’s no appetite for an Asian NATO,” said Blake Herzinger, a Singapore-based defense analyst.

“The U.S. values collective partnerships with shared visions and priorities, without the need to form a defense alliance,” he told RFA.

'A region free from coercion and bullying'

The U.S will “continue to stand by our friends as they uphold their rights,” said Austin, adding that the commitment is “especially important as the People’s Republic of China adopts a more coercive and aggressive approach to its territorial claims."

He spoke of the Chinese air force’s almost daily incursions into Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) and an "alarming" increase in the number of unsafe and unprofessional encounters between Chinese planes and vessels with those of other countries.

Most recently, U.S. ally Australia accused China of conducting a “dangerous intercept,” of one of its surveillance aircraft near the Paracel islands in the South China Sea.

Austin met with his Chinese counterpart Wei Fenghe on the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue on Friday. During the meeting, which lasted nearly an hour, the two sides discussed how to better manage their relationship and prevent accidents from happening but did not reach any concrete resolution.

Austin used Saturday’s speech to remind Beijing that “big powers carry big responsibilities,” saying “we’ll do our part to manage these tensions responsibly — to prevent conflict, and to pursue peace and prosperity."

The Indo-Pacific is the U.S. Department of Defense’s (DOD) "priority theater," he noted, adding that his department’s fiscal year 2023 budget request calls for one of the largest investments in history to preserve the region's security. 

This includes U.S. $6.1 billion for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative to strengthen multilateral information-sharing and support training and experimentation with partners. 

The budget also seeks to encourage innovation across all domains, including space and cyberspace, “to develop new capabilities that will allow us to deter aggression even more surely,” he said.

The U.S. military is expanding exercises and training programs with regional partners, the defense secretary said. Later in June, the Pentagon will host the 28th Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) naval exercise with forces from 26 countries, 38 ships and nearly 25,000 personnel.

Next year a Coast Guard cutter will be deployed to Southeast Asia and Oceania, he said, “the first major U.S. Coast Guard cutter permanently stationed in the region.”

Protecting Taiwan

"Secretary Austin offered a compelling vision, grounded in American resolve to uphold freedom from coercion and oppose the dangerously outmoded concept of aggressively-carved spheres of influence,” said Andrew Erickson, Research Director of the China Maritime Studies Institute at the U.S. Naval War College, speaking in a personal capacity.

“The key will be for Washington to match Austin’s rhetoric with requisite resolve and resources long after today’s Dialogue is over,” said Erickson. 

 “It is that follow-through that will determine much in what President Biden rightly calls the ‘Decisive Decade’,” he added.

Last month in Tokyo Biden announced a new Indo-Pacific Partnership for Maritime Domain Awareness (IPMDA) that Austin said would provide better access to space-based, maritime domain awareness to countries across the region.

The U.S. defense secretary spoke at length about his government’s policy towards Taiwan, saying “we’re determined to uphold the status quo that has served this region so well for so long.”

While remaining committed to the longstanding one-China policy, the U.S. categorically opposes “any unilateral changes to the status quo from either side.”

“We do not support Taiwan independence. And we stand firmly behind the principle that cross-strait differences must be resolved by peaceful means," Austin said.

The U.S. continues assisting Taiwan in maintaining self-defense capability and this week approved the sale of U.S. $120 million in spare parts and technical assistance for the Taiwanese navy.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Staff.

Educational Attainment of AAPI Labor Force

Since 1965, US immigration policy has favored immigrants with higher levels of education

and professional skills. Asian immigrants with the right credentials benefitted from these policies, and it is an important factor behind Asian Americans’ high income. Because a parent’s educational level is a powerful predictor of their child’s, the children of high-socioeconomic-status Asian immigrants are likely to have a similar status.

Figure 1 shows that more than half (56.8 percent) of the Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) labor force has a bachelor’s or advanced degree. For the rest of the labor force, only about a third (32.7 percent) have similar degrees. Ninety-seven percent of the AAPI population is of Asian descent, so the statistics largely reflect the Asian American population. Workers with higher levels of education tend to have higher earnings.

 Figure 1

Another factor influencing Asian American incomes is that they are concentrated in high-cost-of-living states. Table 1 shows that more than half (55.8 percent) of the AAPI labor force lives in the 10 states that CNBC ranked as the most expensive. Only about a quarter (27 percent) of the non-AAPI labor force resides in these states. In high-cost-of-living states, people tend to earn more so this fact would contribute to higher Asian American earnings.

More than half of the AAPI labor force lives in the most expensive states

* The 2020 10 highest-cost-of-living states are found in Scott Cohn, “These are America’s 10 most expensive states to live in,” CNBC.com, July 15, 2021, .

Source: Author’s analysis of 2015-2019 American Community Survey data from IPUMS USA, University of Minnesota, www.ipums.org. AAPI excludes multiracials and Hispanics.

Income Inequality in Asian American and Pacific Islander Populations in US

While high-income AAPIs receive a great deal of attention, there are also low-income AAPIs. Although there is considerable variation in rates, low-income AAPIs can be found among all the AAPI subpopulations and in all states.

As the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) has documented previously, there is considerable economic inequality within the AAPI population. Figure 2 illustrates this inequality. The average income in the highest AAPI income quintile is $289,232. This amount is 16 times the average income of the lowest income quintile ($17,743). This finding should remind us that while the median income is a useful statistic, it does not tell us much about the income range and its distribution.

Figure 2

Low-Income Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders

The remainder of this article will focus on the low-income AAPI population. “Low-income” is defined as people living in households in the lowest AAPI income quintile. Again, we are highlighting the inequality within the AAPI population.

As a whole, the AAPI population is economically diverse. Looking at income by national origin in Figure 3, we also see economic diversity. At the extremes, only 9.1 percent of the Indian American population is low-income, compared to 32.6 percent of the Burmese American population. In the middle, 20 percent of the Laotian American population is low-income.

Figure 3

States Where AAPIs Are More Likely to be Low-Income

Low-income AAPIs can be found in all states, but some states have a larger share of the low-income AAPI population. In Nebraska, West Virginia, and Mississippi approximately a quarter of AAPI households are low-income. In New Jersey, Virginia, and Maryland only about a tenth of AAPI households are low-income. Michigan, Minnesota, and Nevada have rates in the middle with about 17 percent of low-income AAPI households  (See Figure 4.)

Figure 4

To better assess the economic standing of the AAPI population by state, it would be valuable to apply a statewide measure of economic hardship that takes into account the cost of living within the state and other factors.

This first appeared on CEPR.

This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Algernon Austin.

U.S. President Joe Biden has been hosting a special two-day summit with leaders from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) that ends Friday. At the summit, it’s expected that the U.S. will share more details of the framework, which is likely to get its official launch later this month when Biden visits South Korea and Japan.

It’s not a free trade pact in the mold of the Trans-Pacific Partnership that the Obama administration championed and negotiated for years as part of its foreign policy ‘pivot’ to Asia, only to see the Trump administration ditch it. An iteration of the same deal was later adopted by other Pacific Rim nations.

But the IPEF does seeks to foster ties with economic partners in the Indo-Pacific by setting trade rules and building a supply chain, without China.

In the words of President Biden at the East Asia Summit last year, the IPEF involves “trade facilitation, standards for the digital economy and technology, supply chain resiliency, decarbonization and clean energy, infrastructure, worker standards, and other areas of shared interest.”

On Thursday, Beijing warned Washington that the Asia-Pacific is “not a chessboard for geopolitical contest” and any regional cooperation framework should “follow the principle of respecting others’ sovereignty and non-interference in others’ internal affairs.”

The Chinese Foreign Ministry’s spokesperson Zhao Lijian said China rejects “Cold War mentality” when it comes to regional groupings.

The People’s Daily, the mouthpiece of China’s Communist Party, said in an editorial that the IPEF is designed to “make up for the shortcomings of Washington's previous engagement with Southeast Asia, which focused only on security and ignored the economy.”

“The U.S. holds profound political and strategic objectives aimed at forcing countries to decouple from China,” the paper quoted some analysts as saying.

The gathering in Washington is the second U.S.-ASEAN special summit since 2016, when then-President Barack Obama hosted leaders of the bloc in Sunnylands, California.

ASEAN leaders, minus Myanmar and the Philippines, attended a White House dinner with Biden on Thursday and met with a host of U.S. political and business leaders, but had no bilateral meetings with the U.S. president. Leaders were meeting with Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris on Friday at the State Department.

There are 10 ASEAN member states but Myanmar’s junta was not invited to the summit and the Philippines, which held a presidential election last weekend, only sent its foreign minister.

ASEAN’s cautiousness

Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong was the first ASEAN leader to welcome the IPEF.

Speaking at an engagement with the U.S.-ASEAN Business Council and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on Thursday, Lee said that the IPEF “needs to be inclusive and provide tangible benefits to encourage wider participation.”

“We encourage greater ASEAN participation in the IPEF and we hope the U.S. will directly invite and engage ASEAN member states in this endeavor," he said.

At present, it’s understood that only two of the 10 ASEAN countries - Singapore and the Philippines - are expected to be among the initial group of counties to sign up for the negotiations under IPEF.

“Most ASEAN members have remained hesitant to voice support for Biden's IPEF, which is, to their perceptions, a counterweight against China's Belt and Road Initiative in specific and Beijing's economic coercion in general,” said Huynh Tam Sang, a lecturer at Ho Chi Minh City University of Social Sciences and Humanities (USSH) in Vietnam.

“Given the economic proximity to China, ASEAN member states have sought to avoid provoking Beijing, let alone getting embedded in the Sino-U.S. competition,” Sang said.

Yet judging from prepared statements and initial feedback from ASEAN leaders on the prospects of ASEAN-U.S. economic cooperation and the IPEF, “they do not only value the substance of the relationship but are eager to see it grow,” according to Thomas Daniel, a senior fellow at Malaysia's Institute of Strategic and International Studies.

“Unfortunately, Washington is still unable to fully grasp or address the desire in Southeast Asia for practical dimensions that will bring an immediate and tangible benefit to local economies and communities,” he said.

On Thursday, Malaysian Prime Minister Ismail Sabri Yaakob urged the U.S. to adopt a more active trade and investment agenda with ASEAN countries. He pointed to the Chinese-backed Regional Economic Comprehensive Partnership, which took effect this year, as an important tool to invigorate regional business and economic activity through reduced trade barriers.

Seeking to offer concrete benefits at the summit, Biden offered US$150 million for ASEAN infrastructure, security, pandemic preparedness and other efforts.

More division in the bloc?

Details of the IPEF remain vague but policymakers in Washington have said that they’re designing a framework to prioritize flexibility and inclusion, with a pick-and-choose arrangement for participating countries, allowing them to select the individual areas where they want to make more specific commitments.

The IPEF looks to foster economic cooperation by establishing trade rules across “four pillars” - trade resiliency, infrastructure, decarbonization and anti-corruption.

An analysis by the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) said while the IPEF holds promise, “it will need to be well engineered and managed.”

“Wherever possible, the framework should seek to advance binding rules and hard commitments that go beyond broad principles and goals,” the CSIS said.

At the same time, “the Biden administration will need to offer tangible benefits to regional partners, especially less-developed ones,” according to the analysis.

There are warnings that the proposed framework, if not carefully considered, may even create a bigger gap between countries in the Southeast Asian region.

“Middle and small powers in Southeast Asia are likely to embrace a prudent approach when coming to great powers' proposed initiatives, especially when these multilateral frameworks could undermine ASEAN centrality,” said Sang from Vietnam’s USSH.

Countries like Singapore, the Philippines and Malaysia may seek to join some “pillars” that could serve their pragmatic interests but “China may seek to discourage regional small states about forging ties with Washington through partaking in the IPEF.”

Sang said that could in particular pose a dilemma for Laos and Cambodia, which may not want to left out, but have deep and growing economic ties with China.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Staff.

Waving the flags of many of the ten nations that make up the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) or in some cases, the flags of now-defunct governments, the protesters called for “Democracy, not autocracy” in the countries that make up the regional bloc.

The protesters, who mostly came from Cambodian, Lao, Burmese and Vietnamese communities across in the United States, said they were in Washington to draw attention to the lack of democratic freedoms in Southeast Asia.

Signs accused Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen, who is the rotating ASEAN chair for 2022, of being a “dictator” and “killer of Cambodian Democracy.”

“We’re here today to work with other Asian countries to ask the president to convey our message that we do not like the authoritarians in this land of the free,” Rithy Uong of Massachusetts, a member of the banned opposition Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP) and one of the leaders of Thursday’s rally, told RFA’s English Service.

“We Asians, we like to have democracy, not autocracy in our countries,” he said. “We want to have free and fair elections in Cambodia, monitored by the international community.”

Opponents of the ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) have been targeted in a five-year crackdown that has sent CNRP leaders into exile and landed scores of its supporters in prison. Cambodia’s Supreme Court dissolved the CNRP in November 2017 in a move that allowed the Hun Sen’s CPP to win all 125 seats in Parliament in a July 2018 election.

Flanked by a fellow Vietnamese-American waving the flag of the former South Vietnam, Duyen Bui, who traveled from Hawaii for Thursday’s protest, told RFA that she wanted to call attention to how the governments of Vietnam and other ASEAN countries are not directly elected by the people. South Vietnam was absorbed by Communist North Vietnam in 1975.

“So we’re calling on U.S. President Biden to really listen to the voices of the people as he meets with these leaders to put human rights forward within his policy and strategic planning with these different leaders,” she said.

Much of the crowd was made up of members of the Burmese diaspora who held signs denouncing the military junta that ousted Myanmar’s democratically elected government more than one year ago.

“Right now, there’s a new military coup, and we need the United States to help our country that’s being repressed by the military regime,” Burmese-American Stephanie Shwe, who lives in Maryland, told RFA. Myanmar’s elected government was overthrown by its army in February 2021, plunging the country of 54 million into political and economic turmoil and armed conflict.

“And that is why we are out here trying to raise awareness and ask President Biden to give us the support that we need so that our people can be free from injustice and oppression,” she said.

Lynn Lwin Naing, a member of the U.S. Advocacy Coalition for Myanmar, told RFA that all of the rally attendees are like-minded in support of U.S. efforts to promote democracy across the entire region.

“The communities of ASEAN — Cambodia, Vietnam, Burma and others — we’re here to use this opportunity for the ASEAN summit to speak directly to Chairman Hun Sen and also encourage President Biden to help the ASEAN members move forward with issues in ASEAN, especially the crisis in Myanmar and returning democratic government to Myanmar,” he said.

ASEAN governments include several electoral democracies, traditional one-party Communist states Laos and Vietnam, strongman rule in Cambodia and Thailand, a military junta in Myanmar and a monarchy in oil-rich Brunei.

Protesters interviewed by RFA raised issues such as the absence of media and internet freedom in Vietnam to the lack of fair elections in Cambodia and an overall deterioration of human rights across Southeast Asia. 

Some expressed their support for Ukraine as it fights off a Russian invasion. Several of the ASEAN member states have strong ties with Russia, and the conflict is an area that Biden is expected to focus on in his meetings with the ASEAN leaders.

Following their rally at the Washington Monument, the protesters marched to the U.S. State Department to hold another demonstration at the site of Friday’s summit.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Eugene Whong.

The post Asian Fault Lines Emerge Over Great War Conflict appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by M. K. Bhadrakumar.

To attest to the lack of research, at present only one study, published in the early 2000s, examines Asian American mental health. Since this data was collected, the Asian American population has grown by 72 percent. Turning a blind eye to suicide among Asian Americans could lead to an endemic in a rapidly growing community that has limited resources for countering suicidal behavior.  Moreover, a 2018 study published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health found a positive correlation between suicidal behavior and specific countries or regions of origin. This study specifically noted the risks for young women of South Asian origin. This example addresses the importance of intersectional considerations, for the experiences of a South Asian woman could differ drastically from that of an East Asian woman or those of an Asian man. To the knowledge of the researchers, “this is the first study providing a literature overview on suicidal behaviour and specific risk factors both in migrants and ethnic minorities”— once again supporting the need for more data collection.

In recent years, suicide has made headlines as an unfortunate and increasingly more frequent phenomenon across the United States. Additionally, the media has reported a rise in anti-Asian American sentiment since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite all this, corporate news organizations continue to pay little attention, if any at all, to the connection between the two. As of March 2022, no prior reporting on this information has been found from any corporate news organizations.

Source: Amelia Noor-Oshiro, “Asian American Young Adults Are the Only Racial Group with Suicide as Their Leading Cause of Death, So Why Is No One Talking about This?,” The Conversation, April 23, 2021.

Student Researchers: Carly Erickson, Grace Sherwood, and Anne Lizette Sta. Maria (University of Massachusetts Amherst)

Faculty Evaluator: Allison Butler (University of Massachusetts Amherst)

The post Lack of Research on Rise of Suicides Among Asian American Youth appeared first on Project Censored.

This content originally appeared on Project Censored and was authored by Vins.

To attest to the lack of research, at present only one study, published in the early 2000s, examines Asian American mental health. Since this data was collected, the Asian American population has grown by 72 percent. Turning a blind eye to suicide among Asian Americans could lead to an endemic in a rapidly growing community that has limited resources for countering suicidal behavior.  Moreover, a 2018 study published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health found a positive correlation between suicidal behavior and specific countries or regions of origin. This study specifically noted the risks for young women of South Asian origin. This example addresses the importance of intersectional considerations, for the experiences of a South Asian woman could differ drastically from that of an East Asian woman or those of an Asian man. To the knowledge of the researchers, “this is the first study providing a literature overview on suicidal behaviour and specific risk factors both in migrants and ethnic minorities”— once again supporting the need for more data collection.

In recent years, suicide has made headlines as an unfortunate and increasingly more frequent phenomenon across the United States. Additionally, the media has reported a rise in anti-Asian American sentiment since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite all this, corporate news organizations continue to pay little attention, if any at all, to the connection between the two. As of March 2022, no prior reporting on this information has been found from any corporate news organizations.

Source: Amelia Noor-Oshiro, “Asian American Young Adults Are the Only Racial Group with Suicide as Their Leading Cause of Death, So Why Is No One Talking about This?,” The Conversation, April 23, 2021.

Student Researchers: Carly Erickson, Grace Sherwood, and Anne Lizette Sta. Maria (University of Massachusetts Amherst)

Faculty Evaluator: Allison Butler (University of Massachusetts Amherst)

The post Lack of Research on Rise of Suicides Among Asian American Youth appeared first on Project Censored.

This content originally appeared on Project Censored and was authored by Vins.

This content originally appeared on openDemocracy RSS and was authored by Fin Johnston.

Remittances support families

He said Maung Maung Chay had been working in China for the past four years to help out with the family's financial difficulties, and the family had relied heavily on his remittances.

His wife Oo Khin Yin, mother of Maung Maung Chay and Hla Hla Win, said she wanted the two released as soon as possible.

“We have had no contact with them since that day," she told RFA. "My daughter said she had has no contact with the two men and she didn't know where they were being held."

She added: "I just want them released as soon as possible. If the owner doesn’t want to pay, it’s okay. I just want my son released as soon as possible."

Min Thein Naing's sister, Daw Ma Win Nwe, said all family members were worried because they hadn't been able to contact him.

"It makes me very worried that I haven't been in contact with him," she said. "Where are they now? How are they doing? All the brothers and sisters are worried."

"Honestly speaking, their families depend on them," she said. "The money they would send was enough for us to live on. Now that they are in trouble, their families are in trouble too."

Hundreds of thousands of people from Myanmar work in China in any given year, crossing into the southwestern province of Yunnan by border checkpoints at Muse or Chin Shwe Haw, yet there is no formal agreement between China and Myanmar about how to handle this migrating workforce.

Ko Htay, head of the Humanitarian Aid Network for Migrant Workers based in Muse, Shan State on the Chinese border, said Myanmar nationals working in mainland China are suffering due to the lack of any agreement.

"You can just compare Thailand with China," Ko Htay said. "On the Thai side, there is an MOU, a memorandum of understanding for workers."

"According to their laws, the Chinese are not wrong [to arrest people]. If you cross the border and work illegally, you break the law. I would like to advise workers to travel there only after China and Myanmar sign a labor agreement," he said.

Repeated calls to the Myanmar embassy in Beijing requesting comment had met with no response by the time of writing.

The Chinese embassy in Myanmar told RFA in an email dated Mar. 10 that it was unaware of the details of the arrests.
 
It said China welcomes foreigners wishing to work in China, but will punish those who break the law.

No legal status

According to its website, Huaqiang Hardware Factory makes kitchen, bathroom, office and stationery products that are sold to more than a dozen countries and regions in China, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, Southeast Asia, Europe and the United States.

Zhang Shengqi, a businessman who is familiar with the situation in Myanmar said labor agents are currently recruiting young people between the ages of 25 and 35 to work in Chinese factories, mostly in Guangdong and Yunnan provinces.

"They have no work or income in Myanmar; they can only farm. They may have passports, and there is also a red book [pass], which is a pass for residents of Myanmar’s border areas to travel to and from China," he said.

But he said working in China wasn't easy.

"The wages are relatively low, because they have no legal status," Zhang said.

China currently allows Myanmar nationals to work in the border towns of Dehong and Jinghong without a work permit, but not the rest of China.

"Once they leave that area to work elsewhere in China, they are considered illegal workers," he said. "Now they will probably not be sent back to Myanmar if they are caught, but to [border regions of Yunnan] where they are let go."

Article 80 of China's Exit and Entry Administration Law says illegal foreign workers can be fined up to 150,000 yuan and deported. Zhang said employers face fines of up to 300,000 yuan for hiring illegal foreign workers.

Translated by Khin Maung Nyane and Luisetta Mudie.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Qiao Long and RFA's Myanmar Service.

Biden had invited leaders of the 10-member Southeast Asian bloc to Washington, D.C., for a summit on March 28-29. The U.S. sees the region as critical to its efforts to push back against China's rising power in the South China Sea and across the Indo-Pacific region.

The summit "will be delayed because some ASEAN leaders can’t join the meeting as scheduled,” Cambodian Foreign Minister Prak Sokhonn told the pro-government outlet Fresh News on Wednesday.

Cambodia is the current chair of ASEAN.

On Monday Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen said at least three ASEAN leaders wanted to reschedule the meeting

"Some ASEAN leaders wanted the meeting to be held between March 26-27 but the U.S said it couldn’t accommodate 26-27, while three ASEAN leaders couldn’t join the 26-27,” Hun Sen said. He did not identify the countries.

There were no immediate comments on the summit from the White House or from Indonesia, which is the coordinator of the summit, and other members of ASEAN.

Washington, under the Biden administration, has been ratcheting up its engagement with Southeast Asia, where it has traditional treaty allies as well as other partners.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken visited Indonesia and Malaysia in December, a trip that followed visits to the region by Vice President Kamala Harris, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and State Department Counselor Derek Chollett.

Blinken had earlier laid out a “new, comprehensive Indo-Pacific Strategy,” that emphasized the U.S. view of ASEAN and Southeast Asia’s importance to the Indo-Pacific region.

Speaking last week, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said: “It is a top priority for the Biden-Harris Administration to serve as a strong, reliable partner and to strengthen an empowered and unified ASEAN to address the challenges of our time.”

ASEAN has been grappling with a 13-month-old crisis in bloc member Myanmar, where a military junta is bombing and burning swathes of the country to quell resistance to the overthrow of the elected government in February 2021.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has also posed a challenge to ASEAN unity, with the bloc as whole calling for a ceasefire without naming Russia or using the word “invasion” while members supported much a tougher U.N. General Assembly resolution against Moscow.

Reported by RFA's Khmer Service. Translated by Samean Yun, Written in English by Paul Eckert.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Staff.

The post Underreported Epidemic of Hate Crimes Against Asian Americans appeared first on Project Censored.

This content originally appeared on Project Censored and was authored by Vins.

Comprehensive coverage of the day’s news with a focus on war and peace; social, environmental and economic justice.

• Senate hearing on For the People Act to expand voting rights and protections.
• President Joe Biden picks Vice President Kamala Harris to tackle nation’s immigration crisis.
• California Governor Gavin Newsom nominates Alameda County Assemblyman Rob Bonta for Attorney General.
• Senate confirms first transgender to cabinet post, Dr. Rachel Levine, as Assistant Secretary of Health.
• President Joe Biden calls for end to gender pay gap on Equal Pay Day.
• 700 janitors go on strike in San Francisco, demand better wages and protections.

Photo of Dr. Rachel Levine by The Office of Governor Tom Wolf.

The post Senate hearing on For the People Act; California Governor nominates Asian American Assemblyman Rob Bonta for Attorney General; Senate confirms first transgender to cabinet post, Dr. Rachel Levine appeared first on KPFA.

This content originally appeared on KPFA - The Pacifica Evening News, Weekdays and was authored by KPFA.