src='https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js?client=ca-pub-2513966551258002'/> Rightways: Russia Infolinks.com, 2618740 , RESELLER

Pages

Share This

Showing posts with label Russia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Russia. Show all posts

Sunday, February 27, 2022

US’ real strategic color of selfishness, hypocrisy revealed in Ukraine crisis

Illustration: Liu Rui/GT 


 

 Click here to stay tuned with our live updates on Ukraine tensions.

 

Since dramatic changes took place in Ukraine, the US, which had repeatedly promised to protect Kiev at critical moments and continued to "add fuel to the fire" of the situation, has once again come into the spotlight. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in a video speech complained that Western countries have abandoned Ukraine and left it to defend itself alone. Some Western netizens even asked: Where has the US been which provoked the war and said it "stands with Ukraine?"
`
However, has the US really disappeared? On the contrary, it is quite busy gaining more "strategic interests" from the flames of war in Ukraine. The latest remarks by the US on the Ukraine situation released by the White House have underlined two points: First, turning Russia into "a pariah on the international stage" through sanctions and other measures; second, NATO has been "more united and more determined than ever" and this is "good news."
`
As for Ukraine, which Washington uses as a pawn, in addition to reiterating that the US wouldn't send troops there, Washington only simply said it "will support the Ukrainian people as they defend their country," and "will provide humanitarian relief to ease their suffering." Washington has once again displayed its selfishness and hypocrisy to the world. People have seen that after the US pushed Ukraine into the fire, it stood aside, pretending to care about the country and saying "I support you, keep fighting!"
`
It is fair to say the evolution of the situation in Ukraine until today is a geopolitical tragedy. From the very beginning, it's a bitter result of the US' strategic selfishness and shortsightedness. As early as 1998 when the US Senate approved NATO's eastward expansion plan, the late senior US diplomat George Kennan had foreseen today's tragedy. He said then, "This expansion would make the Founding Fathers of this country turn over in their graves."
`
However, the arrogant American elites always think they can profit from crises. For years, the US has incited conflicts, manipulated the situations from offshore and reaped benefits. It is accustomed to be the one who adds the fuel to the fire without paying any cost. What it wants is to realize its instant interests. The US shows no consideration for the suffering of the locals pushed into the forefront. When there is a real crisis, the so-called commitments it initially made will only become empty diplomatic rhetoric. Those politicians don't care about the suffering of local people at all, but attempt to attract attention under the guise of "humanitarianism."
`
This reminds people of when it abandoned the former Afghan regime last year, the US also said on multiple occasions it would provide "humanitarian" assistance to Afghanistan. But shockingly, the reality is that the so-called US "humanitarian" assistance hasn't been provided to the Afghan people, but the US carved up the $7 billion in frozen funds that Afghanistan's central bank had deposited in New York. As the culprit of the Afghan issue, after satisfying its own strategic interests, the US only left the locals "an avalanche of hunger and poverty," leading to the severe malnutrition of millions of children in Afghanistan.
`
The US often talks about humanity, justice and morality, but what it really does is calculating interests. Washington's strategic selfishness and hypocrisy have been laid bare again and again in international political practices. Reports indicate that at least 37 million people have been displaced in and from Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, the Philippines, Libya and Syria as a direct result of the wars fought by the US since September 11, 2001. There is even a saying that wherever the US "intervenes," conflicts, chaos and terrorism will appear.
`
A country is called a major power not because of how strong its ability to form cliques or to realize its own self-interests is. What matters is its responsibility and ability to safeguard international peace. If a country only cares about its own interests, fuels the flames everywhere and constantly exports chaos to others, no matter how powerful it is, it is inevitable its credibility will go bankrupt and its hegemony will come to an end.
`
For countries and regions that still have fantasies or act as pawns of the US, the Ukraine crisis is a good reminder: A "partner" who announces "good news" when you are in difficulties is untrustworthy

Source link

 

RELATED ARTICLES
 
Washington bears 'special responsibility' for Russia-Ukraine situation: Global Times editorial

Washington, in particular, should shoulder the “special responsibility,” instead of continuing to be the source of chaos.

 

.

This incident and war have given small countries an important lesson: when they are caught between major powers, they should try to avoid completely being inclined to one side and helping this side challenge the other.

Ukraine Is A Part Of Russia, Meaning Russia ... - Simon Parkes


The US tries to manipulate the world's opinion on Ukraine tensions under the guise of “maintaining the rules-based international order.” Fortunately, more and more countries have realized the US' shameless purpose of using them to advance its own interests.

 

Related posts:

 

 Black smoke rises from a military airport in Chuguyev near Kharkiv on February 24, 2022, after Russian President Vladimir Putin announced a..

Checkmated over Ukraine; Is Ukraine a metaverse nightmare?

 

 

 

 

`

Checkmated over Ukraine; Is Ukraine a metaverse nightmare?

 Cornered: Ukrainian armoured vehicles blocking a street in Kyiv as Russian troops stormed toward Ukraine’s capital on Saturday. – AP Nato's actions have made it's Western allies incapable of doing better for Ukraine than Ukraine can do its own relations with Russia

WHEN the wilfully unstoppable force of Nato expansion hits the steadfastly immovable object of Russian national security, war erupts.
`
By February 24 when Russian tanks rolled into Ukraine, Moscow’s challenges became exposed and grew more acute.
`
Russia cannot hold Ukraine in any sense as resentment to its incursion swells. There can be no assurance Russia can succeed in whatever it seeks to do to Kiev.
`
As in all military interventions, moving in is always easier than pulling out – which must eventually happen. And then what?
`
All disputes must conclude in negotiations, especially between neighbours, and it is now harder to negotiate. Meanwhile Russia is cast as the sole villain, so an invasion could not have been its preferred option.
`
As a power play it is a tragedy of Shakespearean proportions and superpower dimensions. Ukraine and Nato may have top billing but the US and Russia are the key actors.
`
The 1947 Dunkirk Treaty between Britain and France was a contingency agreement against German or Soviet aggression. This grew to include the Benelux countries and then the US and six others to become today’s North Atlantic Treaty Organisation.
`
By 1955 Nato expanded to include WWII foe Germany, leaving the Soviet Union out in the cold. Moscow then established its Warsaw Pact alliance in trying to achieve some balance.
`
Since then, Moscow stayed in Nato’s sights on the other side of the fence. Nato’s first Secretary-General Hastings Ismay described its role as “keeping the US in, Germany down, and Russia out.”
`
Nato is a Cold War device that was not dismantled after the Cold War but has instead grown. But the official rhetoric in the early 1990s was of consolidation with a few contemplating dissolution.
`
As the Soviet Union was collapsing in 1991, Nato officials from the US, Britain, France and Germany repeatedly assured Moscow that Nato would not expand. Nato had become the most serious organised challenge to Russian national security.
`
US Assistant Secretary of State Raymond Seitz said expansion of membership would not happen “either officially or unofficially.” His British counterpart added that expansion was “unacceptable”.
`
German Chancellor Helmut Kohl and Foreign Minister Hans Dietrich Genscher agreed and said so. Then Nato’s expansion happened.
`
When Russia complained, Nato stalwarts said any agreement was only verbal and not written down, implying that what they said could not be trusted. Later Nato claimed there had not even been a verbal agreement.
`
Earlier this month Germany’s Der Spiegel newspaper reported that Prof Joshua Shifrinson of Boston University had found a declassified document confirming that a pledge on Nato’s non-expansion had been made. Elsewhere it is reported that President Bill Clinton broke that pledge.
`
In 1999, Nato expanded by including former Soviet bloc countries Poland, Hungary and Czechia. Russia seethed but could do little.
`
In 2004, Nato expanded further by admitting former Soviet republics Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Russia complained again but once more its security concerns were ignored.
`
As Nato missiles aimed at Russia moved closer to its borders, Moscow protested but Nato said they were only there because of Iran. Russia was unconvinced.
`
After Ukraine’s independence its government continued friendly relations with Russia. But the US engineered the 2004-05 Orange Revolution that toppled the government and replaced it with one closer to the West.
`
France and Germany invaded Russia in the 19th and 20th centuries with each attack ending in disaster. Napoleon’s and Hitler’s forces nonetheless made damaging incursions into the Russian heartland and national psyche.
`
Today France and Germany are among European nations careful in managing relations with Russia. However, a US-led Nato with less experience and less sensitivity to Russian security concerns has acted with less care.
`
Russia remains the world’s largest country by area rich in natural resources like oil and gas. It is not a threat to Europe or even Ukraine if agreements made can be honoured, but provoking it can produce a different result.
`
Using Nato to challenge and undermine Russian interests will not end well for anyone. US interests are protected with the Atlantic Ocean as buffer, but European members of Nato share a continent with Russia and would have different priorities.
`
The UN wants Russian forces to withdraw from Ukraine and return to base almost as much as Russia wants Nato to withdraw from its eastward momentum and return to the 1997 Nato-Russia Founding Act. Although neither may happen soon, Moscow has no interest or expressed desire to occupy Ukraine so the former is more likely than the latter.
`
Ukraine for now is trapped in a vicious cycle of violence and disintegration beyond its control. It is a familiar plight of pawns caught between incompatible great powers.
`
Ukraine wants urgent negotiations with Russia while Russia wants Belarus to host talks on the Minsk accords for a ceasefire and phased measures towards a compromise. Even if talks are possible it will be an uphill task since Moscow and Kiev have different interpretations of the 2014-15 terms.
`
Among Biden’s errors is targeting Putin personally as if another Russian leader would have acted differently. Even Boris Yeltsin would have done the same over Ukraine, while a nationalist like Vladimir Zhirinovsky would have acted tougher and earlier.
`
For the West to dump the Nord Stream 2 deal supplying Europe with Russian gas punishes only Europe which now has to pay many times more for US supplies. On Feb 4 Russia signed a new US$117.5bil oil and gas deal to supply China instead.
`
Western observers worry that China may learn unsavoury lessons from Russia’s actions in Ukraine to further its disputed claims in Asia. Any lessons would be more akin to Nato’s gradual encroachment on Russian territory.
`
The apparent beneficiary from Ukraine’s crisis is China, being a distraction for the West which also increases Moscow’s dependence on Beijing. But China is also awkwardly positioned as it wants to maintain good ties with all parties.
`
The only unqualified beneficiary of the crisis is China-Russia relations, which must count as another major strategic blunder for Nato and the West.
`
Bunn Nagara is a political analyst and Honorary Research Fellow of the Perak Academy. The views expressed here are solely the writer’s own.

Source link

 


Is Ukraine a metaverse nightmare?


`

The Russian pipe-laying ship 'Akademik Tscherski' which is on deployment for the further construction of the Nord Stream 2 Baltic Sea pipeline, is moored at the port of Mukran on the island of Ruegen, Germany, on Sept. 8, 2020. The gas is still flowing from Russian even as bullets and missiles fly in Ukraine. But the war is raising huge questions about the energy ties between Europe and Russia. The conflict is helping keep oil and gas prices high due to fears of a possible reduction in supplies, and consumers will continue to face financial stress from that. 

 


The real-life cost of war: People walk at the border crossing between Poland and Ukraine, in Medyka, Poland, on February 24, 2022. Photo: Reuters

 Moving from a unipolar world to a multipolar world was always likely to be messy and risk-prone. But few saw how fast we moved from beating war drums to actual armed conflict between the Great Powers, the latest being in Ukraine. Are we on a march of folly to World War III, or have key players lost sight of reality?

`Lest we forget, World War I (1914-1918) and World War II (1939-1945) were fought to keep down rising powers—Germany and later Japan.
`
Russia and China suffered the most casualties in WWII, and both were allies against German Nazis and Japanese militarists.
`
The United States became the real winner, but decided after WWII to contain communism in both the Soviet Union (USSR) and China.
`
Fifty years ago, in 1972, US President Nixon set aside enmity against China, restored US-China relations, and in one strategic stroke, isolated the Soviet Union, leading to its collapse two decades later.
`
The great achievement during the Cold War was the avoidance of nuclear conflict, with the Cuban missile crisis being a live test of brinkmanship.
`
Both sides climbed down when the USSR removed missiles from Cuba, and the US quietly removed missiles from Turkey.
`
President Kennedy understood that grandstanding on moral issues should be restrained, because in a nuclear war, mutually assured destruction is madness.
`
After seven decades of peace, the Western media has been painting the multipolar world as a black-and-white conflict between good vs evil, democracy vs autocracy—without appreciating that the other side may have different points of view that need to be heard.
`
By definition, a multipolar world means that liberal democracies will have to live with different ideologies and regimes.
`
Today, YouTube and the Web provide a wealth of alternative views than mainstream media, such as CNN or BBC.
`
Prof John Mearsheimer, author of the influential book "The Tragedy of Great Power Politics," offers the insight that the Western expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (Nato) was the reason why Russia felt threatened.
`
The more the Nato allies try to arm Ukraine, the more insecure Russia gets.
`
In essence, Russia wants a buffer zone of neutral countries like Austria, which are not members of Nato, but that does not exclude trade with all sides.
`
Carnegie Moscow Center analyst Alexander Baunov described how "the two sides appear to be negotiating over different things.
`
Russia is talking about its own security, while the West is focusing on Ukraine's."
`
What he is describing are two sides that are each in their own social bubble or virtual reality (VR) Metaverse, deaf to the other side's views.
`
The term "Metaverse" came from a 1992 dystopian sci-fi novel titled "Snow Crash," where the Metaverse is the virtual refuge from an anarchic world controlled by the Mafia.
`
Today, Metaverse is an online virtual world where the user blends VR with the real, flesh-and-blood world through VR glasses and software augmented reality (AR).
`
In other words, in Metaverse, your mind is colonised by whatever algorithm and virtual information that you get—real or fake news.
`
Metaverse is escapism from reality, and will not help us solve real world problems, especially when we need to talk eyeball to eyeball.
`
The Metaverse designer is more interested in controlling or influencing our minds, feeding us what we want to hear or see, rather than what information we need to have to make good decisions. The risk is that we think VR conflict is costless, whereas real war has real flesh-and-blood costs.
`
.In short, the more we look inward at our own Metaverse, the more we neglect the collective costs to the world as it lurches from peace to war
`
Surprisingly, I found the right-wing influential Fox commentator Tucker Carlson asking better questions than CNN or BBC commentators.
`
In his show Tucker Carlson Tonight, in the segment "How will this conflict affect you?" he asked bluntly why Americans should hate Putin and what the war will cost every American.
`
Carlson asked some really serious questions, even though his views are partisan—have the Democrats, with their moral concern to hate Putin, forgotten the big picture of war costs?
`
First, would Americans be willing to go into a winter war with Russia?
`
Second, would they pay much higher gas prices as oil prices have already hit above USD 100 per barrel?
`
Although economic sanctions are applied, even Europe will not be willing to risk cutting off gas supplies from Russia, since Russia accounts for 35 percent of European gas supplies.
`
Third, is Ukraine a real democracy?
`
Carlson's 2018 book "Ship of Fools: How a Selfish Ruling Class Is Bringing America to the Brink of Revolution" is well worth reading to understand how conservative Americans think about elites who care about themselves more than society at large. 

Carlson asked some really serious questions, even though his views are partisan—have the Democrats, with their moral concern to hate Putin, forgotten the big picture of war costs?
`
First, would Americans be willing to go into a winter war with Russia?
`
Second, would they pay much higher gas prices as oil prices have already hit above USD 100 per barrel?
`
Although economic sanctions are applied, even Europe will not be willing to risk cutting off gas supplies from Russia, since Russia accounts for 35 percent of European gas supplies.
`
Third, is Ukraine a real democracy?
`
Carlson's 2018 book "Ship of Fools: How a Selfish Ruling Class Is Bringing America to the Brink of Revolution" is well worth reading to understand how conservative Americans think about elites who care about themselves more than society at large.
`
In sum, the decade of 2020s may face a tough period of escalating conflicts at local, regional and global levels, with proxy wars that disrupt each other's economies and social stability.
`
If states fail, and poor and hungry people migrate at a larger scale, even more border conflicts are likely, since most will want to go to the richer countries in the North, such as Europe and America.
`
There is no ideal world where everyone is good and the other side is bad.
`
In a multipolar world, there will be all kinds of people that we don't like, but we have to live with them.
`
A negotiated peace is better than mutual destruction.
`
In Metaverse, virtual life can be beautiful, moral and perfect, but the real world is lurching towards a collective nightmare.
`
We should not kid ourselves that the Metaverse VR of self-deception is the real world.

`
We either sleepwalk to war, or have the courage to opt for sustainable peace.
`
The real question is: Who is willing to climb down and eat the humble pie for the sake of peace?
`
By Andrew Sheng is adjunct professor at Tsinghua University, Beijing and the University of Malaya. He was formerly the chairman of the Securities and Futures Commission, Hong Kong. 

Andrew Sheng | South China Morning PostTan Sri Andrew Sheng (born 1946) is Hong Kong-based Malaysian Chinese banker, academic and commentator. He started his career as an accountant and is now a distinguished fellow of Fung Global Institute, a global think tank based in Hong Kong.[1] He served as chairman of the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) before his replacement by Martin Wheatley in

Andrew Sheng comments on global affairs from an Asian perspective. The views expressed here are his own.

Source link

 

Related posts:

 

THE GLOCALISATION OF HUMANITY 

 

China calls for building a community for man and nature at US-held climate summit

Monday, December 6, 2021

Democracy summit will dodge questions on governance gap between China and US: Martin Jacques

Supporters of US President Donald Trump protest outside the US Capitol on Wednesday, in Washington, DC. Demonstrators breached security and entered the Capitol as Congress debated the 2020 presidential election Electoral Vote Certification. Photo: AFP 


Martin Jacques: Western concept of democracy lacks historical context


There is something more than a little ironic about President Biden's Summit for Democracy this week. The intention is blindingly obvious: to rally the troops in favour of Western-style democracy and draw a line in the sand between "democracy" (ie, the West) and "autocracy" (ie, China and Russia). In this Biden faces two huge problems, which will get little or no airing at the Summit. First, the Western democracies are in serious difficulties. And second, that China, in terms of governance, has been seriously out-performing the West.

The US talks about democracy in the manner of a slick TV advert. It is all good and no bad. It is timeless. It has long reigned and will reign forever. It cannot be improved upon. This, of course, is nonsense. No form of governance has, or will, last indefinitely. There are multiple signs that Western democracy is losing its popularity. Numerous Western polls have indicated growing disillusionment in their political systems.

Ultimately, any form of governance depends upon its ability to deliver. Whatever the fancy words, this is the bottom line. If it fails to deliver, then people will look for alternative forms of governance. Western governance was at its most successful during the long boom between 1945 and the mid-1970s. It delivered rapid economic growth, full employment, generous welfare reforms and prosperity. In the 1959 general election, the British Conservative Prime Minister ran on the slogan "You've never had it so good." He was right. And the Conservatives won big time. Even during the following rather less successful period between 1980 and 2007, Western governance still worked after a fashion. The turning-point was the Western financial crisis in 2008, the worst since 1931.

Ever since then, living standards in the West have struggled to return to even where they were in 2007. All the Western economies have remained on life-support, with zero or near zero interest rates, following the financial crisis. Their economic woes had political consequences, with growing disillusionment in the mainstream political parties and their leaders and, more seriously, in societal elites and governing institutions. The most dramatic case was the United States, the citadel of Western democracy. The reasons for the disaffection go back long before 2008: nearly half of all Americans have experienced static or falling living standards since 1980. Trump gave voice to the anti-establishment anger. His attitude towards democracy is, to put it mildly, unclear, as his covert support for the Insurrection at Capitol Hill last January well illustrates. Biden won the 2020 presidential election, but what will happen in 2024 is anyone's guess. The country is deeply divided and polarised to the point where there are almost two Americas. For the first time since the Civil War, there are serious doubts among Americans as to whether their democracy can survive.

Democracy works in good times but not so well in bad times. Between 1918 and 1939, a large majority of European states lived under various forms of dictatorship for part of, or most of, that period. Democracies were, for the most part, few and far between. The overriding reason was the Great Depression, with falling living standards, huge unemployment, impoverishment, racism, nationalism, and acute political polarisation.

Even if Western-style democracy survives, and it likely will in most Western countries, such are its deep roots, it will enjoy nothing of the elan and prestige it possessed during its heyday in the long boom, or even between 1980 and 2007. The reason is simple. Between 1945 and 2000, the West dominated the world. In 1970 it accounted for two-thirds of global GDP. The United States was by far the dominant country. Now the West accounts for rather less than half of global GDP while China, in terms of size, is on a par with America. We are in the process of transitioning to a post-Western world. Domestically and internationally, Western leaders enjoy much less prestige and authority than they did during the second half of the 20th century. Compare the regard in which Roosevelt, Eisenhower and Kennedy were held with that for George W Bush, Trump and Biden. And the same can be said of the declining respect for the US political system. The allure of democracy has greatly diminished.

The rise of China since 1978 has become a new measure of the performance of the United States and the West. Over this period China has out-performed the West in terms of delivery: the supercharged growth rate, the transformation in living standards, the huge reduction in poverty, the increase in life expectation, the long run social stability and the very high approval ratings. The way in which China has handled the pandemic, with just 4,636 deaths compared with 787,695 deaths in the US, is a powerful endorsement of Chinese governance and a shameful exposure of that in the US. Western democracy is under huge pressure both internally and externally. And the gulf between the relative performance between the US and China is set to grow ever wider.

These are the questions that should be discussed at the Summit for Democracy. But they won't be.
 

By Martin Jacques@martjacques
Martin Jacques was until recently a Senior Fellow at the Department of Politics and International Studies at Cambridge University. He is a Visiting Professor at the Institute of Modern International Relations at Tsinghua University and a Senior Fellow at the China Institute, Fudan University. He is the author of When China Rules the World.

Source link

RELATED ARTICLES
 

Thursday, August 13, 2020

Health experts doubt Russia Covid-19 vaccine, as China likely to take lead along Russia in accelerated global vaccine race: experts

https://youtu.be/SHi2RjWP_zo

https://youtu.be/-XW9_1fXmKE

A handout photo provided by the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) shows samples of a vaccine against the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) developed by the Gamaleya Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology, in Moscow, Russia August 6, 2020. Picture taken August 6, 2020.

PETALING JAYA: The announcement of a Covid-19 vaccine in Russia – dubbed Sputnik V – that will help end the pandemic soon is still a “distant reality”, say local public health experts.

Russia announced on Tuesday it will approve a Covid-19 vaccine after less than two months of human testing and hopes to begin production in September with plans to vaccinate its medical staff immediately afterwards.

The approval was made before a phase three trial which would involve thousands of participants and considered essential before regulatory approval is made.

Public health expert Datuk Dr Zainal Ariffin Omar criticised the approval of the Covid-19 vaccine in Russia as non-ethical for its lack of full clinical trials and scientific data.

“The scientific community is worried as basically, a vaccine will need to undergo full clinical trials to identify its efficacy and side effects.

“So, it is premature for Russia to be releasing the vaccine now without conducting large-scale trials that would produce data to show whether it works, ” he said.

Public health medicine specialist of Universiti Malaya Medical Centre, Associate Professor Dr Rafdzah Ahmad Zaki said for any available vaccines, the effectiveness of the vaccine needs to be evaluated before it can be considered.

“With any new vaccine, there will be a committee to discuss and decide on the evidence of whether the vaccine works or not, ” she said.

The head of the Centre for Epidemiology and Evidence-Based Practice noted that any risk or benefit will be balanced before a vaccine is approved, such as whether the tested population is similar to Malaysia’s community and the kind of resources needed to implement the vaccine.

Dr Zainal, who is Malaysian Public Health Physicians’ Association president, cited an example of a dengue vaccination which was approved by the World Health Organisation (WHO). But even then, it was later found to have caused a lot of deaths and />complications.

“Luckily after evaluation, we did not implement the use of the dengue vaccination for our country.

“That is why the scientific and medical community is very cautious of approving a vaccine for the community because we don’t want to be wrong for using a premature product, ” he said.

Dr Zainal expects a vaccine to be made available in the country only by the middle or end of 2021.

“Any vaccine will help the situation later on. But at the moment, we don’t have the capability of developing new vaccines. But we can be involved in any trials or collaborate with international agencies for trial purposes, ” he said.

Indonesia said on Tuesday it would launch a Phase 3 human trials of a vaccine candidate from China’s Sinovac Biotech.

According to the WHO, there are currently 139 vaccines in development and 26 have been undergoing human trials since July 31. Out of the 165 vaccines, six are reaching Phase 3, which is the last step before regulatory approval and will involve large numbers of human testing.

Sinovac’s vaccine, named CoronaVac, is already being tested on 9,000 Brazilian health workers.

Malaysian Medical Association president Dr N. Ganabaskaran said the Covid-19 pandemic will go on for years even if vaccines are readily available.

“Even if vaccines are available, what about poor countries? Not all countries can afford the vaccine.

“There are vaccines being developed, but available vaccines will go to the rich countries first and it may take many years before we can overcome Covid-19, ” he said.

Source link

 Related:


China likely to take lead along Russia in accelerated global vaccine race: experts

The battlefield of a global vaccine race has seemingly transferred from research and development to the market after Russia announced its approval of the world's first COVID-19 vaccine on Tuesday, soon after which the US announced to purchase another 100 million doses of a domestic candidate, revealing the Trump administration's anxiety over Russia's move.

Covid'19 Vaccine for the world started mass produced in China on 8/8/20

8月8日!中国传来大喜讯!疫苗开始大规模生产,准备9月份分发全世界,拟定第一批名单,不是开玩笑,特朗普最怕的事发生!

https://youtu.be/JoXhQIGmtBs


Putin hails 'Sputnik vaccine'

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday that Russia had become the first country to grant regulatory approval to a COVID-19 vaccine after less than two months of human testing, a move Moscow likened to its success in the Cold War-era space race.

Related posts:

 China's Covid-19 vaccine will be available for all, could be ready for public use early next year

China will make its Covid-19 vaccine a global public good when it is ready for application after successful research and clinical trials, a senior Chinese official said.

 

China leads in coronavirus vaccine clinicals to combat Covid-19

Saturday, June 27, 2020

Break free of US dollar hegemony: What’s next?

The dollar is central to the global monetary system – used worldwide as a unit of account, store of value and medium of exchange. Most commodity and forex contracts are denominated in it. It represents more than one-half of all cross-border interbank claims (a proxy for international payments). That’s five times US share of world goods imports, and three times its share of exports. About two-thirds of world reserves is held in US dollars.
https://youtu.be/kWNBDSj9O_I

https://youtu.be/jsDwMGH5E8U

Warning : China Started Dumping US Debt -- End Game for The Dollar !


https://youtu.be/rRFqy08Wnrg

THE END OF THE DOLLAR STANDARD | A WARNING FROM PETER SCHIFF


https://youtu.be/MeRWfRZp_rg

The yuan’s stability is partly by design, and by good luck; backed by foreign exchange reserves held steady at US$3.1 trillion since mid-2016.


TODAY, the world’s financial rhythm remains American. The US dollar assumed the role of the world’s dominant reserve, payment and settlement currency after WWII. The country’s position as the sole financial superpower gives it extraordinary influence over the destinies of nations.

For 70 years, the United States has used this power rather routinely, as a matter of reality. Of late, however, it has been engaged in “financial warfare” in the service of its foreign policy. This has prompted nations to “break free” of US dollar hegemony, including preventing “US sanctioned nations” free access to US dollar-based financial system with devastating impact.

The dollar is central to the global monetary system – used worldwide as a unit of account, store of value and medium of exchange. Most commodity and forex contracts are denominated in it. It represents more than one-half of all cross-border interbank claims (a proxy for international payments). That’s five times US share of world goods imports, and three times its share of exports. About two-thirds of world reserves is held in US dollars.

It is the preferred currency of central banks and capital markets (accounting for 65% of global securities issuance). The irony is people rushed to buy dollars during the subprime crash, even though Wall Street caused it. They did so again in March this year despite US bungled response to Covid19. The global finance plumbing is US dolarbased – most international transactions are ultimately cleared in US dollars through SWIFT (banks’ main cross-border messaging system) and CHIPS (Us-centric clearing house network) through New York by US “correspondent banks.” Denied access to this infrastructure, the institution is isolated and financially crippled. The United States began flexing its financial muscles (including imposing hefty penalties) after the terrorist attacks of September 2001.

Trump has since “weaponised” it to a new level – to-date, it has over 30 active financial and trade-sanctions programs. Early this year, it used this dominance to cut-off support to the Iran and Iraq regimes, adversely affecting their use of oil revenues.

This use of the dollar to extend its policy reach is “an abuse of power,” i.e. bullying; Russia refers to its use, a “political weapon.” Even allies (EU, Japan, UK) are concerned Trump is undermining US role in maintaining orderliness in global commerce and finance. There is already widespread talk to “dethrone” the US dollar, through the dedollarisation of assets; more use of domestic currencies in its trade workarounds and swaps; and new banking payments mechanisms and digital currencies.

Also, nations have expanded settlement of bilateral trade in their own currencies, or gold; even barter. Russia has gone the furthest, including dedollarising parts of its financial system; reducing US dollar share of its foreign reserves (40% to 24%); cutting its bank’s holdings of US dollar Treasuries to under Us$10bil from Us$100bil; bringing down its exports denominated in US dollar to 62%; and shifting US dollar trade with China and India to non-us dollar settlements; and denominating over 40% of its crude oil tenders in euros.

Like Russia, China has begun to set-up “building blocks” to become more autonomous, including a yuan-denominated crude oil futures contract (“petroyuan”) on the Shanghai exchange. US allies are flirting with it, too. But, EU first has to reform the inner workings of the euro and complete work on banking union, fiscal integration, etc., before it is ready to create a global electronic invoicing euro currency.

Reserves option

US dollar’s role as a reserve currency point to three distinct benefits: (i) lower transactions cost; (ii) macroeconomic policy flexibility, including foreign financing of its deficits; and (iii) leverage to benefit allies. Of course, it carries costs: (a) tends to hurt exports by being strong and stable; (b) overhang of debt overseas opens domestic economy as hostage to sudden capital movements; and (c) needs to bail-out the system.

That’s why the UK, Japan and Germany shied away. However, because the world has changed, EU has since started to push for a stronger international role for the euro. But becoming a serious reserve currency requires: (a) large, deep and liquid capital markets; (b) a secure bonds infrastructure, especially in government bonds; (c) wide use in world trade; and (d) a big economy that’s integrated into global markets.

Without fiscal union, EU lacks a supranational, liquid euro bond; its capital markets are not robust enough – a real banking union would help. Euro’s share of global reserves is down to 20%. Russia also tried – cuts US dollar share of its reserves to 24%. Issues most debt in roubles and euro; only 60% of its exports is settled in US dollars, and 40% of its oil sales contracts is denominated in euros. It has still a long way to go.

China had longed wish to internationalise. But, its capital controls remain a serious problem: it limits how much outsiders can access its currency. In 2017, Bond Connect was launched – allowing foreigners to invest in offshore bonds through Hong Kong, and scrapped investment quotas.

China has since made good progress: (i) offshore yuan deposits are rapidly rising; (ii) issues of yuan “dim-sum” bonds are getting popular; (iii) boom in forex transactions suggests growing usage, especially in hubs like Hong Kong, London, New York and Paris; (iv) more offshore investment products are denominated in yuan; and (v) Hong Kong today lists ETFS, gold futures and property investment trusts in addition to Chinese equity. China’s advances are global: it has a vast global trade and investment network; Chinese FDI is mainly in yuan; it settles 15% of its foreign trade in yuan. Today, more globally yuan payments are processed by banks.

One-fifth of European trade with China is settled in yuan, as is 55% of payments among them. Since 2018, yuan-denominated oil futures were launched in Shanghai, as are margin deposits on iron ore futures in Dalian. China’s commodity exchange is emerging. Most of all, central banks are warming up to the yuan – since inclusion in IMF’S SDR (a basket of five elite currencies), its share of global reserves has risen to 2.1%;

China has already signed currency swap arrangements with over 60 nations. Today, the “yuan bloc” accounts for 30% of global GDP – second only to US dollar (at 40%). China opened up its US$13 trillion bond market (world’s second largest), which accounts for 51% of all bonds issued by EMES.

Foreigners now hold 3% of this market and 9% of its government bonds. Its main attraction: good yields and diversification benefits. Further, the yuan has been among the most stable currencies in the world since mid-2016. Its real effective exchange rate – against the basket of currencies of its trading partners, adjusted for inflation – has risen by just 0.2% over the past four years. The yuan’s stability is partly by design, and by good luck; backed by foreign exchange reserves held steady at US$3.1 trillion since mid-2016.

New initiatives

US geopolitical rivals’ desire to escape the dollar dominance is real. In designing its new e-yuan, China wants a head start on the dollar; it is reported to be considering creating a common cryptocurrency with other BRICS nations (Brazil, Russia, India and South Africa). Similarly, on its part, EU is determined to encourage its members to eliminate “undue reference” to US dollars in payments and trade invoicing.

EU’S main initiative has involved Iran. It tried to create a way for its banks and firms to trade with it through Instex (a clearing house created for this purpose by Britain, France and Germany, with European Commission’s support) by-passing US dollars or SWIFT.

The stuttering performance of Instex reflects the sheer scope of the dollar reach: US claims jurisdiction if a transaction has any American “nexus,” even though not denominated in dollars. Despite this, more EU states are determined to join Instex. It’s EU’S intention to expand its financial reach – through a network of global electronic central bank digital monies that serves as a global invoicing currency, excluding US dollars. Also, its capital market needs greater depth and liquidity, key factors in choosing a currency for commerce. As Trump continues to use sanctions aggressively, efforts to circumvent them will accelerate. The reality is that US does not have a monopoly on financial ingenuity.

What then are we to do

There’s no question the world urgently needs a multinational currency reserve regime. The dollar is being weaponised to bully. This won’t do. Nations, including US allies, are looking for and working on an effective but viable and sustainable option. This will take time. The search is still very much work-in-progress. Euro and e-yuan look promising. But they have a way to go. Like it or not, any e-currency has to be central bank-backed to be credible, and where the public can readily access it.

Still, central banks face hurdles in offering dedicated digital currencies and related accounts to the public. Understandably, many central banks have been hesitant in creating digital currencies. As I see it, they remain worried on how to monitor transactions to prevent fraud and hacking, and whether digital currencies should be linked to interest rates. It’s a responsibility, I think, central banks really don’t want to take-up.


By Lin See Yan, Kuala Lumpur, June 22, 2020

Former banker, Harvard educated economist and British chartered scientist, Prof Lin of Sunway University is the author of “Trying Troubled Times Amid Trauma &Tumult, 2017–2019” (Pearson, 2019). Feedback is most welcome.

Source link

Friday, February 21, 2020

Chinese varsities hold seven top spots in world ranking


Beijing: Universities from the Chinese mainland have secured seven of the top 10 positions in the Times Higher Education’s Emerging Economies University Rankings 2020 for the third straight year.

Tsinghua University maintained its position at the top in the listing of institutions from emerging economies.

Peking University was in second place for the second year running.

Zhejiang University and the University of Science and Technology of China remain in third and fourth place, while Shanghai Jiao Tong University climbed from eighth to sixth. Fudan University was listed in seventh place, while Nanjing University was ninth.

Other institutions in the top 10 include Moscow State University (fifth), National Taiwan University (eighth), and The University of Cape Town (10th).

Phil Baty, chief knowledge officer at Times Higher Education, said: “China’s success in our Emerging Economies University Rankings reflects its rapid rise on the world higher education stage. With the Double First Class Initiative driving improvements across participant universities, we expect it to continue to establish itself as a major global player in providing world-class higher education over the coming years.”

The Double First-Class Initiative refers to fostering “world-class universities” and “world-class discipline”. — China Daily/ANN

 Source link


Read more:

Suppressing Chinese media bodes ill for bilateral ties

Some US political elites have been strengthening political mobilization against China and trying to rope in more Western forces to oppose China. Their most prominent act is to attack the leadership of the Communist Party of China and blacken China's political system. They obviously hope to suppress other countries' desire to expand cooperation with China by mobilizing people's political aversion to China.

Seven Chinese universities in top 10 in QS Asia rankings ...


Top Universities in China 2019 | Top Universities


Meet Mainland China's Top 10 Universities 2019

https://youtu.be/VqHtvCOrkmg

New ranking — get to know the top 10 universities in Mainland China for 2019! Get the full results: http://bit.ly/MainlandChina19Y #QSWUR


Related post:


  Recent discourses about revamping our higher education system have included the following: critical thinking, empowerment, humanistic v...

Meritocracy Vs. Mediocrity Education system must champion meritocracy THE country is facing yet another controversy of its own .

The pump-prime our financial situation, we need a massive investment to revamp and rebuild our education    https://youtu.be/FVnBpckzi...
New decade, new Malaysian education: For the sake of our children and our future, Mazlee’s replacement should be a qualified and capable .


China, next global hub for higher education

With its varsities gaining better rankings, the most populous nation is set to become the world’s leading learning destination.


.