@4cminews tweet: 2020 JUN 02 Victoria Chooses A ‘Fist Full of Dollars’ Over Human Rights

VIDEO: 2020 JUN 02 **VICTORIA CHOOSES A ‘FIST FULL OF DOLLARS’ OVER HUMAN RIGHTS** , , , , , , , , , , , , , , WATCH HERE: 4cmitv.com/2020/06/07/202…

This post comes from one of our syndications links which may have 3rd party Content and is subject to our Disclaimer on all content

@4cminews tweet: 2020 MAY 29 Premier Andrews ‘Rebuked by Federal Labour’ For Vic-China Investment Deal

VIDEO: 2020 MAY 29 **PREMIER ANDREWS ‘REBUKED BY FEDERAL LABOUR’ FOR VIC-CHINA INVESTMENT DEAL** , , , , , , , , , , WATCH HERE: 4cmitv.com/2020/05/29/202…

This post comes from one of our syndications links which may have 3rd party Content and is subject to our Disclaimer on all content

@4cminews tweet: 2020 JUN 03 VIC Labour MP’S Forced to Take A Stand Against China

VIDEO: 2020 JUN 03 **VIC LABOUR MP'S FORCED TO TAKE A STAND AGAINST CHINA** , , , , , , , , , , , , WATCH HERE: 4cmitv.com/2020/06/07/202…

This post comes from one of our syndications links which may have 3rd party Content and is subject to our Disclaimer on all content

@4cminews tweet: 2020 MAY 22 Australia: Victoria’s Belt and Road Initiative Deal Undermines Cohesive National China Policy

EDITORIAL: 2020 MAY 22 **AUSTRALIA: VICTORIA’S BELT AND ROAD INITIATIVE DEAL UNDERMINES COHESIVE NATIONAL CHINA POLICY** , , , , , , , , , , READ HERE: 4cminews.com/?p=51856

This post comes from one of our syndications links which may have 3rd party Content and is subject to our Disclaimer on all content

@4cminews tweet: 2018 DEC 06 One Belt, One Road, One Big Mistake

EDITORIAL: 2018 DEC 06 **ONE BELT, ONE ROAD, ONE BIG MISTAKE** , , , , , , , , , , , , , , READ HERE: https://4cminews.com/?p=51836 

This post comes from one of our syndications links which may have 3rd party Content and is subject to our Disclaimer on all content

The CCP Stitchup ‘Belt Road Initiative’ CURATED ARTICLES INDEX LIST.

PUBLISHED

HEADING

FORMAT

2017 MAR 01 Understanding China’s Belt and Road Initiative EDITORIAL
2017 MAR 24 China’s ‘One Belt, One Road’ Initiative EDITORIAL
2017 NOV 10 What Is the Belt and Road Initiative? EDITORIAL
2018 MAR 04 Whitepaper: Examining the Debt Implications of The Belt and Road Initiative from A Policy Perspective EDITORIAL
2018 MAR 05 Will China’s Belt and Road Initiative Push Vulnerable Countries into a Debt Crisis? EDITORIAL
2018 APR 03 How Big Is China’s Belt and Road? EDITORIAL
2018 JUL 30 What Is China’s Belt and Road Initiative? EDITORIAL
2018 SEP 03 OECD: China’s Belt and Road Initiative in The Global Trade, Investment and Finance Landscape EDITORIAL
2018 SEP 14 Belt and Road Initiative Explained VIDEO
2018 NOV 14 China Luring Pacific Islands with One Belt, One Road Investments EDITORIAL
2018 DEC 06 One Belt, One Road, One Big Mistake EDITORIAL
2018 DEC 13 Exported Tyranny; Telecom Role in the CCP’s One Belt, One Road EDITORIAL
2018 DEC 18 China Uses ‘Debt Trap’ Diplomacy to Seek Hegemony EDITORIAL
2019 MAY 24 The Debt Trap of One Belt, One Road: The Price of Following China EDITORIAL
2019 SEP 27 China; the Economic Warfare; (BRI) ‘Belt Road Initiate’ & ‘Made in China 2025’ (MIC25) VIDEO
2019 OCT 01 China’s Path Forward Is Getting Bumpy EDITORIAL
2019 OCT 25 Victoria Deepens Engagement with Beijing’s Controversial Belt and Road Initiative EDITORIAL
2019 OCT 30 Australian Perspectives on The Belt and Road Initiative EDITORIAL
2019 NOV 08 The Curious Strategy Behind Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative MoU With Victoria EDITORIAL
2019 NOV 12 The US Is Scrambling to Invest More in Asia To Counter China’s ‘Belt and Road’ Mega-Project. EDITORIAL
2020 MAY 21 Vic Government ‘Clothed in Secrecy’ Over Beijing Links VIDEO
2020 MAY 21 Australia’s State of Victoria Pushing Ahead with Belt and Road Plans, Despite Canberra’s Objections EDITORIAL
2020 MAY 22 Australia: Victoria’s Belt and Road Initiative Deal Undermines Cohesive National China Policy EDITORIAL
2020 MAY 24 More Countries May Fall into China’s Debt Trap With COVID-19 EDITORIAL
2020 MAY 26 China Building, Bugging Government Offices in African Nations, Report Says EDITORIAL
2020 MAY 27 Victoria’s Belt and Road consultant has (strong ties to powerful Chinese communists) VIDEO
2020 MAY 27 Belt and Roads has (damaged Victoria’s reputation) VIDEO
2020 MAY 28 VIC ALP (Given Green Light for China’s Belt and Road Deal by LP Graham Fletcher, DFAT) VIDEO
2020 MAY 28 Lack of transparency; over BRI Vic-China deal (shows Daniel Andrews is hiding something) VIDEO
2020 MAY 28 Victoria (undermines) foreign policy but won’t call out China’s human rights abuses VIDEO
2020 MAY 28 Commonwealth (should desperately) seek to (interfere) with Vic’s Belt and Road deal VIDEO
2020 MAY 28 Commonwealth (should desperately) seek to (interfere) with Vic’s Belt and Road deal VIDEO
2020 MAY 29 Premier Andrews ‘Rebuked by federal Labor’ for Vic-China Investment Deal VIDEO
2020 JUN 02 Victoria Chooses a ‘Fist Full of Dollars’ Over Human Rights VIDEO
2020 JUN 03 VIC Labor MPs Forced to Take a Stand Against China VIDEO
2020 JUN 05 The ‘Trade-Off’ for Cheap Chinese Products has Come at a ‘Huge Ethical Cost’ VIDEO
YY MM DD Article Led Head Line BRI 29
YY MM DD Article Led Head Line Format?
YY MM DD Article Led Head Line Format?
YY MM DD Article Led Head Line Format?
YY MM DD Article Led Head Line Format?
YY MM DD Article Led Head Line Format?
YY MM DD Article Led Head Line Format?
YY MM DD Article Led Head Line Format?

Hashtags: #4cminewswire, #4cminews, #OBOR, #BRI #Europe #China #Eurasia, #IndianOcean, #Africa, #Oceania, #Australia, #Renminbi, , #4CM2020MAY25

2018 DEC 06 ONE BELT, ONE ROAD, ONE BIG MISTAKE

China’s signature foreign-policy project is a failure that the U.S. shouldn’t copy.

China's President Xi Jinping, Papua New Guinea's Governor-General Bob Dadae, and Papua New Guinea's Chief of Defense Major General Gilbert Toropo attend a welcome ceremony for Xi's state visit in Port Moresby on Nov. 16 ahead of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Summit. (David Gray/AFP/Getty Images)

The headlines coming out of this year’s APEC conference in Papua New Guinea focused on the conflict between America and China that kept the forum from issuing a joint communiqué. Less noticed were two short memorandums released on the sidelines of the conference by the island nations of Vanuatu and Tonga. In return for renegotiating existing debt, both agreed to become the newest participants—following other Pacific nations like Papua New Guinea and Fiji—in Chinese President Xi Jinping’s signature foreign-policy venture, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

As Xi’s trillion-dollar development strategy has snaked away from the Eurasian heartland and into the South Pacific, Western Africa, and Latin America, concern has grown. Many Americans fear that the Belt and Road Initiative is an extension of efforts by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to undermine the security and economic architecture of the international order. China’s growing largesse, they worry, comes largely at the expense of international institutions and American influence.

This angst lies behind another announcement made at last month’s APEC gathering: Australia, Japan, and the United States declared that they had formed their own trilateral investment initiative to help meet infrastructure needs in the Indo-Pacific.

FOR SOME THIS IS NOT ENOUGH: In its most recent report to the United States Congress, the bipartisan U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission recommended that Congress create an additional fund “to provide additional bilateral assistance for countries that are a target of or vulnerable to Chinese economic or diplomatic pressure.” This is the wrong response to the Belt and Road Initiative. 

IGNORE THE HYPE: For the Chinese, this initiative has been a strategic blunder. By buying into the flawed idea that barrels of money are all that is needed to solve complex geopolitical problems, China has committed a colossal error. Xi’s dictatorship makes it almost impossible for the country to admit this mistake or abandon his pet project. The United States and its allies gain nothing from making China’s blunders their own.

In Xi’s speeches, the phrase most closely associated with the Belt and Road Initiative is “community of common destiny.” Xi’s use of this term is meant to link the BRI to the deeper purpose party leaders have articulated for the CCP over the last three decades. China’s leaders believe that not only is it their “historic mission” to bring about China’s “national rejuvenation” as the world’s most prestigious power, but that China has a unique role to play in the development of “political civilization” writ large.

It is the Chinese, Xi maintains (as Hu and Jiang did before him), who have adapted socialism to modern conditions, and in so doing have created a unique Chinese answer to “the problems facing mankind.” Though this answer began in China, Xi is clear that the time has come for “Chinese wisdom and a Chinese approach” to benefit those outside of China.

The Belt and Road Initiative is intended to do just that. By using the Chinese model of socialism to develop the world’s poorer regions, the initiative justifies Xi’s grandiose claims about the party’s historic mission on the international stage.

To match these lofty aims, Chinese academics and policy analysts at prestigious party think tanks have articulated more down-to-earth goals for the initiative. According to them, the BRI promises to integrate China’s internal markets with those of its neighbors.

Doing so will bring its neighbors closer to China geopolitically and bring stability to the region. By increasing economic activity in China’s border regions, such as Xinjiang and Tibet, the Belt and Road Initiative will lessen the appeal that separatist ideology might have to the residents.

Another projected benefit is the energy security that will come through the construction of BRI-funded transport routes. Finally, by articulating and then following through on an initiative that puts common development over power politics, China will gain an advantage over other major countries (read: Japan and the United States) who present the world as a black-and-white competition for hegemony. The community of common destiny, these analysts have claimed, is a community that will immensely benefit China.

As the Belt and Road Initiative is only five years old (and many of its main members have been involved for a far shorter time) its full results cannot yet be judged. However, a preliminary assessment can be offered for BRI projects in South and Southeast Asia, the region described by Chinese leaders as the “main axis” of the Belt and Road Initiative.

It is here that BRI investment is strongest and has been around longest. The picture is not promising. The hundreds of billions spent in these countries has not produced returns for investors, nor political returns for the party.

Whether Chinese leaders actually seek a financial return from the Belt and Road Initiative has always been questionable—the sovereign debt of 27 BRI countries is regarded as “junk” by the three main ratings agencies, while another 14 have no rating at all.

Investment decisions often seem to be driven by geopolitical needs instead of sound financial sense. In South and Southeast Asia expensive port development is an excellent case study. A 2016 CSIS report judged that none of the Indian Ocean port projects funded through the BRI have much hope of financial success.

They were likely prioritized for their geopolitical utility. Projects less clearly connected to China’s security needs have more difficulty getting off the ground: the research firm RWR Advisory Group notes that 270 BRI infrastructure projects in the region (or 32 percent of the total value of the whole) have been put on hold because of problems with practicality or financial viability. There is a vast gap between what the Chinese have declared they will spend and what they have actually spent.

There is also a gap between how BRI projects are supposed to be chosen and how they actually have been selected. Xi and other party leaders have characterized BRI investment in Eurasia as following along defined “economic corridors” that would directly connect China to markets and peoples in other parts of the continent. By these means the party hopes to channel capital into areas where it will have the largest long-term benefit and will make cumulative infrastructure improvements possible.

Original Source: Date-stamped: 2018 DEC 06 | Time-stamped: 3:29 PM | Author: Tanner Greer | Article Title: One Belt, One Road, One Big Mistake | Article Link: foreignpolicy.com

Tag: 4cminewswire, 4cminews, CCP, BRI, China, Papua New Guinea, Fiji, Vanuatu, Tonga, Xi Jinping, Eurasia, South Pacific, Western Africa, Latin America, Australia, Japan #4CM2018DEC06,

Hashtag: #4cminewswire, #4cminews, #CCP, #BRI, #China, #PapuaNewGuinea, #Fiji, #Vanuatu, #Tonga, #XiJinping, #Eurasia, #SouthPacific, #WesternAfrica, #LatinAmerica, #Australia, #Japan, #4CM2018DEC06,

2020 MAY 22 Australia: Victoria’s Belt And Road Initiative Deal Undermines Cohesive National China Policy

the face of a godless traitor

ZOMBIE PROJECT? needs to be rethought

The Victorian government’s Belt and Road Initiative program is a zombie project that has its own inertia and is proceeding despite the world changing around it. It needs to be halted and comprehensively reassessed. The federal government institutions that understand foreign policy, national security and digital technology must be involved actively and comprehensively in that reassessment.

The core rationale for a state government being a party to this initiative of Beijing’s also needs to be rethought in light of the world we are now living in.

If it’s about cheap financing, the COVID-19 environment means money is as cheap for governments to borrow as it has ever been, so that reason doesn’t make much sense.

If it’s about giving Chinese firms work, there are plenty of Australian companies that are at least as qualified and available to undertake infrastructure projects.

If it’s about using Chinese digital technology in our infrastructure, that’s probably just a bad idea.

VICTORIA’S BIG BUILD

Premier Daniel Andrews has been personally pursuing Chinese involvement in Victoria’s multi-billion-dollar ‘Big Build’ since at least his May 2018 visit to China. In October of that year, he signed up to the Belt and Road Initiative in a memorandum of understanding with Beijing. He refused to make the agreement public, only doing so after intense pressure during the last Victorian election campaign.

Then in October last year, Andrews signed a ‘framework agreement’ with the People’s Republic of China on ‘Jointly Promoting the Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road’. The title is boilerplate Chinese government language for the BRI, Xi Jinping’s strategy for growing Chinese power and creating a Sino-centred world.

That document was made public, which is great, because it has some clear principles. It commits China and Victoria to adhere to ‘the concept of openness, green and clean governance’ as well as ‘highlighting the importance of procedure [which is] open, transparent and non-discriminatory’.

So, it’s surprising to find that as the Victorian government prepares to sign up Chinese entities—perhaps banks, perhaps state-owned or private construction companies, perhaps a combination of these—for actual projects in Victoria, no one can be told any of the details.

BIG PROBLEMS

There are two bigger problems here, though. The Victorian government’s BRI activities are simply out of step with the new international and economic environment, including the now openly coercive directions that Beijing is taking with Canberra over trade and in government relations.

And the Victorian political leadership’s championing of the state’s tie-up with Beijing on infrastructure is a glaring wedge that Beijing is driving into Australia—at a time when national cohesion on dealing with the Chinese state is essential.

Almost as bad has been the language used by Victorian Treasurer Tim Pallas, who accused the federal government of ‘vilifying’ China—when what Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Foreign Minister Marise Payne had actually done and said was call for a credible, independent, international inquiry into the causes of a global pandemic. In very calm language. They have since gained the support of more than 120 nations.

Unfortunately, the treasurer’s words sounded like talking points from Beijing’s foreign ministry or an article in the Chinese Communist Party’s Global Times mouthpiece.

The result is that we appear headed for an outcome in Victoria where Chinese firms are involved in building chunks of national infrastructure, perhaps with tie-ups to Chinese state banks and other entities—who knows.

INFRASTRUCTURE & DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY 5G

So what? Infrastructure isn’t just concrete and steel now. It’s laced with digital technology controlling its critical functions. The 2018 federal decision on 5G was all about the risks in digital technology from states like China that compel companies to cooperate for state security and intelligence purposes. Those issues are relevant here too.

What Victoria is proposing has foreign policy and national security implications that the Victorian government is simply unequipped to assess.

From the beginning, the BRI program with Victoria appears to have fallen into gaps between the federal and state governments. Right at the start, the Victorians said they had consulted at the federal level with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, but Canberra seemed only partly aware of the proposal and expressed what sounded like lukewarm public support.

CHINA-CENTRED WORLD

That was then. Who now thinks it’s the time to implement Xi’s strategic agenda and work to make Australia part of a more China-centred world? Who now thinks it’s the time to enter non-public arrangements with Chinese firms—state-owned or otherwise—to build Australian infrastructure? And who now thinks it’s the right time to show that the federal and state levels of government are on divergent paths in responding to an assertive and authoritarian Beijing?

Victoria’s tender process must not be used to hinder transparency with the proposed deal. This is not a standard arrangement between a government and the private sector. This is an Australian state dealing with an authoritarian superpower that is pursuing its key strategic agenda—and using its companies, banks and technologies to do so.

NATIONAL PERSPECTIVE, NATIONAL SECURITY APPLICATIONS, and IMPLICATIONS

There’s more to the Victorian BRI deal than infrastructure. The agreements talk about cooperation on biotechnology and life sciences, research and high-end manufacturing—all areas that also have important national security applications and implications. Again, this must all be reassessed from a national perspective.

If the national cabinet has any purposes other than helping us all manage the COVID-19 pandemic, a fundamental one must be forging a cohesive and united national policy on China. This is needed to help us navigate the increasingly sharp strategic differences between Australia and the Chinese state, while keeping the areas in which we can continue to trade and cooperate to both our national advantages. To have any meaning, that national cohesion must extend to any deals contemplated by individual states and territories.

Unlike the excuses we heard after the disastrously managed 2015 Port of Darwin deal, which led to that piece of key infrastructure being leased to a Chinese company for 99 years, we have our eyes wide open about the issues involved this time. And we have time to stop and think. Let’s do so.


Original Source: Date-stamped: 2020 MAY 22 | Author: Michael Shoebridge | Article Title: Australia: Victoria’s Belt And Road Initiative Deal Undermines Cohesive National China Policy | Article Link: aspistrategist.org.au

Hashtags: #4cminewswire, #Australia, #ForeignPolicy, #NationalPerspective, #NationalSecurity, #DanielAndrews, #ScottMorrison, #China, #Beijing, #XiJinping, #4cminews, #4CMiTV, #4CM2020MAY22,

Tags: 4cminewswire, Australia, Foreign Policy, National Perspective, National Security, Daniel Andrews, Scott Morrison, China, Beijing, Xi Jinping, 4cminews, 4CMiTV, #4CM2020MAY22,

@4cminews tweet: 2020 MAY 19 Security concerns sufficient to ‘break China’s lease on the Port of Darwin’

2020 MAY 19 **Security concerns sufficient to 'break China's lease on the Port of Darwin'** , , , , WATCH HERE: https://youtu.be/pEzVXPCmY0w 

This post comes from one of our syndications links which may have 3rd party Content and is subject to our Disclaimer on all content

@4cminews tweet: 2020 MAY 21 ‘We stand with Australia’: US Secretary of State

2020 MAY 21 **‘We stand with Australia’: US Secretary of State** , , , , , WATCH HERE: https://youtu.be/CW0MSrlZKmw 

This post comes from one of our syndications links which may have 3rd party Content and is subject to our Disclaimer on all content