China 'in distress': economy suffering 'rapid' slowdown as 'systemic' problems surface - Peter Aitken

 

​ by Peter Aitken

World banking institutions and experts have labeled China's approach as 'unsustainable'

 

 

China’s economic rebound may face a greater uphill battle than Beijing would otherwise like the world to believe thanks to pressure within the real estate sector and "frustrations" in the banking industry. 

"China's economy has been slowing for quite some time," Craig Singleton, a fellow at the nonpartisan Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told Fox News Digital. "What we're witnessing now is a rapid economic slowdown."

Economists can’t seem to make heads or tails of China’s current economic situation: GDP data indicated a sharp slowdown in Q2, but just weeks ago the Hang Seng hit a 3-month high in what some analysts hailed as signs of recovery.

Larry Hu, the chief Chinese economist at Macquarie in Australia, told Fortune that the economy "is on the mend, but it remains very weak." He attributed the struggles to the impact of extended lockdowns during the pandemic, and China’s zero-covid policy has only further complicated the issue. 

REP. WALZT SAYS CHINA ‘BUYING UP’ AMERICAN LAND, RESOURCES: THIS IS AN ‘ECONOMIC WAR’

The policy requires localized lockdowns with the detection of any COVID-19 infections, which has led to the prolonged lockdown of major ports and economic centers. Shanghai shut down for 60 days in Spring 2022, measuring a peak of 26,000 cases per day in April. Post-lockdown, officials reported only 29 cases on June 1. 

FILE PHOTO: Under-construction apartments are pictured from a building during sunset in the Shekou area of Shenzhen, Guangdong province, China November 7, 2021.  (Reuters/David Kirton)

Singleton argues that while COVID has played a part in the initial troubles, China’s recovery slowdown has resulted from "deeper structural, systemic problems." 

"One of them happens to be … China's hyper leveraged property market by some conservative estimates," he explained. "China's property sector makes up 30% of Chinese GDP, so even small deviations in that market can have outsized impact on China's broader global domestic product and its broader growth." 

Homebuyers across China have threatened to stop making mortgage payments, blaming "stalled" building work, which has added a serious wrinkle against any recovery Beijing has recorded. 

MILLEY DIRECTS A REVIEW OF US, CHINESE MILITARY CONTACTS, AMID WARNING BEIJING POSES NATIONAL SECURITY THREAT

"We've seen a number of very large defaults of some of the largest Chinese property construction companies," Singleton said. "We've seen an increasing amount of frustration from Chinese citizens who have sunk their life savings into China's real estate market, primarily viewing it as an investment vehicle or a safe investment, and now many of them are left unable to move into their homes." 

The China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission (CBIRC) insisted that the banks should meet "reasonable" developer financing needs and that "all the difficulties and problems will be properly solved," Reuters reported. Data for the property sector showed a 7% shrink in the second quarter compared to the previous year. 

next
Image 1 of 2
FILE PHOTO: Under-construction apartments are pictured from a building during sunset in the Shekou area of Shenzhen, Guangdong province, China November 7, 2021.  (Reuters/David Kirton)

Chinese Premier Li Keqiang spoke with 100,000 officials to lay out a 33-point plan that included a $120 billion credit line for infrastructure projects. The World Bank voiced concern that Beijing would turn to "the old playbook of boosting growth through debt-financed infrastructure and real estate investment." 

"Such a growth model is ultimately unsustainable, and the indebtedness of many corporates and local governments is already too high," the World Bank wrote, instead supporting consumer-based incentives. 

CHINA WARNS OF ‘FORCEFUL MEASURES’ IF US HOUSE SPEAKER PELOSI VISITS TAIWAN

That economic weakness creates a troubling picture for Chinese President Xi Jinping as he seeks another, record third term as leader, according to Asia expert and Gatestone Institute senior fellow Gordon Chang. Xi might try to shake things up in order to show that China remains strong internationally even as it faces these domestic troubles. 

"Xi Jinping has every incentive in the world to cause some military misadventure abroad," Chang said, saying Xi could "either invade a neighbor or perhaps dangerously intercept a plane or a vessel." 

Chinese President Xi Jinping waves during the closing ceremony of the Beijing 2022 Paralympic Winter Games at the National Stadium in Beijing, capital of China, March 13, 2022. (Photo by Xie Huanchi/Xinhua via Getty Images)

"We don’t know exactly what he would do, but he does have reason to do it," Chang added. "Right now, China is in distress: [Xi]'s got the mortgage boycott, which is now in 86 cities; a new supplier’s boycott; bank runs - this is just unprecedented." 

Chang suggested Xi might try to even stir up trouble with India, a neighbor that China has clashed with a number of times over recent years. He also pointed to recent Chinese incursions into Japanese waters, as well as renewed pressure in the South China Sea, which prompted a warning from the U.S. State Department. 

HALEY OPPOSES MAJOR COMPUTER CHIPS BILL: ‘WE DON’T NEED TO BE CHINA TO BEAT CHINA'

"We know that these are not only simmering incidents, but some of them could actually make sure to a full-blown crisis," he said. 

The Center for Strategic and International Studies wrote that Zero-Covid has "exacted high economic, social and political costs in a remarkably short period." Analysts at the Center believe that the policy has "disrupted manufacturing, supply chains and consumer spending." 

Singleton noted that this has led to record-high urban youth unemployment and "broad-based" frustration in the banking sector. About one-fifth of all 16 to 24-year-olds in China are currently unemployed, meaning less than 15% of recent graduates have managed to find jobs. 

"There's every indication that China will fall far short of meeting its annual economic growth target of 5.5%," Singleton argued. "What we are starting to realize very quickly, I think, is that, you know, the days of China's meteoric economic, economic rise are long past." 

Peter Aitken is a Fox News Digital reporter with a focus on national and global news.

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/world/chinas-economy-suffering-rapid-slowdown-systemic-problems-surface

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Biden's Trip: A Total Disappointment to Allies - Majid Rafizadeh

 

​ by Majid Rafizadeh

"Words will not stop them, Mr. President. Diplomacy will not stop them. The only thing that will stop Iran is knowing that if they continue to develop their nuclear program, the free world will use force." — Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid

• The Islamic Republic of Iran did not murder just one American journalist... in 1983, Iran murdered 241 American servicemen in the US Marine Corps barracks in Beirut.

• To top it off, then in 2018, Iran was ordered by a US federal court to pay billions of dollars in compensation to relatives of victims in the 9/11 attacks that murdered 3,000 people on US soil.

• Iran is still holding six Americans hostage... In addition, Iran recently called for the assassination of leading US officials, a story the Biden administration reportedly tried to "keep under wraps," lest it disturb their efforts to enable Iran to acquire nuclear capability along with more than a trillion dollars to revive what has been called, in a scathing analysis by Richard Goldberg, a former National Security Council official and US Navy Reserve Intelligence Officer, "the new worst deal in history."

• "Words will not stop them, Mr. President. Diplomacy will not stop them. The only thing that will stop Iran is knowing that if they continue to develop their nuclear program, the free world will use force." — Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid, speaking alongside US President Joe Biden at a joint news conference, July 14, 2022.

• Iran also now has "over 3,000 [ballistic] missiles of various types," many capable of carrying nuclear warheads — US Central Command Gen. Kenneth McKenzie, Jerusalem Post, March 15, 2022.

• The Iranian regime has also switched off UN cameras to monitor its nuclear program and announced that it will not allow the IAEA to see images from the devices.

• In addition, the Iranian regime is refusing to answer the IAEA's questions about uranium particles found at three clandestine and undeclared nuclear sites in Iran.

• The Biden administration not only wants this warmed-over nuclear deal, but also appears eager to throw more billions at a regime that used the last billions to solidify its takeover of four countries: Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Lebanon.

• The ruling mullahs of Iran are freely being allowed to violate US sanctions and UN Security Council Resolutions. Shipments of weapons to the Houthis in Yemen are in violation of UN Security Council Resolution 2140.

• Any revival of a nuclear deal will only enrich what the US State Department has called the "top state sponsor of terrorism": Iran. Since its founding in 1979, the regime has openly called for "Death to America" and "Death to Israel". Or are these results what the Biden administration possibly wants?

The Islamic Republic of Iran did not murder just one American journalist... in 1983, Iran murdered 241 American servicemen in the US Marine Corps barracks in Beirut. Pictured: An aerial view of the destroyed US Marine Corps barracks in Beirut, Lebanon. (Image source: U.S. National Archives/Gun. SGT. Lucas)

Many Americans as well as allies of the United States were hoping that US President Joe Biden and his administration, on his recent trip to the Middle East, would announce a firmer policy towards the regime of Iran. The Islamic Republic of Iran did not murder just one American journalist: it celebrated its birth in 1979 by kidnapping more than 50 Americans from the staff of the US Embassy in Tehran and holding them hostage for 444 days. Then, in 1983, Iran murdered 241 American servicemen in the US Marine Corps barracks in Beirut.

To top it off, then in 2018, Iran was ordered by a US federal court to pay billions of dollars in compensation to relatives of victims in the 9/11 attacks that murdered 3,000 people on US soil.

Iran is still holding six Americans hostage, as well as the remains of another, Robert Levinson. In addition, Iran recently called for the assassination of leading US officials, a story the Biden administration reportedly tried to "keep under wraps," lest it disturb their efforts to enable Iran to acquire nuclear capability along with more than a trillion dollars to revive what has been called, in a scathing analysis by Richard Goldberg, a former National Security Council official and US Navy Reserve Intelligence Officer, "the new worst deal in history."

"Iran was cheating on the old deal from the very start and using its benefits to destabilize the Middle East. Which is exactly what they will do again," Goldberg wrote.

Last week, Biden nevertheless stressed again that he would continue to pursue diplomacy (read: appeasement) and efforts to revive the disastrous nuclear deal with the ruling mullahs in Iran.

"I continue to believe that diplomacy is the best way to achieve this outcome," Biden stated. Appearing alongside Biden at a joint news conference in Jerusalem, referring to Iran's nuclear program, Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid warned:

"Words will not stop them, Mr. President. Diplomacy will not stop them. The only thing that will stop Iran is knowing that if they continue to develop their nuclear program, the free world will use force. The only way to stop them is to put a credible military threat on the table... the Iranian regime must know that if they continue to deceive the world, they will pay a heavy price"

Let us examine what has Biden's diplomacy with the ruling mullahs of Iran done so far. The Iranian regime, for the first time its history, has now enough enriched uranium to produce a nuclear bomb -- a fact that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has acknowledged. The Institute for Science and International Security also reported in November 2021:

"Iran has enough enriched uranium hexafluoride (UF6) in the form of near 20 and 60 percent enriched uranium to produce enough weapon-grade uranium (WGU), taken here as 25 kilograms (kg), for a single nuclear weapon in as little as three weeks. It could do so without using any of its stock of uranium enriched up to 5 percent as feedstock. The growth of Iran's stocks of near 20 and 60 percent enriched uranium has dangerously reduced breakout timelines."

Iran also now has "over 3,000 [ballistic] missiles of various types," many capable of carrying nuclear warheads, according to Gen. Kenneth McKenzie, commander of the United States Central Command.

Thanks to Biden's diplomacy-only approach, the ruling mullahs have succeeded at advancing their nuclear program to the highest level ever, conducting uranium metal production, and adding additional advanced centrifuges. The Iranian regime has also switched off UN cameras to monitor its nuclear program and announced that it will not allow the IAEA to see images from the devices.

In addition, the Iranian regime is refusing to answer the IAEA's questions about uranium particles found at three clandestine and undeclared nuclear sites in Iran. "Iran has not provided explanations that are technically credible in relation to the Agency's findings at those locations..." the IAEA stated. "The Agency remains ready to engage without delay with Iran to resolve all of these matters."

While the ruling mullahs of Iran are going nuclear, the Biden administration is busy appeasing them. The Biden administration not only wants this warmed-over nuclear deal, but also appears eager to throw more billions at a regime that used the last billions to solidify its takeover of four countries: Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Lebanon.

The Biden administration also revoked the designation of an Iranian proxy, Yemen's Houthis, as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, in gratitude for which the Houthis began firing missiles into Abu Dhabi and Saudi Arabia. The Biden administration also removed sanctions on three former Iranian officials and several energy companies, and is considering lifting sanctions against Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

The US administration is also continuing to turn a blind eye away from the Iranian regime's destructive behavior in the region and beyond -- activities that encompass smuggling weapons to the Houthis, shipping oil and weapons to Venezuela, harassing the US Navy, and targeting US bases in Iraq. Iran's shipment of weapons to Venezuela have included , according to the US Department of Justice, advanced arms such as:

"171 guided anti-tank missiles, eight surface-to-air missiles, land attack cruise missile components, anti-ship cruise missile components, thermal weapon optics and other components for missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles [drones]".

The ruling mullahs of Iran are freely being allowed to violate US sanctions and UN Security Council Resolutions. Shipments of weapons to the Houthis in Yemen are in violation of UN Security Council Resolution 2140, which states:

"Obligation to freeze all funds, other financial assets and economic resources that are owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by the individuals or entities designated by the Committee, or by individuals or entities acting on their behalf or at their direction, or by entities owned or controlled by them; no funds, financial assets or economic resources to be made available to or for the benefit of such individuals or entities."

Any revival of a nuclear deal will only enrich what the US State Department has called the "top state sponsor of terrorism": Iran. Since its founding in 1979, the regime has openly called for "Death to America" and "Death to Israel". Or are these results what the Biden administration possibly wants?

• Follow Majid Rafizadeh on Twitter

 

Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a business strategist and advisor, Harvard-educated scholar, political scientist, board member of Harvard International Review, and president of the International American Council on the Middle East. He has authored several books on Islam and US Foreign Policy. He can be reached at Dr.Rafizadeh@Post.Harvard.Edu

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18738/biden-trip-disappointment

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Watson Video: There's Something Wrong With Biden - Paul Joseph Watson

 

​ by Paul Joseph Watson

Democrats are starting to panic.

 

Paul Joseph Watson's latest target is the mental decline of decrepit President Biden. Not even Joe's fellow Democrats can deny it any longer.

Check out Watson's short video below:

 

Paul Joseph Watson

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/07/watson-video-theres-something-wrong-biden-paul-joseph-watson/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Fishing for a Biden Successor - Rick Fuentes

 

​ by Rick Fuentes

For 2024, Democrats are turning to blue-state strongholds where governors levy burdensome taxes, host sanctuary cities, bankroll illegals, and infuse wokeness and equity throughout every corner of state government.

Provided the Democrats don’t meddle with the mail-in ballots, drop boxes, or cover their hijinks with a doomsday variant, congressional gavels will change hands in November.  If Joe Biden seeks re-election after this drubbing, it will be against the will of the voting majority, including several Democrat bigwigs, and in the face of a media in retreat. As a withering octogenarian, his doddering gait and stumbling faculties will be a sad feature on prime time television.  As patience now wears thin over his lack of leadership and unforced errors, Biden is increasingly party deadweight, a first-term lame duck headed for forced retirement at the hands of his own political allies.   

The usual bluebloods -- Klobuchar, Booker, Warren, etc. -- stand ready for an encore primary performance, although the Democrat stock of late is diminished by an electorate-at-large who see them as holding the common welfare hostage to economy-killing climate hysterics while leaving supersized carbon footprints and getting rich off fail-safe stock investments.  After consistently being shot down by party turncoats and high court decisions, progressives view the presidential aspirations of many upper and lower House Democrats as dead in the water by their failure to hijack state elections, disarm the populace, and consummate the green raw deal.

To find the new darlings of the party, Democrats are turning to blue-state strongholds where governors levy burdensome taxes, host sanctuary cities, bankroll illegals, and infuse wokeness and equity throughout every corner of state government.  Instead of being dragged down by Beltway politics, risky party line votes, and failed negotiations, these extremists of the gubernatorial ranks continue to push through leftist policies by executive fiat.  Their high-handed approach on issues of gun control, illegal migration, and advocating for full-term abortions in a post-Dobbs era are tyrannical and supported by a collective fantasy that any SCOTUS decision tied to a conservative majority is illegitimate and can be reversed in their states by decree.

Here's some examples.

Over the last three months, the hibernating conservative majority on the U.S. Supreme Court awoke late-term to hand down successive landmark decisions in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, West Virginia v. EPA, and New York Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen that sent abortion back to the states, slapped down the overreach of the federal administrative state through its regulatory authorities, and eliminated the New York State standard of self-defense to carry a concealed weapon, respectively. The  impact to the progressive agenda and narrative of the Democrat party was seismic and filled the newsrooms of the liberal media outlets with the smell of burning hair.

These SCOTUS rulings have also brought about the comeuppance of a handful of governors jockeying for pole position in a likely 2024 Democrat primary for president.  They include the less-than-telegenic and lesser-known chief executives of Illinois and Colorado, whose recent exploratory junkets about the country to stump for local Democrat candidates have raised the eyebrows of prospective donors and political odds makers.

More favorable to progressives are a duo of like-minded but rivalrous prospects from California and New Jersey.  Both hold impeccable credentials that tack Far Left and come from states that are choked by interminable Democrat legislatures and a rabidly woke model of governance.  They throw millions in taxpayer monies at progressive causes cèlébre while their middle-classes flee in droves to more affordable locales and leave behind a prospering underclass of whiny, illegal residents that reap more benefits than citizens. As Joe Biden loses ground, their stars are ascendant, and a gambit of one-upmanship has ignited among them.

Gavin Newsom believes he can throw a wet blanket over California’s out-of-control home, gas, and food prices, street crime and mob-lifting, and rampant and aggressive homelessness by keeping a stiff upper lip on gun control, climate activism, and funding benefits for the state’s future Democrat constituency of illegal immigrants.  His scalding critiques of his own party in the face of Republican victories and televised home ground attacks against Ron DeSantis are a false flag operation to attract moderates and independents.  A recent visit to the White House, swaggering to the back door while the chief executive was abroad, conferring with Dr. Jill and other West Wingers actually pulling the levers of power, took more chutzpah than his pandemic restaurant faux pas and tickled the national media.

Phil Murphy has been California dreaming ever since he took office, in fulfillment of a campaign promise to turn the Garden State into the Golden State of the East.  Minus the Pat Riley pompadour and Colgate smile, Murphy is a Newsom clone in a tug-of-war to see who can inflict the most pain through progressive policies and practices.  He has leveraged the pandemic to bring New Jerseyans to heel, overregulated their lives on every front, and sent businesses running for the exits after telling them they should look elsewhere if they’re concerned about taxes.

Murphy’s bromance-turned-rivalry with Newsom took center stage after the forced departure of disgraced New York governor Andrew Cuomo.  Always a few headlines behind, Murphy had closely followed Cuomo’s lead as COVID ravished the two states, with carbon-copy executive orders that sent sick seniors from hospitals back into nursing homes where thousands died in close quarters.  More concern was shown to the thousands of so-called nonviolent inmates who were released back to the streets over fears of viral spread.  Several of those spared from serving out their sentences went on to commit multiple homicides.

After the Bruen decision was handed down, a defiant Phil Murphy ascended the bully pulpit to announce intentions to ban concealed weapons in government buildings, schools, hospitals and mass transit and to put pressure on private businesses to invoke similar policies on their property. He signed seven bills requiring background checks for ammo purchases, a costly training course for anyone applying for a gun permit, and opened the sluice to legal actions against gun dealers and manufacturers.  If Murphy could not reverse the SCOTUS decision, he would make the fundamental right to bear arms as onerous a process as possible and raise public fears over personal information kept in State Police databases.

Murphy’s own words have made light of the Bill of Rights, but the policies of both governors show a clear intent to undermine those sacred amendments with an activist revisionism intended to  further their political ambitions.  Such was the case during the pandemic and continues on with gun control by drawing a moral equivalence between legal gun owners and criminals.  Nowhere in their gun regulations can be found a remedy for urban gang gunplay, addressing the out-of-state trafficking of guns that get into the hands of street thugs, or funding law enforcement in ways that enhances their weapons-trafficking investigations.  Solutions to those systemic problems are not in the best interests of a radicalized party that seeks to remake society from the ashes of social chaos.

 Fishing for a Democrat successor in 2024, progressives will demand much more than an archetype of Joe Biden without the dementia and incontinence, or a cabinet full of appointees that come from the shallow end of the gene pool. They want to find themselves at the finish line of a country thoroughly devoid of its exceptionalism and beholden to its enemies, with its middle class disarmed and waving a white flag in submission to the administrative state and beholden to a future where every landscape is scarred by wind farms and household electricity rationed to power up EVs.  No matter the future course of their political lives, Phil Murphy and Gavin Newsom will remain aloof to these realities, eventually to find pasture in gated villas far removed from the urban visuals of homelessness and gunplay. 

 

Rick Fuentes

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/07/fishing_for_a_biden_successor_.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Australia: New Government Maintains Hardline Stance on China - Soeren Kern

 

​ by Soeren Kern

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese: "Australia doesn't respond to demands; we respond to our own national interests."

• Australia's new Labor Party government has signaled that it will maintain the hardline policies toward China pursued by the previous conservative government and expand security ties with the United States.

• Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi blamed the previous government for the break-down in ties and warned the new government that it must "take concrete actions" to adopt a "correct understanding" of China. He then handed Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong a list of four demands the new government must meet to "recalibrate" the relationship: 1) do not treat China as a rival; 2) seek common ground; 3) do not do the bidding of the United States; and 4) build public support for China.

• Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese replied: "Australia doesn't respond to demands; we respond to our own national interests."

• In April 2022, China signed a security pact with the Solomon Islands. A leaked draft of the agreement indicates that China intends to establish a military presence in the South Pacific.

• "A closed one-party state — that would never allow a foreign company near China's critical technologies — expects one-sided reciprocity and openness from Australia. China would also reject out of hand any similar attempt by another country to meddle in its domestic politics and foreign policy as a precondition for better relations." — Editorial Board of the Australian Financial Review, July 11, 2022.

Australia's new Labor Party government has signaled that it will maintain the hardline policies toward China pursued by the previous conservative government and expand security ties with the United States. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese (R) and Foreign Minister Penny Wong speak during a press conference at the Pacific Islands Forum in Suva, Fiji on July 13, 2022. (Photo by William West/AFP via Getty Images)

Australia's new Labor Party government has signaled that it will maintain the hardline policies toward China pursued by the previous conservative government and expand security ties with the United States.

Australia's fraught relationship with China was a key issue in the May 21 election and the Labor Party was said to have won due in part to hopes that a new left-leaning government could improve bilateral ties.

Those hopes have been dashed by China itself. On July 8, in the first high-level meeting since China froze bilateral relations in 2019, Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong met with her Chinese counterpart, Wang Yi, on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Bali.

Wang blamed the previous government for the break-down in ties and warned the new government that it must "take concrete actions" to adopt a "correct understanding" of China. He then handed Wong a list of four demands the new government must meet to "recalibrate" the relationship: 1) do not treat China as a rival; 2) seek common ground; 3) do not do the bidding of the United States; and 4) build public support for China.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese replied: "Australia doesn't respond to demands; we respond to our own national interests."

Since taking office, the Albanese government has shown that there is a strong bipartisan consensus in Australia about the threat posed by China and that the new prime minister will not fundamentally alter the hardline position held by the previous government.

May 24. In his first appearance on the world stage as prime minister, Albanese met with leaders from the United States, Japan and India at a meeting of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) in Tokyo. He reaffirmed Australia's commitment to the Quad: "We have had a change of government in Australia, but Australia's commitment to the Quad has not changed and will not change." He also pledged to work more closely with Indo-Pacific nations to counter China's growing influence in the region. Moreover, Albanese reaffirmed his commitment to AUKUS, a trilateral security pact between Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States to develop a nuclear-powered submarine capability for Australia.

May 26. In her first bilateral visit as foreign minister, Wong traveled to Fiji, where, in a speech to the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, she promised that Australia would pay more attention to the views and needs of the Pacific Island countries, whose leaders have long complained of being ignored by Canberra. Wong's diplomacy was instrumental in the May 30 decision by ten Pacific Island countries to reject a sweeping security and trade deal with China. Fiji, an archipelago of more than 300 islands, instead signed on to the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), an alternative pact led by the United States.

June 24. Australia, Japan, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States established Partners in the Blue Pacific (PBP), a new initiative aimed at boosting economic and diplomatic ties with Pacific island nations. The move is part of an effort to counter China's growing influence in the region.

June 28. In an interview with Australian Financial Review, conducted en route to Spain for the NATO Summit in Madrid, Albanese said that the Chinese government, when thinking about Taiwan, should learn the lessons of Russia's "strategic failure" in Ukraine. He added that the so-called special relationship between Russia and China had "reinforced the implications for the world beyond just what is happening in Russia and Ukraine." He elaborated:

"This is about whether, in an international rules-based order, you will see a sovereign nation such as Ukraine invaded in such a brutal, illegal way by a country that is a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council."

Albanese added:

"The resistance of Ukraine has brought democratic nations closer together which have a shared commitment to rules-based, international order, whether they be members of NATO, or non-members such as Australia."

July 6. Wong, in her first major foreign policy speech, delivered in Singapore, called on China to exert its influence on Russia to end the war in Ukraine. "Exerting such influence would do a great deal to build confidence in our own region," she said. "The region and the world is now looking at Beijing's actions in relation to Ukraine." Wong also called on China to exercise restraint in its dealings with its own neighbors.

July 12. Australia's new defense minister, Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles, in a speech to the Washington, DC-based Center for Strategic and International Affairs, reaffirmed that "there is no more important partner" to Australia than the United States, and that the U.S.-Australian alliance has become a "cornerstone" of Australia's foreign and security policy. He then listed some of the challenges posed by China:

"A military buildup occurring at a rate unseen since World War II; the development and deployment of new weapons that challenge our military capability edge; expanding cyber and gray-zone capabilities which blur the line between peace and conflict; and the intensification of major-power competition in ways that both concentrate and transcend geographic confines. These trends compel an even greater Australian focus on the Indo-Pacific.

"For the first time in decades, we are thinking hard about the security of our own strategic geography; the viability of our trade and supply routes; and above all the preservation of an inclusive regional order founded on rules agreed by all, not the coercive capabilities of a few. In particular, we worry about the use of force or coercion to advance territorial claims, as is occurring in the South China Sea, and its implications for any number of places in the Indo-Pacific where borders or sovereignty are disputed."

Marles added that his "first priority" will be the trilateral partnership with the United States and the United Kingdom under AUKUS:

"For a three-ocean nation, the heart of deterrence is undersea capability. AUKUS will not only make Australia safer; it will make Australia a more potent and capable partner. That the United States and the United Kingdom have agreed to work with Australia to meet our needs is not only a game-changer; it illustrates why alliances help reinforce, not undermine, our country's national sovereignty."

Australia has long been a vocal critic of China's human rights abuses, especially the repression of ethnic Uyghurs, as well as the crackdown on democracy in Hong Kong, its threats against Taiwan, its aggressive actions in the disputed South China Sea. China is also accused of meddling in Australia's political process. In June 2018, the Australian Parliament passed a package of laws aimed at preventing foreign interference in the country.

Bilateral relations reached a new low in September 2020, when then-Prime Minister Scott Morrison called for an independent international inquiry into the COVID-19 outbreak. China retaliated by imposing sanctions on the imports of Australian goods.

In April 2022, China signed a security pact with the Solomon Islands. A leaked draft of the agreement indicates that China intends to establish a military presence in the South Pacific.

In June 2022, a Chinese fighter jet intercepted an Australian surveillance plane in international airspace over the South China Sea. The Chinese jet then released small pieces of aluminum which were sucked into the engine of the Australian plane. Australia's defense ministry said it had "for decades undertaken maritime surveillance activities in the region" and "does so in accordance with international law, exercising the right to freedom of navigation and overflight in international waters and airspace." Defense Minister Marles added that Australia will continue its legal operations in the South China Sea:

"This incident will not deter Australia from continuing to engage in these activities which are within our rights at international law, to ensure that there is freedom of navigation in the South China Sea because that is fundamentally in our nation's interests. This is a body of water which is deeply connected to Australia."

The Editorial Board of the Australian Financial Review, in an essay — "Albanese Government No Soft Touch Under China's One-Way Pressure" — wrote that the tone of Beijing's rhetoric remains aggressive:

"The tone of Beijing's message — along with the presumed right to issue one-sided diktats demanding Australia take 'concrete action' to correct its attitude and behavior — remains much the same. All the blame for the problems in the relationship are placed at Australia's feet. This, of course, ignores the reality that assertive China has changed.

"All this is underlined by the attempt to pin the 'root cause' of the deteriorating relationship on the former Coalition government's 'irresponsible words and deeds' — such as Malcolm Turnbull's legitimate decision to protect Australia's sovereignty by banning China-owned Huawei from participating in the 5G network build.

"A closed one-party state — that would never allow a foreign company near China's critical technologies — expects one-sided reciprocity and openness from Australia. China would also reject out of hand any similar attempt by another country to meddle in its domestic politics and foreign policy as a precondition for better relations.

"If China genuinely seeks a reset of the relationship, it should take the first concrete action itself and withdraw the unwarranted trade punishment against Australia's grain, beef, and wine exports — not make this conditional on improved political relations on its terms first."

In an article — "Plus ça Change: The New Australian Labor Government's Foreign Policy Agenda" — Thomas Wilkens, Senior Fellow at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, concluded:

"The new government's continued emphasis on the Quad and AUKUS will likely disappoint Chinese observers who hoped that Labor may downplay these groupings, given their perceived role as instruments designed to respond to China's growing power and assertiveness, out of deference to Beijing. While many commentators have viewed the change of government as an opportunity to 'reset,' or at least improve, dire bilateral relations with Beijing, the new Labor government indicated that 'fixing' the relationship is a high priority, but it will not occur at the expense of close cooperation with fellow democratic allies and partners, whom Albanese praised as 'like-minded friends.' Indeed, given the parlous state of bilateral relations over the past few years, such a task appears 'a difficult one,' as Mr. Albanese himself indicated....

"PM Albanese comes to the premiership at a fraught time both in terms of the deteriorating regional security environment and the economic challenges that Australia will face in the coming period. When considering Labor approaches to foreign policy, it must be remembered that the core aspects of Australian external relations, famously characterized by Allan Gyngell as (i) support for the rules-based international order, coupled with (ii) the US-alliance, and (iii) Asian engagement, have enjoyed bipartisan consensus. Only in select policy spheres such as climate change and nuclear weapons are significant partisan divergences apparent.

"Thus far, all has been quite predictable — plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose (the more things change, the more they stay the same.)"

• Follow Soeren Kern on Twitter and Facebook

 

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18736/australia-hardline-china

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Axios reveals Trump's plan to take out the Deep State - Rajan Laad

 

​ by Rajan Laad

Intended as a hit piece, it reads like an important section of Trump's 2024 campaign manifesto to his supporters.

 

Just yesterday, Axios carried a piece provocatively entitled "A radical plan for Trump's second term."

The following are key excerpts from the article:

The heart of the plan is derived from an executive order known as "Schedule F," developed and refined in secret over most of the second half of Trump's term and launched 13 days before the 2020 election. (snip)

Trump signed an executive order, "Creating Schedule F in the Excepted Service," in October 2020, which established a new employment category for federal employees. It received wide media coverage for a short period, then was largely forgotten in the mayhem and aftermath of Jan. 6 — and quickly was rescinded by Biden.

Sources close to Trump say that if he were elected to a second term, he would immediately reimpose it.

Tens of thousands of civil servants who serve in roles deemed to have some influence over policy would be reassigned as "Schedule F" employees. Upon reassignment, they would lose their employment protections. (snip)

An initial estimate by the Trump official who came up with Schedule F found it could apply to as many as 50,000 federal workers — a fraction of a workforce of more than 2 million…. (snip)

Even if Trump did not deploy Schedule F to this extent, the very fact that such power exists could create a significant chilling effect on government employees.

It would effectively upend the modern civil service, triggering a shock wave across the bureaucracy. The next president might then move to gut those pro-Trump ranks — and face the question of whether to replace them with her or his own loyalists or revert to a traditional bureaucracy. (snip)

Such pendulum swings and politicization could threaten the continuity and quality of service to taxpayers, the regulatory protections, the checks on executive power, and other aspects of American democracy.

To sum it up, this is Trump's plan to take on the Deep State bureaucracy, purging it of the sort of partisan officials who torpedoed many of his initiatives in his first term.

But there is also the Washington Democrat Establishment that Trump refers to as the swamp, made up of politicians, interest groups, and donors, in addition to Deep State bureaucrats.  The swamp is the core of every problem within the U.S. political system.

It begins with elections.

If a relatively unknown but well-meaning candidate wants to run for office, the swamp places numerous impediments before him. 

The first impediment is funding.  The candidate first needs to raise millions to fund a campaign, for which the swamp is the facilitator.  If the candidate chooses to circumvent the swamp and fund a campaign on small donations from regular individuals, there are challenges.

Firstly, few donate to unknown candidates.  Secondly, his swamp-funded opponent, either during the primary or the main electoral contest, runs attack advertisements, while the regular candidate has no means to respond.  Despite good intentions, he loses.

Hence, candidates intending to win have no option but to plunge into the swamp.  This enables millions of dollars for their campaign, favorable media coverage, and a few coveted endorsements.

Back in 1974, during his first term in the Senate, Joe Biden talked about the need for campaign finance reforms.

Once candidates are elected, they follow diktats from the swamp.  For instance, they vote for bills that send $55 billion to defend Ukraine and grant billions in subsidies to manufacturers of silicon microchips all based on the orders.

Do they care about Ukraine?

Not really.  Multimillion-dollar contracts to aid and defend Ukraine are awarded to swamp loyalist freelancers and corporate houses.  The bills purposefully have no tracking mechanisms for the funds.

Any act of rebellion, and the swap retaliates with viciousness.  Swamp members run a primary campaign to unseat the elected representative.  Or they fund a malicious media campaign to defame.  In extreme cases, investigative agencies are deployed where the probe itself is conflated with guilt.

The relationship between elected officials and the swamp is symbiotic.  In exchange for obeying diktats, there are multiple means of enrichment.

Shady quid pro quo deals are stuck behind closed doors when the swamp votes for sending billion to Ukraine or grants subsidies to the private sector.

The campaign is also used as an expense account.  Close relatives are "employed" by the campaigns and are paid handsome salaries.  The Daily Caller recently revealed that both House majority whip James Clyburn of South Carolina and Rep. Jahana Hayes from Connecticut use their campaign funds to enrich family members.  Obviously, there are many more who do this.

There also are lucrative jobs for close relatives in the private sector or shady business deals with hostile foreign nations.  In exchange, the private sector receives government contracts while the hostile foreign nation receives "aid," and their crimes are overlooked.  Perhaps Joe Biden's sale of the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserves to a Chinese company linked to Hunter Biden's investment firm was in exchange for Hunter profiting from dealings in China.  The swamp specializes in legalizing corruption.

If any swamp member were to lose an election or retire, the swamp ensures lucrative post-retirement positions, rewarding book contracts, handsome speaking fees, etc.

While the might of the law never spares regular citizens, swamp members always get a pass.  Trump's former campaign manager Steve Bannon was found guilty of contempt of Congress and faces two years of imprisonment, while swamp member Eric Holder, who was guilty of a similar offense, faced no consequences.

The swamp members also get a pass in exchange for a favor done in the past or favor that will be done in the future.  Clyburn endorsed Biden during the primary, which enabled him to win the nomination.  In exchange, Clyburn misusing his campaign fund will be ignored.

The symbiotic relationships, cultivated owing to decades of shady deals, are labyrinthine and complex.  With new recruits every day, the influence of the swamp widens, and its durability increases.  This is a self-serving, self-promoting, self-preserving, corrupt, and nepotistic cabal. 

The swamp's influence spreads beyond governmental powers.  International organizations, corporate houses, Big Tech, think-tanks, charity foundations, climate and environmental bodies, academia, and above all members of the legacy media are all members.

Despite thriving on public money, the well-being of the public is the least of the swamp's concerns.  In fact, swamp members frequently exhibit disdain for regular people, calling them pejorative names such as deplorable and Neanderthals.  Those who challenge them are branded as extremists and domestic terrorists.  Swamp members even display Mary Antoinette–like behavior in response to the struggles of regular people.

Back to the Axios piece.

The piece is intended to be a companion to the January 6 Stalinist propaganda show trial.  The goal is to make Trump appear like a dictator who will impose martial law upon being elected, crush every dissenting voice, and purge rebels within the civil service.

The sanctimonious seldom have self-awareness.  The authors also fail to understand most people are suffering on myriad fronts due to the misgovernance and the apathy of the Biden administration that has been propped up by the swamp.  When these people read of a plan to constrain the ability of the swamp to act through the Deep State bureaucrats, they will celebrate.

What Axios thinks is a hit job reads like an important section of Trump's 2024 campaign manifesto to his supporters.  It will be a huge vote-getter for the GOP during the midterms and President Trump in 2024.

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 3.0 license.

 

Rajan Laad

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/07/axios_reveals_trumps_plan_to_take_out_the_deep_state.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Entire North Carolina police department resigns after new town manager is hired - Timothy H.J. Nerozzi

 

​ by Timothy H.J. Nerozzi

Kenly Police Chief Josh Gibson cites 'hostile work environment' as cause for resignation

An entire police department in North Carolina resigned Friday after the hiring of a new town manager.

Police officers and other officials in the small town of Kenly have submitted mass-resignation letters citing stress, a hostile work environment and an inability to continue the department's long-term betterment projects.

In a letter to Town Manager Justine Jones, Police Chief Josh Gibson expressed regret toward the negative changes he felt were occurring in the department.

"In my 21 years at the Kenly Police Department, we have seen ups and downs. But, especially in the last 3 years, we have made substantial progress that we had hoped to continue. However, due to the hostile work environment now present in the Town of Kenly, I do not believe progress is possible," Gibson wrote.

Neither the police department nor Jones has been willing to speak to the media on the nature of these complaints, local outlets report.

MISSOURI CITY POLICE CHIEF 'UNEXPECTEDLY' RESIGNS ALONG WITH EVERY SINGLE OFFICER

Gibson's letter was only one of several resignations that were made publicly available after the mass exodus.

Police car siren. (iStock)

"It is with a heavy heart that I take this action. I have been with the town since 2004 and fully expected to finish my law enforcement career with the Town of Kenly. Unfortunately, there are decisions being made that jeopardize my safety and make me question what the future will hold for a Kenly Police Officer," wrote officer G.W. Strong.

While all others addressed their resignations to Gibson, the police chief himself submitted his to Jones.

NEW YORK CRIME CRISIS: ROCHESTER POLICE OFFICER KILLED IN SHOOTING, ANOTHER INJURED

Jones was just hired as town manager last month after serving in various local government positions in other states. Her new position was celebrated by the Town of Kenly in a June press release.

"Jones has dedicated her career to public service over the last 16 years during which she worked in progressively responsible positions with local governments in Minnesota, Virginia, South Carolina and North Carolina," the town wrote in the statement. "She began her municipal career as the Executive Assistant to the City Manager and National Urban Fellow in the City of Norfolk, Virginia"

Police leadership and active duty officers were joined in their resignation by other officials.

"I have truly enjoyed working for The Town the last four years. Due to the current situations and the stress in the work area lately, my main concern is my health, and right now I need to focus on my wellbeing. The work area is very hostile and I will not let myself be around that kind of atmosphere," wrote Christy Thomas, utility clerk for the town of Kenly.

Some outgoing government employees kept their messages curt and to the point — including Town Clerk Sharon Evans.

"I will be retiring sooner than I had planned. This is my two weeks notice as of today. I can no longer work under the stress," wrote Evans.

 

Timothy H.J. Nerozzi is a writer for Fox News Digital. You can follow him on Twitter @timothynerozzi and can email him at timothy.nerozzi@fox.com

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/us/entire-north-carolina-police-department-resigns-new-town-manager-hired

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Guns and Masculinity - Mark Tapson

 

​ by Mark Tapson

Democrats want to rid America of both.

 

In opening comments Wednesday for the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on so-called “assault weapons,” Democrat Senator and gun-confiscation enthusiast Dick Durbin threatened that it is “time to name and shame” the makers of AR-15s, the rifle Democrats have demonized as “weapons of war.” Gun manufacturers aren’t the trigger-pullers behind mass shootings, but they are a much easier and more politically useful scapegoat to target than the criminally insane minds of the actual shooters. Democrats aren’t interested in ending gun violence anyway; if they were, they would be holding hearings on the shootings perpetrated by gang members in Democrat-run inner cities, by terrorists, and by the criminally insane. What they want to end is not gun violence but gun ownership.

Sitting with posters of AR-15 advertisements placed prominently behind him, Durbin claimed hyperbolically that there have been “309 mass shootings” in the United States so far in 2022. “Why are these killing machines flying off the shelves after they were banned for a decade, until 2004?” he asked rhetorically. "Maybe it’s the ads that market the ‘assault weapons.’ Symbols of independence, freedom, or the promise that owning an AR-15-style-gun will make you more of a man. Or could it be the enticing prospect of toting around the same style of weapon that soldiers and Marines use to defend our country in combat?"

Let’s break down this sneering statement, because it is very revealing of the Left’s perspective on guns and masculinity, both of which the Left would like to eradicate.

First of all, there is the obvious propaganda of the loaded (pardon the pun) terminology like “killing machines” and “assault weapons” to refer to tools that are more often used to stop or prevent killing and assaults. Second, what's wrong with an advertisement and a product that appeal to one’s desire for independence, freedom, and the capability to defend one’s home and community? Nothing to the average American patriot, but they run against the grain of the average leftist’s totalitarian impulse for control.

As for owning an AR-15 making you “more of a man,” Durbin meant it as a taunt to suggest that male gun owners are insecure about their masculinity. But in fact – and this assertion will cause the heads of feminists and proud non-binary types to explode – owning a firearm actually does make one more of a man. One of the universal duties of manhood is to fulfill the role of protector. Having the capability (such as a firearm), the training, and the will to stand up and protect your life, your loved ones, your property, and your community is a clear marker of moral masculinity. Not in the swaggering way of someone looking to pick a fight, but in the quiet strength and confidence of a man who understands, respects, and is capable of wielding the power of righteous force. In that sense, owning a firearm and being trained and ready to use it when necessary does indeed make you more of a man than someone who willfully abdicates that responsibility.  

(Female gun owners benefit from a similar independence and empowerment, but Durbin didn’t mention women because his aim was to diminish and humiliate predominantly male gun owners.)

Democrats despise masculinity, especially moral masculinity, which is why the tip of the spear of their neo-Marxist revolution is gender ideology – the eradication of traditional sex roles and even of the biological reality of male and female. (The only arena in which toxic masculinity is acceptable to the Left today is in women’s sports.) They fear and despise men’s inherent warrior spirit because it is the most elemental barrier to their totalitarian agenda. They fear and despise the fact that the constitutional right to own a firearm empowers you to fulfill your responsibility as a man, to maintain your freedom as an American, and to defend the lives and freedom of others.

As for Durbin’s comment about “toting around the same style of weapon that soldiers and Marines use to defend our country in combat,” civilians aren’t, for the most part, using the same weapons as the military. That having been said, owning “weapons of war” is precisely the point of the Second Amendment, which is to empower civilians to defend themselves against government tyranny. Democrats know this full well but try to skirt around it by pretending the issue is hunting. That’s why they make silly, seemingly irrelevant declarations like former New York governor Andrew Cuomo once did, that “no one needs ten bullets to kill a deer.” Or even more embarrassingly, decrepit Joe Biden’s 2019 pronouncement that “if you need 100 clips or 30 clips in a weapon, then you shouldn’t be hunting, man!”

As is often noted by conservative commentators, mass shooters aren’t National Rifle Association members who value their freedom and independence and right to bear arms. They are mostly homicidally/suicidally angry young men whose problems run far deeper than just being enticed by advertisements. Indeed, if they're being enticed by anything to commit gun violence, it's by a leftist-dominated news media that thrives on turning mass-murdering losers into overnight celebrities.

But Durbin and his fellow Democrats don't care about getting to the real, cultural roots of the problem of gun violence. Their aim is to roll back, if not eliminate, the Second Amendment and to disarm the populace. Toward that end, Democrats want to punish firearm makers. So Durbin blames “the marketing tactics used by gun manufacturers like Mossberg, Bushmaster, and Daniel Defense. It’s time to name and shame these companies,” he stated ominously.

Last weekend, 22-year-old Elisjsha Dicken stopped a mass shooter at Indiana’s Greenwood Park Mall by taking him out with a handgun within seconds of the shooter launching his rampage. In a sane world, Dicken would be unanimously hailed as a hero. And sane people have hailed him as such. Greenwood Police Chief Jim Ison said of Dicken, “I’m going to tell you, the real hero of the day was the citizen that was lawfully carrying a firearm in the food court and was able to stop the shooter almost as soon as he began.”

But instead of being grateful and relieved that Dicken’s courage, skill, and concealed-carry weapon limited the murderer to three victims (still a terrible loss, but it could have been exponentially worse), Democrats openly resent the fact that Dicken is living refutation of their false narrative that a “good guy with a gun” is a myth. They have taken to social media to condemn him, for God’s sake, as an “armed vigilante” and to grumble that, as journalist David Leavitt stupidly tweeted, “You’d never need a ‘Good Samaritan’ with a gun at Greenwood Park Mall or at any other place if there weren’t any guns to begin with.”

And that is the Democrat fantasy: an America in which there are no guns (except, of course, those belonging to the government, to the privately-funded security teams of anti-Second Amendment celebrities, and to the taxpayer-funded security teams protecting Democrat politicians). And no men either, at least those who exhibit the dangerous, moral masculinity of an “armed vigilante” like hero Elisjsha Dicken.

 

Mark Tapson is the Shillman Fellow on Popular Culture for the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/07/guns-and-masculinity-mark-tapson/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter