May 14, 2022

The U.S. is using the Ukraine conflict to influence others' interests

By: Azhar Azam

Thanks to insistent economic growth, augmented import capacity and cooperative external policy, Beijing over the past few years has emerged into a predominant player and important stakeholder in the global economy. The burgeoning China has quivered the U.S. that fails to stomach the new global reality in fear of the East Asian giant becoming a "near-peer competitor."

Washington of late continues to fall into populist politics, protectionist policies and isolationist sentiments. As domestic polarization reduces America's influence the world over and the country evolves into a less reliable partner – it is looking to take advantage of the Russia-Ukraine conflict to stop allies from pursuing their "national interests," see the Kremlin "weakened" and target China by releasing ad hominem statements against the planet's second largest economy.

From allegations of coronavirus origins to genocide, the U.S. has been running a systematic disinformation campaign against China. During the ongoing Ukrainian crisis, Washington wasted no time in falsely asserting Beijing knew the plan and sought Moscow to delay the military action until the conclusion of the Beijing Winter Olympics. The blame was followed by rumors the Kremlin was seeking military assistance from China.

Such assertions ignored the fact that more than 6,000 Chinese citizens were stuck in Ukraine when the conflict began. Also, Beijing is the largest trading partner of both Russia and Ukraine and the world's largest importer of crude oil and natural gas; the war has sparked billions of dollars in losses to Chinese firms due to disruptions in commodity markets and supply chains.

A Chinese titan, Tsingshan Holding Group, for instance reportedly expected an $8 billion trading loss after nickel prices exploded following Russia's "special military operation." The war, together with lockdowns in China, damaged vast swathes of the global manufacturing economy, broadening economic malaise. It was therefore reckless to inveigh against Beijing for supporting Moscow on Kyiv despite many Chinese nationals and a multi-trillion-dollar economy was put at risk by the conflict.

The U.S. is still trying to shift the blame of conflict on China. In an imbecile assessment on May 2, the U.S. State Department for the first time through its so-called counter-disinformation unit, known as the Global Engagement Center, accused the Chinese government and media of "pro-Russia neutrality" and routinely peddling Russian propaganda, conspiracy theories and disinformation.

Clearly, America aims to suck China into a conflict that bears no relation with the East Asian nation other than threatening its own economy. The bizarre tone endeavored to peel off Beijing's rational responsible position: Sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries including Ukraine must be respected and make sincere efforts for peaceful dispute resolution.

Yet the statement blithely flouted the U.S. officials' blatant lies about China's prior knowledge of the conflict and the Russian request of weaponry support.

Even before the crisis roiled Eastern Europe, China in a joint communique with Russia called on all states to practice dialogue, strengthen mutual understanding and champion universal human values rights such as peace, development, equality, justice, democracy and freedom. It emphasized that all countries should respect every nation's right to determine its path of development and other states' sovereignty, security and development interests.

Some international leaders misconceived and equated the "new era" – where international community needed a leadership aiming at peaceful and gradual development and which vowed to "defend the world order based on international law" in accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations-driven international architecture and charter – with an intent to "replace the existing international order." That's off base.

The declaration rather expressed a desire to seek a genuine multipolar world with the global body and its Security Council playing a central role in democratization of international relations. This reaffirmed China was committed to a UN-led world order for global peace and stability in the face of the U.S. hegemonic efforts to make the world a unipolar chessboard. Claims such as alignment of "a new arc of autocracy" to "challenge and reset the world order" are absurd too.

All these pronouncements in an interrelated and interdependent world would cast aside the possibility of much-needed international cooperation, ushering a new geopolitical spat; they could help the crisis deepen and spread across the European peninsula.

Since Beijing's positive vision doesn't pursue great power status and "instead interweaves the interests of the Chinese people with pursuit of the global common good," such a scenario should be avoided through international engagement to thwart economic and security challenges to Europe and the globe.

The U.S. officials are divided on "China's backing of Russia in Ukraine." On the same day the U.S. State Department released a jarring assessment alleging China's push to amplify the Kremlin's voice on Ukraine, American ambassador to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe Michael Carpenter defied, admitting to finding no indication of Beijing's involvement or help to Moscow on the military campaign in Kyiv.

Washington seems to want to prolong the Ukraine conflict in an attempt to reintegrate a highly polarized country and reassert its domination over the world. America doesn't just intend to bolster its position in a so-called strategic competition with China; the U.S. multilayered strategy also focuses to make Europe more dependent on American energy and security in a bid to influence Brussels' autonomy.

This U.S. approach to exploit the European crisis to its advantage by infringing the rights, interests and sovereignty of other states should be closely watched while strengthening cooperation for a peaceful solution of the Russia-Ukraine dispute.

*This is my opinion piece that originally appeared at "China Global Television Network (CGTN)":

A timely decision can curb inflation and provide relief to Americans

By: Azhar Azam

The Consumer Price Index (CPI) recently climbed further into the stratosphere as the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics confirmed it leaped 8.5 percent in March, the largest 12-month increase since December 1981. Even excluding food and energy, the index rose 6.5 percent, the largest 12-month change since August 1982. For the first time in over three years, the U.S. Federal Reserve in March increased the policy interest rate by 25 basis points and could hike it by another 50 basis points in May before trimming its asset portfolio.

In February, the personal consumption expenditures price index, a key metric the Fed uses to measure inflation, also surged 6.4 percent year-on-year to reach a new 40-year high. Excluding food and energy, the preferred inflation gauge of America's central bank clocked a jaw-dropping increase of 5.4 percent.

A Bloomberg analysis summarizes the effect of inflation on ordinary Americans. It says inflation will cost a typical U.S. household an extra $5,200 this year to buy the same goods it bought last year. As an accelerated depletion of savings built up during the pandemic factors out that cushion of survival, a labor supply glut threatens to dampen wage growth. The forecast supports two recent studies, which showed inflation was likely to cost the average U.S. citizen an incredible $5,000 a year.

Portraying inflation as an abstract force beyond control is an attempt to gloss over the Biden administration's "fiscal recklessness." The Fed gamble — "stimulate" the economy by printing trillions of dollars in the middle of the pandemic — inflated away Americans' savings and wealth as the move made the dollars they held less valuable.

This led the way to a "stealth tax" or "taxation without legislation," as the Nobel laureate Milton Friedman called it. On completion of Biden's first year in the White House, the "Bidenflation" had already shot up to a 40-year high of more than 7 percent and encumbered lower-income Americans, drawing opposition to the U.S. President's "Build Back Better" agenda.

Steven Rattner, a top Obama-Biden economic recovery czar, described the incumbent President's $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan (ARP) as an "extraordinary policy mistake." Mark Zandi, the U.S. President's preferred economic forecaster, has been skeptical of the Democrats' new scramble and says the legislation will worsen inflation because it will juice up demand, warning: "people hate inflation more than they love a low unemployment rate."

The American President and his administration insisted inflation was "transitory" and a "high-class problem." Biden has blamed the Ukrainian crisis for the surge in energy prices. But voters, paying more for everything from basic goods such as eggs and milk to electricity and used cars, won't buy into the idea and could express their anger in the November midterms when Democrats will try to draw the wool over their eyes.

While high inflation levels not seen in decades have eaten away at Americans' income as Biden ignored the past price increases as signs of persistent inflation, his ARP enacted in March 2021 couldn't create a single job of an additional four million jobs pledged under the program despite almost $2 trillion spending. The double whammy will keep the country's economy under pressure until the administration takes tangible measures to boost trade and revive economic activity.

Last month, Biden said: "Make no mistake, inflation is largely the fault of Putin." He continued the theme and asserted: "70 percent of the increase in prices in March came from Putin's price hike in gasoline." Yet he should demonstrate dignity and own the inflation, which had been steadily rising well before the Ukraine crisis mostly due to his administration's mismanagement.

Biden still isn't ready to accept the fact that ARP has driven up inflation as well as the U.S. budget deficit to the second-highest level ever. He keeps on blaming the pandemic and Moscow, although he could have tackled soaring prices by scaling back much of former U.S. President Donald Trump's tariffs. The continuation of his predecessor's disastrous trade policy raised the cost of Chinese imports by $81 billion and ruined the Democratic President's economic ambitions.

Amid wishful thinking inflation has likely topped out, one major concern is the producer price index. It has been rising much faster than CPI due to strong demand for goods and services, increasing the most in more than 12 years in March and 11.2 percent over the past 12 months. Given it tends to indicate high inflation ahead, this suggests the inflationary crisis is far from over.

The White House wants to focus on improving innovation and manufacturing in order to strengthen supply chains, create more manufacturing jobs, lower prices for consumers and address tailbacks that push inflation higher and higher. Indeed, nothing other than tariff elimination on goods from China can hibernate the intensifying public frustration and Biden's declining approval more quickly.

By withdrawing Trump-era tariffs on China, Biden could surely provide immediate relief to millions of inflation-stricken Americans. As of now, it has so far made exemptions on a narrow set of 359 products. For a critical issue such as inflation, the administration should stop distinguishing between strategic and non-strategic goods and engage in widespread talks with Beijing on lowering tariffs. A farsighted decision at the right time could ease up the financial worries of Americans and prevent the U.S. economy from landing hard.

*This is my opinion piece that originally appeared at "China Global Television Network (CGTN)":

Outlook for Peace and Development offers long-term solution for the Horn of Africa

By: Azhar Azam

Claims by spokespersons of America's military and the White House that the U.S. role in Africa has been limited to "advising and assisting" other militaries or that Washington hasn't maintained any military presence on the ground in some countries have repeatedly been snubbed by many. Those claims even include U.S. self-declared actions in Somalia which killed scores of civilians. An acknowledgment of a military "footprint" by the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) last year in the Horn of Africa country established this truth.

Over the years, American Green Berets, Navy SEALs and other commandos have been dominating their African partner forces under little-known U.S. Code Section 127e. The authority funded classified programs and compelled African governments to essentially loan out their military units to American special operations teams which would use them as surrogates to hunt militants posing threats to American citizens and embassies.

The world first became aware of the U.S. military presence in Africa after the Islamic State killed four American soldiers in Tongo Tongo, Niger in 2017. According to a retired U.S. army officer, American troops have been killed or wounded in at least six African countries. The fallen Green Berets had allegedly gone rogue in the Sahel region, and when the families sought the truth the details were obscured by a highly-redacted U.S. report which cannot be declassified until 2043.

Washington has announced visa restrictions on Somali officials just for delaying the parliamentary elections. It is "visibly disconcerted" about growing rapprochement between Beijing and Mogadishu. Yet Somalia continues to strengthen historic relations with China rooted in mutual respect for sovereignty, territorial integrity, political independence and unity.

Eritrea is another country in the Horn of Africa facing U.S. sanctions over its involvement in the Tigray conflict in neighboring Ethiopia. The Biden administration last year targeted the defense and political institutions of the long-isolated country for entering the conflict on the side of Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed in November 2020.

In the face of the U.S. unilateral and despotic sanctions, China elevated its bilateral relationship with Eritrea to a strategic partnership during the January 2022 visit by Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi. Exchanging views on the situation in the Horn of Africa and slamming acts by non-regional forces to undermine the continent's peace and stability, both sides in a joint statement opposed the hegemonic interference in Africa by major powers operating under the veil of democracy and human rights.

On March 29, the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee overwhelmingly approved the Ethiopia Peace and Stabilization Act; again, in the name of promoting democracy and human rights. Introduced in November, the proposed bipartisan legislation creates a framework of sanctions to punish Addis Ababa. American "humanitarian imperialism" seeks to destabilize the Ethiopian government as well as "threatens to regress" its peace initiatives.

One major reason for the U.S. stomachache is Ethiopia's central role in the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). China is estimated to have undertaken 400 construction and manufacturing projects worth of $4 billion in Ethiopia in addition to financing and building much of the country's air, road and rail networks.

Strong Chinese engagement has helped the Ethiopian economy grow by an average of around 10 percent through the decade before the pandemic struck, affirming China's importance to the economic and infrastructure development of Ethiopia. As sanctions and conflicts risk peace and growth in the landlocked country, the BRI comes into play to complement the 50-year development aspirations of both Ethiopia and Africa. China's support at multilateral fora is also helping Ethiopia thwart threats to sovereignty and territorial integrity.

As the U.S. continues to arbitrarily interfere in the regional and internal affairs of African countries, the appointment of Xue Bing, China's Special Envoy for the Horn of Africa affairs, is regarded as an attractive and valued mediating effort. Also popular on the continent has been Beijing's policy of non-interference, boosting China's image as Africa's true development partner.

The deployment of a permanent diplomat in the Horn of Africa discourages the intention to make Africa an arena for geopolitics and promises to help the region reach lasting peace through economic development initiatives such as connecting infrastructure and increasing trade between communities and countries.

China has supported several projects in the region such as the construction of railway lines from Nairobi to Mombasa and Addis Ababa and Djibouti City. Beijing is prepared to share its development miracles to help Africa achieve long-term social stability. These ambitions help embolden the poverty-stricken and conflict-laden region to settle differences and rally efforts to fight climate change, drought, famine and terrorism in order to increase trade and strengthen economic cooperation to realize the region's huge development potential.

For too long, the Horn has been gripped with border disputes and ethnic and religious conflicts, and the U.S. has removed Ethiopia from a key trade pact and looks to use its influence to block international loans to Addis Ababa. To overcome the region's security challenges and make headway for sustainable growth, the China-proposed Outlook on Peace and Development in the Horn of Africa empowers regional nations to build consensus via a long-term solution based on three core issues: peace and security, development and governance.

*This is my opinion piece that originally appeared at "China Global Television Network (CGTN)":

How should China and EU approach their relationship?

By: Azhar Azam

Leaders at the 23rd China-EU Summit presented different approaches for resolving the conflict in Ukraine, but they all sought peace and stability in the European peninsula. As ripple effects of the war reach regional economies, some of which are Beijing's key trade partners, the bloc would soon understand that the continent's security is in Chinese interests too.

Beijing and Brussels agreed that the war threatened international security and the global economy, European Council President Charles Michel tweeted. As major global powers and leading economies, they have a "shared responsibility" toward global security. There's also a need to count on this consensus and act independently and increase communication to safeguard international economy and stability.

An assessment of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) last month warned of the negative impacts of the conflict on the international economy and its alarming implications for the developing countries, especially the ones in Africa, as well as least-developed nations. The evolving situation necessitates an increased cooperation between China and the EU as the global body has downgraded global economic growth forecast from 3.6 percent to 2.6 percent for 2022.

The rapidly worsening economic outlook from the UNCTAD is a stark reminder of cataclysmic effects of the war. With conflict putting further upward pressure on energy and staple food prices and adding to production costs, trade disruptions and sanctions may have a crippling effect on long-term investment. These factors, coupled with heightened financial volatility and complex global supply chain reconfigurations, could mark a potential shift from land to "expensive and overstretched" maritime transport between Asia and Europe.

Even in a pandemic-stricken 2021, China's trade with the EU rose 27.5 percent to more than $828 billion. The China-Europe freight train service, an important component of the Belt and Road Initiative, also reported sizable growth of 22 percent, making 15,000 trips last year. This mutually beneficial partnership and deepening bilateral relationship shouldn't be influenced by the U.S.-concocted "China threat" narrative.

Realizing the intensity of economic challenges, Brussels took the summit as an opportunity to pore over the state of its relationship with Beijing and reiterate the importance of cooperation in the areas of mutual interest, including trade, climate change and health, to pave the way for the next high-level trade and economic and digital dialogues, foster constructive engagement on decarbonization and mull over an international plan to respond to future health crises.

At the summit, China and the EU evaluated the progress on bilateral cooperation and mandated top-ranking consultations to make headway on issues including environment, trade, digital technology, energy and food security. Brussels supported the one-China principle and intended to move toward renewables and decarbonization with Beijing. It explained the European leaders were deeply concerned about economic fallouts of the conflict, expecting China to play a positive role in the middle of an uncertain regional economic future.

Ahead of the meeting, Brussels argued neutrality wasn't possible in the Moscow-Kyiv conflict. The stance is a bit too hard and oppugnant to the norms of diplomacy and international relations. Since the EU goals, such as establishing a ceasefire, ensuring safe humanitarian corridors and quickly ending the war, are in tune with those of China to obviate the risks of further escalation, the bloc ought not to oppose an objective and impartial position that provides a fair view of the conflict and may help to calm tensions.

At the summit again, Chinese President Xi Jinping described the conflict as "deeply regrettable" and reiterated China's support for the peace talks. Brussels should welcome Beijing's expression of peace without gauging it on America's hate-scaled measuring rule. Both sides need to collaborate on commonalities, push back differences and pursue engagement to shield the valuable relationship.

The bloc should also beware of toeing the line of Washington, which is trying to make China a scapegoat for its failures, using the Ukraine crisis to drive a wedge between China and the EU and pressurizing the latter to consider the former a "strategic adversary." In a world battered by U.S. protectionism and unilateralism, Beijing and Brussels must exercise an abundance of caution and make joint efforts for a peaceful resolution of the conflict to thwart threats to the EU security and economy.

Even though China has expressed concerns about the war in Ukraine and the European leaders want to avoid confrontation with Russia, the U.S. is breaking its back to drag Beijing in the conflict. Washington would like to bring Brussels on the same page and force Europe to consider Beijing a threat to the continent's security. However, Josep Borrell, the European Union's high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, said that "China, as a military danger or threat for the European Union, is not in our mindset."

Against wishful thinking that China-EU cooperation in other areas will take a back seat over the Ukrainian conflict, leaders from Beijing and Brussels had a frank discussion on a range of issues.

However, for a more productive engagement and to address regional and global challenges, the bloc should deal with China more as a "partner of cooperation and negotiation" than as an economic competitor or systemic rival.

An independent approach for a balanced and reciprocal cooperation toward each other can lead to stronger economic and strategic China-EU ties and would be the right priority.

*This is my opinion piece that originally appeared at "China Global Television Network (CGTN)":