إعلام المنتدىView all posts

Avatar for إعلام المنتدى

إعلام المنتدى

هجوم سيبراني صيني يطال عشرات الشركات الإسرائيلية

عرضت عشرات المواقع الإلكترونية التابعة لشركات حكومية إسرائيلية وشركات من القطاع الخاص أيضا إلى هجمات سيبرانية نفذتها الصين، ويرجح أن الهجمات نفذت منذ العام 2019 وتواصلت لعامين، وهدفت قرصنة البيانات والحصول على المعلومات عن الهيئات والشركات الإسرائيلية، بحسب ما أفادت صحيفة “هآرتس”.

وتم الكشف عن تفاصيل الهجوم السيبراني الصيني من خلال إعلان الشركة العالمية “FireEye”، وهي إحدى أكبر شركات الأمن السيبراني في العالم، حيث قامت الشركة وعلى مدار عامين بالتحقيق بالهجمات السيبرانية المنسوبة إلى الصين، مؤكدة في تقريرها أن الحديث يدور عن أوسع وأكبر هجمات سيبرانية تم رصدها وتوثيقها ضد مواقع وأهداف في إسرائيل، وفق موقع عرب 48.

ويأتي تقرير الشركة العالمية والتطرق إلى الهجمات السيبرانية التي تعرضت لها مواقع إسرائيلية، ضمن تقرير شامل وواسع استعرضت من خلاله الهجمات السيبرانية التي تعرضت لها العديد من الدول وأبرزها، إيران والسعودية، وأوكرانيا، وأوزباكستان، وتايلاند.

وبحسب تقرير الشركة العالمية “FireEye”، فإن الهجمات السيبرانية الصينية استهدفت شركات الملاحة البحرية والسفن الإسرائيلية، وشركات هايتك واتصالات ومؤسسات أمنية وأكاديمية، وشركات تكنولوجيا المعلومات التي تعتبر من أبرز الأهداف لقراصنة السايبر، كونه في حال اختراقها يمكن الوصول إلى شركات أخرى.

وذكرت الشركة العالمية في تقريرها أن الهجمات السيبرانية الصينية هدفت إلى سرقة المعلومات والحصول على أسرار تجارية، وتركزت الهجمات على اختراق البريد الإلكتروني وسرقة وثائق ومستندات سرية، حيث تم سرقة اسم المستخدم وكلمات السر بغية مهاجمة واستهداف هذه المؤسسات لاحقا أو من أجل الوصول عبر اختراق هذه المؤسسات لخدمات أخرى.

وقالت الباحثة في شركة “FireEye”، سونز يشار، التي أشرفت على الجانب الإسرائيلي في التقرير إن “الصين لديها خطة لإنشاء خط بري وبحري حول العالم”.

وأضافت إن ما ورد في التقرير عن الهجمات السيبرانية الصينية “يرتبط بمناقصات البنى التحتية الضخمة التي يشارك فيها الصينيون في إسرائيل، مثل الموانئ أو القطارات. وهناك العديد من الشركات الإسرائيلية التي تنشط وتختص بالمجالات التي هي في صميم المصلحة الصينية، كما ينعكس ذلك في الخطط الخماسية لهذه الشركات”.

وبحسب الباحثة يشار، فإن مصدر آخر لاهتمام الصينيين في إسرائيل، هو “قطاع التكنولوجيا، إذ يهتمون أيضا بالمعرفة في مجال الإنترنت والطاقة المتجددة والتكنولوجيا في مجال الزراعة والاتصالات في الجيل الخامس والمزيد من المواضيع”.

وتابعت “في أماكن أخرى من العالم، لكن ليس في إسرائيل، رأينا أن المجموعة التي قامت بتنفيذ الهجمات السيبرانية مهتمة أيضا بمعلومات حول لقاحات كورونا، كما إننا لم نشهد في اسرائيل هجوما على كيانات مالية”.

وفقا للباحثة يشار، “يمكن لأي شخص يتعامل مع الصين أن يكون في دائرة الاستهداف”، قائلة “الهدف ليس بالضرورة ملكية فكرية لكنهم ربما يبحثون عن معلومات تجارية. بالنسبة للصينيين، أنه لأمر شرعي مهاجمة شركة أثناء المفاوضات معها حتى يعرفوا كيفية تسعير الصفقة والمناقصة بشكل صحيح”.

وأضافت إنهم “لا يتعاملون مع المناقصات بأعين مغلقة، بل يفحصون المقترحات الأخرى، ورسائل البريد الإلكتروني لمجلس الإدارة، والمراسلات بين الناس، وما هي المخططات والمؤامرات، ومن هم الأشخاص الرئيسيون”.

المصدر: شبكة راية R.N.N

منتدى آسيا والشرق الأوسط يستقبل القنصل الأفغاني في اسطنبول

إعلام المنتدى

استقبل منتدى آسيا والشرق الأوسط “القنصل الأفغاني في اسطنبول” آغا سيد حامد، وكان في استقباله بمقر المنتدى د. محمد مكرم بلعاوي “رئيس المنتدى” و د. خالد هنية “مدير المنتدى”. وبحث الطرفان خلال الزيارة، أهم الأهداف المشتركة في العمل، والتطرق لذكر أبرز الأنشطة والفعاليات التي يتم تنفيذها ضمن خطة المنتدي، كما وتم النقاش حول آلية العمل والتعاون بين الطرفين في المساحات المشتركة وتبادل الخبرات والمعرفة، مؤكدين على أهمية توطيد وتقوية العلاقة بينهما.

من جهته ذكر القنصل سيد حامد أهمية تعزيز التعاون مع منتدى آسيا والشرق الأوسط، وتقديم الخبرات وتشبيك العلاقات مع المراكز والمؤسسات ذات الصلة، وفي حديثٍ متصل أكد القنصل على دور تركيا الكبير والتي تمثل جزءًا كبيرًا من العالم الإسلامي، ويتواجد فيها الكثير من المراكز والمؤسسات البحثية التخصصيّة والتي بحاجة إلى ضرورة التعاون فيما بينها لتحقيق الأهداف الرئيسية والغايات المشتركة.

كما أكد بلعاوي “رئيس المنتدى” بأن منتدى آسيا والشرق الأوسط هو منصة رائدة لحوار آسيوي – شرق أوسطي، بهدف معرفة دول قارة آسيا بشكل مباشر وتقديمها للمهتمين في الشرق الأوسط، وكذلك تقديم القضايا الشرق أوسطية لصناع القرار في دول آسيا وخصوصًا القضية الفلسطينية، وتأسيس علاقات جديدة وتعزيز العلاقات القائمة بين الطرفين وتوفير فرص اللقاء والتواصل الفعال والحوار بين المهتمين من كلا الجانبين.

وفي نهاية اللقاء اتفق الطرفان على تنظيم زيارة أخرى لمقر القنصلية الأفغانية في إسطنبول لمناقشة كافة التفاصيل وتقوية العلاقة، والعمل قدر المستطاع على تنفيذ الأنشطة المشتركة بين الطرفين.

منتدى آسيا والشرق الأوسط يشارك في حفل توقيع كتاب “وائل حلاق وإدورد سعيد جدل ثالث”

نظم المركز الكندي للاستشارات الفكرية في إسطنبول حفل خاص لتوقيع الإصدار الأخير للمؤلف الأستاذ مهنا الحبيل والذي بعنوان: “وائل حلاق وإدورد سعيد جدل ثالث” ، حيث شارك في الحفل منتدى آسيا والشرق الأوسط ، بالإضافة إلى العديد من مدراء المراكز والمؤسسات ومجموعة من الشخصيات الإعتبارية والأدبية، كما وتخلل الحفل عرض خلاصات عن الكتاب من الكاتب المؤلف الأستاذ مهنا الحبيل، وفتح باب النقاش مع السادة الحضور.

وقد اتفق الطرفان على تبادل الخبرات وتعزيز آفاق التعاون والعمل في المستقبل في المجالات المختلفة ومنها مجال نشر الدراسات والأبحاث ذات الصلة التي يختص بها المنتدى.

وفي نهاية الحفل قدم مؤلف الكتاب نسخة خاصة لمنتدى آسيا والشرق والأوسط، ومن جهته قدم المنتدى هدية للمؤلف بالإضافة لنسخ خاصة من العدد الأول والثاني من مجلة آسيا بوست والتي يصدرها المنتدى.

العلاقات العامة والإعلام

منتدى آسيا والشرق الأوسط

Webinar Summary: Towards a New Vision for the Struggle for Palestine

The Asia Middle East Forum has organized its forth live webinar entitled ‘Towards a New Vision for the Struggle for Palestine’. The talk was delivered by Prof. Dr. Sami Al-Arian, Director of the Center for Islam and Global Affairs CIGA at Istanbul Zaim University.

Prof. Dr. Sami Al-Arian outlines his talk by two main points: background of the Palestinian cause and Jewish history, and fresh vision for the struggle for Palestine.

The speaker began his talk by highlighting substantial differences in dealing with Jewish communities under Muslim rule and Christian authorities throughout the history. Under the constitution of Madinah, the Jewish community or Jews of Islam who were part of the Arabia lived in security and peace together with Muslims and people of other faiths. On the other hand, Jewish communities in Europe lived in ghettos for centuries, facing multiple forms of discrimination, marginalization and restrictions. Despite some improvements upon the emancipation of Jews in the age of Enlightenment, the debate over the so-called Jewish problem in Europe had continued to take place in the 19th and 20th centuries.

Prof. Al-Arian explained that the imperial and colonial movements in Europe had given momentum to the Zionist movement as they identified a common ground in establishing a colonial entity in the heart of the Arab world and while Europe would get rid of the “Jewish problem”. The former European move came also in line with own objective to dismantle the Ottoman Empire, and fragment the Middle East into separate countries. The British role was much obvious as it pledged to support the erection of a Jewish national home in Palestine in the form of the Balfour Declaration. As the Ottoman Empire was in decline, the British forces had controlled Palestine (British Mandate) and subsequently gave way to Jewish immigrants to arrive and settle in the land, and allowed them to establish settlements or Kibbutz and carry arms. It is worth mentioning that towards the end of 19th century and before the Mandate came into force, the Jews in Palestine had constituted only some 2.5% of the total population. Later, the Zionist conquest in 1948 resulted in the occupation of 79% of Palestine and it led to the expulsion of 60% of the indigenous population from their homes. In 1967, “Israel” had further expanded its occupation and seized the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Sinai Peninsula, and Golan Heights.

The Director of the Centre for Islam and Global Affairs emphasizes that Western powers supported the Israeli occupation in all sorts of ways as Britain, Germany, France and the United States enormously gave life to it through military, political, diplomatic and security assistances, among others.

The lecturer also elaborates on the persistence of the Palestinian issue which has lasted for many decades and is still alive. He particularly acknowledged the role of Palestinian national movements and mass uprisings in this field where people resisted the occupation and remained steadfast on their land. In contrast, Prof. Al-Arian explained the inclination of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) under a regional pressure to opt for “peace process” with the Israeli authorities which resulted in the recognition of the PLO as the official negotiator on behalf of the Palestinian people in exchange with PLO’s abandonment of 78% of the Palestinian land. The speaker also examined the viability of “the two-state solution” and realized that it has become impossible after the Deal of Century which declared Jerusalem as the eternal capital of “Israel” and legitimized the annexation of large parts of the West Bank, including the Jordan Valley. The one-state solution, if any, is considered unjust to more than 7 million Palestinian refugees who have the right to return to their land.

Prof. Al-Arian believes that the only solution to Israeli occupation is to dismantle the whole Zionist project with all of its institutions and instruments. Hence, he proposes a number of principles that Palestinians and free people elsewhere may need to adhere to in order to achieve justice in the region. These principles include: the restoration of the Palestinian rights; the need of other actors to join forces with the Palestinian people; “Israel” attempts to become the hegemon in the area, threatening the whole region; the struggle is against oppression and global threat that may concern the whole humanity; the need to understand the Israeli strategic imperatives in order to deal with it effectively; much larger role for common people, not only elite; alliance with other movements related to just struggles; the project must have strategic and operational plans; and finally the Zionist project will collapse upon changes in the balance of power.

The Zionist project was erected and is still operating based on supportive pillars, Dr. Al-Arian outlines 12 strategic imperatives that sustain the Zionist entity and could be utilized to weaken the project, as follows:

  1. 1- Exclusivism: The ingathering of all or most Jews around the world in the historic Palestine.

 

  1. 2- Exclusion: The non-Jews, Palestinians will not be allowed to live in Palestine.

 

  1. 3- Expansion and Colonization: Seizing the much possible land with the fewest indigenous people.

 

  1. 4- Creating Facts on the Ground (Fait accompli): This is a geopolitical term that imposes the situation in reality as opposed to in the abstract. This means that the Israeli occupation attempts to obtain gradual and full control over all the land of Palestine.

 

  1. 5- Garrison State: “Israel” has created a military-based society, and the Israeli budget (per capita) is the highest in the world.

 

  1. 6- Developing the Military Doctrine of using Overwhelming Forces to win against any and all enemies: The Israeli occupation fights to have military and technological edge over all rivals. It seeks to clash with enemies on their territories.

 

  1. 7- Maintaining Monopoly of Nuclear Weapons: “Israel” has tried to prevent other countries in the region from obtaining nuclear capabilities as it destroyed Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1981, and another Syrian reactor in 2007. The pressure campaign against Iran’s nuclear program is still ongoing.

 

  1. 8- Building the most Efficient, Sophisticated, and Ruthless Security Apparatuses and Intelligence Agencies in order to control the Palestinian population.

 

  1. 9- Linking tightly with International Powers and Benefactors: The Israeli occupation has relied largely on great powers; it particularly appeals for strategic protection from them. This connection has been prioritized even if it required to act as a client state.

 

  1. 10- To Keep World Jewry Zionist, particularly in the United States and Europe.

 

  1. 11- To Keep the Enemy Divided and Weak: The Israeli occupation aims to fragment the Middle East and beyond. The Oded Yinon Plan could serve as evidence to show the Israeli endeavor to balkanize the region into hostile entities.

 

  1. 12- To Become Regional Hegemon by Allying itself with Minorities, Separatists, and Tyrants.

 

All in all, the region will remain threatened as long as the Zionist project is not dismantled. The Middle East could become more fragmented, weakened and in extreme turmoil unless the Israeli occupation is ended. The one-state solution or two-state solution have evidently become irrelevant in this context, and those concerned need to study the Israeli strategic imperatives and sources of strength in order put an end to the occupation. The struggle requires collective efforts from Palestinians and other concerned movements and peoples around the world. The Palestinian struggle is indeed for all humanity.

Summary prepared by Bilal Samir

Summary: Current Situation in US, Impacts on Middle East Issues

The Asia Middle East Forum organized its third live webinar to discuss latest developments in the United States and examine potential effects in the Middle East. The event featured a talk by the former Egyptian Minister of Planning and International Cooperation, Dr. Amr Darrag.

Dr. Amr Darrag outlines his talk with three main points: a brief background of the United States in the pre-Coronavirus era, developments in the US during the last three months, and some expected repercussions of the US policy in the Middle East.

The speaker began his talk by indicating that multiple changes have taken place in the international arena over the last twenty years as the United States apparently began to lose momentum. Furthermore, the outbreak of Coronavirus made the US more vulnerable, and there appears a recession of the liberal democratic model.
Dr. Darrag suggests the United States has been in a position of leading the world by control following the end World War II. The chairman of the Egyptian Institute for Studies says the US military spending is exceeding the next largest seven military budgets combined. In addition, the speaker says the US economy is strong, and he links that to the ability to print as much Dollars as they want. It was also mentioned during the talk that the American dollar is used for more than 60% of trade transactions in the world, including the oil sector. The technology and cultural sector in the US present other forms of the American dominance.

However, the former Egyptian Minister of Planning and International Cooperation notes that the US international status became in doubt over the last few years. He observes a recession of attractiveness of the America model to the entire world, while the domestic democratic liberal model is in dilemma as well. Dr. Darrag recalls a book authored by Francis Fukuyama assuming the US was going to control the world forever which proved not to be the case.

The internal dispute is emerging in the country as people complain about the elite control of politics, media, economy, business and everything. This issue of elite was viewed by the speaker as a main problem in the US that leads to a large social problem. He elaborates that the top 0.1 elite may control 23% of the wealth, while the top 1% group controls 50% of the economy. In politics, it is very hard to join the top elite as candidates need wide support from corporations, interest groups and access to huge amounts of money. Dr. Amr Darrag also highlights the challenge to get access to media and audience as only few media outlets control the narrative.
The speaker states that the intrinsic issue in the US is discrimination against color and treatment of minorities, especially during the current tenure of Trump’s presidency.
Due to the pandemic outbreak in the last three months, the economy has been almost shutdown and more than forty million Americans submitted unemployment claims which is an unprecedented figure that exceeds the number of those affected by the Great Depression.

According to Dr. Darrag, the Coronavirus highlighted and expedited the said problems, but it did not create them. While the military factor remains the same, the US society is suffering and such internal factor constitutes a major threat to empires and nations. ‘The situation becomes much worse in case the country is headed by a president who lacks leadership and keeps pouring oil onto fires’, Dr. Darrag said.

The former Egyptian Minister discusses the presence of international actors in the Middle East. He acknowledges that Russia and China seek to cultivate their ties and roles in the region. Dr. Darrag believes that the United States began to decrease its presence in the Middle East since Barack Obama’s presidency term. It all stared with the realization after George W. Bush left the presidency that the US paid much attention to the Middle East while ignoring the rising power of China. The speaker suggests that since the presidency of Obama, the US government has given more attention to Asia, China in particular, and the presence in the Middle East was arguably reduced. Dr. Darrag says that the United States left a (power) vacuum in the Middle East which filled by ‘three mechanisms’. The three mechanisms are: the rising powers of Russia and China, regional powers (namely Iran, Turkey, UAE and Saudi Arabia), and the expansion of autocratic regimes. For the lecturer, the involvement of China in the Middle East is not a major one, while Russia counts on its military capabilities to play a role in the region as in the cases of Syria, Egypt and Libya. The Russian role could help Moscow secure strategic advantage and strong position in the face of the European Union and NATO. On the other hand, Iran has expanded its role in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen. The UAE seemingly leveraged on its wealth to get involved in the region with a strategic turn to make use of Egypt capabilities. The Turkish role in the region has expanded in Qatar, Syria and Libya. The speaker views the Turkish actions as positive as the country counterbalances negative interventions in the region. Dr. Darrag takes note that the third mechanism of autocratic regimes associate with major powers to enforce mutual agenda.

In summary, it is understood that significant changes have taken place in the United States over the last twenty years. The phenomenon of discrimination is seemingly one of the defining characters of the United States that affect its status worldwide. The Trump leadership that propagates self-interests has contributed to a recession of the US leading role in the world, and the Coronavirus further magnified the weakness of the American model.

Opinion: Israel’s piracy against the Gaza Freedom Flotilla exposed Zionism’s ugly face

By: Anas Nairoukh

We all go through many experiences in life that leave lasting impressions, especially if they are positive. Thus, when something bad happens, we tend to be haunted – for want of a better term — by it, even though it might make us believe more strongly in the values of righteousness, justice and equality. Indeed, it might make us more determined to strive towards developing such values within ourselves and society.

A short while ago I watched a movie called Captain Phillips, which is based on the true story of Somali pirates attacking a container ship —MV Maersk Alabama — in international waters. I do not accept everything that I watched at face value, but the 2013 movie made me reflect on my own experiences on board the MV Mavi Marmara in 2010. Our ship was part of the Freedom Flotilla trying to help the Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip.

I was one of more than 700 international activists on board six vessels in the flotilla, the largest of which was the Mavi Marmara. Our goal was to stand in solidarity with the people in Gaza, highlight their suffering and break the inhumane and illegal blockade imposed upon them by delivering humanitarian aid. Personally, I had purchased medication and nutrients for children in the coastal enclave, hoping that each item would help to save a life.

Captain Phillips brought back memories of what happened to us. In recalling events of that night ten years ago, I also want to deliver a message to the Israeli commandos who were pirates in all but name. They should watch the film and make note of the similarities between them and the Somalis depicted in the movie. In my view, the Israeli pirates are even worse for attacking unarmed civilians in international waters who had purely humanitarian intentions. The difference between the Israeli criminals and the pirates in the film is that the latter are powerless, yet the Israelis draw their strength from the forces of evil who control world events, albeit temporarily.

Just as at one point the Somali pirates were afraid, I remember that Israel’s so-called “elite” commandos were trembling with fear despite their military strength, weaponry, helicopters and warships. Their eyes betrayed how scared they were even though they wore masks and we were handcuffed.

The Israelis could easily have taken control of the flotilla without using the military option, avoiding the inevitable diplomatic crises with dozens of countries whose citizens were on board. Moreover, that would have saved the lives of the ten martyrs who were shot at close range by cowards in uniform, to say nothing about the dozens who were wounded by the commandos. Stupidly, though, the Israeli pirates insisted on exposing their criminal intent before the entire world. As a result, the Palestinian cause gained even more than it would have if the ships had been allowed to reach the tiny port in Gaza.

Although Israel claims to be a civilised nation, it has unmasked itself on numerous occasions, not least on the night of 31 May 2010 in the Mediterranean Sea; the world knows that it is a terrorist state which uses the might of a modern army, navy and air force against unarmed civilians. On that particular night, such civilians were carrying urgently-needed food, medicine and medical equipment. Nevertheless, they were prepared to defend themselves against Israel’s fully armed commandos — the “elite”, remember — the moment they landed on deck.

As I recall it, some of these commandos wet themselves with fear when we began to defend ourselves and resist their piracy. The navy called this act of piracy Operation Sky Winds, and yet it was damned from the heavens above, a damnation which will continue to haunt Israel, along with the spirit of our martyrs.

The cowards killed nine men in cold blood (the tenth died later of his wounds), who have become heroes. The youngest was 19 year old Turkish-American national Furkan Dogan, who was shot fatally as he lay wounded on deck. Divine justice will prevail eventually; Israel’s earthly impunity will not save it at the end of the day, and the curse of the Mavi Marmara martyrs and the children of Gaza who died because it deprived them of humanitarian aid will haunt the terrorist state. The free world has seen Israel’s ugly face exposed by documentaries such as The Truth: Lost at Sea directed by my shipmate Rifat Audeh, and others.

The cycle of Israeli criminality and savagery continues, the latest example being the killing of an autistic Palestinian man, Iyad Hallaq, whose “crime” was to run away because he was scared. Maybe the message here is that while oppression and barbarity can be found in many places, their ultimate fate is the same. Just as the age of piracy has been consigned to the history books, the age of Israel’s existence will be judged by history as a disgrace and stain upon humanity. It will come to an end, for sure; and sooner than we expect.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author 

Coronavirus pandemic further strains US-China relations

Mistrust and rivalry have been simmering between the US and China for years. Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, this has given way to open hostility. Could this lead to a new Cold War?

A “new Cold War”: the loaded term had already been floating in the air for some time, but on May 24 it was first used publicly by Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi at the recent National People’s Congress in Beijing. He was reacting to Washington’s accusations that China was responsible for the global spread of the coronavirus pandemic.

Wang accused Washington of spreading “lies and conspiracy theories,” telling journalists that in addition to the coronavirus, there was a “political virus” running rampant in the United States.

At a White House event in early May, President Donald Trump called the pandemic the “worst attack” the US had ever experienced, and put the blame squarely on China.

“This is worse than Pearl Harbor. This is worse than the World Trade Center,” Trump said. “And it should have never happened. Could’ve been stopped at the source. Could’ve been stopped in China. It should’ve been stopped right at the source. And it wasn’t.”

In the early days of the pandemic, optimists held out hope that the global crisis could lead to more cooperation between Beijing and Washington. But these recent broadsides are symptoms of a deeper conflict between the US and China.

Josef Braml, an expert for US affairs at the German Council on Foreign Relations, told DW the pandemic had accelerated and reinforced economic and geostrategic competition between the two world powers. He said both countries were vying to control trade streams, finance streams and data streams, with the latter being the most important.

Huawei controversy

Nowhere has this become more apparent than in the case of Chinese telecommunication giant Huawei, one of the world’s leading companies when it comes to 5G networks. “Huawei is the global spearhead of Chinese innovative power and technology policy,” said Sebastian Heilmann, a China expert at the University of Trier. “This means that Huawei has a great significance going beyond the company itself. It is absolutely no wonder that the US is using every means it can at the moment to end Huawei’s success story.”

At the Munich Security Conference in February, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo described Huawei and other Chinese state-run technology companies as “Trojan horses for Chinese intelligence.” His statement reflects the suspicion harbored by some in the West that Huawei could build backdoors into its 5G networks, giving Chinese spies free access to data streams at the heart of the new digital economy.

In March, the US ambassador to Germany, Richard Grenell, upped the ante by writing a letter to German Economy Minister Peter Altmaier warning that the US would stop cooperating with German intelligence agencies if Huawei were involved in building 5G networks in Germany.

Washington fired its most recent salvo against Huawei on May 15, aiming at the company’s very heart: chip production. The US said American machines, tools or other products would no longer be allowed to be involved in Huawei chip production anywhere in the world, a move Huawei said would endanger its very existence.

Less than a week later, on May 21, Chinese President Xi Jinping announced plans to invest $1.4 trillion (€1.3 trillion) in building 5G networks and developing artificial intelligence over the next six years, helping to ensure China’s technological independence.

Clash of world powers

Over the past 30 years, China has seen an unprecedented economic and technological rise, and jumped from being an impoverished developing country to a global economic power. In the fifth century BC, Greek historian Thucydides described the perilous dynamics between emerging and established powers, writing that the growing influence of the rising power inevitably leads to shifts in the geopolitical balance. He said these shifts must be cushioned by clever political decisions — or they will end in war.

US political scientist Graham Allison has cast a sobering look at the history of the past 500 years. Allison, a professor at Harvard University, examined 16 cases in which a new power came into being. His conclusion: In 12 of them, the “Thucydides trap” went into action, resulting in blood being shed.

“The rise of a 5,000-year-old civilization with 1.3 billion people is not a problem to be fixed. It is a condition — a chronic condition that will have to be managed over a generation,” Allison warned in a September 2015 article in The Atlantic, commenting on the US-China relationship.

Conflict-loving leaders

Yet the current leaders in Washington and Beijing hardly seem willing to undertake this cautious approach. Until Xi Jinping became Communist Party leader in 2012, China’s politicians had followed a policy set out by former leader Deng Xiaoping, who was behind China’s policy of reform and gradual opening in the late 20th century: “Hide your strength and bide your time.”

Xi seems to feel that China’s time has now come. When he took office, he promised the Chinese people a return to the greatness of past dynasties, clothed in the image of the “Chinese dream” of the revitalization of the nation. China has been displaying this growing self-assertiveness on the international stage, on both the political and the military front. In the South China Sea, for example, American and Chinese warships have had several dangerously close calls in recent years. According to Heilmann, “with Xi Jinping, China’s irreconcilable political and ideological differences have come to the fore.”

Even before the pandemic, Trump was already blaming China for more or less everything that has gone wrong in the US. Ahead of November’s presidential election, he appears to be doubling down on this strategy — in part to distract from his own horrendous management of the coronavirus pandemic.

Heilmann is worried by the fact that both Trump and Xi are playing the nationalist card. “Xi Jinping feels himself to be at the height of his powers and is basking in China’s success at controlling the pandemic. Donald Trump is under a lot of pressure. And neither of them is willing to compromise,” he said.

Zero-sum world

A report published by the Trump administration on May 20 gives an insight into Washington’s worldview. In the 16-page document, entitled “United States Strategic Approach to the People’s Republic of China,” the authors explicitly turn away from the assumption that integrating rivals into international institutions and global trade structures will turn them into benign players and trustworthy partners.

Trump has already gone a step further toward escalating tensions: In an interview with US broadcaster Fox News in mid-May, he mused on whether the US could cut off relations with China entirely, even predicting that the US would save $500 billion by doing so.

“The familiar way of thinking that free trade helps everyone, the win-win concept, has now been turned on its head,” said US expert Braml. “Now, the idea is: Mutual dependence makes you vulnerable. We are living in a zero-sum world.”

It remains unclear how Europe will find its place in this new world, as Gerard Araud, the former French ambassador to the US and the UN, noted on Twitter in May. The growing polarization between China and US may mean that the time when profitable deals could be made with both sides is coming to an end.

At any rate, post-Brexit Britain has already made its own decision regarding Huawei. In late May, Prime Minister Boris Johnson called on his officials to cut ties with the Chinese company’s involvement in the UK’s 5G networks by 2023. Washington, no doubt, was delighted by the move.

From: DW

AMEF Calls for International Efforts to End Israeli Occupation and Repatriate Palestinian Refugees

On the seventy-second anniversary of Palestinian Nakba (catastrophe)

AMEF Calls for International Efforts to End Israeli Occupation and Repatriate Palestinian Refugees

Asia Middle East Forum calls for positive international efforts to help end the Israeli occupation in Palestine and repatriate the Palestinian refugees to their home land.
The Israeli occupation has caused prolonged suffering in Palestine and instability elsewhere in the region as the Israeli forces continue to carry out attacks over sovereign countries.
The lingering effect of occupation seems alarming, both in political aspect and human rights aspect, as well.
The recent Israeli announcement of another wave of annexation in the occupied West Bank serves as a reminder of the Israeli disregard to Palestinian basic rights and the international law.

In the spirit of international solidarity and upon a collective responsibility to make the end of occupation, we urge friends and supporters of Palestine to play roles on all possible arenas to support the Palestinian legitimate rights of self-determination and sovereignty.

In the aftermath of the Palestinian Nakba (Catastrophe) that took place on May 15, 1948, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were forcefully displaced from their homes by Zionist forces. The invaders totally destroyed more than 530 Palestinian towns and cities, and official reports state that thousands of Palestinians have been killed.

Asia Middle East Forum
May 15, 2020
Istanbul, Turkey

AMEF organizes webinar on Palestine in Corona Era

The Asia Middle East Monitor (AMEF) organized a live webinar on the developments of the Palestinian issue in the midst of Covid-19. In the first of a series of webinars, the former Palestinian Health Minister, Dr. Basim Naim, shared latest information on the Covid-19 pandemic in Palestine, and highlighted challenges and threats faced by the Palestinians in the context of the Israeli occupation and Coronavirus.

“ While the pandemic constitutes a real danger to the people in Palestine as in other countries, the Israeli occupation assembles the highest threat by nature and functions as it attempts to exploit the current situation to enforce own agenda”, Dr. Naim said.

The former Palestinian official and head of Council on International Relations in Gaza warned from Israeli serious attempts to annex parts of the West Bank, continuing colonial efforts to change the identity of Jerusalem and displacement of Palestinians. Dr. Naim also cautioned that Israeli occupation authorities seek to normalize relationships with Arab and Muslim states and he urged for efforts to reveal the real and criminal faces of the occupation.

It is learnt that AMEF will host a senior Palestinian political leader in its second webinar on May 17, 2020 to address the Israeli annexation of the West Bank.

Philippines not seeking new military pact with U.S.: presidential spokesman

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has not authorized any new negotiations to forge a new military pact that will replace the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) with the United States, presidential spokesman Salvador Panelo said Sunday.

Panelo reiterated Duterte does not want a new military deal with the U.S., adding that the Philippine leader is determined to terminate the VFA.

Panelo belied reports which quoted the Philippine Ambassador to the U.S. Jose Manuel Romualdez as saying that Manila and Washington are finding ways to come up with an agreement similar to the VFA.

“Actually I was talking to Ambassador Romualdez. He denied it. It’s like he was saying that they are studying other agreements, whether they are disadvantageous or advantageous to the country,” Panelo said in a radio interview.

Panelo said there might be some U.S. officials who are pushing for a possible new agreement but Duterte has already made up his mind not to negotiate a new one with the U.S.

“None. There was no approval from President Duterte. It must be an initiative of the counterparts of Ambassador Romualdez. They are the ones affected, that is why they will likely initiate and make a good suggestion,” he said.

Panelo said any talks for new military pact with the United States is not sanctioned by Duterte.

“The president’s position remains unchanged. He still wants to scrap the VFA. He wants us to be self-reliant. That’s his main point,” Panelo said.

In a speech this week, Duterte said that the Philippine troops can fight terrorists without U.S. military help.

On Feb. 11, the Philippines officially notified Washington of its intention to unilaterally terminate the VFA with the United States. The termination will take effect 180 days after the notification.

The two countries signed in 1998 the VFA allowing joint Philippine-U.S. military operations. The Philippine senate ratified the agreement in 1999, seven years after the closure of the last U.S. base on Philippine territory.

Over 300 military engagements are scheduled between the two militaries during the entire year. These engagements include training exercises, expert exchanges, functional training and exchanges, planning and table-top exercises.

From: Xinhau

Opinion: What Would Ending the US-Philippines Visiting Forces Agreement Actually Do?

By Prashanth Parameswaran

Last week, Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte issued a threat to cancel the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) with the United States, the latest of a series of threats regarding the alliance Duterte has made since taking office in 2016. While specifics are still unclear as to if and when this termination will actually play out in practice, it is nonetheless worth considering what its nixing would actually mean for the U.S-Philippine alliance and wider dynamics in the Indo-Pacific.

As I have observed before in these pages and elsewhere, the U.S.-Philippine alliance is no stranger to rounds of stress testing. Since the alliance was born through the Mutual Defense Treaty in 1951, it has been through a series of challenging periods, whether it be the renegotiating of the terms of base agreements in the 1970s, the closure of U.S. military facilities in the early 1990s, or the management of China’s growing assertiveness in the South China Sea in the early to mid-2010s.

But Duterte’s rise to power has brought about the biggest stress test for the alliance in decades. Since coming to office in May 2016, Duterte has sought to distance the Philippines from its alliance with the United States while pursuing closer ties with China and Russia. While his aspirations have unsurprisingly run into long-standing realities – from the Philippine military’s close ties with the United States to Washington’s important role in helping Manila with some of its urgent threats, including terrorism – we have nonetheless seen divergences in threat perceptions and slowing of U.S.-Philippine collaboration in some areas.

Last week, we saw another test for the alliance in the Duterte era with his threat on Thursday to cancel the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA), a pact ratified by the U.S. Senate in May 1999. The VFA, which governs the terms under which U.S. military personnel can be temporarily present in the Philippines, was itself reached following an increased threat perceived by the Philippines from China in the early to mid-1990s following the U.S. base closures that had occurred.

Duterte’s threat has raised a series of questions regarding the VFA, from the reasons behind it to how the termination process could actually play out between the United States and the Philippines. But it is also worth probing what the significance of such a move would actually constitute if it indeed does take place.

In terms of symbolism, the nixing of the VFA would constitute the biggest realized setback we have seen in the U.S.-Philippine alliance since Duterte took office. While Duterte has previously issued various threats including seeking “separation” from the United States and canceling exercises, none of them have actually played out, and on some fronts such as exercises, collaboration has actually increased. And as former Philippine Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario pointed out, the VFA matters not only for its own sake, but as part of a series of agreements tied to the MDT that help advance its effective implementation.

The symbolism would likely extend beyond the alliance itself, even if much of this may seem overhyped in reality. It is worth recalling, for instance, that the last time that the U.S.-Philippine alliance took such a hit, with the closure of U.S. bases in the Philippines, this was seen as part of a wider reduction of American presence in the region in a post-Cold War context, even though the reality of U.S. presence was much more complex than that. At a time when Washington is seeking to reassert its role in the Indo-Pacific region and pursuing a more competitive approach with China, the nixing of the VFA would be interpreted as a blow for the United States.

Substantively, the move would also not be without significance. For the United States, while its alliance with the Philippines may not rank as highly as its other Asian alliances and has under performed in the past, it would nonetheless complicate the issue of the presence of U.S. military personnel on Philippine soil, since the VFA is the agreement that governs this and this aspect of the alliance relationship has proven to be contentious previously. The presence of U.S. personnel is important not only bilaterally to further alliance cooperation across a range of issues and contingencies, ranging from terrorism to humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, but also regionally as well since the Philippines is one of the few places where Washington currently has such as pact in the Indo-Pacific region.

But the effects on the Philippines would unquestionably be far more significant given Manila’s limited capabilities, its continued reliance on the United States, and the threat environment it faces. This was why the Philippines recognized its need for the VFA in the first place in the 1990s, and that reality remains unchanged today. Contrary to Duterte’s recent comments on the VFA about being able to lean more on Russia and China, the tangible security cooperation that Manila has with both Moscow and Beijing is nascent and nowhere near what it currently has with the United States. And while Duterte may not admit it, a degrading of Manila’s alliance with Washington would only weaken the leverage the Philippines has in its ties with China and increase the risks of Beijing undermining Philippine interests on various fronts, including in the South China Sea.

To be sure, since it is still early days since Duterte’s VFA threat. And the impact of its actual termination would depend on a range of factors, including how the termination process plays out, the effects on broader alliance cooperation including existing pacts such as the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) approved by the Philippines in 2016, and reactions from a range of actors including the United States and China. But as headlines continue to roll in, it will be important to keep in mind what impact a VFA nixing would actually have for the alliance as well as for the wider region.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author.

From: The Diplomat

Opinion: Politics of coronavirus: Taiwan, China and WHO

By Erin Hale

As Taiwan faces 13 coronavirus cases on Thursday, its exclusion from leading global organisations has come under scrutiny as countries around the world struggle to prevent the spread of the highly-infectious virus.

While Taiwan, home to nearly 24 million people, has never been ruled by China’s Communist Party, Beijing’s claims over the island have long blocked it from membership from United Nations agencies like the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).

Beijing has collaborated with Taiwanese authorities amid the outbreak, with two Taiwanese experts travelling to Wuhan, the epicentre of the outbreak in China, in late January. But challenges remain.

On Thursday, Taipei accused Beijing of providing the WHO with wrong information about the number of coronavirus cases in Taiwan. It has also imposed more restrictions on travel from Hong Kong and Macau.

Last week, flights from Taiwan to Vietnam and Italy were turned back as international travel bans and restrictions were extended to people travelling from China, where the virus first broke out in late December, after the WHO declared the outbreak a global emergency.

Vietnam’s ban was reversed after some swift diplomatic manoeuvring. But the restriction remains in Italy, highlighting the global confusion over Taiwan’s political status and relationship with China, which claims Taiwan as part of its territory.

“Last week, when WHO started to publish a world map of the epidemic using colour coding to indicate the same level of seriousness, Taiwan was given same level as China. That has a direct impact on Taiwanese people and airlines who are travelling there,” said Chunhuei Chi, a Taiwanese-American professor at Oregon State University who specialises in global health.

On Thursday, Taiwan’s foreign ministry accused China, which includes Taiwan on its daily update as “Taiwan province”, of feeding incorrect data to the WHO, and complained about the way in which the WHO referred to the island.

The agency currently calls the self-governed territory “Taipei and environs”. Previously, it has used “Taiwan, China”, “Taipei municipality” and “Taipei”.

“I’d like to ask the WHO, how many times are you going to change Taiwan’s name?” spokeswoman Joanne Ou said at a news conference.

“These are not our correct names. Let me reiterate – our name is Taiwan, whose formal name is the Republic of China. We beseech the WHO not to put Taiwan’s information under China, creating mistake after mistake after mistake.”

Taiwan’s China dilemma

China has recorded more than 28,000 confirmed cases and more than 550 deaths, while Taiwan’s handful of cases have only been linked to people who recently visited or resided in China – meaning it cannot be classified as an “outbreak”, according to Kuan-Yu Chiang, a physician and president of the Taiwan Association for Global Health Diplomacy.

Taiwan is instead in the strange position of having its data compiled as part of China, while also being denied the same access to information as other governments by the WHO. It has to rely on allies like the US for updates, or liaise with Beijing on a case-by-case basis.

Excluding Taiwan from organisations like the WHO has also meant a loss of expertise from Taiwan’s respected medical community and successful public healthcare system, according to Chiang.

Taiwan ranked 14th worldwide in the 2017 Global Access to Health Care Index compiled by the Economist Intelligence Unit, and fifth in the ease of access to infectious disease care. The report covered 60 countries including China, which topped the rankings for child and maternal health services.

Taiwan will also be unable to share its experiences in battling the infection, as it cannot attend the upcoming meeting of the WHO’s governing body, the World Health Assembly, in May. Its observer status has not been extended since 2016, according to Taiwan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Beijing’s global influence

But Taiwan’s problems do not end with health and aviation, said legislator Wang Ting-yu, a member of Taiwan’s Foreign Affairs and National Defense Committee.

“ICAO and WHO are just two examples. Actually there are dozens of international organisations that Taiwan cannot be a part of just because of China,” he said, including the international policing body Interpol.

Although a member of the World Trade Organization, it is listed as the “Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu (Chinese Taipei)” while it competes in the Olympics as “Chinese Taipei”.

Taiwan has steadily lost diplomatic space since the 1970s, when the Republic of China as it is formally known was replaced by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) government on the mainland to represent China at the UN.

The distinction stems from the end of World War II when Chiang Kai-shek’s ROC government took control of Taiwan and later retreated to the island when it lost the Chinese Civil War to the Communist Party.

Beijing’s growing global influence in the past 10 years, however, has allowed it to squeeze Taiwan even harder and direct the global conversation around the island across multiple industries, from fashion and the media to consumer electronics and travel.

The ICAO came under fire this week from the US State Department for blocking Twitter users who were attempting to discuss Taiwan’s absence from the organisation.

China has taken on a more visible role in different international organisations, pushing Taiwan further to the margins, said Maggie Lewis, a Taiwan expert and professor of Law at Seton Hall University in the United States.

“Taiwan is being constantly left out of the loop with respect to important global conversations that involve people’s safety. But it’s not just the people of Taiwan’s safety but being left out of these conversations that span borders,” Lewis also said.

“Even though airplanes and disease are not necessarily the first things you may group together as related, the more you look at them the clearer it is that both with ICAO and with WHO that they’re leaving Taiwan out of the safety conversation on the basis of politics instead of pragmatism.”

WHO and ICAO did not reply to Al Jazeera’s emailed request for comment.

From: Al Jazeera