dataDp/1032.jpeg

Worldnews

Why China Has Warned Countries Against Appeasing Trump In Trade Deals

China today is a far bigger trading partner than the US for most countries. That limits what Trump can demand of them, experts say. China has warned countries against striking trade deals with the United States at Beijing’s expense, ratcheting up its rhetoric in a spiralling trade war between the world’s two biggest economies. Responding to reports suggesting that US President Donald Trump’s administration is pressuring other countries to isolate China, a spokesperson for China’s Ministry of Commerce said on Monday that Beijing “will take countermeasures in a resolute and reciprocal manner” against nations that align with the US against it. The warning comes as countries prepare for talks with the US to seek exemptions from “reciprocal” tariffs that Trump imposed and then later paused on about 60 trading partners. So what’s this latest verbal spat about, how much clout does China wield in global trade and can Trump drive a wedge between other capitals and Beijing? The Wall Street Journal recently reported that Trump was seeking to use tariff talks to push US economic partners to curb trade with China and rein in Beijing’s manufacturing dominance. In return, these nations could secure reductions in US levies and trade barriers. The Trump administration has said it is in negotiations with more than 70 countries. On Monday, China’s Commerce Ministry hit back, warned other nations that “to seek one’s own temporary selfish interests at the expense of others’ interests is to seek the skin of a tiger”. In effect, it argued that those trying to strike deals with the US – the tiger – would be eaten up themselves eventually. The ministry also said China would in turn target all countries that fell in line with US pressure to hurt Beijing. After Trump suspended his “reciprocal tariffs” on major US trading partners on April 9, he ramped them up on China. US trade levies on most Chinese exports have climbed to 145 percent. Beijing has retaliated with duties of its own at 125 percent on US goods. Trump has long accused China of exploiting the US on trade, casting his tariffs as necessary to revive domestic manufacturing and return jobs to the US. He also wants to use tariffs to finance future tax cuts. For his part, Chinese President Xi Jinping travelled to three Southeast Asian countries last week to bolster regional ties. He called on trading partners, including Vietnam, to oppose unilateral bullying. “There are no winners in trade wars and tariff wars,” Xi said in an article published in Vietnamese media, without mentioning the US. As with other countries in Southeast Asia, Vietnam has been caught in the trade war’s crossfire. It is not only a manufacturing hub itself, but China also frequently uses it to dispatch exports to the US to avoid the tariffs imposed by the first Trump administration on Beijing in 2018. Elsewhere, the Trump administration has begun talks with East Asian allies over the tariffs with a Japanese delegation visiting Washington, DC, last week and South Korean officials set to arrive this week. Many countries now find themselves stuck between the world’s two biggest economies – China, a large source of manufactured goods and a key trading partner, and the US, a crucial export market. In a report published in January by the Lowy Institute, a Sydney-based think tank, analysts found that in 2023, about 70 percent of countries imported more from China than they did from the US. China’s rapid ascent as a trading superpower can be traced back to 2001, the year it joined the World Trade Organization (WTO) and when it started to dominate global manufacturing after years of successful protectionist industrial policies. During the 2000s, China benefitted from the relocation of international supply chains, turbocharged by substantial inflows of foreign investment, large pools of low-cost labour and an undervalued currency exchange rate. By 2023, China had become the largest trading partner for at least 60 countries, almost twice as many as for the US, which remained the largest trading partner for 33 economies. The gap between them is also widening in many countries: The Lowy Institute analysis found that in 2023, 112 economies traded more than twice as much with China as they did with the US, up from 92 in 2018 during Trump’s first trade war. “The critical dependence China has developed around the world, especially in Asia, means that lots [of trading partners] cannot do without China,” said Alicia Garcia-Herrero, an economist at the investment bank Natixis. “From critical minerals to silicon chips, Chinese exports are almost irreplaceable.” In 2018, two years into his first administration, Trump imposed 15 percent tariffs on more than $125bn in Chinese goods, including footwear, smartwatches and flat-screen TVs. Since then, the US has become an even more important source of demand for non-Chinese exports, especially from Mexico and Vietnam, reflecting the impact of years of US tariffs on China. Yet if Trump’s aim in part was to hurt Beijing, his first salvoes failed. Since 2018, many more nations have deepened their trade relations with China – at the expense of the US. When China joined the WTO, more than 80 percent of countries had more two-way trade with the US than with China. That had fallen to just 30 percent by 2018, the year of Trump’s first tariffs on China, according to the Lowy Institute analysis. That trend has only solidified since then: In 2018, 139 nations traded more with China than with the US. By 2023, that number had risen to 145, and about 70 percent of the world’s economies now trade more with China than with the US – up from just 15 percent in 2001. “Trump doesn’t seem to understand how important Chinese trade flows have become,” Garcia-Herrero told Al Jazeera. “What’s more, he’s not offering much by way of carrots, like more investment, so I don’t think he’ll get what he wants.” According to Garcia-Herrero, a few countries such as Mexico that have particularly deep trade links with the US, probably will “say no to Chinese imports”. However, she highlighted that “China’s presence in supply chains is so massive for most of America’s other trade partners, decoupling is virtually impossible.” Indeed, around the world, China has become an invaluable source of imports. The European Union, for instance, had a trade deficit with China worth 396 billion euros ($432bn) in 2022, up from 145 billion euros ($165bn) in 2016. China accounts for 20 percent of EU goods imports. The equivalent figure in Great Britain is 10 percent. Last week, Treasury Secretary Rachel Reeves said it would be “very foolish” for the UK to engage in less trade with China. Across the developing world, China’s trade role is just as crucial. Roughly a quarter of Bangladesh’s and Cambodia’s total imports are from China. Nearly a fifth of Nigeria’s and Saudi Arabia’s goods imports come from China. “Trump’s trade policy is shortsighted,” Garcia-Herrero said. “Trying to pry trade away with China may work in countries where the US has military bases. … They may have to accept the US’s concerns.” “But for most countries, particularly those in the Global South, the more that Trump threatens, the more that countries will go on China’s side.” Follow Al Jazeera English:...

dataDp/1032.jpeg

Worldnews

After A Year Of Hostility, Pakistan And Afghanistan Seek Diplomatic Reboot

Pakistan’s Deputy PM Ishaq Dar visits Kabul as Islamabad and Kabul try to revive stalled diplomatic ties amid refugee expulsion. Islamabad, Pakistan – When Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar landed in Kabul on April 19 for a daylong visit, it marked the first major trip by a senior Pakistani official to Afghanistan since February 2023. Dar’s visit came just days after senior military and intelligence officials from both countries had met in Kabul for the first time since January 2024. These meetings follow months of strained relations between the neighbours amid frequent border skirmishes, Pakistan’s decision to expel Afghan refugees, and repeated border closures that have disrupted business and trade. Dar’s trip, say analysts, signals a willingness from both sides to reset ties through diplomacy. According to Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Dar met Afghanistan’s interim foreign minister, Amir Khan Muttaqi. The two leaders held discussions on “security, trade, transit, connectivity, and people-to-people contacts”. The statement from the Afghan Foreign Ministry, however, did not mention security concerns and focused on issues such as “situation of Afghan refugees, political relations, economic cooperation, trade, transit, large-scale joint projects, and other matters of mutual interest.” At a news conference in Kabul following his meeting with Muttaqi, Dar said Pakistan has invited Afghan officials to Islamabad and called for open communication channels to resolve disputes between the two countries. “We have requested our hosts that we have to work together for the progress, betterment and peace and security of the region. For that, neither will we allow anyone to use our soil to conduct illicit activities in Afghanistan, nor will you allow anyone to use your soil,” Dar said. Since the Taliban took control of Afghanistan in August 2021 after the United States withdrew its troops, Pakistan has witnessed a sharp increase in violent attacks, particularly in the northwestern province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and the southwestern province of Balochistan, both of which share borders with Afghanistan. Islamabad has repeatedly alleged that Afghan soil is being used by armed groups, especially the Pakistan Taliban, known by the acronym TTP, to launch attacks across the porous border. Pakistan Taliban, founded in 2007, is ideologically aligned with the Taliban in Afghanistan but operates independently. The Taliban has repeatedly rejected allegations that it allows its soil to be used for attacks against Pakistan, and has consistently denied any ties with the TTP. Data from the Pak Institute For Peace Studies, an Islamabad-based conflict research organisation, shows that Pakistan experienced 521 attacks in 2024, a 70 percent increase from the previous year. These incidents claimed 852 lives, a 23 percent rise, with 358 of those killed being law enforcement personnel. Most of the violence occurred in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan. Once seen as a benefactor of the Taliban, Pakistan has cited the uptick in violence as the main reason for its crackdown on hundreds of thousands of Afghan refugees, many of whom have lived in the country for decades. Pakistan has hosted millions of Afghan refugees since the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, welcoming several waves of displaced people as conflict continued in the country. Following the 9/11 attacks and the subsequent US invasion of Afghanistan, thousands of Afghans returned home. However, the Taliban’s dramatic return to power in August 2021 prompted another wave of displacement, with between 600,000 and 800,000 people seeking refuge in Pakistan. Since the expulsion programme began in November 2023, nearly one million Afghan nationals have been forced to return, with the Pakistani government declaring that it would continue its repatriation drive. Global rights organisations, as well as the Afghan government, have urged Pakistan to reconsider the decision and ensure the dignity of those being deported. Despite rising hostilities between the two countries, including Pakistani air attacks on Afghan soil in December that killed at least 46 people, analysts see Dar’s visit as “significant” and suggestive of a broader resumption of dialogue. Iftikhar Firdous, co-founder of The Khorasan Diary, a portal that tracks regional security issues, pointed out that this was the highest-level visit from Pakistan to Kabul since former Prime Minister Imran Khan’s trip in November 2020. “The visit by Dar included discussions on security, ease of business for traders, and continued conversations on cross-border issues,” Firdous told Al Jazeera. The Islamabad-based analyst added that the recent meeting between military and intelligence officials indicates that backchannel efforts to resurrect diplomacy were under way even before Dar’s trip. “It was not a start, but instead a culmination of the agenda to re-engage with Afghanistan and break the ice,” he said. Amina Khan, director of the Centre for Afghanistan, Middle East and Africa at the Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad (ISSI), said both sides appear to be looking for ways to accommodate each other’s concerns. “For Pakistan, it is security, and for Kabul, it is trade. However, since both are intertwined, a comprehensive bilateral approach is needed. This trip appears to have initiated a dialogue. One will have to see if both sides can maintain the positive momentum,” she told Al Jazeera. Khan added that Pakistan recognises the importance of Afghanistan to its own stability. “Pakistan realises that, in order to achieve this, workable ties with Kabul are paramount, but at the same time it is pivotal for Kabul to address Pakistan’s security concerns emanating from the TTP,” she said. A United Nations report [PDF] published in February concluded that the Taliban continued to provide logistical, operational and financial support to the TTP. It added that the armed group has set up new training centres in border regions near Pakistan. In response, Zabihullah Mujahid, the Afghan government spokesperson, denied the allegation, calling it a “regular slander” against the country. “The stance of the UN is misused. We call on the countries who are members of the UNSC but have good relations with Afghanistan to not allow the reputation of the organization to be harmed,” Mujahid said in February. Khan of ISSI said the Taliban faces its own challenges while dealing with armed groups like the Pakistan Taliban. “Pakistan understands the limitations of the Afghan Taliban in taking action against the TTP, who may very well join the ranks of so-called ISIS [ISIL] and take up arms against the government,” she said. Meanwhile, the Taliban has stressed that the Afghan government is unhappy about the eviction of hundreds of thousands of Afghans by Pakistan. Raising the issue of their forced repatriation in the meeting with Dar, Minister Muttaqi stressed the need for humane treatment and urged Pakistani authorities to protect the rights of Afghan nationals currently residing in Pakistan or returning from there. The Pakistan Foreign Ministry statement, meanwhile, focused on the country’s security concerns. “The Deputy Prime Minister emphasised the paramount importance of addressing all pertinent issues, particularly those related to security and border management, in order to fully realise the potential for regional trade and connectivity,” the ministry’s statement read. Still, Khan, the analyst, said she believes that Dar’s visit has broken the ice. Now, the key will be to “remain engaged” and pursue a holistic approach to bilateral relations, she said. “While security is a crucial aspect, it should not be the sole focus. Other aspects, such as diplomatic, economic, and cultural cooperation, must also be considered to build a balanced and sustainable partnership,” Khan said. Follow Al Jazeera English:...

dataDp/1032.jpeg

Worldnews

Iran To Brief China As It Accuses Israel Of Undermining US Nuclear Talks

Tehran official’s Beijing trip comes before third round of talks with the US and follows consultations with Russia. Iran says it will brief China this week in advance of a third round of talks with the United States on its nuclear programme, as Iranian officials separately accused Israel of seeking to “undermine and disrupt the diplomatic process”. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi will visit Beijing on Tuesday to discuss the latest talks with the administration of US President Donald Trump on the country’s nuclear programme, spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said on Monday. The trip echoes “consultations” Iran held with Russia last week, before the second round of direct US-Iran talks was held over the weekend. A third round of talks between Araghchi and US envoy Steve Witkoff is scheduled to take place in Oman on Saturday. Araghchi has previously said Tehran always closely consults with its allies, Russia and China, over the nuclear issue. “It is natural that we will consult and brief China over the latest developments in Iran-US indirect talks,” Baqaei said. Russia and China, both nuclear-armed powers, were signatories to a now-defunct 2015 deal between Iran, the US and several Western countries intended to defuse tensions around Tehran’s nuclear programme. The 2015 deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), from which Trump withdrew in 2018, saw Tehran curtail its nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief. The US and Israel have accused Iran of seeking to use the programme to develop nuclear weapons. Tehran has staunchly denied the claim, saying the programme is for civilian purposes. On Monday, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs stressed close ties between Beijing and Tehran, but did not confirm the Iranian minister’s planned visit. “China and Iran have maintained exchanges and contacts at all levels and in various fields. With regard to the specific visit mentioned, I have no information to offer at the moment,” Guo Jiakun, spokesperson for the ministry, said. Israel’s war in Gaza has seen Iran pull closer to Russia and China. Recent diplomatic moves surrounding the US-Iran talks have further underscored the strengthened ties. Araghchi met his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov, last week, just before his second round of negotiations with Witkoff. On Monday, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed off on a 20-year strategic partnership treaty agreed earlier this year with his Iranian counterpart, Masoud Pezeshkian. Meanwhile, Iran’s already fraught relations with Israel and its “ironclad” ally, the US, have nosedived amid the war. Since taking office, Trump has reinstated a “maximum pressure” sanctions campaign against Tehran, while repeatedly threatening military action if a new nuclear deal is not reached. Speaking on Monday, Foreign Ministry spokesman Baqaei accused Israel of trying to disrupt the nascent negotiations to open the way for military action. In comments carried by the AFP news agency, he declared that Israel is behind efforts from a “kind of coalition” to “undermine and disrupt the diplomatic process”. “Alongside it are a series of warmongering currents in the United States and figures from different factions,” the spokesman said. Last week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reiterated that Israel would not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. His statement came a day after The New York Times reported that Trump had dissuaded Israel from striking Iran’s nuclear sites in the short term, saying Washington wanted to prioritise diplomatic talks. Baqaei added that “consultations must continue” with countries that were party to the JCPOA. Iran has gradually breached the terms of the treaty since Trump abandoned it, most notably by enriching uranium to levels higher than those laid out in the deal. The International Atomic Energy Agency says Iran has enriched uranium to 60 percent, close to the 90 percent level needed to manufacture weapons. The JCPOA had restricted it to 3.67 percent, the level of enrichment needed for civilian power. Speaking last week, Witkoff sent mixed messages on what level Washington is seeking. He initially said in an interview that Tehran needed to reduce its uranium enrichment to the 3.67 percent limit, but later clarified that the US wants Iran to end its enrichment programme. Follow Al Jazeera English:...

profile/5683FB_IMG_16533107021641748.jpg

News_Naija

Judgment Analysis: Report Me To LPDC, Falana Dares Wike

Human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Femi Falana, has dared the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, to report him to the Legal Practitioners’ Disciplinary Committee over his (Falana’s) analysis of the Supreme Court judgment on the Rivers State politucal crisis. Falana, in a statement on Sunday, titled “I Did Not Lie Against the Supreme Court of Nigeria,” accused Wike of trying in vain to incite the Supreme Court against him. The SAN said contrary to Wike’s claim, he did not lie or misrepresent the Supreme Court’s decision concerning the defection of 27 members of the Rivers State House of Assembly. Falana dismissed Wike’s claims as “spurious and tendentious in every material particular,” accusing the minister of attempting to incite the apex court against him. Wike had publicly criticised Falana during a press conference in Abuja, asserting that the senior lawyer misrepresented the Supreme Court’s ruling on Channels TV. Wike said, “If someone of Femi Falana’s calibre can go on national television and lie, it’s very serious. Lies can cause a lot of crises.” In response, Falana explained, “Mr. Wike subjected me to another scurrilous attack in a press conference, where he alleged that I lied about the defection status of certain legislators during my appearance on Channels TV.” He added that the issue of the lawmakers’ defection was still pending before the Federal High Court in Port Harcourt when the Supreme Court made its ruling. Falana clarified, “I did not lie against the Supreme Court in respect of the judgment in question. All I said was that the matter of the defection of the 27 legislators was raised suo motu and determined by the eminent Justices of the apex court.” He further asserted that there were video tapes and a sworn affidavit in which the lawmakers confirmed their defection from the Peoples Democratic Party to the All Progressives Congress. Falana emphasised that his right to criticise court judgments is protected by both the Nigerian Constitution and international human rights law. “My fundamental right to criticise the decisions of courts is guaranteed by Section 39 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), and Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights,” he said. The SAN accused Wike of hypocrisy, pointing out that the minister has a history of attacking judges when rulings do not align with his political views. Falana added, “Unlike Mr. Wike, who calls judges names whenever they disagree with his politics of opportunism, I have always criticised the judgments of domestic and regional courts with utmost decorum and in good faith.” He referenced a famous statement by the late Justice Oputa in the Adegoke Motors Limited v. Dr. Babatunde Adesanya case: “We are final not because we are infallible; rather, we are infallible because we are final,” highlighting the judiciary’s openness to criticism.  Falana also quoted former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad, who once said, “You have the responsibility of drawing our attention to where things are going wrong or on the verge of going wrong.” Falana challenged Wike to take legal action if he believed Falana had breached professional conduct. “Since he has become the unsolicited defender of the judiciary, I challenge him to report me to the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee for professional misconduct,” Falana said. On the issue of legislative defection, Falana warned that the Supreme Court’s recent stance—requiring proof of defection through a party’s membership register—could embolden “unpatriotic politicians to justify political prostitution in Nigeria.” He urged the court to adhere to its earlier rulings, such as in Attorney-General of the Federation v. Abubakar and Abegunde v. Ondo State House of Assembly, where it ruled that legislators who defect automatically lose their seats. Falana concluded that Wike’s attempts to discredit him had failed.  “It is indubitably clear that the allegation leveled against me by Mr. Wike is spurious… He has failed in his desperate bid to incite the Justices of the Supreme Court against me without any basis whatsoever.” In a recent media outburst, Wike taunted Falana for losing a case he had won at the Supreme Court, dubbing him “a television lawyer.” Falana chose not to engage with Wike’s comments at the time, stating, “Mr. Wike is the only life bencher in Nigeria who has never handled a case in any trial court or appellate court.” Falana further added, “It is no crime if a lawyer loses a case in any court. Only a corrupt lawyer wins all cases in all courts.”