RUTHFULLY YOURS

http://China’s Fishing Fleet, the World’s Largest, Drives Beijing’s Global Ambitions Governments and conservation groups accuse the ships of fishing illegally and advancing military goals

In Beijing’s push to become a maritime superpower, China’s fishing fleet has grown to become the world’s largest by far—and it has turned more aggressive, provoking tensions around the globe.

The fleet brings in millions of tons of seafood a year to feed the country’s booming middle class. Foreign governments, fishermen and conservation groups have accused the fleet of illegal fishing, including by using banned equipment and venturing into other countries’ territory. That fishing has upended local economies and threatens ecosystems including around the Galápagos Islands, affected governments and fishermen say.

The Chinese fleet is helping the country stake out a bigger presence at sea, including by building a world-wide network of ports. The vessels, rigged with winches and booms and pulling giant nets, can be twice as large as a naval patrol boat, at an average of almost 200 feet long. Fishing crews have helped establish island settlements in waters subject to territorial disputes with neighbors.

An analysis of transponder and global vessel registration data indicates Chinese boats involved in distant-water operations—meaning outside a country’s own territorial waters—total as many as 17,000, according to London-based researcher Overseas Development Institute. Official data and analyst estimates indicate China’s closest competitors in the industry, Taiwan and South Korea, have some 2,500 such vessels combined.

China’s foreign ministry said that legally registered vessels were far lower, at 2,701 as of 2019. China agreed to cap its fishing vessels at 3,000 in 2017, in response to World Trade Organization efforts to cut government subsidies that contribute to overfishing.

The ministry said that Beijing implements the world’s strictest oversight on distant-water fishing. It has toughened legal penalties on errant fishing in recent years.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17297/china-fishing-fleet

“China’s leaders see distant water fleets as a way to project presence around the world. The aim is to be present all over the world’s oceans so that they can direct the outcomes of international agreements that cover maritime resources.” — Tabitha Mallory, CEO of China Ocean Institute and affiliate professor at the University of Washington, Axios, March 23, 2021.

In the past five years, more than 500 abandoned wooden fishing boats, often with skeletons of starved North Korean fishermen aboard, have washed up on the shores of Japan. For years the cause was unknown, until it was found out that the likely reason was that “an armada” of Chinese industrial boats fish illegally in North Korean waters…. It is estimated that China’s fishing vessels have depleted squid stocks in North Korean waters by 70%.

Most of the fishing vessels in China’s fleet are trawlers. “Fishing by trawling method sweeps out the seafloor in the south, and annihilates its resources,” a representative of the fishermen said.

In a number of West African countries — Sierra Leone, Liberia, Nigeria and others — Chinese trawlers have for years “taken advantage of poor governance, corruption and the inability of these governments to enforce fishing regulations” according to the China-Africa project. “Today, the Chinese vessels largely operate beyond government control, prompting an increasingly serious environmental crisis brought on from over-fishing that also endangers local coastal communities who depend on these waters for their livelihoods”. In July, six Chinese super trawlers arrived in Liberia, capable of capturing 12,000 tons of fish — nearly twice the nation’s sustainable catch.

In South America, Chinese predatory fishing is now so critical that in March, Argentina announced the creation of a Maritime Joint Command to combat the predatory fishing practices of foreign vessels.

The Chinese fishing fleet, however, is about much more than fishing. “Against the backdrop of China’s larger geo-political aspirations, the country’s commercial fishermen often serve as de-facto paramilitary personnel whose activities the Chinese government can frame as private actions”, stated a report by Ian Urbina published by the Yale School of Environment in August. “Under a civilian guise, this ostensibly private armada helps assert territorial domination, especially pushing back fishermen or governments that challenge China’s sovereignty claims that encompass nearly all of the South China Sea”.

Communist China seems increasingly to be depleting the world’s oceans of marine life. The country has by far the world’s largest fishing fleet of anywhere between 200,000 to 800,000 fishing boats — accounting for nearly half of the world’s fishing activity — approximately 17,000 of which belong to its distant-water fishing fleet. The growth has been made possible by enormous state subsidies. In 2012, for instance, the Chinese state poured $3.2 billion in subsidies into its fishing sector, most of it for fuel. However, according to a report from 2012, “government support for the fishing and aquaculture sector could be as much as CNY 500 billion (USD 80.2 billion, EUR 61.7 billion) when regional and national subsidies for rural-based fish farmers are taken into account.”

As noted by the Overseas Development Institute (ODI), many industrialized countries, having depleted their domestic waters, go distant-water fishing in the territorial waters of low-income countries, but China’s distant-water fleet is by far the largest in the world. The ODI also noted that ownership and operational control of China’s fleet is both “complex and opaque”.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/04/dice-are-rolling-afghanistan-bruce-thornton/

The Biden administration has announced that it will start pulling our 2500 troops out of Afghanistan, and the withdrawal will be completed on September 11, the 20th anniversary of the terror attacks that killed nearly 3000 Americans. This decision is a rare example of bipartisan support. Both Democrats and Republicans are ready for America’s “longest war” to be over. Although our troops now are mainly engaged in military training and building institutions of civil society and liberal democracy, many Americans believe the 20-year effort to achieve those goals instead achieved little. It’s time to come home.

Many of us share those sentiments, and there’s a visceral appeal to the “pox on both your houses” response to our attempts to help peoples who stubbornly cling to their traditional illiberal ways, and who seem rarely to show gratitude or reciprocity. But pulling all our troops out now is a gamble that recent history shows will likely end in failure, with consequences both seen and unseen.

For example, let’s recall Barack Obama’s ill-advised withdrawal from Iraq in 2011. That move created a vacuum which Iran and ISIS filled, exponentially worsening the disorder in the region. ISIS carved out a caliphate that brutalized and murdered minority faiths in the region. Russia and Iran, no longer deterred by U.S. forces, accelerated their exploitation of the Syrian civil war, and increased their influence and presence in the region. Russia established a naval base on the Mediterranean and sent mercenaries, missile batteries, and advisors to support the Assad regime as it brutally fought to hold on to its power.  Iran, meanwhile, shipped missiles to Hezbollah that increased its stockpiles in Lebanon, and also funded building military outposts near Israel’s norther border. Terrorist outfits still eager to attack the West occupied territory for training and plotting attacks.

https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/reform-in-saudi-arabia-the-road-

Saudi Sheikh Salman Awdah, a popular but controversial religious scholar who has been mostly in solitary confinement since 2017, appeared in court recently only to hear that his case had been adjourned yet again for four months. Charged with more than 30 counts of terrorism, a term that is broadly defined in Saudi Arabia to include adherence to atheism and peaceful dissent, prosecutors are demanding the death sentence.

It was not immediately clear why the trial of Sheikh Awdah was postponed, but some analysts suggest the government may have wanted to avoid a high-profile court case at a moment in which Saudi Arabia is maneuvring to prevent a deterioration of relations with a Biden administration critical of the kingdom’s human rights record.

The State Department’s annual human rights report has identified Awdah as one of “at least 120 persons [who] remained in detention for activism, criticism of government leaders, impugning Islam or religious leaders, or ‘offensive’ internet postings.”

Awdah’s crimes reportedly include sedition, stirring public discord, inciting people against the ruler, supporting imprisoned dissidents, and being an affiliate of Qatar and the Muslim Brotherhood. Saudi Arabia designated the Brotherhood as a terrorist organization in 2014.

Awdah was detained after he called in a tweet to his millions of followers for reconciliation with Qatar three months after Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, and Egypt imposed an economic and diplomatic boycott on the Gulf state.

The four countries lifted their boycott in January 2021 with no indication that their demands for far-reaching changes in Qatari foreign and media policy had been met.

A 64-year-old militant Islamist cleric who shed his support for jihadists after his release from prison in 1999, Awdah denounced Osama bin Laden in the 2000s and became a leading figure in the government’s deradicalization program.

Like other scholars, writers, and journalists, several of whom were sentenced last year to lengthy terms in prison, he became a voice for political and social reform in the wake of the 2011 popular Arab revolts, calling for a humanist interpretation of Islam and reform of Islamic law through recontextualization. He argued that Saudi Arabia should be a democracy rather than a theocracy, embrace pluralism, respect minority rights, and allow for the emergence of an independent civil society.

United Nations human rights experts described Awdah, who has not sought to hide his militant past, as an “influential religious figure who has urged greater respect for human rights within Sharia.”

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17271/turkey-erdogan-political-rival

The lockdown has already put too much economic pressure on small businesses. A total of 125,000 small businesses and shop owners have gone bankrupt during the pandemic. That makes an estimated 500,000 people in Turkey badly affected by the unfortunate blend of economic and pandemic mismanagement…

Growing poverty is seen in other official numbers too. Energy Minister Fatih Dönmez said that power distribution companies cut electricity supplies to 3.7 million households last year due to unpaid debts. That makes more than 10 million Turks having to live without power due to inability to pay bills.

As of December 11, there were 22,759,000 cases of legal proceedings for unpaid debts, corporate and individual. Unemployment is another pressing problem.

This means that means Turkey must maintain its lockdown rules. Further lockdown, however, will mean further economic contraction especially in a country that depends on tourist industry revenues.

The pandemic has further impoverished Turkey’s fragile economy. It threatens to do worse damage to the budgets of poorer families, who are the core of the voting public. One recent study says that Erdoğan loyalists are the biggest number of voters who will vote differently or abstain from voting in the next elections.

Erdoğan’s biggest political rival appears to be poverty.

After 19 years of uninterrupted governance, Turkey’s Islamist strongman, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, seems to remain politically unchallenged. With presidential and parliamentary elections 2½ years away, credible research shows he is still the most popular politician, with his closest rival coming far below him in the polls. But he is now facing an unexpected rival that may unseat him.

MetroPOLL, an independent pollster, found recently that Erdoğan’s popularity was at 31%, followed by the main opposition party CHP at 17.4%. If elections were held today, Erdoğan’s ultranationalist coalition partner, MHP, would win 7.2%, bringing the government bloc’s vote up to 38.7%. The opposition bloc, a fragile alliance of six parties from different ideologies, would win an overall 36.1%.

Polls say that Erdoğan’s followers follow him as if they were following the Messiah, both figuratively and literally, rain or sunshine. At a new peak of a national currency crisis in November, a pro-Erdoğan columnist, Ali Karahasanoğlu, wrote that “even if the dollar rate rises to 15 lira (from 8.50) we will not surrender to the executioner.” He wrote: “We’d prefer one dollar to 15 liras instead of 8.50 in order not to see a Turkey that follows America’s orders.”

https://ewn.co.za/2021/04/20/holding-on-to-power-africa-s-longest-serving-leaders

Here are some of Africa’s other longest-serving leaders, some of whom change the constitution, crush the opposition and use fear and violence to maintain their grip on power.

N’DJAMENA, Chad – After three decades in power, Chad’s President Idriss Deby died on Tuesday from wounds suffered on the battlefield, the army said in a shock announcement just a day after the 68-year-old was re-elected to a sixth term.

Here are some of Africa’s other longest-serving leaders, some of whom change the constitution, crush the opposition and use fear and violence to maintain their grip on power.

MORE THAN 30 YEARS

Equatorial Guinea’s Teodoro Obiang Nguema is Africa’s longest-serving leader, still in power after 41 years. He deposed his uncle in a 1979 coup, and became “the country’s god” with “all power over men and things”, state radio said.

Obiang, the world’s most enduring non-royal head of state, was last re-elected in 2016.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/tokyo-flexes-its-talons-11618871351?mod=opinion_featst_pos3

Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga’s visit to the White House is being hailed in both countries as a major success. On the American side, officials rejoiced that Mr. Suga aligned Japan with U.S. talking points in Asia. As the prime minister said at a joint press conference, America and Japan both “oppose any attempt to change the status quo by force or coercion in the East and South China seas and intimidation of others in the region.” References to the Taiwan Straits and the situation in Xinjiang added to the impression that Tokyo is becoming more forthright in supporting a tougher U.S. line.

On the Japanese side, there was also much to be happy about. President Biden chose Mr. Suga for his first Oval Office meeting with a foreign leader, an unmistakable sign of the priority the Biden administration attaches to the relationship. Better still, American officials didn’t press the prime minister for a list of specific commitments that might have been difficult to sell at home—or that would ignite a firestorm in the volatile relationship between Beijing and Tokyo.

Mr. Suga hedged comments on Taiwan and Xinjiang carefully. On Taiwan, he said at the joint press conference that the summit “reaffirmed” the U.S.-Japan consensus. On Xinjiang he said that he had “explained Japan’s position and initiatives” to the president. Neither the press conference nor the joint statement Messrs. Biden and Suga issued after their discussion used the word “genocide.”

While Washington and Tokyo broadly agree about the risks of China’s behavior, Japan still prefers to stay a few steps behind America. Geography, economics and history all connect Japan to China. While officials in Tokyo fully understand that China’s growing military might and territorial assertiveness require a robust Japanese response, neither the country’s business community nor the public wants to be too confrontational with a neighboring superpower. On military and human rights issues alike, the Japanese consensus is shifting, but Tokyo’s postwar tradition of cautious diplomacy won’t change overnight.

And then there is the American question. The oscillations in U.S. policy under both President Obama and President Trump left Japan with a severe case of whiplash. Mr. Obama’s flaccid response to China’s construction of artificial islands in the South China Sea horrified Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s government. Mr. Obama made the Trans-Pacific Partnership the centerpiece of his Asia policy, but Mr. Trump campaigned against it before rejecting the deal in office.

Tokyo cannot be 100% sure where the Biden administration’s China policy is going. While Mr. Suga was in Washington, John Kerry was in China pushing for a grand bargain on climate. The Biden administration’s rhetoric on issues ranging from Taiwan to Xinjiang is hawkish, but Mr. Biden has proposed a small cut to the defense budget, adjusted for inflation. Under the circumstances, Mr. Suga’s most prudent course was to avoid offending anyone in Washington without unduly shocking China—and this is what he seems to have accomplished.

The alliance with Japan is the single most important international relationship America has. Without Japan’s economic weight, technological capabilities and geographical position, the U.S. cannot build an effective coalition to balance China. But without strong and stable American support, Japan can’t last as an independent great power in China’s front yard.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17300/china-russia-provocations

Russian troops are massing on the Ukraine border, Chinese vessels are swarming Whitsun Reef of the Philippines in the South China Sea, and China’s air force is flying almost daily through Taiwan’s air-defense identification zone. Chinese troops for almost a year have been dug in deep in Indian-controlled Ladakh in the Himalayas. Two large aggressors are threatening to break apart neighbors and absorb them.

American attempts to de-escalate flashpoints are seen in Russian and Chinese circles as failures of resolve.

The Global Times, an unofficial Communist Party tabloid used by Beijing to signal new policies, on April 12 posted a video of Hu Xijin, its editor-in-chief, warning that Beijing would overfly Taiwan—in other words, fly into Taiwan’s sovereign airspace—to “declare sovereignty.”

Chinese leaders speak provocatively because, among other reasons, they do not believe the United States or others will come to Taiwan’s rescue…. In effect, China’s leaders are saying they do not believe President Joe Biden would defend Taiwan.

In a propaganda blast on April 8, China’s regime said Taiwan “won’t stand a chance” if it decides to invade the island. This Chinese self-perception of overwhelming strength is extraordinarily dangerous….

[W]e have already passed the point where just declarations and warnings will suffice. The Biden administration has yet to impose costs on China for aggressive actions jeopardizing America’s security and that of allies like Japan. Chinese leaders, while hearing the mild warnings from the Biden administration, must be asking one question: “Or what?”

Vladimir Putin in 2019 said that Russia reserved the right to protect ethnic Russians outside Russia. This month, Dmitry Kozak, deputy head of Russia’s presidential administration, said his country might intervene to “defend” its citizens. If it did, he suggested, Ukraine would not survive because it would not be “a shot in the leg, but in the face.”

The American response has not been adequate. Russians perceive Biden as feeble. “In Putin’s game of brinkmanship, Biden blinked first,” said journalist Konstantin Eggert to the BBC, referring to the American president proposing a meeting to his Russian counterpart. Biden’s “nerves,” he said, “had failed him.”

That assessment may be correct. In the face of threats directed at Washington by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, the U.S. Navy did not, as many had expected, send two destroyers through the Bosporus into the international waters of the Black Sea. Politico reported that “two U.S. officials familiar with the plans” said the cancellation was due to American concerns about inflaming the Russia-Ukraine situation….

the ultimate decision to stay away made it look as if the U.S. had backed down.

The Dragon and the Bear appear to be coordinating moves, as they have for some time. At the very least, each is acting with an eye to what the other is doing. Once one of these aggressors makes a move, the other large state, taking advantage of the situation, will almost certainly follow. Biden also has to be concerned about Moscow or Beijing acting through proxies Iran and North Korea.

All the elements for history’s next great conflict are now in place.

Russian troops are massing on the Ukraine border, Chinese vessels are swarming Whitsun Reef of the Philippines in the South China Sea, and China’s air force is flying almost daily through Taiwan’s air-defense identification zone. Chinese troops for almost a year have been dug in deep in Indian-controlled Ladakh in the Himalayas. Two large aggressors are threatening to break apart neighbors and absorb them.