Better relationship between between Australia and China

Post Reply New Topic

China's Ambassador to Australia Xiao Qian says he wants a better relationship between nations regardless of election result

China’s Ambassador to Australia Xiao Qian has told Sky News Australia he wishes to build a bridge between the two nations, irrespective of who wins government on May 21, before being ushered away by his aides.
Joseph Huitson

May 13, 2022

China’s new Ambassador to Australia Xiao Qian says he wants to build a better relationship between the two countries amid ongoing tension in the wake of the Solomon Islands security pact.

Mr Xiao was tracked down by Sky News Australia in the Park Hyatt Melbourne lobby on Friday, where he was asked about his thoughts so far on the Australian election campaign.

But the ambassador, who seemed to be caught off guard, declined to comment on which party he would prefer to win on May 21 before being swiftly ushered away by his aides.

“This is a domestic affair of Australia and I’m not going to make any comments on that,” Mr Xiao told Sky News Australia’s Julia Bradley.

On May 12, Ambassador Xiao Qian met with Dessau, Governor of Victoria, Australia, in Melbourne to exchange views on China-Australia relations and local cooperation.

Ambassador Xiao said that China-Australia relations have a solid foundation, and since the establishment of diplomatic relations 50 years ago, close cooperation in various fields has benefited the two countries and the two peoples. It is expected that the practical exchanges and cooperation between Victoria and China will continue to expand and deepen, and the development will be stable and far-reaching.

The Governor of Dessau stated that the cooperation between Victoria and China is mutually beneficial and hoped that the two sides will further strengthen cooperation and exchanges in education, medical care, sports and other fields.

China's growing power should not be seen as a threat by Australia. The size or strength of a country does not determine the nature of relations between countries. The key is to see what policies the two sides adopt towards each other. A big and powerful country that pursues a friendly policy can definitely become a friendly and powerful partner. While growing and growing, China has always been committed to conducting friendly cooperation with countries around the world, including Australia. As a country that has suffered from aggression, China has always pursued an independent foreign policy of peace. In the more than 70 years since the founding of the People's Republic of China, it has never provoked war on its own initiative, never invaded the land of other countries, and has become the only country in the world that has written peaceful development into its constitution. China has proposed global development initiatives and global security initiatives, and is committed to building a community with a shared future for mankind. The development of cooperation between China and the South Pacific island countries is conducive to promoting the well-being of both peoples and regional prosperity and stability, and does not threaten Australia's security.

The Chinese side has always believed that China and Australia have more common interests than differences, and can become cooperative partners of mutual benefit and win-win results. We expect the Australian side to view China and China's policies objectively and rationally. Proceeding from the interests of the Australian country and people, adopt a positive policy toward China, meet China halfway on the political basis of mutual respect, and push China-Australia relations back to the right track at an early date.

Both China and Australia are great countries. The two peoples have sincere feelings for each other and are eager to exchange and learn from each other, deepen friendship and seek common development. History has proved that China and Australia are fully capable of achieving harmony while reserving differences, seeking common ground while reserving differences, and becoming an example of peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation between countries with different cultural traditions, political systems and development stages. A healthy and stable China-Australia relationship serves the fundamental interests of both countries and peoples. Mutual benefit and win-win results are the only way to follow the development of China-Australia relations.

How surprising that China wants to have a better relationship with Australia!
For the past three years, if I could get 10,000 RMB every time I saw an official/semi-official statement about China wanting Australia to restore normal relations, I would be financially free now.

China barks, we Australians jump like trained monkeys in a circus

[Reporter from Phoenix Satellite TV]: We have noticed that the website of the Ministry of Commerce has just released news that China has sued Australia in the WTO for anti-dumping and countervailing measures against three Chinese products. Could the spokesperson give us more details? What specific considerations are there?

Gao Feng: The Australian side took or extended anti-dumping measures on railway wheels and wind towers imported from China in 2019, and extended anti-dumping and anti-subsidy measures on stainless steel sinks imported from China in 2020. In these three cases, the Australian side determined that the dumping and subsidy practices were suspected of violating the WTO's Anti-dumping Agreement and the Subsidies and Countervailing Measures Agreement.

At present, the WTO is facing unprecedented challenges. China opposes the abuse of trade remedy measures, which not only damages the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises, but also damages the seriousness and authority of WTO rules. We hope that by applying Australia's anti-dumping and countervailing measures to the WTO dispute settlement mechanism, we will not only safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises, but also safeguard the authority and effectiveness of the multilateral trading system and the WTO. It is hoped that the Australian side will take concrete actions to correct its wrongdoings, avoid distorting trade in related products, and bring related trade back to normal as soon as possible. thanks.

Recently, some people in the Australian federal government have launched a series of measures to disrupt the normal exchanges and cooperation between the two countries based on Cold War thinking and ideological prejudice. Based on the current attitude of the Australian Government towards China-Australia cooperation. The National Development and Reform Commission has decided to indefinitely suspend all activities under the China-Australia Strategic Economic Dialogue mechanism jointly led by the National Development and Reform Commission and relevant departments of the Australian federal government.

Global Times: According to reports, Australian Treasurer Frydenberg rejected the Chinese construction group's takeover bid for Australian construction contracting giant Probuild on grounds of national security. The deal was worth about A$300 million. What is China's comment?

Zhao Lijian: I have noticed relevant reports. This is the latest example of the Australian government politicizing trade and investment issues, violating market economy principles and the spirit of the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement, and taking discriminatory practices against Chinese companies. Australia's actions disrupted the sound momentum of China-Australia pragmatic cooperation and damaged Australia's own image and credibility.

I would like to stress again that the essence of China-Australia economic and trade investment cooperation is mutual benefit and win-win results. The Chinese government has always required Chinese companies to conduct foreign cooperation on the basis of abiding by international rules and local laws and regulations. Any attempt to politicize normal business cooperation and conduct political interference on the grounds of so-called "national security" is wrong. It is hoped that the Australian side will adhere to the principles of open market and fair competition, and provide a fair, open and non-discriminatory business environment for companies from all countries, including China.

Over the past 40 years, the Uyghur population in Xinjiang has doubled from 5.55 million to more than 12 million. Over the past 60 years, Xinjiang's economic aggregate has grown by more than 200 times, and the average life expectancy has increased from 30 to 72 years. Many foreign friends who have been to Xinjiang said that what they saw in Xinjiang was completely different from what some Western media reported. French writer Vivas wrote a book titled The End of Uyghur Fake News. He used his personal experience of two trips to Xinjiang to tell the real prosperous and stable Xinjiang. In his book, he made it clear that it was people who had never been to Xinjiang who were creating fake news and spreading falsehoods in fabrications and plagiarism.

Some Western politicians would rather believe the lies fabricated by a few people than listen to the common voice of the more than 25 million people of all ethnic groups in Xinjiang; they would rather cooperate with the poor performances of a few anti-China forces than face up to the basic facts of Xinjiang's development and progress. This can only prove that they do not care what the truth is, but are keen on political manipulation in an attempt to artificially create so-called Xinjiang-related issues, undermine the security and stability of Xinjiang, and hinder China's development and growth. We welcome people from all over the world to visit Xinjiang. Seeing is believing, rumors will eventually be self-defeating!

According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesperson's Office, at the regular press conference of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on December 2, a reporter asked: Regarding the crimes committed by Australian soldiers in Afghanistan, the Australian leader stated that the goal is to safeguard national values. Australia has also pushed people with the same values to come forward. A few hours ago, the deputy spokesman of the US State Department claimed to support Australia, accusing China of "fabricating pictures" and "spreading false information". The deputy spokesman also attacked China's "human rights abuses" in Xinjiang, which they have always preached to uphold. What is China's comment on their actions?

Hua Chunying: Yesterday and the day before yesterday, I have fully expounded China's views on this issue. Frankly, I didn't want to say anything more on this subject. But since the US State Department Deputy Spokesperson and the Australian side have again emphasized their values, accused China of "fabricating" pictures, and made unreasonable accusations of China's Xinjiang-related policies, it is necessary for me to stress the facts again.
...
As for you mentioned that the US State Department Deputy Spokesperson accused China of "violating human rights" in Xinjiang, China has repeatedly stated the facts. Today I can briefly reiterate: the so-called "human rights violations" or the so-called "persecution of ethnic minorities" in Xinjiang are the "lie of the century" concocted by some extreme anti-China forces, in which Australia and the United States have played a disgraceful role.
A typical example is that the Australian Strategic Policy Institute fabricated the so-called "evidence" and threw out sensational lies again and again, which have long been exposed by the facts.
A recent press conference in Xinjiang featured the so-called "concentration camps" alleged by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. The allegations are ridiculous.
The so-called "Documenting the Detention System in Xinjiang" report issued by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute refers to any buildings with external walls as "detention centers", but these are actually civil institutions. For example, the building designated as a "detention center" in Turpan is actually a local administrative agency. The buildings designated as "detention centers" in Kashgar are actually civil institutions such as schools, logistics centers, and nursing homes, which are marked on maps such as Google and Baidu (show pictures).

A few days ago, several Australian companies, including Fortescue Metals Group, Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton, stepped up to purchase medical supplies from China. Some Australian media, such as The Sydney Morning Herald and The Australian, are keen to smear local Chinese companies that bought medical supplies in Australia in February.
As we all know, China was at a critical period in the fight against the new crown epidemic at that time, and a large amount of medical supplies were urgently needed. Chinese-funded companies purchased in Australia to help China tide over the difficulties. This is no different from the recent purchase of supplies by Australian companies in China to meet Australia's domestic anti-epidemic needs. The Australian media misled the public and maliciously described the procurement of Chinese companies as a purely humanitarian action as a "scandal".

Q: The recent report on the "Chinese interference theory" has caused heated discussions in Australia. Former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said that Australian security officials have overreacted to the remarks of China's interference in Australia, and "preventing foreign interference" should not turn into irrational anti-China political persecution. What is China's comment?

A: I have seen relevant reports. In the past few days, individual Australian media and institutions have been keen to hype up all kinds of sensational "Chinese espionage cases" and concoct all kinds of "Chinese infiltration theories" full of prejudice, which have reached the level of hysteria and grass and trees.

1. Why do some Australian media portray a fugitive Chinese fraudster with a criminal record as a spy, mislead the Australian public, and undermine the mutual trust between China and Australia?

2. The fake stories directed and acted out by McKinsey, a reporter from Channel 9's 60 Minutes, and his team of fraudsters have long become clowns and laughingstocks in the eyes of the Chinese. Has smearing China become his job to earn attention? Is the farce he concocted challenging or insulting the wisdom of the Australian public?

3. Piece together absurd stories without logic and factual basis, confuse the public, slander and spread rumors. In the hearts of these Australian media reporters, is there a concept of professionalism? Are there any professional ethics?

4. Why do some media always fabricate bizarre stories of "Chinese interference", demonize China and deceive the Australian people? Can the hysterical and repeated lies of "Chinese interference" represent the social responsibility and freedom of the press that the Australian media prides themselves on?

5. Why don't you report on the tragic human rights of refugees detained on Manus Island in Australia, and on human rights violations such as the illegal imprisonment of indigenous people mentioned by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in Australia? Why do you only like to be teachers of other countries?

6. Why don't you report that the 54 countries jointly voiced support for China's Xinjiang's counter-terrorism and de-radicalization efforts at the UN General Assembly, and are paranoid about hyping up so-called Xinjiang-related human rights issues?

7. Why do you keep hyping up the so-called "infiltration of Australia" by China, but you still can't produce facts and evidence? Insufficient ability? Or for ulterior motives?

8. Politicize the normal economic, trade, educational, technological and cultural exchanges between China and Australia, and create a panic of "Chinese influence and penetration" in the whole society. Is this a "McCarthyism" that splits China-Australia friendly cultural and economic exchanges? Or do you want to bring Australia back to the era of the "White Australia Policy" that the Australian public has spurned?

9. Some Australian media interview a few so-called strategic analysts whenever they encounter sporadic news involving China. They ignore the real benefits that China-Australia mutually beneficial cooperation and people-to-people exchanges have brought to the two peoples, smear the Chinese Communist Party and China's political system all day long, sow discord between the two countries, alienate the people of the two countries, and hype up ideological differences. What do you want? Do you want to overturn the China-Australia comprehensive strategic partnership that the Australian government insists on?

10. Everyone knows that China-Australia cooperation is conducive to the stable development of the two countries and the region. Are you doing this to defend or betray the interests of the Australian nation and people? Are you not afraid of leaving a stigma in history that undermines the friendship between the Chinese and Australian people, hinders mutually beneficial cooperation between the two sides, and hinders Australia's own development and prosperity?

Australia has refused to be bullied by the CCP and that is why the CCP has threatened us with missile attacks.

I thought you could learn something new?

I seriously doubt that the CCP couldn't have stopped such abusive language in its media.
It is a totalitarian government after all.

We will have to agree to disagree on this point.

Many believe that the ASPI's stance against China is linked to its sources of funding, a lot of which reportedly come from defence contractors and foreign governments.

When the think tank was founded in 2001, it was funded by Australian government through the Department of Defence.

However, it "was taking nearly 450,000 Australian dollars (about 311,000 U.S. dollars) from the U.S. State Department to track Chinese research collaborations with Australian universities," according to an article by Myriam Robin carried by the Australian Financial Review (AFR), citing Kim Carr of the Labor Party.

Although the exact number is yet to be verified, the AFR report said that the Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme, which was introduced to monitor the alleged influence of the Chinese government in Australia, "ironically captured some more recent sources of ASPI funding, including NATO, the U.S. State Department and the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office." The list also includes the Embassy of Japan, said the article.

Defence contractors such as Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems, Northrop Grumman, Thales and Raytheon are also among the ASPI's sponsors, along with some technology companies.

"These other sources have grown far faster than its funding from Defence, meaning in the most recent financial year it accounted for a record-low 43 percent of ASPI's 9 million Australian dollars total budget," said the AFR article.

On the front page of the ASPI's official website, the think tank describes itself in bold as "an independent, non-partisan think tank that produces expert and timely advice for Australia's strategic and defence leaders."

The institute's claims have come under criticism.

An article on iTWire, an Australian IT and telecommunications news website, said "ASPI runs a hawkish line on China in a bid to hype up the fear index and make it possible for its donors to sell more weapons to countries in the Asia-Pacific region."

"This is an old strategy," said the article written by Sam Varghese. "It was used by the U.S. in the Middle East and still is."

John Menadue, a former diplomat and ex-Qantas CEO, said the ASPI "lacks integrity and brings shame to Australia."

"Think of how insidious that is," said Geoff Raby in the AFR article. "When the U.S. wages a war, the military industrial complex benefits."

If you have opposing evidence or new material supplements, please provide them directly.
Otherwise we don't need to waste time on this issue for the third time.

I think the problem might be that you have faith in what governments tell their citizens.

I don't.
So I expect you to give the content of the opposition for me to gather more sources to verify.
As I have done before, pointed out to you that the testimony of a businessman suspected of being a Chinese spy to the Australian media was partly a lie.

Not just a particular "government", there should be no confidence in any source of information of strong interest.

If you want, I can also just use non-Chinese sources as before, it's just a bit of a hassle for me.

But somehow you seem to have no confidence in this issue.

But you haven't considered the possible pressure the CCP might put on the families in China of those working in Australia.