US condemns 'repression' of Independence Day celebrations in Hong Kong, China News
HONG KONG — The United States condemned what it described as Hong Kong's "repression of US Independence Day celebrations" after media reports on Tuesday (June 24) that some schools had received "friendly reminders" warning students against taking part in such events.
The Education Bureau had sent the notice to schools in the former British colony, warning that students who take part in US Independence Day activities could be at risk of violating Hong Kong's national security law, the South China Morning Post reported. It did not say if the schools were international or local campuses.
The Education Bureau did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
"We condemn the Hong Kong government's repression of US Independence Day celebrations and interference in US consulate-hosted events. Its attempts to characterise these activities as 'unlawful' only further reveal its insecurity and fear of freedom," a spokesperson for the US Consulate said.
The US Consulate General in Hong Kong and Macau will host a private reception in Hong Kong to celebrate July 4 and to deepen the "longstanding friendship between the people in Hong Kong and the United States", the statement said.
The National Security Law, which punishes offences such as acts of subversion, collusion with foreign forces, and terrorism, with terms of up to life in jail, was imposed by Beijing on the former British colony in 2020.
The Chinese and Hong Kong governments say the law is necessary to restore stability following anti-government protests in 2019 when then leader Carrie Lam called on universities and schools to urge students not to participate in the sometimes violent demonstrations.
Some Western governments have, however, criticised the law as being used to suppress free speech and dissent.
[[nid:718938]]
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
Defiant UK PM Starmer defends leadership as welfare rebellion grows
FILE PHOTO: Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer speaks during a press conference at the end of the NATO summit in The Hague, Netherlands, Wednesday, June 25, 2025. Kin Cheung/Pool via REUTERS/File photo THE HAGUE - British Prime Minister Keir Starmer vowed to lead his party into the next general election and rejected suggestions he was failing to listen to the concerns of his party on Wednesday, as he faces a growing rebellion from lawmakers over welfare reform. Lawmakers from Starmer's Labour Party have spearheaded an effort to kill the government's welfare plan at a vote due next week, saying it failed to provide support for disabled people and those with long-term health conditions. More than 100 lawmakers have vowed to vote for an amendment that would halt the proposed reforms, in what would be a major political embarrassment for the prime minister. Starmer insisted he "can read the room" in response to a question at a press conference about whether he had the political skill to lead Britain. Taking questions at the NATO summit in The Hague, Starmer said the same criticism was made in the run-up to last year's general election, before he led his party to one of the largest parliamentary majorities in modern British history. "Is it tough going? Are there plenty of noises off? There always are, there always have been, there always will be," Starmer said. "I'm comfortable with reading the room and delivering the change the country needs." Due to rising welfare spending, which had been on course to top 100 billion pounds ($129 billion) by 2030, Labour said in March it planned to cut more than 5 billion pounds from its welfare budget by 2029/30. Asked if he was confident he would lead his party into the next election, due in 2029, Starmer said "very", adding: "we were voted in absolutely clearly saying we need a decade of national renewal." Some of his lawmakers say the bill contains "dangerous and counterproductive cuts to entitlements aimed at disabled people" and lacked "measures to take proper account of the needs of people with ... long-term conditions". Starmer insisted that the vote would go ahead on July 1 and said his party was "pretty united" about the need to reform the welfare state and the question was how to do it. "We're committed to reforming our welfare system. It doesn't work, it traps people, and it has to be reformed," Starmer said. "It's really important I lead from the front and take the long-term decisions for the future of this country." REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Business Times
2 hours ago
- Business Times
This energy embargo has been going on for a decade
THERE are few things more calculated to strike fear into the world than an energy embargo. The mere possibility of Teheran harassing shipping in the Strait of Hormuz – a narrow stretch of the Persian Gulf through which about a fifth of the world's oil must pass – has sent commodities markets into turmoil since the US strike on Iranian nuclear facilities on Saturday (Jun 21). President Donald Trump then announced a tentative ceasefire between Iran and Israel on Monday. The worries are understandable, because in the roughly 15 decades that have marked the modern petroleum era, crude has hardly ever had restrictions on commerce. Even the autarkic, self-reliant economies of Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia never sought to impose a tariff on the black gold. How different things are for green power. Back in 2015, when 195 nations came together to sign the Paris Agreement pledging to keep the planet well below 2 degrees Celsius of warming, there were just nine measures globally constraining trade in clean energy. As at last year, that number had blossomed to 212, according to a report this week by Ren21, a group backing renewable power. That's one of the main reasons the world is likely to build only about two-thirds of the renewables leaders had pledged to connect by 2030. The barriers to fossil energy imposed for just five months during the 1973 oil embargo are still remembered decades later. And yet we have spent 10 years building a similar set of restrictions against clean power, in the midst of an escalating climate crisis – and most of us barely give it a moment's thought. One reason is that the shackles on green energy are justified with the noblest of misguided intentions. A government promising to support domestic manufacturers of solar panels, wind turbines, and lithium-ion batteries sounds like a climate leader. That's especially the case when rapacious Chinese competitors seem on the brink of monopoly. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up In practice, such measures mostly just slow the necessary work of decarbonisation. Local clean energy manufacturers are perpetually begging for support. It's quicker, cheaper and easier for governments to quieten those complaints by stifling competition on the supply side of the industry with levies and regulations, such as the 3,521 per cent tariff the US is putting on Cambodian photovoltaic panels. Carrying out the more effective policy of stimulating demand via subsidies and mandates is harder. Such rules are legion. Ghana, for instance, requires a rising share of local content in renewable energy. Almost anyone working on such projects – manufacturers, contractors, lawyers, bankers, truckers and even caterers – must demonstrate their compliance by applying for a US$3,000 permit, more than a typical annual salary. Unsurprisingly, that's deterred development, leaving Ghana with just 188 megawatts of installed solar. That's less than what Malta, one of the world's smallest countries, has. Indonesia has similar rules, intended to foster a local manufacturing sector and originally targeting a 90 per cent share of local content in solar projects by 2025. That level was clearly impracticable and the requirement was cut last year to 20 per cent, but the damage had already been done. Despite having sufficient land to power all of South-east Asia with solar, Indonesia is currently generating less than tiny Singapore or frigid Estonia. Such trade restrictions can have a limited use in fostering infant industries, but in general they're applied too widely and removed too rarely, even when it's clear they're not working. The number of regulations has doubled since 2022, according to Ren21. This is desperately counterproductive. We tax and over-regulate things we want to discourage. With prospects of limiting warming to 1.5 degree Celsius already pretty much out of reach, we should be doing everything we can to make clean energy cheaper, and fossil energy more costly. We're instead doing the opposite. Even under former president Joe Biden and after the invasion of Ukraine, the US imposed higher trade barriers on Malaysian solar panels made with Chinese materials than it did on Indian diesel made with Russian crude oil. When President Donald Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariffs were announced in April, fossil fuels were one of a handful of sectors exempt. Such special treatment for oil, gas and coal is the tic of a nervy addict in fear of withdrawal. Oil embargoes are so feared because without an uninterrupted flow of crude, our non-electric trucks, trains, work vehicles, and cars would grind to a halt in a matter of weeks, threatening punch-ups at petrol stations and economic calamity. If China stopped exporting photovoltaic panels tomorrow, however, hardly anyone outside of the solar industry would notice. The sun would still shine, and your rooftop would still generate electricity. That's, to be clear, a virtue of this cheap, clean, resilient technology. But the lack of immediate blowback means that ill-considered policies hampering the growth of renewables can feel consequence-free. One virtue of crises is the way they concentrate the mind. The 1973 embargo sparked a boom in alternatives to imported Middle Eastern oil, from coal and nuclear power to North Sea, Alaskan and Soviet petroleum. Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine similarly drove the European Union to redouble efforts to switch to renewables. If there's one silver lining from the current grim geopolitical situation, let's hope it will prompt the world to start dismantling this metastasizing embargo on clean energy. BLOOMBERG
Straits Times
3 hours ago
- Straits Times
Zelensky opts for more formal, calibrated wardrobe ahead of Trump meeting
Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky has switched his typical khaki military-style tee-shirts and long-sleeved tops for more formal, but still rugged, black suit-style jackets and shirts. PHOTO: REUTERS KYIV - Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has retuned his wardrobe since a disastrous Oval Office meeting with US President Donald Trump in February, switching his typical khaki military-style tee-shirts and long-sleeved tops for more formal, but still rugged, black suit-style jackets and shirts. The media-savvy leader had wanted to show solidarity with the troops fighting Russia on the frontline. But he was chided by a US reporter for not wearing a suit at the White House event, which descended into a shouting match over whether he was showing sufficient gratitude for US wartime support. Since then, Mr Zelensky has worked to rebuild relations with Washington, whose military help Kyiv still badly needs, even though Mr Trump has shown no sign of resuming the donations of weaponry that his predecessor Joe Biden had instituted. When Mr Zelensky met Mr Trump at Pope Francis's funeral in Rome in April, he wore a heavy black field jacket and black shirt buttoned to the collar, with no tie. He sported a similar look when meeting British Prime Minister Keir Starmer in London on June 23, and again at the dinner hosted on June 24 by the Dutch king that preceded June 25's Nato summit in The Hague. Although he was not invited to the meeting itself, he met with Mr Trump afterwards, with an agenda including a wish-list of arms purchases. The subtle switch, stopping short of white shirt or tie, has captured attention on social media and from the Ukrainian edition of ELLE magazine, which on June 25 described his changed look as "visual diplomacy of a new kind". The negative focus on Mr Zelensky's attire at the White House was widely criticised by Ukrainians, who have largely rallied around their leader since Moscow's February 2022 invasion. A communications adviser for the president's office did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
