China promises to address India's rare earth requirements
KIRAN SHARMA
August 19, 2025 20:34 JST
NEW DELHI -- In a major diplomatic breakthrough, China has promised to address India's concerns regarding Beijing's export curbs on rare earths, tunnel boring machines and fertilizers.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Diplomat
2 hours ago
- The Diplomat
China's Taiwan Dilemma: How Public Opinion Is Shifting Strategy From Force to Diplomacy
In the complex theater of international affairs, few issues generate as much intensity and global scrutiny as the future of Taiwan. Often framed through the binary lens of sovereignty versus secession, the 'Taiwan issue' remains a central thread in Beijing's domestic and foreign policy calculus. Yet, beneath the headlines and official pronouncements lies a more nuanced picture of how the Chinese public envisions resolving one of the most consequential territorial disputes in contemporary geopolitics. The latest findings from the Chinese Citizens' Global Perception Survey (CCGPS) reveal evolving preferences among the mainland Chinese public toward the Taiwan question. Conducted annually since 2023, with representative samples across gender, geography and socio-economic background, the CCGPS provides a statistically robust and demographically calibrated snapshot of popular sentiment in mainland China. It suggests that while the Chinese government continues to emphasize 'reunification' in official discourse, the public's appetite for resolution via military force is waning. At the same time, alternative diplomatic pathways – especially those involving both Taiwan and the United States – are gaining very modest traction among segments of the general population. The data from the most recent wave of the survey in 2025 explores three distinct resolution strategies: (1) military intervention, (2) direct diplomacy with Taiwan, and (3) diplomacy involving both the United States and Taiwan. These categories were rated on a seven-point Likert scale, allowing respondents to express degrees of preference rather than binary choices. When analyzing attitudes toward military resolution, the 2025 data reveals a subtle but perceptible shift. Although support remains relatively stable, the distribution of preferences appears to be flattening. In 2024, 22 percent of respondents selected a 4 on the Likert scale – representing moderate support for military resolution – while 15 percent opted for 7, indicating strong endorsement. By 2025, these figures dropped slightly to 19 and 15 percent respectively. Meanwhile, responses clustered at the lower end of the scale (1-3) stayed consistently between 10 to 12 percent. This pattern implies that while core support for a military solution has not collapsed, it has softened. The center of gravity in Chinese public opinion is slowly tilting away from confrontation, perhaps nudged by rising awareness of the economic and human costs tied to armed conflict. More striking is the public's growing comfort with diplomatic engagement directly with Taiwan. In 2025, 25 percent of respondents selected a score of 6 on the scale, reflecting strong agreement with pursuing direct diplomacy, while another 21 percent chose a score of 5. These numbers held steady compared to 2024, and when combined with the mid-point score of 4, which rose from 18 percent to 20 percent year-over-year, they suggest an emerging cluster of moderate to strong approval for diplomacy. Although official Chinese discourse rarely entertains the notion of Taiwan as a separate negotiating entity, the CCGPS results underscore the public's receptiveness to such dialogue, especially among younger, urban and educated respondents. The most geopolitically layered approach – tripartite diplomacy involving both Taiwan and the United States – elicits more caution. In 2025, 27 percent of respondents selected a score of 1 on the Likert scale, indicating strong disagreement with this strategy, an increase from 26 percent in 2024. Meanwhile, moderate responses remained static, with 20 percent choosing a score of 4 both years. Support at the highest end of the scale, a score of 7, was minimal, declining slightly from 7 to 8 percent, while a score of 6 dipped from 12 to 10 percent. This distribution points to entrenched skepticism toward U.S. involvement, possibly reflecting broader mistrust in the Sino-American relationship amid escalating rivalry over trade, technology and security. Nonetheless, the presence of some support at moderate and higher ranges reveals that for a portion of the population, multilateral dialogue retains strategic appeal. These attitudinal shifts are not occurring in a vacuum. The Chinese information ecosystem is rapidly evolving, and citizens are increasingly exposed to global narratives through digital platforms and cross-border interactions. This growing awareness appears to be tempering hardline views and fostering a more pragmatic lens. In fact, respondents with higher education and international exposure were notably more favorable to diplomatic options, reinforcing the idea that cosmopolitanism and strategic caution can coexist. The overall implications of these findings are both timely and instructive. First, they suggest that while nationalist fervor exists, it coexists with a pragmatic strain that increasingly favors diplomacy over force. This is not to say that China's official stance will shift quickly or radically. State narratives are crafted through a blend of ideology, strategic calculation and domestic political exigencies. However, domestic public opinion, especially if it trends away from confrontation, will exert subtle influence on foreign policy formation, especially in moments of crisis or miscalculation. Second, the tepid enthusiasm for involving the United States suggests a rising belief in self-sufficiency or skepticism of external arbitration. In a multipolar world where trust between major powers is increasingly fragile, such attitudes carry significant weight While elite perspectives and government positions often dominate discussions on Taiwan, public opinion inside China remains a relatively underexplored terrain. The CCGPS opens a window into this space, revealing a populace that is neither uniformly bellicose nor naively conciliatory. Instead, Chinese citizens appear increasingly aware of the stakes and costs of different strategies, and are navigating these choices with a blend of realism, caution and national pride. As tensions in the Taiwan Strait continue to mount, especially amid rising military maneuvers, technological competition and diplomatic pressure, understanding domestic opinion within China becomes vital. Whether Beijing ultimately chooses dialogue or confrontation may depend as much on domestic sentiment as on the calculus of leadership. The CCGPS data does not predict the future, but it does illuminate the conditions shaping it. If China is indeed entering a new era, one where soft power, image cultivation, and strategic patience play a greater role, then the Chinese public's evolving view of Taiwan suggests that the future may be less about military coercion and more about diplomatic choreography. Whether that pivot materializes remains to be seen, but the survey data offers one clear takeaway: the Chinese people are thinking deeply, and differently, about Taiwan. Foreign observers would do well to listen.
Japan Today
2 hours ago
- Japan Today
New Zealand soldier admits attempted espionage in country's first spying conviction
New Zealand army officer cadets move on exercise in the Waiouru training area in the central North Island of New Zealand, May 6, 2022. (Corporal Naomi James/NZDF via AP) By CHARLOTTE GRAHAM-McLAY A New Zealand soldier who tried to spy for a foreign power has admitted to attempted espionage in a military court. Monday's conviction was the first for spying in New Zealand's history. The soldier's name was suppressed, as was what country he sought to pass secrets to. Military court documents said the man believed he was engaged with a foreign agent in 2019 when he tried to communicate military information including base telephone directories and maps, assessments of security weaknesses, his own identity card and log-in details for a military network. The wording of the charge said his actions were 'likely to prejudice the security or defense of New Zealand.' He wasn't speaking to a foreign agent, but an undercover New Zealand police officer collecting intelligence on alleged right-wing extremist groups, documents supplied by the military court showed. The soldier came to law enforcement attention as part of an operation that was established after a March 2019 terrorist attack on two mosques in the city of Christchurch, when an Australian white supremacist opened fire on Muslim worshipers, killing 51. Officers spoke to the man twice about his involvement in a group, court documents showed, and after the government became aware he had expressed a desire to defect he was contacted by the undercover officer. When the soldier's hard drive was searched, investigators found a copy of Christchurch gunman Brenton Tarrant's livestreamed video of his massacre and a manifesto document he published online before the killings. Possession of either without permission is a criminal offense in New Zealand and the soldier, who admitted that charge too, joins several others convicted in New Zealand of having or sharing the terrorist's banned material. In a statement read to the court by his lawyer, the man said the two nationalist groups with which he was involved were 'no more than groups of friends with similar points of view to my own,' according to Radio New Zealand. The laywer, Steve Winter, added that his client denied supporting the Christchurch shooter's ideology, RNZ reported. The soldier — who was based at Linton Military Camp near the city of Palmerston North — also pleaded guilty to accessing a military computer system for dishonest purposes. The amended suite of three charges replaced 17 counts levelled against him earlier in the proceedings. Each of the three charges he admitted carries a maximum prison term of either seven or 10 years in New Zealand. His sentence was expected to be delivered by a military panel within days after Monday's conviction. The man was due to stand trial by court martial on the charges before he admitted the offenses. His was the first charge in a New Zealand military court for espionage or attempted spying. The last time such a case reached the civilian courts before was in 1975, when a public servant was acquitted on charges alleging he had passed information to Russian agents. A spokesperson for New Zealand's military said they would not comment until the proceedings against the soldier finished. © Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
Japan Today
2 hours ago
- Japan Today
Despite flurry of meetings on Russia's war in Ukraine, major obstacles to peace remain
By BARRY HATTON and KATIE MARIE DAVIES In this photo provided by Ukraine's 65th Mechanized Brigade press service, recruits practice military skills on a training ground on a sunflower field in the Zaporizhzhia region, Ukraine, Monday, Aug. 11, 2025, (Andriy Andriyenko/Ukraine's 65th Mechanized Brigade via AP) The second Oval Office meeting in six months between U.S. President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy went off smoothly Monday, in sharp contrast to their disastrous encounter in February. European leaders joined the discussions in a show of transatlantic unity, and both they and Zelenskyy repeatedly thanked Trump for his efforts to end Russia's three-year war on Ukraine. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said his expectations for the meeting 'were not just met, they were exceeded,' while Zelenskyy on Tuesday called the sit-down 'an important step toward ending this war.' But despite the guarded optimism and friendly banter among the leaders, there was little concrete progress on the main obstacles to peace — and that deadlock likely favors Russian President Vladimir Putin, whose forces continue to make steady, if slow, progress on the ground in Ukraine. 'Putin cannot get enough champagne or whatever he's drinking,' Gabrielius Landsbergis, a former foreign minister of Lithuania, said of Monday's meeting. As NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte told The Ingraham Angle on Fox News: 'All the details have to be hammered out." Here is a look at the issues that must be resolved: To agree to a peace deal with Russia, Ukraine wants assurances that it can deter any future attacks by the Kremlin's forces. That means, Zelenskyy says, a strong Ukrainian army that is provided with weapons and training by Western partners. It could potentially also mean securing a guarantee resembling NATO's collective defense mandate, which sees an attack on one member of the alliance as an attack on all. How that would work is not clear. Additionally, Kyiv's European allies are looking to set up a force that could backstop any peace agreement in Ukraine. A coalition of 30 countries, including European nations, Japan and Australia, have signed up to support the initiative, although the role that the U.S. might play in such a force is unclear. European leaders, fearing Moscow's territorial ambitions won't stop in Ukraine, are keen to lock America's military might into the plan. On Tuesday, Trump told Fox News Channel's 'Fox & Friends' that U.S. troops would not be sent to help defend Ukraine against Russia. Russia has repeatedly said that it would not accept NATO troops in Ukraine. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron co-chaired an online meeting Tuesday of the coalition countries. Ukraine and its European supporters have repeatedly called for a ceasefire while peace talks are held. Putin has balked at that prospect. With his forces inching forward in Ukraine, he has little incentive to freeze their movement. Ahead of his meeting with the Russian leader last week, Trump threatened Russia with 'severe consequences' if it didn't accept a ceasefire. Afterward, he dropped that demand and said it was best to focus on a comprehensive peace deal — an approach that Putin has pushed for. Trump said in Monday's Oval Office meeting with Zelenskyy that a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine was 'unnecessary.' But after his closed-door meeting with European leaders and Zelenskyy, Trump told reporters that 'all of us would obviously prefer the immediate ceasefire while we work on a lasting peace.' Where Trump ultimately falls on that issue is important because it could affect how much Ukrainian land Russia has seized by the time the two sides get around to hammering out how much it could keep. Zelenskyy and European leaders said that Putin has demanded that Ukraine give up the Donbas, the country's industrial heartland made up of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. It has seen some of the most intense fighting of the war though Russian forces have failed to capture it completely. Moscow also illegally annexed Crimea and its forces hold parts of four other regions outside the Donbas. In all, they hold about one-fifth of Ukraine. Zelenskyy has long noted the Ukrainian Constitution prohibits breaking up his country. He has also suggested the demand for territory would serve as a springboard for a future Russian invasion. Rutte said the possibility of Ukraine ceding occupied territory to Russia in return for peace wasn't discussed in Monday's talks. That is an issue for Zelenskyy and Putin to consider, he said to Fox News. Zelenskyy has repeatedly suggested sitting down with Putin, even challenging the Russian leader to meet him as part of direct peace talks between the two sides in Turkey in May. Putin snubbed that offer, saying that significant progress on an agreement would have to be made before the pair met in person. On Monday, Trump appeared to back Zelenskyy's plan. 'I called President Putin, and began the arrangements for a meeting, at a location to be determined, between President Putin and President Zelenskyy,' Trump said in a social media post. He said he would join the two leaders afterward. But when discussing a phone call held after the meeting between Trump and the Russian leader, Putin's foreign affairs adviser Yuri Ushakov gave no indication that either a bilateral or a trilateral meeting with Ukraine had been agreed. European leaders know that Putin doesn't want to meet Zelenskyy and that he won't allow Western troops in Ukraine — but they're expressing optimism that these things could happen in the hopes of forcing Putin to be the one to say no to Trump, according to Janis Kluge of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs. 'Europeans hype up expectations to create a reality in which Putin disappoints,' he wrote on X. © Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
