Hong Kong's religious harmony is best maintained through trust
letters@scmp.com or filling in
this Google form . Submissions should not exceed 400 words, and must include your full name and address, plus a phone number for verification
I am writing in response to
the letter , 'Hong Kong welcomes Muslims, but let's safeguard against extremism' (April 30).
Hong Kong's efforts to foster inclusivity for Muslims while safeguarding social harmony are commendable and reflect the city's commitment to diversity. However, the suggestion that extremism is a significant concern with regard to Hong Kong's Muslim community lacks empirical support and risks perpetuating unnecessary stereotypes.
Hong Kong's Muslim population, estimated at around 300,000, including both permanent residents and migrant workers, has historically been peaceful and law-abiding.
The government's security reports do not identify the local Muslim community as a source of extremism. While vigilance against radicalisation is prudent worldwide, framing inclusivity efforts with undue caution may inadvertently stigmatise a minority that contributes positively to Hong Kong's economy and culture.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
AllAfrica
01-08-2025
- AllAfrica
China happily and aggressively filling Trump's climate vacuum
When President Donald Trump announced in early 2025 that he was withdrawing the US from the Paris climate agreement for the second time, it triggered fears that the move would undermine global efforts to slow climate change and diminish America's global influence. A big question hung in the air: Who would step into the leadership vacuum? While it's still too early to fully assess the long-term impact of the United States' political shift when it comes to global cooperation on climate change, there are signs that a new set of leaders is rising to the occasion. The US first committed to the Paris Agreement in a joint announcement by President Barack Obama and China's Xi Jinping in 2015. At the time, the US agreed to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions 26% to 28% below 2005 levels by 2025 and pledged financial support to help developing countries adapt to climate risks and embrace renewable energy. Some people praised the US engagement, while others criticized the original commitment as too weak. Since then, the US has cut emissions by 17.2% below 2005 levels – missing the goal, in part because its efforts have been stymied along the way. Just two years after the landmark Paris Agreement, Trump stood in the Rose Garden in 2017 and announced he was withdrawing the US from the treaty, citing concerns that jobs would be lost, that meeting the goals would be an economic burden, and that it wouldn't be fair because China, the world's largest emitter today, wasn't projected to start reducing its emissions for several years. Scientists and some politicians and business leaders were quick to criticize the decision, calling it 'shortsighted' and 'reckless.' Some feared that the Paris Agreement, signed by almost every country, would fall apart. But it did not. In the US, businesses such as Apple, Google, Microsoft and Tesla made their own pledges to meet the Paris Agreement goals. Hawaii passed legislation to become the first state to align with the agreement. A coalition of US cities and states banded together to form the United States Climate Alliance to keep working to slow climate change. Globally, leaders from Italy, Germany and France rebutted Trump's assertion that the Paris Agreement could be renegotiated. Others from Japan, Canada, Australia and New Zealand doubled down on their own support of the global climate accord. In 2020, President Joe Biden brought the US back into the agreement. Amazon partnered with Dominion Energy to build solar farms, like this one, in Virginia. They power the company's cloud-computing and other services. Photo: Drew Angerer / Getty Images via The Conversation Now, with Trump pulling the US out again – and taking steps to eliminate US climate policies, boost fossil fuels and slow the growth of clean energy at home – other countries are stepping up. On July 24, 2025, China and the European Union issued a joint statement vowing to strengthen their climate targets and meet them. They alluded to the US, referring to 'the fluid and turbulent international situation today' in saying that 'the major economies … must step up efforts to address climate change.' In some respects, this is a strength of the Paris Agreement – it is a legally nonbinding agreement based on what each country decides to commit to. Its flexibility keeps it alive, as the withdrawal of a single member does not trigger immediate sanctions, nor does it render the actions of others obsolete. The agreement survived the first US withdrawal, and so far, all signs point to it surviving the second one. From what I've seen in international climate meetings and my team's research, it appears that most countries are moving forward. One bloc emerging as a powerful voice in negotiations is the Like-Minded Group of Developing Countries – a group of low- and middle-income countries that includes China, India, Bolivia and Venezuela. Driven by economic development concerns, these countries are pressuring the developed world to meet its commitments to both cut emissions and provide financial aid to poorer countries. Diego Pacheco, a negotiator from Bolivia, spoke on behalf of the Like-Minded Developing Countries group during a climate meeting in Bonn, Germany, in June 2025. Photo: IISD / ENB via The Conversation | Kiara Worth China, motivated by economic and political factors, seems to be happily filling the climate power vacuum created by the US exit. In 2017, China voiced disappointment over the first US withdrawal. It maintained its climate commitments and pledged to contribute more in climate finance to other developing countries than the US had committed to – US$3.1 billion compared with $3 billion. This time around, China is using its leadership on climate change in ways that fit its broader strategy of gaining influence and economic power by supporting economic growth and cooperation in developing countries. Through its Belt and Road Initiative, China has scaled up renewable energy exports and development in other countries, such as investing in solar power in Egypt and wind energy development in Ethiopia. While China is still the world's largest coal consumer, it has aggressively pursued investments in renewable energy at home, including solar, wind and electrification. In 2024, about half the renewable energy capacity built worldwide was in China. China's interest in South America's energy resources has been growing for years. In 2019, China's special representative for climate change, Xie Zhenhua, met with Chile's then-ministers of energy and environment, Juan Carlos Jobet and Carolina Schmidt, in Chile. Photo: Martin Bernetti / AFP via Getty Images / The Conversation While it missed the deadline to submit its climate pledge due this year, China has a goal of peaking its emissions before 2030 and then dropping to net-zero emissions by 2060. It is continuing major investments in renewable energy, both for its own use and for export. The US government, in contrast, is cutting its support for wind and solar power. China also just expanded its carbon market to encourage emissions cuts in the cement, steel and aluminum sectors. The British government has also ratcheted up its climate commitments as it seeks to become a clean energy superpower. In 2025, it pledged to cut emissions 77% by 2035 compared with 1990 levels. Its new pledge is also more transparent and specific than in the past, with details on how specific sectors, such as power, transportation, construction and agriculture, will cut emissions. And it contains stronger commitments to provide funding to help developing countries grow more sustainably. In terms of corporate leadership, while many American businesses are being quieter about their efforts, in order to avoid sparking the ire of the Trump administration, most appear to be continuing on a green path – despite the lack of federal support and diminished rules. USA Today and Statista's 'America's Climate Leader List' includes about 500 large companies that have reduced their carbon intensity – carbon emissions divided by revenue – by 3% from the previous year. The data shows that the list is growing, up from about 400 in 2023. The Paris Agreement isn't going anywhere. Given the agreement's design, with each country voluntarily setting its own goals, the US never had the power to drive it into obsolescence. The question is whether developed and developing country leaders alike can navigate two pressing needs – economic growth and ecological sustainability – without compromising their leadership on climate change. This year's UN climate conference in Brazil, COP30, will show how countries intend to move forward and, importantly, who will lead the way. Shannon Gibson is professor of environmental studies, political science and international relations, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences Research assistant Emerson Damiano, a recent graduate in environmental studies at USC, contributed to this article. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
AllAfrica
31-07-2025
- AllAfrica
Trump burning a diplomatic bridge to Malaysia
President Donald Trump's pick to be the United States' next ambassador to Malaysia has raised more than a few eyebrows in the Southeast Asian nation. Right-wing influencer Nick Adams, a naturalized American born and raised in Australia, is, by his own account, a weightlifting, Bible-reading, 'wildly successful' and 'extremely charismatic' fan of Hooters and rare steaks, with the 'physique of a Greek God' and 'an IQ over 180.' Such brashness seems at odds with the usually quieter business of diplomacy. The same could be said about Adams' lack of relevant experience, temperament and expressed opinions – which clash starkly with prevailing sentiment in majority-Muslim, socially conservative Malaysia. Whereas the US usually sends a career State Department official as ambassador to Malaysia, Adams is most definitely a 'political' nominee. His prior public service, as councilor, then deputy mayor, of a Sydney suburb ended abruptly in 2009 amid displays of undiplomatic temper. Yet far more problematic for his new posting is his past perceived disparaging of Islam and ardent pro-Israel views – lightning rod issues in a country that lacks diplomatic relations with Israel and whose population trends strongly pro-Palestinian. So it was little surprise when news of Adam's nomination on July 9, 2025, prompted angry pushback among the Malaysian public and politicians. Whether or not Malaysia would officially reject his appointment, assuming Adams is confirmed, remains uncertain, notwithstanding strong domestic pressure on Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim to do so. But regardless, the nomination marks a turning point in US-Malaysian diplomatic relations, something I have been tracking for over 25 years. In my view, it communicates an overt U.S. disregard for diplomatic norms, such as the signaling of respect and consideration for a partner state. It also reflects the decline in a relationship that for decades had been overwhelmingly stable and amicable. And all this may play into the hands of China, Washington's main rival for influence in Southeast Asia. The US and Malaysia have largely enjoyed warm relations over the years, notwithstanding occasional rhetorical grandstanding, especially on the part of former longtime Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad. Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad and U.S. President Bill Clinton talk at the White House in 1996. Ralph Alswang/Consolidated Photo: News Pictures / Getty Images via The Conversation Having successfully battled a communist insurgency during the mid-20th century, Malaysia remained reliably anti-communist throughout the Cold War, much to Washington's liking. Malaysia also occupies a strategically important position along the Strait of Malacca and has been an important source of both raw materials such as rubber and for the manufacturing of everything from latex gloves to semiconductors. In return, Malaysia has benefited both from the US security umbrella and robust trade and investment. But even before Trump's announcement of his ambassadorship pick, bilateral relations were tense. The most immediate cause was tariffs. In April, the U.S. announced a tariff rate for Malaysia of 24%. Despite efforts to negotiate, the Trump administration indicated the rate would increase further to 25% should no deal materialize by August 1. That the White House released its revised tariff rate just two days before announcing Adams' nomination – and just over a month after Ibrahim held apparently cordial discussions with US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore – only added to Malaysia's grievance. Malaysia may reap some benefit from the new US trade policy, should Trump's broader agenda results in supply chains bypassing China in favor of Southeast Asia, and investors seek new outlets amid Trump's targeted feuds. But Malaysia's roughly US$25 billion trade surplus with the US, its preference for 'low-profile functionality' in regard to its relationship with the US and the general volatility of economic conditions, leave Malaysia still vulnerable. Moreover, trade policy sticking points for the US include areas where Malaysia is loath to bend, such as in its convoluted regulations for halal certification and preferential policies favoring the Malay majority that have long hindered trade negotiations between the two countries. The punishing tariffs the White House has threatened leave Malaysia in a bind. The US is Malaysia's biggest investor and lags only China and Singapore in terms of trade volume. As such, the government in Kuala Lumpur may have little choice but to sacrifice domestic approval to economic expediency. Nor is trade the only source of angst. The White House's pressure on American institutions of higher education is effecting collateral damage on a host of its ostensible allies, Malaysia included. Although numbers have declined since the Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s, the US has remained a popular destination for Malaysians seeking education abroad. In the 1980s, over 10,000 Malaysians enrolled in US colleges and universities annually. Prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, numbers stabilized at around 8,000. But after, enrollments struggled to recover – reaching only 5,223 in 2024. Now, they are falling anew. In the first Trump administration, the visa approval rate for Malaysian students remained high despite Trump's 'Muslim ban' exacerbating impressions of an unwelcoming environment or difficult process. Now, economic uncertainty from trade wars and a struggling Malaysian currency, coupled with proliferating alternatives, make the comparatively high expense of studying in the US even more of a deterrent. Yet what propelled Anwar's administration to announce that it will no longer send government-funded scholarship students to the US – a key conduit for top students to pursue degrees overseas – was specifically the risks inherent in Trump's policies, including threats to bar foreign students at certain universities and stepped-up social media screening of visa applicants. Clearly, Malaysia's government believes that deteriorating relations with the US are not in its best interests. Yet as the junior partner in the relationship, Malaysia has limited ability to improve them. In that, Kuala Lumpur has found itself in a similar boat to other countries in the region who are likewise reconsidering their strategic relationship with the US amid Trump 2.0's dramatic reconfiguration of American foreign policy priorities. When sparring with China for influence in Southeast Asia, the US has, until recently, propounded norms of a Western-centric 'liberal international order' in the region – promoting such values as openness to trade and investment, secure sovereignty and respect for international law. Malaysia has accepted, and benefited from, that framework, even as it has pushed back against U.S. positions on the Middle East and, in the past, on issues related to human rights and civil liberties. But amid the Trump administration's unpredictability in upholding this status quo, a small, middle-income state like Malaysia may have little option beyond pursuing a more determinedly nonaligned neutrality and strategic pragmatism. Indeed, as the U.S. sheds its focus on such priorities as democracy and human rights, China's proffered 'community with a shared future,' emphasizing common interests and a harmonious neighborhood, cannot help but seem more appealing. This is true even while Malaysia recognizes the limitations to China's approach, too, and resists being pushed to 'pick sides.' Malaysia is, after all, loath to be part of a sphere of influence dominated by China, especially amid ongoing antagonism over China's claims in the South China Sea – something that drives Malaysia and fellow counterclaimants in Southeast Asia toward security cooperation with the US. That said, Anwar's administration seemed already to be drifting toward China and away from the West even before the latest unfriendly developments emanating from Washington. This includes announcing in June 2024 its plan to join the BRICS economic bloc of low- and middle-income nations. Now, the more bridges the US burns, the less of a path it leaves back to the heady aspirations of the first Trump administration's 'Free and Open Indo-Pacific' framework, which had highlighted the mutual benefit it enjoyed and shared principles it held with allies in Asia. Instead, Malaysia's plight exemplifies what a baldly transactional and one-sided approach produces in practice. As one ruling-coalition member of parliament recently described, Adams would be the rare US ambassador with whom Malaysian politicians would be loath to pose for photos. And that fact alone speaks volumes about diplomacy and evolving global strategic realities in the MAGA era. Meredith Weiss is professor of political science, University at Albany, State University of New York This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
South China Morning Post
30-07-2025
- South China Morning Post
Teochew diaspora has a role to play amid Thailand-Cambodia conflict
Feel strongly about these letters, or any other aspects of the news? Share your views by emailing us your Letter to the Editor at letters@ or filling in this Google form . Submissions should not exceed 400 words, and must include your full name and address, plus a phone number for verification Gaginang – Teochew for 'our own people' – is how we Teochew or Chiu Chow people refer to ourselves. Originally from the Chaoshan region of China, we are now a global diaspora, with many living in Singapore, Thailand, Cambodia and other parts of Southeast Asia. Our presence in the region is not new; much of the migration stretches back over generations. Teochew contributions have shaped the histories of our adopted homes. One of Thailand's most beloved kings, Taksin , had a Teochew father. Hong Kong's Li Ka-shing, once the richest man in Asia, is Teochew. Across many countries, Teochew have shown deep national loyalty. I was born in the United States to Teochew-Cambodian refugees. Like many minority groups, we hold complex views of our home country. The US has its flaws – particularly now, with its more aggressive foreign policy under the Trump administration. Still, I am proud of the country's historical strides in civil rights and social progress. As a former US federal employee, I took seriously the responsibility of public service. Yet my Teochew identity remains central. When gaginang meet, especially by chance, there is a special excitement. Our dialect is rare and, some would say, fading. The older generation keeps tradition alive through formal Teochew associations. The younger generation stays connected online, often informally but with no less enthusiasm. Many of us also share memories of hardship. In Cambodia, Teochew were targeted during the genocide. In Indonesia, many suffered during anti-Chinese riots . These experiences connect us deeply through stories of survival and resilience.
