China 'clearly' trying to interfere in Taiwan's democracy, Taipei says before recall vote, Asia News
On Saturday, Taiwan voters will decide on the fate of 24 lawmakers from Taiwan's largest opposition party, the Kuomintang (KMT), in a recall campaign started by civic groups who accuse the lawmakers of cozying up to Beijing, which views the island as its own territory.
The KMT denies being pro-Beijing, but says it needs to keep lines of communication with China open, and has denounced the recalls as a "malicious" attack on democracy that does not respect the results of last year's parliamentary election.
China's Taiwan Affairs Office and Chinese state media have repeatedly commented on the recall vote and used some of the same talking points as the Kuomintang, Reuters reported this week.
In a post on Facebook citing the Reuters report and research by Taiwan's IORG, which analyses Chinese state media reports, Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council said it "rejects the Chinese Communist Party's intervention".
"The Chinese Communist Party's attempt to interfere with Taiwan's democratic operation is evident and clear," it said.
"Recall in Taiwan is a civil right guaranteed by the constitution, and it is up to the people of Taiwan to decide who should or should not be removed from office."
China's Taiwan Affairs Office did not respond to a request for comment. It has also not responded to questions submitted last week by Reuters about the recall and whether China was seeking to interfere in the outcome.
The recall campaign has been happening against a backdrop of China ramping up its own military and diplomatic pressure campaign against Taiwan to assert territorial claims that Taiwan resolutely rejects.
[[nid:719700]]
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
AsiaOne
an hour ago
- AsiaOne
UCLA says Trump administration froze $749m of its federal funding, World News
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump's administration has frozen US$584 million (S$749 million) in federal funding for the University of California, Los Angeles, UCLA said on Wednesday (Aug 6) after the government reprimanded the university over pro-Palestinian protests. The Trump administration has threatened to cut federal funds for universities over pro-Palestinian protests against US ally Israel's war in Gaza. The government alleges universities, including UCLA, allowed antisemitism during the protests. Large demonstrations took place at UCLA last year. Protesters, including some Jewish groups, say the government wrongly equates their criticism of Israel's military assault in Gaza and its occupation of Palestinian territories with antisemitism, and their advocacy for Palestinian rights with support for extremism. "Currently, a total of approximately US$584 million in extra-mural award funding is suspended and at risk," UCLA Chancellor Julio Frenk said in an update on the university website. University of California President James Milliken separately said the institution agreed to have talks with the federal government to restore its funding. Milliken said funding "cuts do nothing to address antisemitism." The White House had no immediate comment. Last week, UCLA agreed to pay over US$6 million to settle a lawsuit by some students and a professor who alleged antisemitism. It was also sued this year over a 2024 violent mob attack on pro-Palestinian protesters at the height of the campus protest movement. The government has in recent weeks settled its probes with Columbia University, which agreed to pay over US$220 million, and Brown University, which said it will pay US$50 million. Both institutions accepted certain government demands. Talks to settle with Harvard University are ongoing. Rights advocates have raised concerns about academic freedom and free speech. The government has also attempted to deport foreign student protesters but faced judicial roadblocks. Stanford University's student-run newspaper sued the Trump administration on Wednesday, saying student writers censored themselves and turned down assignments related to Gaza to avoid being targeted for deportation. Rights advocates have noted a rise in antisemitism, anti-Arab bias and Islamophobia due to the war. The Trump administration has not announced equivalent probes into Islamophobia. [[nid:721007]]
AsiaOne
an hour ago
- AsiaOne
Missed signals, lost deal: How India-US trade talks collapsed, World News
NEW DELHI/WASHINGTON — After five rounds of trade negotiations, Indian officials were so confident of securing a favourable deal with the United States that they even signalled to the media that tariffs could be capped at 15 per cent. Indian officials expected US President Donald Trump to announce the deal himself weeks before the Aug 1 deadline. The announcement never came. New Delhi is now left with the surprise imposition of a 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods from Friday, along with unspecified penalties over oil imports from Russia, while Trump has closed larger deals with Japan and the EU, and even offered better terms to arch-rival Pakistan. Interviews with four Indian government officials and two US government officials revealed previously undisclosed details of the proposed deal and an exclusive account of how negotiations collapsed despite technical agreements on most issues. The officials on both sides said a mix of political misjudgement, missed signals and bitterness broke down the deal between the world's biggest and fifth-largest economies, whose bilateral trade is worth over US$190 billion (S$244 billion). The White House, the US Trade Representative office, and India's Prime Minister's Office, along with the External Affairs and Commerce ministries, did not respond to emailed requests for comment. India believed that after visits by Indian Trade Minister Piyush Goyal to Washington and US Vice President J.D. Vance to Delhi, it had made a series of deal-clinching concessions. New Delhi was offering zero tariffs on industrial goods that formed about 40 per cent of US exports to India, two Indian government officials told Reuters. Despite domestic pressure, India would also gradually lower tariffs on US cars and alcohol with quotas and accede to Washington's main demand of higher energy and defence imports from the US, the officials said. "Most differences were resolved after the fifth round in Washington, raising hopes of a breakthrough," one of the officials said, adding negotiators believed the US would accommodate India's reluctance on duty-free farm imports and dairy products from the US It was a miscalculation. Trump saw the issue differently and wanted more concessions. "A lot of progress was made on many fronts in India talks, but there was never a deal that we felt good about," said one White House official. "We never got to what amounted to a full deal — a deal that we were looking for." Over-confidence and miscalculation Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who visited Washington in February, agreed to target a deal by fall 2025, and more than double bilateral trade to US$500 billion by 2030. To bridge the US$47 billion goods trade gap, India pledged to buy up to US$25 billion in US energy and boost defence imports. But officials now admit India grew overconfident after Trump talked up a "big" imminent deal, taking it as a signal that a favourable agreement was in hand. New Delhi then hardened its stance, especially on agriculture and dairy, two highly sensitive areas for the Indian government. "We are one of the fastest growing economies, and the US can't ignore a market of 1.4 billion," one Indian official involved in the negotiations said in mid-July. Negotiators even pushed for relief from the 10 per cent average US tariff announced in April, plus a rollback of steel, aluminium and auto duties. Later, India scaled back expectations after the US signed trade deals with key partners including Japan, and the European Union, hoping it could secure a similar 15 per cent tariff rate with fewer concessions. That was unacceptable to the White House. "Trump wanted a headline-grabbing announcement with broader market access, investments and large purchases," said a Washington-based source familiar with the talks. An Indian official acknowledged New Delhi wasn't ready to match what others offered. South Korea, for example, struck a deal just before Trump's Aug 1 deadline, securing a 15 per cent rate instead of 25 per cent by offering US$350 billion in investments, higher energy imports, and concessions on rice and beef. Communication breakdown "At one point, both sides were very close to signing the deal," said Mark Linscott, a former US Trade Representative who now works for a lobby group that is close to the discussions between the two nations. "The missing component was a direct line of communication between President Trump and Prime Minister Modi." A White House official strongly disputed this, noting other deals had been resolved without such intervention. An Indian government official involved in the talks said Modi could not have called, fearing a one-sided conversation with Trump that could put him on the spot. However, the other three Indian officials said Trump's repeated remarks about mediating the India-Pakistan conflict further strained negotiations and contributed to Modi not making a final call. "Trump's remarks on Pakistan didn't go down well," one of them said. "Ideally, India should have acknowledged the US role while making it clear the final call was ours." A senior Indian government official blamed the collapse on poor judgement, saying top Indian advisers mishandled the process. "We lacked the diplomatic support needed after the US struck better deals with Vietnam, Indonesia, Japan and the EU," the official said. "We're now in a crisis that could have been avoided." Trump said on Tuesday he would increase the tariff on imports from India from the current rate of 25 per cent "very substantially" over the next 24 hours and alleged that New Delhi's purchases of Russian oil were "fuelling the war" in Ukraine. Way forward Talks are ongoing, with a US delegation expected in Delhi later this month and Indian government officials still believe the deal can be salvaged from here. "It's still possible," one White House official said. The Indian government is re-examining areas within the farm and dairy sectors where concessions can be made, the fourth official said. On Russian oil, India could reduce some purchases in favour of US supplies if pricing is matched. "It likely will require direct communication between the prime minister and the president," said Linscott. "Pick up the phone. Right now, we are in a lose-lose. But there is real potential for a win-win trade deal." [[nid:721042]]
Straits Times
2 hours ago
- Straits Times
Returned and reeling: Afghans expelled from Iran struggle to start over
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox ISLAM QALA, Afghanistan, August 7 - Habiba, an Afghan woman who fled Taliban rule to pursue a master's degree in engineering in Iran, was deported in July just before she was about to complete her studies. The 31-year-old, who declined to give her family name for fear of repercussions, said she returned to her homeland with little more than her laptop and documents, the last traces of a future she nearly secured, one of hundreds of thousands forced to return in recent weeks as Iran ramped up expulsions of Afghans in the wake of its war with Israel. "I was so close," Habiba told Reuters at the Afghan border post of Islam Qala. She said she had just saved enough to complete her thesis, the final step before graduation, and now will have to start over in a country where women are barred from high school, let alone university. Aid agencies say accusations by Iranian authorities that Afghan nationals were spying for Israel triggered a surge in deportations, with the UN refugee agency UNHCR reporting nearly 700,000 Afghans expelled from Iran since the beginning of June. The two countries share a 920-km (550-mile) land border through a flat, arid landscape. Iranian officials maintain those deported were undocumented and most left voluntarily, citing security and resource concerns. Interior Minister Eskandar Momeni said in July that 70% of the 1 million who left since March did so by choice, local media reported. Local media quoted Nader Yarahmadi, an adviser to Iran's Interior Ministry and head of its Centre for Foreign Nationals and Immigrants Affairs, as saying that temporary census cards held by about 2 million Afghan nationals were invalidated from March and that they had until July to leave. An additional 2.1 million Afghans in Iran had no documents, he said. The number of Afghans returning exploded after Israel and Iran fought a 12-day war in June. UNHCR estimates Iran deported an average of more than 30,000 Afghans each day during the war, up 15-fold from about 2,000 earlier. But Iranian officials have downplayed espionage claims as isolated media reports. The crackdown is on illegal immigrants, Yarahmadi said. Aid workers at Islam Qala said some of the returnees arrived after days without food or water. Momeni said deportations were conducted with 'respect and dignity,' but admitted the war triggered rushed exits, leaving many without their wages or possessions. Reuters interviewed 26 Afghans who had recently returned from Iran, many of whom described coming home to a country that now feels unfamiliar and unlivable. Most of them denied they were illegal immigrants in Iran and said they had held some form of documentation. BACK TO CONFINEMENT Rahela, 37, said she had built a steady livelihood in Tehran as a certified makeup artist and seamstress. Now back in the Afghan city of Herat with her two daughters, she says she sees no future. She says she separated from her husband several years ago after he struggled with drug addiction, and has been raising her daughters alone ever since. The Taliban's restrictions bar women from most forms of employment and from travelling long distances without a male guardian. 'I have no helper and no male guardian (mahram),' she said. Her father, although a mahram, is elderly and unable to accompany her or provide support, leaving her effectively confined, she said. The flood of refugees returning to Afghanistan from Iran and Pakistan is straining aid in a country already grappling with economic collapse, donor fatigue and a ban on girls' secondary education. But it is the post-conflict purge from Iran that has overwhelmed Afghan authorities and aid workers, many of whom say they were unprepared for the scale and speed of the deportations. The Taliban-led government has urged Iran to proceed gradually, and allow returnees time to settle financial affairs and retrieve personal property. While the women who have returned spoke of lost rights and opportunities, Afghan men described split families, derailed plans and an uncertain future. Rahim Uzbek, 59, said he was arrested at his job as a security guard, deported alone, and is now living in a mosque near the Islam Qala crossing, away from his two wives and seven children who remained in Iran, although they were also Afghan nationals. He said that he had some money tied up in an advance payment for rent in Iran, but the landlord did not return it. 'I have no assets or savings, nor do I have any shelter or place to stay,' he said, with tears in his eyes. 'I have no idea what to do.' Mansoor Ahmad, 21, a metalworker from Kabul, said he was arrested at work and deported without his family. He said Iranian officers accused him of helping someone escape a deportation camp and beat him when he denied it. 'When I spoke, they beat me. When I stayed silent, they beat me again,' he said. 'Then they put me in solitary.' Red marks and bruises were visible on his back and shoulders, consistent with being struck or kicked. SECURITY AND EMPLOYMENT Iranian officials deny systemic abuse. The Iranian chargé d'affaires in Kabul, Alireza Bigdeli, said there were no official reports of mistreatment but acknowledged 'some may be unhappy with the way they were treated, detained, or returned.' Iranian authorities say they tried to prevent family separations but admit the post-war rush split some families. Students were encouraged to leave with relatives under a voluntary return plan. While many of the Afghans said life in Iran was tough, marked by discrimination, high costs and a constant sense of being unwelcome, they still had goals. Some worked, others studied. 'The situation in Iran was very difficult,' said Rahela. 'People treated us harshly. They humiliated and insulted us. But at least there was security and work. Women could work... and that was good for us." REUTERS
