Ex-Australian PM Morrison to address China's ‘economic coercion' at US House panel hearing
Scott Morrison will testify at a
US House panel hearing on Wednesday about countering
China 's 'economic coercion against democracies,' the committee said on Friday.
Advertisement
Former US ambassador to
Japan Rahm Emanuel will also testify before the House Select Committee on China.
Relations with China , already rocky after Australia banned Huawei from its 5G broadband network in 2018, cooled further after Canberra called for an independent investigation into the origins of Covid-19
China responded by imposing tariffs on Australian commodities, including wine and barley, and limited imports of Australian beef, coal and grapes, moves described by the United States as 'economic coercion.'
Morrison was defeated in a bid for re-election in 2022.
Advertisement
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South China Morning Post
21 minutes ago
- South China Morning Post
Africa looks to China as ‘beneficial partner' while US imposes tariffs, aid and visa cuts
The United States is losing ground to China for influence in Africa , according to analysts, as Beijing's expansive trade policies and economic engagement outpace Washington's increasingly restrictive approach. Advertisement The assessment came after China announced last month it would expand duty-free access for all taxable products for 53 African countries – all except Eswatini. Beijing's move stands in stark contrast to Washington's levying of trade tariffs, aid cuts and restrictive visa measures. The policy comes amid US threats to cut foreign aid by closing down USAID and imposing visa restrictions on countries including Cameroon, Ethiopia, Ghana, Nigeria and Somalia. From August 1, the US also plans to impose higher reciprocal tariffs on imports from nations such as Algeria, Libya, South Africa and Tunisia. Observers said the duty-free plan was a major narrative win for China. The move is likely to further endear Beijing to African nations, which are increasingly viewing China as a more reliable and beneficial partner. Cameron Hudson, a former US official and senior associate with the Africa programme at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said what was more troubling was that Washington had long believed its aid and humanitarian help to Africa would buy it the goodwill to be able to pursue whatever policies it wanted, no matter the consequences. Advertisement But this had not been the case for a long time, he noted.
AllAfrica
an hour ago
- AllAfrica
Sanchez's Huawei stance puts Spain in Trump's line of fire
The United States could soon impose severe consequences on Spain's Sanchez administration for advancing the claim that the use of Huawei technology in its storage system for Spanish judicial wiretaps does not pose a national security threat. The Trump administration and the US Congress have made it clear that they believe that it is in the US national interest to aggressively counter the use of Chinese hardware and software in and around the national security-sensitive infrastructure of the United States and its allies. That includes NATO and major non-NATO allies. The Trump administration, therefore, cannot give the Sanchez government a pass on its controversial decision to downplay the national security threats posed by Huawei technology in the Spanish defense, security and intelligence sector. That would not only give rise to inconsistency between policy and practice, but also lead to confusion and uncertainty. It would create the impression that the Trump administration is willing to accept strategic misalignment with US national security and foreign policy interests by US allies and partners. It is not. The Trump administration, therefore, needs to quickly decide how best to respond to the Sanchez administration. In Washington, one proposal that has been discussed is to impose targeted sanctions that restrict travel and freeze the assets of Spanish individuals and entities that are involved in corruption, organized crime, human rights violations and anticompetitive practices. They might include Spanish organizations far outside the defense industrial base. Examples include La Liga, the Galician Mafia and the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party. Another option that has been discussed is to rein in bilateral defense, security and intelligence cooperation. That could include imposing restrictions on defense trade, relocating US military forces from Spanish military bases, suspending Spain from US intelligence sharing platforms, and/or ordering a full review of the bilateral relationship between Spain and the United States – similar to what is being discussed for South Africa. All of those options would impose heavy consequences for Spanish national security and foreign policy interests. Whatever policy pathway the Trump administration ultimately pursues, there is likely to be support within the US Congress for imposing harsh consequences on the Government of Spain. The Republican Party remains relatively united in demanding strong alignment on Chinese affairs from US allies and partners. That does not exist in the case of Spain right now, and many Republican elites are unwilling to continue to settle for the status quo. This is not the Biden era. To be clear, this is a predicament of Sanchez's own making. Since inauguration, Sanchez has been playing a high-stakes game of political poker with the Trump administration. Unfortunately, he has been using the bilateral strategic partnership as collateral in this game. At some point, both sides are going to have to show their hands. That could be disastrous for the future of US-Spain relations. Before that happens, the Sanchez administration would be wise to solicit non-partisan advice from the Spanish Ministry of Defense and National Intelligence Center. If domestic politics were taken off the table, one would have to imagine that those institutions would advise Sanchez against siding with the People's Republic of China over the United States on the matter. Michael Walsh is a non-resident senior fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute
South China Morning Post
2 hours ago
- South China Morning Post
UK slams fresh Hong Kong bounties on activists as ‘transnational repression'
Britain has hit out at Hong Kong's move to place a new round of bounties on 15 overseas activists accused of national security offences, saying it is another example of 'transnational repression' that only damages the city's international reputation. Advertisement UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy and Home Secretary Yvette Cooper also stressed on Friday that Britain was committed to the safety of all individuals settled there and had taken steps to 'complete the severing of ties' between the extradition systems of the country and Hong Kong. 'This government will continue to stand with the people of Hong Kong, including those who have made the UK their home. We take the protection of their rights, freedoms, and safety very seriously, and will not tolerate any attempts by foreign governments to coerce, intimidate, harass, or harm their critics overseas,' Lammy and Cooper said. The joint statement by the two senior British officials was made hours after the city's national security police placed the bounties on the 15 activists and issued new arrest warrants against four more, over their involvement in the 'Hong Kong Parliament', a group deemed as subversive by authorities. A bounty of HK$200,000 was placed on each of the 15 activists listed in the latest announcement, as police accused those behind the group of violating the Beijing-decreed national security law by attempting to unlawfully overthrow and undermine the constitutional system, and Chinese and Hong Kong authorities. Advertisement Some of them are reportedly based in the UK, Canada and Taiwan.
