G7's 'deep concern' on China's drills around Taiwan
Foreign ministers of the G7 - Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United States - plus the European Union condemned Beijing's "provocative actions".
"These increasingly frequent and destabilising activities are raising cross-Strait tensions and put at risk global security and prosperity," they said in a joint statement on Sunday.
#G7 Foreign Ministers' statement on China's large-scale military drills around Taiwan. #G7Kananaskis2025 #G7Canada pic.twitter.com/tWdbWpDwQJ
— G7 (@G7) April 6, 2025
G7 members and the international community have an interest in maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait, the statement said.
"We oppose any unilateral actions to threaten such peace and stability, including by force or coercion."
China rejected the joint statement, calling it a "mischaracterisation of the facts and truth and an interference in China's internal affairs."
"China deplores, opposes and absolutely does not accept this," a spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Canada said.
China's military conducted the drills over two days in early April. The military said the exercise, involving the army, navy, air force and missile unit, included precision strikes on simulated key targets.
The Chinese Embassy spokesperson said that the exercises were "severe punishment" against the Taiwan government's "aggressive provocation to seek 'Taiwan independence'," as well as "a stern warning to 'Taiwan independence' separatist forces who deliberately undermine peace across the Taiwan Strait."
"No external force is in any position to point fingers at this," the spokesperson continued.
"We will never ever allow anyone or any force to separate Taiwan from China in any form. We will take all measures necessary to firmly safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity."
In addition to regular military exercises, Chinese fighter jets fly almost daily into Taiwan's air defence zone, usually prompting a response from Taiwan's Air Force.
China regards Taiwan as part of the People's Republic and has repeatedly threatened to invade it in the past.
It has warned other countries, notably the US, to stop supporting Taiwan, which it regards as interference in China's domestic affairs.
Democratic Taiwan, with a population of around 23.4 million, has had an has had an independent government since 1949.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
28 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump's takeover of D.C.'s police force isn't just another diversion from Jeffrey Epstein
It can be tempting to view President Donald Trump's meandering, deeply dishonest press conference on Monday as just the latest 'hey-look-a-squirrel!' distraction meant to divert the nation's attention from his involvement in the Jeffrey Epstein matter. Flanked by members of his cabinet, Trump invoked Section 743 of the Home Rule Charter, which permits him to send in the National Guard for a fixed period, and announced federal troops would be seizing control of the Washington, D.C., police force to address what he called a 'crime emergency.' Like many in his party, Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., saw an ulterior motive for Monday's action. 'In another transparent ploy to distract America from his coverup of the Epstein file, Donald Trump now wants to militarize the District of Columbia,' Raskin said in a written statement, 'to attack crime and clean up graffiti in the capital city despite the fact that crime is at a 30-year low in Washington and graffiti seems to be pretty sparse.' Whether intentionally or not, Trump has indeed mastered the art of diversion. During his press conference, for instance, he bounced from D.C. crime to his forthcoming summit with Vladimir Putin, to tariffs on Chinese imports, to transgender athletes, to his own real estate experience. But his longstanding desire to deploy federal troops in blue state cities to bend them to his will should not be discounted as mere sleight of hand. 'Local 'youths' and gang members, some only 14, 15, and 16-years-old, are randomly attacking, mugging, maiming, and shooting innocent Citizens, at the same time knowing that they will be almost immediately released. They are not afraid of Law Enforcement because they know nothing ever happens to them, but it's going to happen now!' Trump explained in a comically hyperbolic post on Truth Social last Tuesday, explaining his rationale, adding, 'The most recent victim was beaten mercilessly by local thugs.' That recent victim was a 19-year-old Department of Government Efficiency employee, in case you were wondering what crime got Trump out of the golf cart this morning. To be clear, we're all against these ugly crimes, of course, and under the D.C. charter, sending in the National Guard isn't illegal. It's just ridiculously performative and profoundly unnecessary when you stop to realize that Justice Department data backs Raskin's assertion that crime in the district has hit a 30-year low, Data, of course, is beside the point for Trump. Just as his administration is busily rewriting federal scientific assessments that contradict Trump's view that climate change is a 'hoax,' declining violent crime rates in liberal-run cities are an inconvenient truth that doesn't square with his vision of a Washington that has been 'taken over by violent gangs and bloodthirsty criminals.' Trump's not-at-all hidden fantasy has been to become, to be charitable, something of an authoritarian. And the D.C. deployment is yet another dictatorship cosplay warm-up exercise. Under the Home Rule Charter, Trump's order expires in 30 days, but it remains to be seen whether he'll abide by it. After all, in apparent violation of the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act, 250 National Guard troops he deployed are languishing around Los Angeles. Of course, Trump's newfound enthusiasm for mobilizing the Guard is in stark contrast to his delay in doing so on Jan. 6, 2021, the same day he suggested Vice President Mike Pence deserved assassination by the mob Trump had summoned to block the transfer of power. But that was then. 'We have other cities also that are bad. Very bad. You look at Chicago, how bad it is. You look at Los Angeles, how bad it is,' he said. 'We have other cities that are very bad. New York has a problem. And then you have, of course, Baltimore and Oakland. We don't even mention that anymore there.' Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., said on X that 'Trump's raw authoritarian power grab in DC is part of a growing national crisis … He's playing dictator in our nation's capital as a dress rehearsal as he pushes democracy to the brink.' As his cabinet minions looked on, knowing they were props in yet another Trump late-night comedy fodder bit, Attorney General Pam Bondi dutifully executed Dear Leader's orders. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth seemed to relish the expanded marching orders. Only FBI Director Kash Patel briefly seemed to go off-script when he correctly noted that murder rates in the U.S. 'are plummeting.' Facts may not matter in the White House briefing room, but they could still matter in court. California's lawsuit against the Los Angeles troop deployment proceeded in San Francisco on Monday, where the state is arguing that the Trump administration doesn't have the right 'to execute or assist in the execution of federal law or any civilian law enforcement functions by any federal agent or officer.' During her own Monday press conference, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser struck a low-key response to the takeover of her police department, calling the action 'unsettling.' Oh, it's unsettling all right, just as it was in L.A, and this shock-and-awe arrival of U.S. troops could soon be coming to a blue state city near you. As Trump's long-winded presser drew to a close, some reporters shouted out questions about Epstein. By then, the president was already on his way out of the briefing room.
Boston Globe
28 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
When Israel left Gaza, everything got worse
There is no way to know yet how this will turn out. But as Israel prepares to push still deeper into Gaza in what may be the cataclysmic final phase of its war to eliminate Hamas, it is worth looking back to reflect on another fateful, anguish-filled Israeli decision in Gaza — one that began the descent into the nightmare the Jewish state now faces. Advertisement It was exactly 20 years ago this week — Aug. 15, 2005 — that the Israeli government, led by then-prime minister Ariel Sharon, destroyed 21 Jewish communities in the Gaza Strip, evicting 9,000 Israelis and demolishing the homes where some of them had lived for decades. All of Gaza, denuded of its Jews, was then unilaterally surrendered to the Palestinian Authority. There was no quid pro quo. Israel relinquished the territory it had occupied in the 1967 Six Day War without requiring anything in return. Sharon labeled the operation 'disengagement' — a term meant to suggest that by handing Gaza to the Palestinians, Israel could finally sever its ties to the troubled territory and its population. Advertisement Sharon's deputy prime minister, Ehud Olmert — who, like his boss, had always previously been known as a hawkish defender of Israeli security — 'It will be good for us and will be good for the Palestinians,' Olmert effervesced. 'It will bring more security, greater safety, much more prosperity, and a lot of joy for all the people that live in the Middle East.' With disengagement, he foretold, 'a new morning of great hope will emerge.' He was sure that with the end of Israel's occupation of Gaza, 'the Middle East will indeed become what it was destined to be from the outset, a paradise for all the world.' That was perilously wishful thinking, as I Advertisement 'We will be on this side of the line, and the Palestinians will be on that side,' I remember one Israeli journalist earnestly telling me several months before the evacuation. 'They'll run their lives the way they see fit and we won't have to be involved.' The Ambassador Meir Shlomo, who was then the Israeli consul-general in New England, urged me to support the Gaza disengagement because of the diplomatic dividends it would pay. Israel's withdrawal was being applauded everywhere, he pointed out. The plan had the support of the George W. Bush administration and the European Union. It was being But by heading out of Gaza, Israel wasn't walking into peace. It was walking off a cliff. The unilateral withdrawal from Gaza was not interpreted by Israel's enemies as an act of magnanimity or pragmatism. It was interpreted as a surrender. Rather than a historic demonstration of Israel's desire for peace, the evacuation of those 21 communities and the departure of every Israeli soldier from Gaza were seen by the Palestinian Authority as proof that violence pays. Advertisement And so, 20 years ago this week, the IDF was sent in and But that goodwill and fraternity were not reciprocated. 'Today you leave Gaza in humiliation,' Hamas chieftain all of Palestine will be hell for you." The central error of disengagement wasn't the belief that Israel could live without Gaza. It was the belief that Gaza, left to its own devices, would choose peace over jihad. With the Israelis out, Palestinians surged into the abandoned settlements and immediately Hamas turned Gaza into a forward operating base for terrorism: It imported Iranian rockets, dug hundreds of miles of attack tunnels, and embedded its arsenals in civilian areas to ensure any Israeli response would be politically costly. The withdrawal from Gaza didn't end the conflict; it entrenched it. Advertisement What was intended as a confidence-building measure turned out to be a confidence-destroying one. A radical concession meant to enhance Israel's security instead put many more Israelis at risk. Far from encouraging moderation, disengagement encouraged Hamas to intensify its brutal extremism. In the years that followed, Hamas expanded its power and arsenal. Rocket fire into Israel became routine. An Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, was abducted and held by Hamas for five years. Children in Israeli towns like Sderot and Ashkelon grew up with 15-second air-raid warnings to reach shelter. All the while Hamas kept expanding its terror infrastructure, dispersing arms and fighters through its underground labyrinth. Every few years Jerusalem would respond to Hamas rocket attacks with several days or weeks of 'mowing the grass' — pinpoint bombing meant to buy a spell of relative quiet. It was never long, however, before the attacks resumed. Many Successive Israeli governments accepted this status quo, convinced that the alternative — reoccupying Gaza and destroying the Hamas regime — was too costly to contemplate. It was a judgment rooted in what Advertisement Daniel Pipes, the Middle East historian and analyst, conceptzia — so much so that they ignored Hamas's blood-curdling genocidal threats and dismissed its open preparations for a devastating blow that would overwhelm Israel's defenses. Then came Oct. 7, 2023. On that day Hamas slaughtered more than 1,200 people, most of them civilians. They burned homes, murdered entire families, raped and mutilated victims, and kidnapped more than 250 hostages. It was less a military operation than a pogrom. It was also the culmination of everything disengagement had made possible: a sovereign Hamas stronghold, armed and emboldened, able to commit mass atrocities with impunity. For all the condemnation of Israel's 'occupation' of Gaza, that occupation had in fact ended in 2005. Israel did not control Gaza's streets, neighborhoods, or governance. Yet after Israel left the territory became exponentially more dangerous, for Jews and for Palestinians. Disengagement may have removed Israeli settlers and soldiers — but it did nothing to remove the jihadists or lower their appetite for war. Now, even as Israel wages what This is not honest criticism of wartime conduct. It is the inversion of morality — the recasting of a nation fighting for its life as the villain, and of a terrorist organization dedicated to extermination as the victim. Hamas has built its entire war plan around the mass endangerment of Palestinian civilians: embedding rocket launchers and command posts in hospitals and mosques, turning schools into weapons depots, using apartment buildings as shields, and blocking civilians from fleeing battle zones. It is not a byproduct of the fighting that Gazans die in large numbers — it is Hamas's strategy. It knows that every Palestinian body pulled from the rubble will be blamed on Israel, and it exploits that certainty with cynical brazenness. At any moment, Hamas could end the war. It could release the Israeli hostages it Hamas's purpose is not just to wound Israel's reputation; it is to delegitimize Jews as moral actors altogether, to strip the Jewish state of the right to defend itself, and to normalize the corrosive idea that Israel's very existence is a provocation. Its defamations embolden Israel's enemies, sap the resolve of its friends, and distort the moral lens through which the world views the conflict. Just as Israel's pre-October 7 conceptzia blinded it to the scale of the physical threat from Gaza, too many in the democratic world are blind to the scale of the strategic threat in the information battlefield. In both arenas, illusions are dangerous — and the price of indulging them is paid in blood. The only way forward is to end Hamas's rule in Gaza once and for all — not to contain it, not to conciliate it, but to destroy it as a military, political, and ideological force. History shows that cataclysmic defeat can be the gateway to renewal: After World War II, Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were crushed into unconditional surrender. Their regimes were dismantled, their ideologies discredited, and their societies rebuilt on democratic foundations. That transformation ultimately benefited the vanquished even more than their victors, giving ordinary Germans and Japanese decades of peace and freedom. Such a rebirth is devoutly to be wished for the Palestinians — but it will never be possible until Hamas, and the equally malign Palestinian Authority, are so utterly defeated that their war to destroy Israel is ended permanently. Only when Gaza is freed from leaders who glorify murder and annihilation can it begin to heal; only when there are Palestinian leaders who renounce the dream of eliminating the Jewish state can they begin to build a decent one of their own. And only when Israel prevails completely — militarily, morally, and politically — will both peoples have a chance to live side by side in the secure and mutually beneficial peace that has eluded them for so long. This article is adapted from the current , Jeff Jacoby's weekly newsletter. To subscribe to Arguable, visit . Jeff Jacoby can be reached at
USA Today
28 minutes ago
- USA Today
Russian troops advance in Ukraine ahead of Trump-Putin peace summit
Ahead of an Aug. 15 summit in Alaska between Trump and Putin, Russian troops continued their campaign to take full control of Ukraine's Donetsk region. MOSCOW, Aug. 12 (Reuters) - Small bands of Russian soldiers thrust deeper into eastern Ukraine on Tuesday ahead of a summit this week between Russian President Vladimir Putin and President Donald Trump, which European Union states fear could end in peace terms imposed on an unlawfully shrunken Ukraine. In one of the most extensive incursions so far this year, Russian troops advanced near the coal-mining town of Dobropillia, part of Putin's campaign to take full control of Ukraine's Donetsk region. Ukraine's military dispatched reserve troops, saying they were in difficult combat against small groups of advancing Russian soldiers. Trump has said any peace deal would involve "some swapping of territories to the betterment of both" Russia and Ukraine, which has up to now depended on the U.S. as its main arms supplier. More: Trump says deal to halt Russia's war on Ukraine could include 'swapping' of territories Virtually all the territory in question is Ukrainian, alarming President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and his European allies. Zelenskyy and most of his European counterparts have said a lasting peace cannot be secured without Ukraine's voice in the negotiations, and must comply with international law and Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. They plan to call Trump on Aug. 13 to sway him ahead of his summit in Alaska on Aug. 15 with Putin, and they have praised the U.S. president's peace efforts, if not every idea he has floated for getting there. "An imitated rather than genuine peace will not hold for long and will only encourage Russia to seize even more territory," Zelenskyy said in a statement on Aug. 12 after a phone call with Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan, who has hosted previous talks between Ukrainian and Russian leaders. Russia advances in Eastern Ukraine Ukraine faces a shortage of soldiers after Russia invaded more than three years ago, easing the path for the latest Russian advances. "This breakthrough is like a gift to Putin and Trump during the negotiations," said Sergei Markov, a former Kremlin adviser, suggesting it could increase pressure on Ukraine to yield territory under any deal. Ukraine's military meanwhile said it had retaken two villages in the eastern region of Sumy on Aug. 11, part of a small reversal in more than a year of slow, attritional Russian gains in the southeast. More: Putin stalls. Trump changes his mind. Ukraine targets Moscow. Latest on the war. Russia, which launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, has mounted a new offensive this year in Sumy after Putin demanded a "buffer zone" there. Ukraine and its European allies fear that Trump, keen to claim credit for making peace and seal new business deals with Russia's government, will end up rewarding Putin for his 11 years spent in efforts to seize Ukrainian territory, the last three in open warfare. Europeans link Ukraine to their own security More: President Trump says Zelenskyy should not target Moscow with strikes European leaders have said Ukraine must be capable of defending itself if peace and security is to be guaranteed on the continent, and that they are ready to contribute further. "Ukraine cannot lose this war and nobody has the right to pressure Ukraine into making territorial or other concessions, or making decisions that smack of capitulation," Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said at a government meeting. "I hope we can convince President Trump about the European position." Zelenskyy has said he and European leaders "all support President Trump's determination." Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, Putin's principal ally in Europe, was the only leader not to join the EU's statement of unity, and mocked his counterparts. "The fact that the EU was left on the sidelines is sad enough as it is," he said. "The only thing that could make things worse is if we started providing instructions from the bench." Trump had been recently hardening his stance towards Russia, agreeing to send more U.S. weapons to Ukraine and threatening hefty trade tariffs on buyers of Russian oil in an ultimatum that has now lapsed. Even so, the prospect of Trump hosting Putin on U.S. soil for the first U.S.-Russia summit since 2021 has revived fears that he might put narrow U.S. interests ahead of the security of European allies or broader geopolitics.
