US says it has started seabed mineral talks with the Cook Islands
The Cook Islands lie halfway between New Zealand and Hawaii and are made up of 15 islands and atolls.
Western nations that traditionally held sway in the Pacific Islands have become increasingly concerned about China's plans to increase influence after Beijing signed defense, trade and financial deals with Pacific countries in recent years.
"The Government of the United States of America has begun discussions with the Government of the Cook Islands to support the research necessary to inform seabed exploration and responsible development within the Cook Islands' Exclusive Economic Zone," the State Department said in a statement.
U.S.-linked firms "sit at the forefront" of deep seabed mineral research and exploration in the Cook Islands, it said.
In June, New Zealand suspended millions of dollars in budget funding to the Cook Islands after its prime minister signed partnership agreements with China without consulting Wellington.
Those agreements committed them to deepening cooperation in seabed mining as well as education, the economy, infrastructure, fisheries and disaster management.
On Wednesday, New Zealand's foreign ministry said it was aware of the new arrangement with the U.S. and respected "the rights and responsibilities of states to manage their mineral resources".
The Cook Islands were within New Zealand's borders from 1901. In 1965, the country became self-governing but in free association with New Zealand. The constitutional ties require the two countries to consult on security, defense and foreign policy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Dining across the divide: ‘I expected to be portrayed as an old gammon and paired up with some radical with coloured hair'
Occupation Works in software Voting record Cushla, who came to the UK from New Zealand in 1999, voted Labour in the last election. Describes herself as centre-left Amuse bouche Was the singer in a band in the 90s. She describes them as 'Enigma remixed by Einstürzende Neubauten' Occupation Retired photographer Voting record Reform in the last election, probably Reform in the next. Describes himself as right-of-centre Amuse bouche Martin once told the then Prince Charles an anecdote about an encounter with Liam Gallagher in a nightclub toilet. The future king was 'completely bemused' Martin I was expecting the Guardian to portray me as an old gammon and pair me up with some radical with coloured hair. Then she walked through the door with blue hair, which was rather amusing! She was lovely from the outset – friendly and interesting. We started with some shredded prawn rolls and deep-fried lotus root. Cushla We were both a little wary. I decided to set him at ease by saying: 'Don't worry, my partner voted for Brexit.' He said: 'Why are you here, then? You dine across the divide every evening!' I was expecting a grumpy old man. You can create a two-dimensional stereotype in your brain, and Martin wasn't that. The place was lovely. Martin I have seen a significant change in crime and general disorder even in the last couple of years – people jumping the barriers in the tube, shoplifting, phone-snatching, seemingly without repercussions. To get a grip on crime, you need to start tackling it at the lower level, otherwise people start thinking they can get away with it. Cushla Martin is training to become a magistrate and talked about his experience of watching people come in and out of court. I think he's far more in favour of imprisonment. I countered by saying: let's look at doing more restorative justice – giving offenders the chance to really encounter the impact of their crimes. Martin Some people who break the law, generally more white-collar criminals, are not best served by prison. But for severe crimes – violent, sexual – I think people should be kept in a lot longer than they are, away from society. It requires more cross-party planning, though. Investing in a prison is a 10- or 15-year project; governments don't want to put money into that because they'll be out of power by the time the prison is built. Cushla I think I would be a different kind of magistrate, but I say that from a position of hopeful naivety. I know the justice system is broken, that there is insufficient money. Martin We shared how much we despised the Tory government after 14 years of incompetence and were incredulous that the Labour party think the way to make things better is to cut disability payments and not revoke the two-child benefit cap. Cushla It surprised me that we agreed that the cap should be removed. When you're poor, you're poor, and the early stages are when the most good – and most damage – can be done. Martin Governments across all political parties have consistently promised to tackle illegal immigration and completely failed to do so. It's a cliche, but you're letting people into your house without knowing who they are. I'd favour some kind of holding and assessment system – more like the solution Australia came up with where they housed everyone on an island while they processed their applications and determined who should be let in and who shouldn't. Cushla I'm frustrated by the tag 'illegal'. People are not born 'illegal'; we're creating the conditions for them to become so. I came here on an ancestry visa so I am 'legal' by an accident of birth. What makes my accident of birth any better or worse than someone else's? And given the UK's history in the world, the UK does actually have a very particular moral obligation, whether it likes it or not. Martin It was great to meet someone with different views but also to be able to have a conversation, rather than just throw opinions at each other. I think it's society that demands we take extreme positions, and really, we're not far away from each other in what we think. Cushla When people think differently you don't tend to hear why or get the opportunity to actually challenge your own thinking. What this has taught me is you have to listen to rather than talk. Additional reporting: Kitty Drake Cushla and Martin ate at Xi Home Dumplings Bay in London E1 Want to meet someone from across the divide? Find out how to take part
BBC News
2 hours ago
- BBC News
Willy Chavarria sorry after Adidas shoe cultural appropriation row
US fashion designer Willy Chavarria has apologised after a shoe he created in collaboration with Adidas Originals was criticised for "cultural appropriation".The Oaxaca Slip-On was inspired by traditional leather sandals known as huaraches made by Indigenous artisans in Mexican president was among those who spoke out against the footwear, which was reportedly made in China without consultation or credit to the communities who originated the said in a statement sent to the BBC: "I am deeply sorry that the shoe was appropriated in this design and not developed in direct and meaningful partnership with the Oaxacan community." The BBC has contacted Adidas for comment. Cultural appropriation is defined as "the unacknowledged or inappropriate adoption of the customs, practices, ideas, of one people or society by members of a typically more dominant people or society".Mexico's President Claudia Sheinbaum told a press conference: "Big companies often take products, ideas and designs from Indigenous communities."She added: "We are looking at the legal part to be able to support them."Adidas had contacted Oaxacan officials to discuss "restitution to the people who were plagiarised", Mexico's deputy culture minister Marina Nunez added. Promotional images of the black moulded open-toe footwear have been taken down from the brand's social media accounts as well as Chavarria's. In his statement, the designer said he wanted "to speak from the heart about the Oaxaca slip-on I created with Adidas"."The intention was always to honor the powerful cultural and artistic spirit of Oaxaca and its creative communities - a place whose beauty and resistance have inspired me. The name Oaxaca is not just a word - its living culture, its people, and its history."He went on to say he was "deeply sorry" he did not work with the Oaxacan community on the design."This falls short of the respect and collaborative approach that Oaxaca, the Zapotec community of Villa Hidalgo Yalalag, and its people deserve," he added."I know love is not just given - it is earned through action." Adidas has not responded to the BBC's request for a Associated Press reported that Adidas responded to Mexican authorities in a letter on Friday. The company reportedly said it "deeply values the cultural wealth of Mexico's Indigenous people and recognizes the relevance" of criticisms, and requesting a sit-down to talk about how to "repair the damage" to Indigenous communities.
Telegraph
3 hours ago
- Telegraph
Why every Hong Konger in Britain lives in fear of China's mega embassy
A faded billboard near the Tower of London declares that a disused site behind high walls is set to become a 'new mixed use campus' with 'office, retail and leisure space'. That was the old plan for Royal Mint Court, where the coinage of the Realm was minted in buildings of 19th century grandeur for over 150 years until 1967. The new plan is for the People's Republic of China to transform this venerable location, beside the gleaming high rises of the City and directly opposite the Tower of London, into a gigantic new embassy. A final decision on whether to allow China to proceed will be taken by Angela Rayner, the Housing Secretary and Deputy Prime Minister, before Sept 9. Just how big China's new embassy would be is disclosed by the original planning application, rejected by Tower Hamlets Borough Council in 2022, but 'called-in' by Rayner for a definitive verdict. Royal Mint Court spans 5.2 acres and its fine Georgian buildings and their modern additions boast an internal area exceeding 563,000 sq ft (52,300 sq m) - approaching twice the floorspace of Westminster Abbey. If it goes ahead, China's new embassy would have a bigger site and a larger floor area than America's, which is built on 4.9 acres of Battersea. Not only would China's new mission be the biggest in London, it would be the largest of its kind anywhere in Europe: it would even have 30 per cent more floorspace than the Chinese embassy in Washington. There is simply no precedent for a diplomatic project of this scale on British soil. Plenty of concerns have been raised about the implications for national security but perhaps no-one has a better understanding of the potential dangers than people who are already bitterly familiar with the long reach of China. 'When I first heard of that I was really frightened to be honest,' says Chloe Cheung, a 20-year-old pro-democracy activist from Hong Kong. 'It's a really huge space in central London. Why would they need that?' Cheung left Hong Kong and moved to Britain with her family in 2020 after Beijing imposed a draconian National Security law on the territory. This bid to crush the pro-democracy movement caused over 150,000 of Hong Kong's people to seek refuge in Britain. Now some wonder whether they will always be safe. On Christmas Eve last year, Hong Kong's police published an arrest warrant accusing Cheung of 'incitement to secession' and 'collusion with a foreign country', and offering a bounty of HK$1 million (£95,000) for 'information on this wanted person'. That was not because of anything Cheung had done in Hong Kong: she was only 14 when she left. Instead she was targeted for having dared campaign for democracy in her old home while living in Britain and working here for the Committee for Freedom in Hong Kong. 'It's because of what I did in this country: it's only because of that that I was given a bounty,' she explains. Cheung was subjected to the arrest warrant and bounty under Hong Kong's National Security law, which punishes anything the authorities might define as 'subversion' with life imprisonment. Most chillingly of all, Articles 37 and 38 say this law 'shall apply' to anyone living anywhere in the world, setting no limits on who might become a target of the Chinese authorities. Cheung fears this could help explain China's ambition to build a colossal new embassy in London. 'The location is not about us but the size is more about us,' she says. 'They want to have more space and more people to intimidate us, to do trans-national repression.' Her fears have been supported by Parliament's human rights committee, which on Aug 1 named China as a 'flagrant' perpetrator of 'trans-national repression', targeting Hong Kong's pro-democracy campaigners and other supposed opponents for threats, harassment and intimidation on British soil. While the latest version of the Diplomatic List names 139 Chinese diplomats based in London, the new embassy would include 225 residential flats, suggesting that China wants to increase its staffing by up to 60 per cent. Cheung is deeply disturbed by that possibility. 'They could have a huge surveillance office inside Royal Mint Court and the British cannot do anything because it will be their sovereignty, their embassy,' she says. 'And it's not just about giving them space: it's about giving them face. Giving them the biggest embassy in London is like saying 'you are the most important country'.' Already Cheung must vary her route every day and 'look over my shoulder before I get home to check no-one is following me'. Once, she says she was tailed through London by two men of Chinese appearance, who followed her into a restaurant where they simply stared at her, before disappearing into a nearby hotel. Every time she writes an article or speaks in public, she is inundated with 'sexual harassment and threatening messages' online. 'It has affected my mental health,' says Cheung. 'I have to be really cautious about meeting people.' 'The reality is that the Chinese are going to pursue you wherever you are. When I was placed on the bounty list they said they would chase us to the end of the world.' She adds: 'We thought that it was going to be safe if you move here, but if you are vocal against the Hong Kong or Chinese authorities, you are constantly being harassed. When people think the UK is a safe haven for activists, it's not necessarily the case for us from Hong Kong.' As for the new embassy, Cheung says it would 'make me feel a lot more endangered than right now…. it would imply that the British Government are less and less willing to stand up for our safety'. Last month, Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, and David Lammy, the Foreign Secretary, jointly condemned the National Security law, saying: '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.' But words like these are of limited reassurance to George* (not his real name), a 22-year-old student from Hong Kong studying at a British university. Having attended some campus demonstrations in favour of democracy in Hong Kong, he now feels compelled to hide his real identity from the Telegraph. 'We still think that the UK has free speech and the UK government and police won't allow the Chinese government to exercise trans-national repression over us,' he says. 'So far I feel safe to live here.' But if the new embassy is constructed, George says: 'That would definitely change the way that we feel. The Royal Mint is a huge place so there may be a danger that the Chinese can bring their agents inside.' He warns of a chilling effect on anyone campaigning for democracy. 'Every Hong Konger in the UK may be free in body, but their minds are still in fear of the Chinese government. If the embassy is built, that may make this fear become bigger and bigger.' And George is struck by the internal contradiction in the British Government's position. 'You can't in one press release say the Chinese government is harming democracy and freedom in the UK and then, in the next press release, say we're allowing them to build a big new embassy,' he says. In January, Cooper and Lammy publicly supported the new embassy on two conditions. China would have to relinquish the seven diplomatic premises it already has in London and consolidate everything in the new embassy. In addition, China would have to build a 'gated barrier or fence' to control public access to the forecourt of Royal Mint Court in order to reduce the risk of security incidents. This conditional backing showed that the Government was, in principle, content for the embassy plan to go ahead. Back in 2018, Boris Johnson, then Foreign Secretary, allowed China to buy the Royal Mint Court site for £255 million, a decision that began the project. But Royal Mint Court is next to the City of London, the biggest financial centre in Europe and the second most important in the world, representing the single most vital economic asset in the United Kingdom. The fibre-optic cables serving the City and transmitting countless transactions criss-cross the area around the proposed embassy: a secure BT telephone exchange is directly adjacent to the site. There is an irony in the fact that Angela Rayner is being asked to grant permission for this project not to a close ally but to a state described by Lammy in the House of Commons as a 'sophisticated and persistent threat'. But events this week suggest the British position may be changing. As Housing Secretary, Rayner has the final say and she has suddenly asked for further assurances. It turns out that plans for the new embassy submitted for her approval omit certain details for 'security reasons'. China aims to fill the imposing main building, completed in 1812, with reception rooms, offices and a banqueting hall. But a letter from Rayner's department - revealed by Luke de Pulford, the Director of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China - states that the 'internal physical arrangements' in this plan have been 'greyed out' in the version she received. Plans for the basements of other buildings have also been concealed, along with the proposed layouts of the flats in the accommodation block. In total, Rayner's department has identified 52 redactions which appear to obscure key elements of what China proposes for all the main buildings on the embassy site. Redacting those details inevitably stirs suspicions that China intends to use secure underground facilities for espionage. Rayner has given the planning consultancy engaged by China's regime until August 20 to rectify these omissions. Her department's letter also discloses that China has not satisfied either of the conditions set by Lammy and Cooper. The plans do not include the new 'gated barrier or fence'. And Rayner has asked the Foreign Office for an 'update' on China's 'progress towards consolidation of accredited diplomatic premises', showing this has not been agreed. A Foreign Office spokesperson confirmed that the department would provide this update but declined any further comment. De Pulford describes the letter from Rayner's office as 'easily the most significant development' in the embassy saga, adding that it was possible that the British Government was 'looking for reasons to say no' and reject the scheme. However, the spokesperson of China's Embassy in London says the 'resubmitted planning application for the new Chinese Embassy project has taken into full consideration the UK's planning policy and guidance as well as views of all relevant parties.' The spokesperson adds: ' It is hoped that the UK side will consider and approve this planning application based on merits of the matter.' Step by step, China is steadily extending its influence in Britain, from providing the technology for renewable energy to investing in research with UK universities and preparing to export even greater numbers of electric vehicles. A grand new embassy would be a fitting symbol of how Beijing is steadily entrenching its position and advancing its interests. And part of China's plan, it seems, is to make it steadily harder for any British Government to provide people like Chloe Cheung with a safe refuge and the freedom to campaign for democracy in Hong Kong. Like its predecessors, the Government wants to build a beneficial relationship with Beijing while also upholding Britain's values - and this country's status as a place where even those who are abhorred by China's brutally authoritarian leaders can still be safe. But one day, the balancing act may become impossible and a choice will need to be made. If China is allowed to have the biggest embassy in London, a milestone may be passed. 'We have told them that our safety is at risk from this mega-embassy,' says Cheung. 'But if they still let it be built? If the UK government is walking backwards and the Chinese government is walking forwards?'
