Son of Chinese journalist jailed on espionage charges calls for his release
Dong Yuyu, a former senior editor at the Communist Party-affiliated Guangming Daily, was detained in February 2022 while having lunch with a Japanese diplomat in Beijing.
His son, Dong Yifu, speaking at the National Press Club in Washington on Monday, urged Japanese authorities to support his father's appeal by proving that his diplomatic meetings had no connection to espionage.
'It is a press freedom issue. It is a human rights issue. It has very little to do with national security or espionage,' he said.
The elder Dong's arrest, just two months before his planned retirement, shocked journalists and diplomats in China, where it is common for reporters to maintain contact with foreign officials as part of their work.
The Beijing No. 2 Intermediate People's Court sentenced him in November 2023 after prosecutors presented eight meetings with Japanese diplomats as evidence against him, his family says.
Dong Yuyu was known for advocating constitutional democracy, political reform, and government accountability in his articles — topics that were once open for discussion in party-affiliated media but have since fallen out of favour.
He was previously a Nieman fellow at Harvard University and later held academic positions at Keio University and Hokkaido University in Japan before returning to China.
Despite his imprisonment, Dong's son says he remains in good health, maintaining his fitness with daily exercise. However, he is only allowed a few hours of sunlight per year and has not been permitted to see his wife.
His lawyer, who visits monthly, delivers handwritten letters from his wife, and the elder Dong has prepared a 45-page appeal document contesting his conviction.
The conviction has drawn widespread condemnation from press freedom advocates. Reporters Without Borders has labelled China 'the world's largest prison for journalists', reporting that more than 100 are detained.
Last Friday, the US State Department called for Dong's immediate and unconditional release, while former US Ambassador Nicholas Burns previously condemned the verdict as unjust on X.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
a day ago
- Euronews
Pakistan sentences 108 Imran Khan's party members over 2023 protests
Pakistan sentenced on Thursday 108 members of former Prime Minister Imran Khan's party to prison for their role in nationwide protests against the military in May 2023. The verdicts include a 10-year prison sentence for Omar Ayub Khan, a senior leader of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) and the official opposition leader. Although Omar Ayub was not among those who participated in the protests, he was found guilty by Pakistan's anti-terrorism court of aiding violence and plotting to incite riots and arson, according to media reports. In addition, six PTI lawmakers have been disqualified from parliament, further weakening the party's political presence. Opposition figures have slammed the verdict as "a dark moment" for the country's democracy. Gohar Ali Khan, chairman of PTI, condemned the latest convictions, describing the cases against Omar Ayub and others as 'baseless.' He noted that the verdicts were handed down just days before planned rallies marking the third anniversary of Imran Khan's convictions. PTI condemned the verdicts in a statement posted on X, saying: 'The leaders of the opposition in both houses (of parliament) were punished solely on the basis that they were loyal allies of Imran Khan's political narrative, public representation and constitutional struggle.' The party added that it would challenge the court's decision. The 9 May 2023 protests erupted after Khan's arrest during his court appearance in the Islamabad High Court. Demonstrations turned violent when Khan's supporters 'were accused of participating in attacks on military officers, government buildings and vehicles during the 2023 riots', defence lawyer Changaiz Kakar said. At least 10 people were killed during the unrest, prompting a nationwide crackdown on PTI. Since then, Khan has remained in prison, detained since August 2023, and continues to face more than 150 legal cases, including allegations of terrorism and leaking state secrets. He and his supporters insist the charges are politically motivated, aimed at dismantling his party's influence. Despite being barred from contesting the 2024 general election, PTI-affiliated candidates, running as independents, won the most seats in Pakistan's national assembly.
LeMonde
2 days ago
- LeMonde
Japan's political fragilization
The defeat of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) in the July 20 House of Councillors elections has opened an unprecedented political crisis in Japan. Even though Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has ruled out resigning, citing "the importance of avoiding any disruption to national policy," his position is clearly weakened. The loss of a majority in the upper house of the national legislature, following the setback in the October 2024 general elections, highlights the malaise in a society that appears, on the surface, to be calm. The rise of Sanseito, a small right-wing, populist, xenophobic, anti-globalist and anti-immigration party, is a symptom of that discontent. Against all expectations, and even to the surprise of its own leaders, the small party gained 14 seats in the House of Councillors elections, where it now has 15 out of 248 seats, despite holding only three seats in the lower house. Japanese democracy, whose stability has long surprised observers abroad, could now face the same transformations that have affected democracies in the United States and Europe: a crisis of trust in institutions, the rise of right-wing populism and the spread of disinformation. The LDP, which has held power since 1955 except for two brief intervals in 1993 and between 2009 and 2012, now appears deeply weakened. The party's heterogeneity, bringing together since its creation different strands of the liberal, conservative and nationalist right, has long been its strength. Each strand, represented within the party by different factions, cultivated its own electoral base. The party maintained unity against the opposition by negotiating compromises behind the scenes. This prolonged monopoly has finally worn thin. Anger among the working class Alongside the loss of trust in the LDP among conservative voters – infuriated by repeated scandals such as the 2023 revelation of slush funds, for which those responsible faced only moderate consequences – there has also been anger among the working class, from precariously employed youth to single women. Often living on a shoestring budget, they are all suffering from rising prices. Feeling neglected by the main parties, they are turning to smaller populist parties whose scapegoats are totalitarian globalism and foreigners, whether that means increasing tourism, rising immigration or the mass purchase of real estate, especially by Chinese buyers, made easier by the weak yen. Since Japan regained its sovereignty in 1951, the far right has rarely appeared as such in politics, except marginally in statements by a few conservative figures. Right-wing extremism had been confined to pressure groups such as Nippon Kaigi, whose aim has always been to steer national consciousness toward a form of historical revisionism. The xenophobic rhetoric about a silent invasion by foreigners abusing welfare and causing trouble, now present on the political stage, is not new. Although often virulent, it had previously been confined to social media. Today, it has entered the legislature with Sanseito's Trump-inspired slogan: "Japanese First." In the background, geopolitical stakes are cause for concern: China's hegemonic ambitions, the threat posed by North Korea and Trump's demands regarding tariffs and, no doubt, defense, despite the agreement announced on July 23. Prime Minister Ishiba is invoking these issues to stay in power as long as possible. But his purely defensive stance resolves nothing of substance.
Euronews
2 days ago
- Euronews
'Liberation Day' 2.0: What's coming and who will feel it the most
After a series of pauses and extensions, the 'Liberation Day' country-specific tariffs unveiled in April are set to snap back into force on 1 August. Aside from a few countries who negotiated deals before the deadline, many nations will see US levies revert to their original rates. The Liberation Day tariffs were announced on 2 April, after President Trump branded the US trade deficit a national emergency. Far more goods were flowing into the country than American products were being sold abroad. By invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), Trump proceeded to sign executive orders that imposed what the government branded as "reciprocal tariffs". Namely, they were meant to counteract or reciprocate damaging trade practices and trade barriers. This is despite the fact that many analysts have attributed the US trade deficit to the strength of the dollar and consumer demand for foreign products. Countries like Myanmar and Lesotho had some of the highest tariff rates threatened on 2 April, at 44% and 50% respectively. In terms of trade volume affected and product reliance, countries like China at 34% or the EU bloc at 20% were — however — the biggest shocks to global markets and trade flows. For countries that weren't given a specific rate, a blanket tariff of 10% came into force on 5 April. On 9 April, the reciprocal tariffs were supposed to go into effect. First suspension After the initial announcement sent markets tumbling, Trump signed a 90-day suspension of the higher, country-specific reciprocal tariffs, which was set to expire on 9 July. The 10% baseline tariff based on IEEPA powers stayed in force. China, which had introduced a matching retaliatory tariff of 34% on the US, then got slapped with an additional 50% US tariff on April 9 — one they also then imposed back on the US. At this point, the US rate on Chinese goods came to 84%, not including an extra 20% fentanyl levy. In a tit-for-tat between the two biggest economies in the world, the US then raised the Chinese tariff rate to 145% (including the fentanyl levy). China responded with a total tariff rate of 125%, but said they would ignore future tariff increases. 'Even if the US continues to impose higher tariffs, it will no longer make economic sense and will become a joke in the history of world economy,' the Chinese Foreign Ministry said at the time. On 12 May, an agreement was reached to reduce the tariff rates, bring the US levy on Chinese goods to 30% and the Chinese levy on American goods to 10%. Both sides said they would re-assess the situation after 90 days. Negotiations for a comprehensive agreement are currently underway. Peter Navarro, Trump's counsellor on trade issues, told Time magazine that the US was open to negotiating individual deals with countries and that '90 deals in 90 days' — referring to the 90-day delay windows everyone received — was possible. The country has fallen far short of that, although a number of deals were sealed last-minute. Deals struck so far The UK was the first to secure a trade framework with the US on 16 June that kept the 10% baseline in place, with exceptions for some industries. Vietnam reached a deal on 2 July after facing a rate of 46% in the original "Liberation Day" package. It now faces a 20% tariff, excluding goods that travel through Vietnam from third countries and are destined for the US. Thailand and Cambodia, who struck deals shortly before the deadline, both received a 19% duty, from 36% and 49% respectively. Second suspension A second tariff delay was announced on 9 July, postponing the return of the Liberation Day tariffs until 1 August. Deals were subsequently struck with Indonesia, lowering the tariff rate to 19% from the original 32% rate, and the Philippines struck a preliminary agreement that would lower its rate to 19% as well. Japan and South Korea both announced that trade deals had been reached toward the end of July, both securing rates of 15%. That's a reduction from 24% for Japan and 25% for South Korea. An agreement was reached with Pakistan that would see the US develop its oil reserves in return for lowering the tariff rates to 19%. Previously, Pakistan was subject to a 29% rate. The EU reached an agreement with Trump on 27 July, lowering the rate to 15%. What about pre-Trump trade agreements? The United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA) was signed by Trump in his first mandate to replace NAFTA, the previous trade agreement between the three countries. On the 1 August, Canada is set to see tariffs on its US exports rise to 35%, although White House officials have suggested the new rate will only apply to goods not covered under the USMCA. Nearly 90% of Canadian goods imported into the US are exempted under the free trade deal. Mexico, meanwhile, was expecting to face a 30% tariff until Trump proposed a 90-day negotiating period on Thursday. Trump, posting on his Truth Social platform, said a phone conversation he had with Mexican leader Claudia Sheinbaum was 'very successful in that, more and more, we are getting to know and understand each other". The Republican president said that goods from Mexico imported into the US would continue to face a 25% tariff that he has ostensibly linked to fentanyl trafficking. He said that autos would face a 25% tariff, while copper, aluminium and steel would be taxed at 50%. He said that Mexico would end its 'Non Tariff Trade Barriers', but he didn't provide specifics. Some goods will continue to be protected from the tariffs by the USMCA. Steel, aluminium, copper, Brazil and India Meanwhile, a 50% universal tariff was imposed on steel and aluminium products on 4 June. The UK faces only a 25% steel and aluminium tariff, and negotiations are underway for that to be possibly lowered further. On 30 July, Trump announced semi-finished copper products such as rods and sheets and copper-intensive products such as cables and electrical components will face a 50% tariff starting on Friday. Ahead of Friday's tariff package, Trump announced that a 25% tariff would be imposed on India along with another unspecified penalty for importing Russian oil and weapons despite US sanctions. President Donald Trump also signed an executive order on Wednesday to place a 50% tariff on Brazil, setting a legal rationale that Brazil's policies and criminal prosecution of former far-right President Jair Bolsonaro constitute an economic emergency under a 1977 law. Trump had threatened the tariffs on 9 July in a letter to President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. But the legal basis of that threat was an earlier executive order premised on trade imbalances being a threat to the US economy. The US nonetheless ran a $6.8 billion (€5.8bn) trade surplus last year with Brazil, according to the US Census Bureau, undermining the original basis for the Liberation Day tariffs. Russia, anyone? Russia was not part of the initial Liberation Day tariffs, a move some saw as an indicator of Trump's alleged soft spot for Russian President Vladimir Putin. Yet due to sanctions that carried over from the administration of President Joe Biden, the trade volume with Russia had dropped significantly following the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. On 14 July, Trump gave Putin a 50-day deadline to broker a ceasefire with Ukraine or else it would face a 100% tariff targeting nations that purchase oil and gas from Russia. During his recent trip to Scotland, he said he was "probably" shortening the deadline to 10-12 days, stating: "Because I think I already know the answer what's going to happen." Republican Senator Lindsey Graham introduced a bill in Congress that, if passed, would see countries that import Russian gas, such as India, face a whopping 500% tariff. So what happens on 1 August? Legally, because the previous tariff suspensions were temporary, all countries that have not negotiated a separate trade deal will see their Liberation Day rates re-imposed. For nations not given a country-specific rate, the minimum tariff for imports has been set at 10%, a relief for those who feared that the baseline may double. Trump has also included a 40% penalty for transshipped goods intended to avoid duties.
