WELLINGTON, New Zealand: A security alliance between China and the Solomon Islands has sent shudders throughout the South Pacific, with many worried it could set off a large-scale military buildup or that Western animosity to the deal could play into China’s hands.
What remains most unclear is the extent of China’s ambitions.
A Chinese military presence in the Solomons would put it not only on the doorstep of Australia and New Zealand but also in close proximity to Guam, with its massive US military bases.
China so far operates just one acknowledged foreign military base, in the impoverished but strategically important Horn of Africa nation of Djibouti. Many believe that China’s People’s Liberation Army is busy establishing an overseas military network, even if they don’t use the term “base.”
The Solomon Islands government says a draft of its agreement with China was initialed last week and will be “cleaned up” and signed soon.
The draft, which was leaked online, says that Chinese warships could stop in the Solomons for “logistical replenishment” and that China could send police, military personnel and other armed forces to the Solomons “to assist in maintaining social order.”
The draft agreement specifies China must approve what information is disclosed about joint security arrangements, including at media briefings.
The Solomon Islands, home to about 700,000 people, switched diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to Beijing in 2019 — a move rejected by the most populous province and a contributing factor to riots last November.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken responded in February by saying that Washington would reopen its embassy in the capital, Honiara, which has been closed since 1993, to increase its influence in the Solomons before China becomes “strongly embedded.”
Both China and the Solomons have strongly denied the new pact will lead to the establishment of a Chinese military base. The Solomon Islands government said the pact is necessary because of its limited ability to deal with violent uprisings like the one in November.
“The country has been ruined by recurring internal violence for years,” the government said this week.
But Australia, New Zealand and the US have all expressed alarm about the deal, with New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern describing it as “gravely concerning.”
David Panuelo, the president of nearby Micronesia, which has close ties to the US, wrote an impassioned letter to Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare asking him to rethink the agreement.
He noted that both Micronesia and the Solomon Islands were battlegrounds during World War II, caught up in the clash of great powers.
“I am confident that neither of us wishes to see a conflict of that scope or scale ever again, and most particularly in our own backyards,” Panuelo wrote.
But the Solomon Islands police minister mocked Panuelo’s concerns on social media, saying he should be more worried about his own atoll being swallowed by the ocean due to climate change.
Sogavare has likewise dismissed foreign criticism of the security agreement as insulting, while labeling those who leaked the draft as “lunatics.”
China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson said the agreement aims to maintain the safety of people’s lives and property, and “does not have any military overtones,” saying media speculation on the potential development of a base was groundless.
Euan Graham, a senior fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies based in Singapore, said China has been pursuing such a port facility for some five years as it aims to expand its naval presence in the South Pacific as part of Beijing’s long-game of seeking to become the dominant regional power.
“If they want to break out into the Pacific, at some point they will need the logistics capability to support that presence,” Graham said. “We’re not talking about war plans here; this is really about extending their presence and influence.”
Unlike the base built in Djibouti, where China has commercial interests in the region to protect, Graham said any operation in the Solomon Islands would likely be less substantial.
“It’s quite a subtle and interesting geopolitical game that’s emerged in the South Pacific,” he added. “And I think the Chinese have been very successful, if you like, in outflanking the United States and Australia in an influence competition, not a military competition.”
China’s base in Djibouti was opened in 2017. China doesn’t call it a base, but rather a support facility for its naval operations fending off piracy in the Gulf of Aden and for its African peacekeeping operations. It boasts a 400-meter (1,300-foot) runway and a pier big enough to dock either of China’s two operating aircraft carriers.
The base, with 2,000 personnel, allows China to position supplies, troops and equipment in a strategically crucial region, while also keeping an eye on US forces that are stationed nearby.
Chief among other potential base candidates is Cambodia, whose authoritarian leader Hun Sen has long been a trusted Chinese ally and which reportedly signed a secret 2019 agreement permitting the establishment of a Chinese base.
China is dredging the harbor at Ream Naval Base to allow ships larger than any Cambodia possesses to dock, and is building new infrastructure to replace a US-built naval tactical headquarters. A Chinese base in Cambodia would establish a chokepoint in the Gulf of Thailand close to the crucial Malacca Strait.
China has also funded projects at Gwadar in Pakistan, another close ally, and in Sri Lanka, where Chinese infrastructure lending has forced the government to hand over control of the southern port of Hambantota.
Especially intriguing has been an alleged Chinese push to establish a base in the West African nation of Equatorial Guinea. That would give China a presence on the Atlantic opposite the east coast of the continental United States as well as in an important African oil-producing region.
“China has seized opportunities to expand its influence at a time when the US and other countries have not been as engaged economically in the Pacific islands,” said Elizabeth Wishnick, an expert on Chinese foreign policy at Montclair State University in New Jersey.
About 80 years ago in the Solomon Islands, the US military began its famous “island hopping” campaign of World War II to take back Pacific islands from Imperial Japanese forces one-by-one. It successfully won back the main island of Guadalcanal in February 1943 after some six months of fierce fighting.
Today, the Solomon Islands would give China the potential ability to interfere with US naval operations in the region that could be crucial in the event of a conflict over Taiwan or in the South and East China seas.
Lt. Gen. Greg Bilton, Australia’s chief of joint operations, said that if Chinese naval ships were able to operate from the Solomon Islands it would “change the calculus.”
“They’re in much closer proximity to the Australian mainland, obviously, and that would change the way that we would undertake day-to-day operations, particularly in the air and at sea,” he told reporters.
But Jonathan Pryke, the director of the Pacific Islands Program at the Lowy Institute, an Australian think tank, said he thinks that leaders have overreacted to the agreement, perhaps in Australia’s case because there is an election looming.
“It’s clearly getting everyone very animated in the West and very alarmed,” Pryke said. “But I don’t think it markedly changes things on the ground.”
He said the pact could be seen as the first step toward China establishing a base, but there would need to be many more steps taken before that could happen.
“I think the alarmism has strengthened China’s hand by pushing the Solomon Islands into a corner,” Pryke said. “And they’ve reacted the way I imagine many countries would react from getting this outside pressure — by pushing back, and digging their heels in.”
China’s security deal with Solomons raises alarm in Pacific
https://arab.news/cxraj
China’s security deal with Solomons raises alarm in Pacific
- A Chinese military presence in the Solomons would put it on the doorstep of Australia and New Zealand
- It will also be in close proximity to Guam, with its massive US military bases
US urges vigilance on Chinese investment as Xi opens Peru port
- The $3.5-billion complexis a symbol of the Asian superpower’s growing influence on the continent as it prepares to face off with a new Donald Trump administration
- China's President Xi vowed in his speech to “promote connectivity” between China and South America.
LIMA: As China and Peru launched South America’s first Beijing-funded port in Chancay, Peru, on Thursday, the United States called on Latin American nations to be vigilant.
The $3.5-billion complex, located 80 kilometers north of Lima, is meant to serve as a major hub for Chinese trade at a time the Asian giant is under threat of major tariff hikes after Trump reenters the White House for a second term.
The port was officially opened in a ceremony attended virtually by China's President Xi Jinping and Peruvian counterpart Dina Boluarte from Lima, where they will attend an Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit on Friday and Saturday.
Xi vowed in his speech to “promote connectivity” between China and South America.
Peru — one of Latin America’s fastest-growing economies over the past decade — is China’s fourth-largest Latin American trading partner, with bilateral flows of nearly $36 billion in 2023.
Amid the celebration, Brian Nichols, the top US diplomat for Latin America, spoke out. “We believe it is essential that countries across the hemisphere ensure that PRC economic activities respect local laws as well as safeguard human rights and environmental protections,” he said, referring to the People’s Republic of China.
Pointing to the long US relationship with Peru, Nichols said: “We’ll be focused on building those relations and making sure that Peruvians understand the complexities of dealing with some of their other investors going forward.”
He said that the United States has also recently provided support to Peru, including train donations to the city of Lima, space cooperation led by NASA and the donation of nine Black Hawk helicopters to help police battle transnational crime.
Dan Kritenbrink, the top US diplomat for East Asia, said that the United States came with an “affirmative agenda” and was not seeking to force countries to choose between rival powers.
“We do want to make sure that countries have choices and they were able to make them freely without coercion,” Kritenbrink told reporters.
The United States for two centuries has considered Latin America its sphere of interest, but it has faced increasing competition around the world, especially in the economic sphere, from China.
US policymakers often highlight debt associated by Chinese projects and China’s use of its own workers in mega-projects.
The port will allow South American nations to skirt ports in Mexico and the United States as they trade with Asia.
Xi is set to meet on Saturday in Lima with outgoing US President Biden in their likely final encounter before Donald Trump returns to the White House.
Sri Lankan president’s coalition heads for landslide: early results
COLOMBO: New Sri Lankan President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s party was headed for a landslide win at snap legislative elections, initial results showed Friday.
With over half of the ballots in Thursday’s parliamentary elections counted, Dissanayake’s National People’s Power (NPP) coalition party had taken an unassailable lead with 63 percent of the vote, Election Commission results showed.
UK unveils finance reforms, ups risk-taking to drive growth
- Finance minister announced plans to “modernize” the Financial Ombudsman Service, which deals with complaints between consumers and firms
- Called for “free and open trade” with partners such as the United States under its incoming president Donald Trump
LONDON: Britain’s Labour government on Thursday announced reforms to its financial sector in a bid to grow the economy, including a plan to allow greater risk-taking.
Finance Minister Rachel Reeves outlined the plans in her first Mansion House speech — an annual address by the chancellor of the exchequer to business leaders.
Late Wednesday she announced plans to create mega pension funds, potentially boosting investment in the country by around £80 billion ($104 billion) in a move that mirrored schemes in Australia and Canada.
Reeves used her Mansion House address to say that measures brought in since the 2008 global financial crisis to “eliminate risk” have had “unintended consequences” in holding back growth.
“While it was right that successive governments made regulatory changes after the global financial crisis to ensure that regulation kept pace with the global economy of the time, it is important that we learn the lessons of the past,” she said.
“These changes have resulted in a system which sought to eliminate risk-taking. That has gone too far and, in places, it has had unintended consequences which we must now address.”
Reeves announced plans to “modernize” the Financial Ombudsman Service, which deals with complaints between consumers and firms.
A pilot scheme will meanwhile be launched to deliver digital bonds, embracing technology used by the cryptocurrency sector.
She called for “free and open trade” with partners such as the United States under its incoming president Donald Trump.
“There is so much potential for us to deepen our economic relationship on areas such as emerging technologies,” she said.
“I look forward to working closely with president-elect Trump and his team to strengthen our relationship in the years ahead.”
She added that Britain must “reset our relationship” with the European Union after Brexit.
The “megafunds” pensions plan could unlock vast sums “for infrastructure projects and businesses of the future,” the Treasury said.
Labour aims to pool assets of 86 local government pension schemes in England and Wales.
The Treasury added that together the schemes were on course to manage £500 billion in assets by 2030.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s new government also plans to consolidate workers’ defined contribution schemes, a common form of pension.
“These megafunds mirror set-ups in Australia and Canada, where pension funds take advantage of size to invest in assets that have higher growth potential,” the Treasury said.
Reeves hiked business taxes and government borrowing in her maiden budget at the end of October.
“Last month’s budget fixed the foundations to restore economic stability and put our public services on a firmer footing,” Reeves said in comments alongside the pensions announcement.
“Now, we’re going for growth. That starts with the biggest set of reforms to the pensions market in decades to unlock tens of billions of pounds of investment in business and infrastructure.”
She added that the reforms would also “boost people’s savings in retirement and drive economic growth.”
Some analysts urged caution over the pensions shakeup.
“The government’s hope will be... economies of scale,” noted Tom Selby, director of public policy at investment platform AJ Bell.
He added that “conflating a government goal of driving investment in the UK and people’s retirement outcomes brings a danger.”
“If it goes well, everyone can celebrate. But it’s clearly possible that it will go the other way, so there needs to be some caution in this push to use other people’s money to drive economic growth.”
Spy world vexed by Trump choice of Gabbard as US intelligence chief
- Intelligence officials worry about Gabbard’s views on Syria, Russia
- Western security source warns of slower intelligence sharing
WASHINGTON: President-elect Donald Trump’s choice of Tulsi Gabbard as US intelligence chief has sent shockwaves through the national security establishment, adding to concerns that the sprawling intelligence community will become increasingly politicized.
Trump’s nomination of Gabbard, a former Democratic congresswoman who lacks deep intelligence experience and is seen as soft on Russia and Syria, is among several high-level picks that suggest he may be prioritizing personal allegiance over competence as he assembles his second-term team.
Among the risks, say current and former intelligence officials and independent experts, are that top advisers could feed the incoming Republican president a distorted view of global threats based on what they believe will please him and that foreign allies may be reluctant to share vital information.
Randal Phillips, a former CIA operations directorate official who worked as the agency’s top representative in China, said that with Trump loyalists in top government posts, “this could become the avenue of choice for some really questionable actions” by the leadership of the intelligence community.
A Western security source said there could be an initial slowdown in intelligence sharing when Trump takes office in January that could potentially impact the “Five Eyes,” an intelligence alliance comprising the US, Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
The worry from US allies is that Trump’s appointments all lean in the “wrong direction”, the source said.
Trump’s presidential transition team did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Inside and outside the US intelligence network, much of the anxiety focuses on Trump’s choice of Gabbard, 43, as director of national intelligence, especially given her views seen as sympathetic to Russia in its war against Ukraine.
While Trump has made some conventional personnel decisions such as that of Senator Marco Rubio for secretary of state, Wednesday’s announcement of Gabbard, an officer in the US Army Reserves, surprised even some Republican insiders. She is likely to face tough questioning in her Senate confirmation hearings.
Gabbard, who left the Democratic Party in 2022, has stirred controversy over her criticism of President Joe Biden’s support for Ukraine, which has prompted some critics to accuse her of parroting Kremlin propaganda.
She also spoke out against US military intervention in the civil war in Syria under former President Barack Obama and met in 2017 with Moscow-backed Syrian President Bashar Assad, with whom Washington severed all diplomatic ties in 2012.
The selection of Gabbard has raised alarm in the ranks of intelligence officers unsure of how tightly she holds some of her geopolitical views, whether she is misinformed or simply echoing Trump’s “Make America Great Again” followers, one intelligence official said on condition of anonymity.
“Of course there’s going to be resistance to change from the ‘swamp’ in Washington,” Gabbard said in a Fox News interview on Wednesday night. She said voters had given Trump “an incredible mandate” to move away from Biden’s agenda but offered no policy specifics.
Allies attentive
A senior European intelligence official said agencies in European Union countries “will be pragmatic and ready to adapt to the changes.” “No panic in the air for now,” the official added.
A European defense official described Gabbard as “firmly” in the Russia camp.
“But we have to deal with what we have. We will be attentive,” the official said.
Some analysts said concerns about Gabbard could be tempered by Trump’s choice to head the CIA: John Ratcliffe, a former congressman who served as director of national intelligence at the end of Trump’s first term.
Though close to Trump and expected to offer little pushback against his policies, Ratcliffe is not seen as an incendiary figure and could act as a counterbalance to Gabbard in his post atop the No. 1 spy agency among the 18 that she would oversee.
But some analysts said that by attempting to install Gabbard with other controversial loyalists, including congressman Matt Gaetz for attorney general and Fox commentator and military veteran Pete Hegseth for defense secretary, Trump is showing he wants no guardrails to his efforts to remake federal institutions.
Democratic critics were quick to pounce not only on Gabbard’s views but what they see as her lack of qualifications and the potential the new administration could deploy intelligence for political ends.
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence was created after the Sept 11, 2001 attacks to fix what was seen as a lack of coordination between those organizations.
“She isn’t being put in this job to do the job or to be good at it. She’s being put there to serve Donald Trump’s interests,” US Rep. Adam Smith, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, told CNN on Thursday.
Support for isolationist policies
After leaving the Democratic Party, Gabbard became increasingly critical of Biden and grew popular among conservatives, often appearing on far-right TV and radio shows, where she became known for supporting isolationist policies and showing disdain for “wokeness.”
Shortly after Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Gabbard wrote in a social media post: “This war and suffering could have easily been avoided if Biden admin/NATO had simply acknowledged Russia’s legitimate security concerns regarding Ukraine’s becoming a member of NATO.”
Rubio, a former Trump rival turned supporter, defended Gabbard’s nomination, describing her as a “revolutionary pick that has a chance to really make a positive change.”
But some other Republicans were more non-committal.
Asked about Gabbard’s qualifications, Senator John Cornyn, a member of the Intelligence Committee, said: “We’re going to do our job, vet the nominees and make a decision. That’s a constitutional responsibility of the Senate.”
To become director of national intelligence, Gabbard must first be confirmed by a majority of the 100-member US Senate, where she could face headwinds.
Trump’s fellow Republicans will have at least a 52-48 seat majority in the chamber starting in January, and have in the past been eager to back the party leader, increasing the likelihood that she will secure the post.
“Our friends are watching as closely as our foes, and they are asking what this all means for the pre-eminent player in global intelligence collection and analysis,” said one former US intelligence officer who worked in some of the world’s hotspots.
Trump chooses anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as health secretary
- The appointment was a reward for RFK's abandoning his presidential bid and supported Trump
- Trump's choice of the prominent anti-vaccine activist alarms health leaders
NEW YORK: President-elect Donald Trump says he will nominate anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, putting a man whose views public health officials have decried as dangerous in charge of a massive agency that oversees everything from drug, vaccine and food safety to medical research and the social safety net programs Medicare and Medicaid.
“For too long, Americans have been crushed by the industrial food complex and drug companies who have engaged in deception, misinformation, and disinformation when it comes to Public Health,” Trump said Thursday in a post on his Truth Social site announcing the appointment. Kennedy, he said, would “end the Chronic Disease epidemic” and “Make America Great and Healthy Again!”
Kennedy is one of the most prominent anti-vaccine activists in the world and has long advanced the debunked idea that vaccines cause autism and other health issues.
Hailing from one of the nation’s most storied political families, Kennedy is the son of the late Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy and the nephew of President John F. Kennedy. He first challenged President Joe Biden for the Democratic nomination last year. He then ran as an independent before abandoning his bid after striking a deal to give Trump his endorsement with a promise to have a role overseeing health policy in a second Trump administration.
He and the president-elect have since become good friends. The two campaigned together extensively during the race’s final stretch, and Trump had made clear he intended to give Kennedy a major role overseeing public health as part of a campaign to “Make America Healthy Again.”
“I’m going to let him go wild on health,” Trump said at a rally last month.
During his victory speech in Palm Beach, Florida, last week, Trump exclaimed, “Go have a good time, Bobby!”
Still, it was unclear precisely what job he would be offered. In an October interview on CNN, Trump transition co-chair Howard Lutnick assured there was no way Kennedy would receive the job he got.
The appointment drew alarms from public health experts.
“Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., is not remotely qualified for the role and should be nowhere near the science-based agencies that safeguard our nutrition, food safety, and health,” said Dr. Peter Lurie, president of the public health watchdog group Center for Science in the Public Interest.
Dr. Mandy Cohen, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, told The Associated Press, “I don’t want to go backwards and see children or adults suffer or lose their lives to remind us that vaccines work, and so I am concerned.”
“Any misinformation coming from places of influence, of power, are concerning,” she said.
During the campaign, Kennedy told NewsNation that Trump had asked him to “reorganize” agencies including the CDC, the National Institutes of Health and the Food and Drug Administration.
Kennedy has pushed against processed foods and the use of herbicides like Roundup weed killer. He has long criticized the large commercial farms and animal feeding operations that dominate the industry.
But he is perhaps best known for his criticism of childhood vaccines.
Again and again, Kennedy has made his opposition to vaccines clear. In July, he said in a podcast interview that “There’s no vaccine that is safe and effective” and told FOX News that he still believes in the long-ago debunked idea that vaccines can cause autism.
In a 2021 podcast he urged people to “resist” CDC guidelines that advise when kids should receive routine vaccinations.
“I see somebody on a hiking trail carrying a little baby and I say to him, ‘Better not get them vaccinated,’” Kennedy said.
Repeated scientific studies in the US and abroad have found no link between vaccines and autism. Vaccines have been proven safe and effective in laboratory testing and in real world use in hundreds of millions of people over decades. The World Health Organization credits childhood vaccines with preventing as many as 5 million deaths a year
Trump during his first term launched Operation Warp Speed, an effort to speed the production and distribution of a vaccine to combat COVID-19. The resulting vaccines were widely credited, including by Trump himself, with saving many lives.
Trump, in his announcement, said that, under Kennedy, HHS would “play a big role in helping ensure that everybody will be protected from harmful chemicals, pollutants, pesticides, pharmaceutical products, and food additives that have contributed to the overwhelming Health Crisis in this Country.” But HHS does not have jurisdiction over many of those issues, which fall under the purview of the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Agriculture.
Kennedy is an attorney who has built a loyal following over several decades of people who admire his lawsuits against major pesticide and pharmaceutical companies. He has pushed for tighter regulations around the ingredients in foods.
With the Trump campaign, he worked to shore up support among young mothers in particular, with his message of making food more healthful in the US, promising to model regulations after those imposed in Europe. In a nod to Trump’s original campaign slogan, he named the effort “Make America Healthy Again.”
It remains unclear how that will square with Trump’s history of deregulation of big industries, including food. Trump has pushed for fewer inspections of the meat industry, for example.
Kennedy’s stance on vaccines raises question about his ability to get confirmed, even in a GOP-controlled Senate.
He also has said he would recommend removing fluoride from drinking water, although fluoride levels are mandated by state and local governments. The addition of the material has been cited as leading to improved dental health and is considered safe at low levels.
He has said he would seek to ban certain food additives, cracking down on substances such as food dyes and preservatives, which are regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. He has also targeted pesticides, which are jointly regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency and the FDA.
Kennedy has also drawn headlines for his history with wild animals. He admitted to dumping a dead bear in New York’s Central Park — placing it as though it had been hit by a bike — and found himself the subject of a federal probe after his daughter revealed that he had cut off a beached whale’s head and strapped it to the roof of his car to take home.
HHS has more than 80,000 employees across the country. Kennedy has promised to take a serious look at those who work for HHS and its agencies, including the Food and Drug Administration, the National Institutes of Health and the CDC.
He has said he is especially focused on putting an end to the “revolving door” of employees who have previous history working for pharmaceutical companies or leave government service to work for that industry, his former campaign communications manager, Del Bigtree, told the AP last month. Bigtree is also an anti-vaccine organizer.
Kennedy said he wanted to fire 600 employees at the National Institutes of Health, which oversees vaccine research.
The expected appointment was first reported by Politico Thursday.
Kennedy’s anti-vaccine nonprofit group, Children’s Health Defense, currently has a lawsuit pending against a number of news organizations, among them The Associated Press, accusing them of violating antitrust laws by taking action to identify misinformation, including about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines. Kennedy took leave from the group when he announced his run for president but is listed as one of its attorneys in the lawsuit.
Trump also announced Thursday that he will nominate Jay Clayton, who served as chairman of the US Securities and Exchange Commission during his first term, to serve as US Attorney for the Southern District of New York.
