Shownotes Transcript
Daily news and analysis. We keep you informed and inspired. This is World Today. Hello and welcome to World Today. I'm Zhao Ying. Coming up, Chinese President Xi Jinping has called for efforts to preserve history and look ahead to development ahead of his visit to Russia. What to expect from his trip?
India has launched missile strikes on Pakistan two weeks after a deadly militant attack on tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir. Are the two countries on the brink of war? Friedrich Merz becomes German chancellor after surviving a historic vote failure. What does this rocky start mean for his leadership moving forward?
Chinese President Xi Jinping says China and Russia's support for each other during the world anti-fascist war is the origin of friendship that has spanned generations. In a signed article in Russian newspaper ahead of his visit to Russia, President Xi called on the two sides to firmly safeguard the post-war international order and continue to promote a multipolar world and economic globalization.
The Chinese leader also stressed China's sovereignty over the Taiwan region and reiterated the country's determination at reunification.
President Xi said China and Russia should preserve history, walk together in development, and protect international justice 80 years after the war victory. For more, we are joined by Shen Dingli, professor from the Institute of International Studies at Fudan University. President Xi stressed the importance of upholding a correct view of World War II history. What exactly does he mean by that, and why is it significant in today's context?
Well, Americans brag that it's all due to American's merit that has made the Second World War successful because Americans waged war in Europe to defeat Nazi Germany. Americans countered Japanese aggression in the Pacific War to defeat Japan, so Americans are great. None of us disagreed with this edition.
But at the same time, the then Soviet Union also played a significant role because it had been invaded by Nazi Germany. It has paid a tremendous amount of sacrifice. It defeated Nazi Germany in partnership with America. And the Soviet Union also sent troops to defeat the Japanese imperialist forces stationed in Manchuria, in China's Dongbei, northeastern China at that time.
That credit to Soviet Union has not been properly given. So, while reviewing the Second World War, celebrating the 80th anniversary of the success to defeat fascism, we should give proper credit to Moscow.
And also, the credit to China for winning the anti-fascist war has been even further underestimated. China has made a huge amount of contribution by making tremendous amount of sacrifice. Probably 35 million of Chinese people and armed forces lost their lives.
Tremendous amount of China's territory was brutalized. And China has trapped lots of Japanese force in China to make it unable to invade Soviet Union. And China has trapped the Japanese force to make it not able to use its force in China to be deployed outside of China to damage other country.
And China has made so much contribution and its credit to China even by today is underestimated. So when reviewing, when celebrating the 80th anniversary, China and Russia need to give us proper evaluation and also we deserve the credit from the rest of the world, from Europe, from other parts of the world
that we are a core hero, we are a core strategic partner to defeat fascism, to defeat Japanese imperial force in winning the Pacific War, and China's theater is a major part of the Pacific War.
I guess this may be President Xi's hunch that we should evaluate his history in a proper way. Yeah, and President Xi called for safeguarding the UN-centered international system established post-World War II. How can China and Russia work together to defend this order, especially in the face of growing unilateralism and hegemonic behavior?
Well, the system of United Nations has been apparently an outcome of the so-called post-second world war order. It was created collectively by the US, the Central Union, China, etc. Plus France and Britain, the P5 created this system.
The P5 has a significant weight in the UN's security decision-making apparatus, which is Security Council. And this has forged the so-called internationalism.
globalism, liberalism, a rule of law of the post-Cold War system. The international order would no longer be dictated by any one of the monster hegemon. This is also an invention of the United States. But from time to time we see a different America. America intervened into China's internal affairs,
And America has been sending weapons to Taiwan. America sent a force to Iraq, to Afghanistan, to wage a war, the so-called anti-terrorist war. But some parts of the war were not mandated by the United Nations.
So you have said the many illegal things in violation of the UN Charter that the US has worked with other major powers to establish. A lot of post-second world war records that Americans have set
has violated the international system. Even by today under President Trump, the US has been even more free-riding regardless of international system. Even a few years ago, President Obama, President Biden has been pressing the so-called rule-based international order.
But in these days, the US, the Trump-led US did not care about international law. Even the law was made somehow by America and some other country. I think President Xi Jinping worked with Russia in order to uphold the international system that has been hard established.
through the sacrificing of tens of millions of people and that ended with the success of defeating fascism, Nazi Germany and imperialist Japan. So I hope Xi Jinping's argument delivered in Moscow will be well heard by the international community.
Yes, and President Xi also advocated for dialogue, partnership and win-win cooperation over confrontation and zero-sum games. And how are China and Russia promoting these ideas, these principles through platforms like the SCO or the BRICS? And what does that mean to, especially to the global south?
Well, I think we share lots of US concern and some of the concern may have a reason, but the US need to well articulate it, need to consult with other countries, especially other major powers of the world before taking any one-sided action.
For instance, for the current tariff war, the US wants to balance its trade. That's not a bad idea. But the US needs to consult with other countries. The US should not launch a unilateral tariff war against the entire world. This is not legitimate.
I think China wants to work with the US and wants to work with Russia, wants to work with 150 global South countries on many issues of global concern, such as anti-terrorism, such as poverty eradication, removal, such as climate change, such as public health, like a pandemic.
We want to work with other countries. China and the US worked on lots of such issues, to provide food, to provide vaccines, etc. But the current US seems to be far less interested in working with other countries together. So China and Russia need to take a leadership role. Let's give some ideas.
public security, global health, food availability, and climate change. The US has changed its president and they changed their position. They withdrew from WHO and they may someday withdraw from WTO. That's not good behavior.
The international system is not perfect. That's not the reason we need to withdraw. We need to stick to it, working together, consulting together to contribute to the system to give our resource, either technological resource or financial resource, to make the system better. So that's how China is working with BRICS.
working with Shanghai cooperation organization and to make the small SCO to a big SCO. And China is pushing the envelope of global South 150 countries. So they are not all thinking together, but they share lots of common concern of security and development. So China want to working with them.
And China also wanted America to improve its position by working the rest of the world together. Yeah, you mentioned the United States a lot, but President Xi emphasized that China-Russia relationship is neither targeted at nor constrained by third parties. How do you think they can maintain this strategic independence and foreign policy in today's complex geopolitical environment?
China and Russia share lots of common interests because both Moscow and Beijing want to be an independent major power. And we want to make our country strong, prosperous, and secure.
With or without America, China won't make itself secure, prosperous and independent. Our partnership with Russia fundamentally was not driven by America, was not defined by America. At this time, the two countries work together by chance. America drives us together. And someday, America may not drive us.
But China still wants to make itself strong, independent and prosperous. And we also want to partner with America to make both China and America independent, strong and prosperous. China and Russia have been built for a century through a twisted shape. It is being defined by now to have less difference, to have more common ground.
I think with the ever-complex development of international order, it's very likely China, Russia would share their difference in the future and would define even more and more common grounds for the decades to come. That is Shen Dingli, professor from the Institute of International Studies at Fudan University. You're listening to World Today. Stay with us.
You're listening to World Today. I'm Zhao Ying. Chinese Vice Premier He Li-feng will meet with U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Benson during an upcoming visit to Switzerland. China's Commerce Ministry said China remains committed to safeguarding its own development interests and international trade order. The Chinese Foreign Ministry said the U.S. requested this meeting, and China retains its opposition to tariff abuse.
The vice premier will also travel to France in an eight-day trip to Europe. Joining us now in the studio is my colleague Ding Hong. Thanks for being here. Hello, Zhao Yin. So what do you make of the timing of this planned meeting in Switzerland? And what do you think has made the two sides agree to hold this meeting?
I think on the part of the Chinese government, there has been a consistent position. If Washington wants to fight, China will fight till the end. If Washington wants to talk, then China's door remains open.
By comparison, we have seen more flip-flops or policy reversals on the part of the Trump administration. Initially, Washington took a sort of maximum pressure approach towards China, with Donald Trump claiming that he was waiting for a call from China whatsoever. Then
After some time, somehow Trump began to talk about, oh, the China tariffs will come down sometime in the future dramatically. And Scott Benson also said that a trade war with China will be unsustainable.
Trump also claimed at some point that there were active negotiations with China, but that was denied by Beijing. And interestingly, China's denial in this regard was actually concurred by Scott Benson recently. So,
Basically, things Trump escalated Washington's trade war with China after his return to the office. China has been standing firm. So I guess now Trump has a better understanding that just like during his first term in the office, China is just not a country that he can easily bully, that China has a great leverage in a trade war as well. So...
he has to talk to China in a good manner. Overall, it is quite encouraging to see the two sides starting their public engagement. They have not engaged with each other too much since Donald Trump announced his tariffs. Any fall in this US-China trade war could be a welcoming sign for businesses and consumers in both countries and beyond. I mean,
Let's keep in mind that the U.S. economy went into reverse in the first quarter, actually, its first contraction in some three years as businesses in America stockpiled goods in anticipation of Donald Trump's so-called Liberation Day.
Yeah, and China's Commerce Ministry reiterated a stance that appeasement and compromise cannot win respect, and any talks should be based on equal grounds. What do you make of this? And what do you think needs to be done to create a constructive atmosphere for the meeting in Switzerland? Of course, any discussion or any talks should be on an equal basis. This has to do with some basic principles
international fairness or justice. All countries should be equal, regardless of their power or sizes. So in terms of creating constructive atmosphere for this upcoming meeting, I think it will largely depend on how the Donald Trump administration behaves.
If we are talking about a scenario in which Washington keeps talking about "Oh, China is bad" or how many drops China has stolen from America, this will be detrimental to the atmosphere before and during the meeting.
But if somehow both sides can come to agreeing that yes, there are many economic and trade issues on which we disagree with each other, but we still need to talk to each other for the sake of better understanding of each other's positions, then probably this meeting in Switzerland can be more constructive. I think...
For China, this very decision to have this meeting is in and of itself a show of great sincerity because China to start with didn't want a trade war with the United States at all. It is the U.S. that launched and then escalated this conflict. So now the bow is in the court of the United States or in the court of Washington in terms of restoring the confidence with China.
Well, in a media interview on Tuesday, Scott Benson tried to downplay expectations for a deal because he said we've got to de-escalate before we can move forward. So based on that kind of comment, what do you think we can expect from this meeting? Realistically, there is a huge gap really between the two sides, understanding and perception of all those issues.
contentious economic issues. The Trump administration claims that China has stolen manufacturing jobs from America, but in China's understanding, that was really the outcome of a trade policy that the U.S. has on purpose pursued for decades and other factors like automation, for example. So
In the meantime, Trump claims that the US has been taken advantage of by China. But in China's perspective, taking advantage of what? I mean, American companies are making way more money here in China than Chinese companies over there in America. Apple and Tesla have huge businesses in China, but Huawei and Chinese electric car brands have no market at all in the United States.
So in the case of the trade war during the first Trump term, the two sides basically fought and negotiated simultaneously for about a year and a half before managing to reach a trade deal. This time around, because Donald Trump
and his administration seems to be more aggressive than they were during the first term, we probably need to lower our expectation on how soon a deal could be possible. This meeting in Switzerland is only the first step.
The Trump administration has placed at least 145% tariff on most Chinese goods and that forced China to respond with 125% tariff on some US imports. And China has repeatedly said that there is no winner in a trade war. So how has Trump's trade war with China damaged the two sides businesses so far?
Basically, tariffs have really reached a very high level that trade between the two countries has really dropped off dramatically. According to the information I can collect from the two sides, port operators, for example,
The last tariff-free cargo ships, namely those vessels that were on the water, on the ocean when the tariffs were announced, they have almost all docked on the two sides. And the first ships that carry goods subject to tariffs are nowadays arriving at the two sides ports. So...
This means that the businesses of the two sides will soon be faced with a difficult situation or decision. Are they going to pay a tariff that more than doubles the cost of the imported goods? Or are they simply going to stop selling them altogether?
In particular, consumers, especially those in the United States, are only several weeks away from higher prices and some shortages. According to Flexport, a logistics and freight forwarding broker, the number of cargo ships headed from China to the United States fell by 60% in April and April.
In the meantime, JP Morgan has even estimated that Chinese exports to the United States will somehow plunge by as much as 80% by the second half of this year. So with that in mind, I think a responsible federal U.S. government should really care for its own businesses and consumers, to say the least.
So how do you think the negotiations between China and the U.S. could mean to the rest of the world? Well, it matters a lot to the rest of the world. Speaking from a Chinese perspective, I think what we have seen so far is that, well, what we're seeing right now is that the Trump administration has temporarily spared many other countries and focused more on fighting a trade war with China. So...
I think many countries are actually closely watching how China is responding to Donald Trump's unilateral bullying practices, let's put it this way, and China's responses will in many ways decide or determine how those countries will deal with Trump in the foreseeable future. I think
China, through its own behavior, is really sending a clear message that on one hand, China has an absolute no to bullying practices from Trump, and on the other hand, it remains committed to opening its market wider and further. This is China's way of safeguarding a multilateral trading system.
Okay, thank you, Ding Hung. You're listening to World Today. And coming up, India has launched missile strikes on Pakistan two weeks after a deadly militant attack on tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir. Are the two countries on the brink of war? Friedrich Merz becomes German chancellor after surviving a historic vote failure. What does this rocky start mean for his leadership moving forward? We'll be back after a short break. ♪
You're listening to World Today. I'm Zhao Ying. China's central bank has announced cuts in reserve requirement ratio and policy rates and lowered interest rates on personal housing provident fund loans. The measures are part of China's new financial incentives to stabilize the economy.
The People's Bank of China also unveiled supportive policies for scientific innovation and expanding consumption. Regulators in the financial sector and stock market vowed to inject more certainty into the economy and help small and private businesses through difficulties.
For more, our Zhao Yang spoke with Professor Qi Qiang, fellow of the Belt and Road Research Center at Minzu University of China. So China's central bank will cut the reserve requirement ratio by 0.5 percentage points, releasing about 1.2%.
trillion yuan in long-term liquidity and also lower the policy interest rate by 0.1 percentage points. So, Professor Qu, what potential impact will this have on China's economy, the financial markets, and the monetary policy direction in the coming months?
Well, 50 BP cut in the RRR and 10 BP in the LPR. And I think it's within our expectation. And this has been talked about for quite a long time recently. So I think today they really deliver the promise.
And I think they are, well, by the cut itself, it's not that big, but I think the signal and expectation is very important for the long-term development of Chinese economy. Number one, it released a certain amount of liquidity into the market, like 1 trillion yuan immediately released by the RRR cut. And also, even though there's only 10 BP cut in the LPR, but still, it can help the financial institutions lower their borrowing cost and also reduce
you know, to balance their spread in the landings and also for the real economy. And I think they will, you know, directly to pay less for, you know, the money they borrowed and, you know, and also be sending a very strong signal for ample liquidity so that stability and confidence in the financial market can be maintained.
I think today the stock market is responding pretty well, even though at the end of the trading of today it has dropped a little bit. But still, I think the major heavyweight stocks have turned positive towards this change. And also for the bond market, a lowered interest rate will help the bond market to increase better.
especially for current Chinese situation, I mean, for the home market, for the local government borrowing market, a lower interest rate will definitely help the situation. And also for the SMEs, small and medium sized enterprises, they also borrow, they also are heavy borrower for the banking, you know, financial resources. So through these cuts, and I think they will reduce the burden for the further operations.
So I think the reason why they try to loosen up the monetary policy but not to go to the bottom directly is because we want to help the real economy to reduce the burden gradually, but we do not want to helicopter money and a flood the whole market to create another extreme, which is the inflation expectation. And in the current backdrop of the whole world, what we don't need is slower growth plus inflation.
That's the reason why we're doing it very cautiously. And China plans to raise its funding for tech innovation by 300 billion yuan, pushing the total financing to 800 billion yuan. So how significant is this in accelerating China's technological self-reliance among the current tariff tensions?
Well, a lot of people have a little bit of a misunderstanding about the trade conflicts. People are thinking, okay, our daily groceries, our daily products will probably get more expensive, so you should subsidize these kinds of consumption or production even more.
But actually, you know, it's not within our expectation is that probably many people don't understand that within this trade conflict, actually, the tax savvy product, you know, the high tech products that will be, you know, the most fragile and vulnerable sectors because it will if.
We're having, for example, if we're having some conflicts on like potatoes and soybean or on the clothes and toys, we can switch our trade partners to some other side. We call it very flexible products. For example, if we do not buy from America, we can buy from Brazil. If America do not buy the toys from China, they can buy it from India or from Mexico.
But if we fight to some certain extent with the tariff and the flexibility for the high-tech products and its providence is very, very small. For example, if they block us on semiconductors.
Where should we find the replacement? It's very, very hard because only very few countries in the whole world produce this kind of a high tech product. So that's a reason why more than ever, we will have to toughen up our high tech industry. We need to stand up on our own feet and be very resilient and very independent, especially in high tech product.
That's the reason why the country prioritized the lending support and the financial resources towards these high-technology industries, because this is very easily to become the choke point of the whole country's economic development, even more easier than the energy sector, because like 60 years ago,
Trade conflicts probably is going to choke you through the energy or raw material supply, but today we have the Belt and Road. We have all the trading partners. They can supply us with that, but only the high-tech products and services would probably become the vulnerabilities for the country. So that's a reason why we're investing in high-technology industries.
you know, industries, trying to provide them more of the lending channels. We're going to try to help them to borrow at a lower cost because many of these tax savvy companies are startups, smaller companies. They do not have enough of the collateral to borrow more money from the bank. That's the reason why we're helping them through this round of the facility setting. And China's central bank is also lowering the mortgage rate under the Housing Providence Fund by 0.25 percentage points.
and setting up a new 500 billion yuan relanding tool to support the service consumption and elderly care. So what does it mean for China's real estate sector and consumption?
Well, you see, I think this is a very smart move by the central bank or the monetary regulators. It's because, as we just mentioned, we want to support the vulnerabilities in the economy, but we do not want to create expectation for helicopter money for inflation. So we set it up this targeted or what we call the special purpose vehicle or facilities to support those very important areas, for example, like
people's livelihood, like the home market, like the local government market, and etc. We give them a larger cut in the interest rate to help them reduce the burden. But meanwhile, for the general borrowing market, we will be very, very constrained and very conservative, lower just a bit little than that.
For example, this 25% BP cut in the borrowing rate towards the home market will definitely help the home buyers to reduce the burden and also stimulate more of the demand in the East market. If you turn to the data of some major cities in China, you will find out the second home market and home buying market has actually been turning warmer and warmer. So rally has been
has been happening. And also for the consumptions, if you take a look at the number of these May Day holiday, well, we're having basically, you know, the whole country of people are traveling around and, you know, just within the first day,
Our high-speed railway system actually has been transporting more than 20 million people around China. So this has become very, very active in consumption. I think this has been the result of our policies actually since the end of last year. And also, I think beyond that, people will feel more relieved because many of the other
detailed policy combo is on the way after this major cut in the targeted area. For example, in the health care, in the old age care, in children's education, all these burden will be further reduced. So more cash will be put back into the pocket of ordinary families. So consumption can be further stimulated, especially against the current international trade conflict backdrop.
And we've also seen some new efforts to support the stock market. So could you tell us more details of that and why stabilized stock market is so important for the economy right now?
Because major economies, developing economies like America, like European Union, Japan, or South Korea, well, they always have several, what we have called the assets pool. And the same story happening with China right now is just a little bit different from America.
So where do I find some extra gross then stock market would be one because the stock market right now is only like 1/5 or 1/4 of the size of the home market is still a very small compared to the whole market compared to the T-bond market still very very small and this is not good because China is such a large economy.
So it's like a giant person, he has a very strong right leg but also has a very small left leg. So this is not good. We need to make two legs to be equally strong so that we can walk faster and steadily.
That's the reason why we focused on the stock market this round and set up many facilities and targeted financial tools to stabilize it. And you can see the result is very good because from last year, from the 2700 points, now our market is stabilizing at about 3300 points.
It's a very important improvement, even against the current turbulent international trade situation. We're still doing pretty good. And also the forex market for Chinese renminbi is also being very stabilized. So it shows it's been working and people's confidence is coming back. That is Professor Qu Qian, fellow of the Belt and Road Research Center at Minzu University of China, speaking with my colleague Zhao Yang. This is World Today. We'll be back.
You are listening to World Today. I'm Zhao Ying. India has launched a series of strikes on sites in Pakistan two weeks after a deadly militant attack on tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir. India said Operation Sundur is part of a commitment to hold those responsible for last month's attack accountable. But Pakistan denied any involvement in the attack and described the strikes as unprovoked.
Pakistan's prime minister called India's strikes an "act of war" and said his country has every right to give a robust response. For more, we are joined by Dr. Zhang Chuchu, deputy director of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies at Fudan University. Professor Zhang, thanks for joining us. Good evening. So what triggered this latest round of conflicts between India and Pakistan?
Well, indeed, I think what is happening between India and Pakistan at the moment is worrisome. The latest round of tensions between the two countries was actually triggered by an attack on April 22, 2025.
in a region called Baisaran Valley, which is very close to Pahangam, an area in Jammu and Kashmir, which is controlled by India. So right now, India accused Pakistan of sponsoring the attack.
whereas India's response included diplomatic measures such as suspending the Indo-Swarters Treaty, expelling Pakistani diplomats and also closing the borders, etc. So at the moment, for the Pakistani part, Pakistan denied involvement, which eventually leads to an escalation of the tensions.
Yeah, as we know, Kashmir has long been a flashpoint between India and Pakistan. But how does this latest escalation compare to previous crisis in the region, you think? Well, indeed, actually, as we know, Kashmir has already been a persistent flashpoint since 1947, with several India-Pakistani wars centered on the region. But I think the current escalation is very different in several ways.
For example, we can see that this time in doing the attacks, there are civilian targets, unlike in 2019, which targeted security forces. This time, the Pal Haugam attack actually hit tourists, which inflames Indian public sentiment due to its targets.
and the ways of the attacks. And the second difference is the diplomatic breakdown in the aftermath, because right now we can see that both nations have suspended some key agreements, which undermines the post-1971 framework. And that is a step which did not happen in prior crisis.
And another difference is the military action at the moment, because now we see there is India's Operation Sindur, which is also, and actually this time it strikes different size in Pakistani pound drop, which is beyond the usual Kashmir focus. And it also marks a geographic escalation.
India claims the strikes targeted terrorist infrastructure without hitting Pakistani military or civilian sites. How credible is this assertion and what message do you think India might be trying to send with such an approach?
Well, from my own observation, I think India's claim that strikes under Operation Sindor targeted only terrorist infrastructure might be partially credible, but it's very contentious because at the moment, India asserts precision strikes, whereas Pakistan
reports deaths of civilians and actually at the moment without independent verification, the precision claim is very hard to confirm, especially given the difficulty of distinguishing militants from civilian sites in very densely populated areas. And I think India's approach sends a couple of signals. So on the one hand, by framing the strikes as
anti-terrorist, I think India tries to address public outrage over the attack and tries to bolster the Prime Minister Modi's strongman image. On the other hand, at the moment, India tries to convince the international society that rather than acting aggressively, it is carrying out so-called anti-terrorist attacks.
and countermeasures as an attempt to justify his behavior. Yeah, and then what do you make of Pakistan's response so far? And how close are the two countries now to a full blown military conflict?
Well, at the moment, we can see that Pakistan has closed airspace and borders, expelled Indian diplomats, restricted trade, which actually mirrors India's moves. And Pakistan reported downing an Indian drone and engaging in skirmishes along the line of control since April the 24th.
So at the moment, I think Pakistan's leadership also, we can see that it warned of imminent Indian incursions and threatened a full spectrum response. So I think the two countries, it seemed to be closer to conflict than any point since 2019, which is quite worrisome. But at the same time, we should also note that a full blown war remains unlikely due to a lot of
factors such as economic constraints and also nuclear deterrence. Okay, and just now you mentioned the public outreach, which could be part of the reason behind the Indian strikes. But to what extent are domestic political pressures on both sides shaping the decisions that are being made in a crisis?
well i think this is a very important point because actually domestic pressures are a very important driver which pushes both governments towards very hardline stances and on the one hand domestic pressures shape india's response because prime minister modi has staked his legacy on stabilizing kashmir with recent peaceful elections and booming tourism
as achievements, but the power Helga attack targeting the tourists is a major setback. So it fuels public outrage and there are a lot of demands for retaliation at the moment and Modi's hotline positions aligns with his strongman image and counters opposition criticism.
And as for Pakistan, its civilian military leadership face similar pressures. Also, the government is plagued by economic challenges and political instability. So in the context of the tensions with India, we can see that the Pakistani government tries to rally citizens and also mobilize people there against what it calls external threat, which is a tactic often used to bolster legitimacy.
Yeah, and the UN, US, China and other nations have called for restraint. What role do you think the international community can play in de-escalating the tensions?
Indeed, I think as we can see the international community pay highly attention to what is going on in the region. And I think the international community's role in de-escalating the tension is critical, but also limited by geopolitical dynamics and the two nations sovereignty concerns. While potential roles exist, of course, for instance, United Nations through its secretary general has already offered
good offices for de-escalation and also a Security Council consultations recently also urged restraint. The United States also has engaged both nations reaffirming counterterrorism support for India while urging de-escalation.
Well, China with very close ties to Pakistan and also to India tries to stay neutral. And China has called for de-escalation to avoid regional instability. So I think various international actors here are playing very different roles. But I think the most important issue here is still to solve the confrontation between the
the conflicting parties and try to provide platforms for both sides to facilitate dialogue between them. Thank you, Dr. Zhang Chuchu, Deputy Director of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies at Fudan University. This is World Today. Stay with us.
You're listening to World Today. I'm Zhao Ying. German conservative leader Friedrich Merz has won a parliamentary vote on his second attempt to become chancellor. This came after his alliance with the Social Democratic Party suffered a surprise defeat in the first attempt. Merz's failure to win parliamentary backing in the first round of voting was a first for post-war Germany.
For more, we are joined by Helge Zepp-Larouche, founder of the Schiller Institute, a Germany-based political and economic think tank. Thanks for joining us. Yes, hello. So what factors do you believe contributed to Merz's failure in the first round of voting, despite his coalition's parliamentary majority? Well,
Well, I think that in both parties, or actually all three parties which are part of the coalition, he has made enemies before the government was formed. People in the social democracy were upset that he had voted at one occasion with the Alternative for Germany, another party on the migrant issue.
which, you know, there is a supposed firewall not to ever work with them, then parts of the CDU, his own party, are very upset because he broke the promise not to increase the debt, which was part of his election campaign. And then the day after he was elected...
He initiated a loosening of the so-called dead break for a gigantic rearmament program in Germany. So these people were upset because he broke the promise. And then some other people from the east of the CDU were upset because they were not sufficiently represented in the new cabinet. So I think in all three parties, he has some opponents.
Okay, so what is this initial setback reveal about the internal cohesion, or fragility, we should say, of Merz's governing coalition? And does it cast a shadow over the legitimacy of chancellorship from day one?
Well, I think so, because it took obviously some major arm-twisting of those members of his party, of the three parties who had voted against him in the first round, to make them vote for him in the second round. So I think that therefore the...
the underlying conflicts can erupt at any moment very quickly. And one of the leaders of the Alternative for Germany, Alice Weidel, immediately called for new elections, which naturally was ignored. But I think it is a fragile government. Yeah. So for those who might be less familiar with him, can you tell us more about Friedrich Merz and what are likely to be his top priorities now? Well,
I think that he gained notoriety in his career by helping the hedge funds, the so-called locusts, as they are called, to take over many small and medium industries in Germany and the housing sector, which naturally is not in the common interest of the people but for the speculators, and that
made him known to BlackRock, the largest investment
firm in the world, and also he was on the board of the Hong Kong-Shanghai Banking Corporation, a bank which also has some bad history. So I think that he is a man of the neoliberal speculative interests, and he will go for social cuts a lot. He also has indicated in the past that he is willing to send
the Taurus cruise missile, a long-range missile to the Ukrainians for strikes deep into the territory of Russia, which I think would make Germany immediately the target of any possible military counter-reaction by Russia. So I think we are in for difficult times for sure.
Okay, and in the meantime, the AFD has gained momentum and seized on the parliamentary chaos. How do you see the MERS government responding to the populist challenge? Well, I think that the...
You know, the AfD is rising. Even after the federal election, they gained several points, and they're now the strongest party in Germany. So Berth has two choices. Either he breaks down the so-called firewall and works with the AfD. This is what many people in the CDU are demanding, that that would be the only option to save Germany.
under the present very, very difficult conditions, or he will go for the banning of the alternative for Germany after the sort of German equivalent of the FBI, the Internal Security Service, just ruled or just made a report describing the AfD as a secured right-wing extremist with
which is one step before banning it. Now, the internal security service, the Bundesverfassungsschutz, has been called by the early SPD leaders called Schumacher. He warned against the creation of such a thing. He said this could lead to a new Gestapo, a new secret police like we had it in the period of the National Socialists. And there have been many
question marks about that institution. So I think Merz has to decide, you know, if he wants to break down the firewall, work with the AfD, or move towards banning the AFP, AAFD, which would polarize Germany beyond any imagination. Yeah, and Merz has warned the U.S. to stay out of German politics after the
How do you look at this kind of direct warning to Washington and what could this mean for Yves' Germany relationship moving forward? Well, Merz has been politically an Atlanticist throughout his entire career.
After Trump came in, Merz, like many other European politicians, turned very sharply against Trump, and that demonstrated that they are not really loyal to the United States as such, but more to the neoliberal networks, which are now dominated by Great Britain. So he will for sure give lip service to the Atlantic alliance,
But it depends also very much what Trump will do. Will he settle the relationship between the United States and Russia? What will be Trump's position on China? And I think that that will create the conditions for Merz to decide the
Does he want to join an anti-China policy, or does he want to go with some other tendencies in the EU, saying that under these present various difficult strategic situations, it is more advisable for Europe to work more closely with China?
Thank you Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder of the Schiller Institute, a Germany-based political and economic think tank. And that's all the time we have for this edition of World Today. To listen to this episode again or to catch up on previous episodes, you can download our podcast by searching World Today. And for further discussion, you can follow us on XCGTN Radio. I'm Zhao Ying. Thank you so much for listening. See you next time.
so