Can US-mediated talks in Riyadh help end Russia-Ukraine war?
52:25 Share

Hello and welcome to World Today. I'm Zhao Ying. Coming up, China and Japan have reached 20 consensus points in high-level economic dialogue. How significant are they for bilateral ties?

Ukraine and Russia are talking separately with the United States and Saudi Arabia. What to expect? And South Korea's Constitutional Court has reinstated Han Deok-Soo as the country's acting president. What will come next?

But first, Monday is the final day of the China Development Forum in Beijing. The two-day event has focused on finding ways to ensure stable growth in the global economy, covering topics like new quality products of forces, AI innovation and green development. At the opening ceremony on Sunday, Premier Li Qiang reiterated China's commitment to openness and global collaboration.

He pledged to introduce more measures to help foreign-funded enterprises integrate into the Chinese market. The premier noted that more proactive fiscal policies will be implemented to hit the economic growth rate target of around 5% for 2025. For more on this, my colleague Xiao Yang spoke with Dr. Zhou Mi, Senior Research Fellow with Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation.

So, Dr. Zhou Mi, thank you very much for joining us. At this year's China Development Forum, Premier Li Qiang said China will further expand the market access for foreign investors. He pledged to introduce more measures to help foreign enterprises integrate into the Chinese market. So what are your main takeaways from his speech and what message does he send?

Well, you know, from his speech, he has used the three examples to show that China's development is very strong and sustainable. So I know that you mentioned the word of "integrate". That is a different word that we are talking about the FDI's role in China, because in the past, maybe we frequently will hear that China will open our market, trying to reduce barriers, like to remove any of the restrictiveness for the

for the foreign investors to come to China, but that doesn't mean that they can have a better development in China. So the integration maybe needs more efforts. I mean, from the Premier's speech, we know that he's trying to also to give some messages to the investors that they are not only just to come here to China, but also have a better environment here and better integrated in China's development. That is very helpful because he has, you know,

elaborated with the 5% growth rate of the GDP this year, and also a very strong and sustainable development in the different aspects. So I mean, that is very important for the investors to have more confidence, not just to come here, but have a better development in the future. And how important is China's policy, do you think, the policy consistency of opening up for global investors, especially at this moment?

Well, since President Xi Jinping has mentioned that we were trying to open our door wider and wider, I will never close it. There are so many uncertainties happening in the world and we have seen the protectionism, unilateralism in the trade, in the investment, also trying to

reshape the global supply chains by a very special way, not based on the market. So I think that many of the enterprises, I mean, also include China's domestic enterprises, are thinking, what can we do to deal with these uncertainties? And how can we be better fit for such a changeable world?

So I think that China's persistence on the opening up and trying to give more opportunities to our friends are very important because China is a super large market. We have such a complete supply chains and we have so many different possibilities.

So I think that for the FDIs, they really want to take out the opportunities in a certain world because for even especially for the investment, they do need some more time. They have to consider about the five years or even 10 years.

When China is becoming a more important economy in that time, and the domestic demands and also the supplies are really very important and will be even stronger in the next 10 years, I believe that is a very good opportunity for them to come here.

And at this year's China Development Forum, Premier Li also expressed China's warm welcome for investment from businesses worldwide. And he emphasized that foreign enterprises are indispensable and contributors to China's development. So what do you think is the role of foreign investors in China's economy today?

Well, as you mentioned, they have changed. Actually, in the past, the FDI is a little bit higher than China's domestic ones. So they come here to bring more technology, more new ideas about the management, about the ways of dealing with the businesses. But now, almost that China's domestic enterprises are

growing very quickly as they have much stronger competitiveness compared with the previous years. So the FDI in China are changing their role together. I hope that we can, you know, equally to cooperate with each other because there are still so many uncertainties, so many, you know, unknown areas or fields like for the digital economy. We have introduced the artificial intelligence.

But how can we use that more wisely and equally to different parts of the world? And how can we support the development? I mean, not only for the manufacturing, but for agriculture and services that also need many of the ideas from different sides. And another way is, I mean, the FDI is changing their position now in China because they are trying to gain some of the benefits of China's domestic market. So China's conceptions are growing, I mean,

they are really a big one and more diversified than compared with many other countries. So the FDI coming here not only just brings their technology and capital, they are trying to pursue a better connection with China's domestic market and benefit from the development of our home demand. And that is really important for them to have a sustainable development.

And we know that China's central government issued an action plan to stabilize the foreign investment in February. So how do you think these measures have influenced the decision making of international investors who are looking to enter for this market?

Well, from that action, I think that we can see there are several words. The first one is openness. We want to keep a high level openness. But the high level doesn't mean that there's no restrictions. But we are trying to accommodate the demands,

separately, I mean individually by the different investments. So like the companies who are doing the investment in the automobiles, maybe they do need some supply of the batteries. And some companies who are going to be involved in the financial sectors, they may need more understanding about China's consumers or some of the savers. Well, for a different investment, they are trying to have a better development.

And the second, I think that is transparency, because China is just going to give the messages to the market that what do we want to do and in which way. So we gave the very clear signal to the enterprises and they will know what we can expect for the future. And the third one is also a better

openness, I think that it's different from just removing the restrictions. We are trying to give some new ideas from the technology, from innovation, and that is very important for them to have a better development. So in our world, China is trying to build

FDI-friendly ecosystem. The ecosystem is integration by the domestic stakeholders and also the FDIs, and all of them can enjoy the benefits of the development. And in his speech, Chinese Premier Li Qiang also urged international businesses to resist protectionism. He warned that decoupling and breaking supply chains would only deepen crisis.

And we know that many global business leaders voice their concerns over the protectionist, the US tariff and trade measures. So with regard to this kind of concern of multinational companies, do you think China can address this concern or mitigate the negative impacts by moving to further open up the Chinese economy? Definitely. I mean, that's if the you know, we're talking about the big cake of the world.

I mean, the United States is still the number one economy in the world, but we are the second. So, I mean, with more stakeholders who are going to support China, China's development in the GDP will be even quicker. So I think that for a lot of MNCs, they are trying to look at the demand side and that is definitely very important.

big opportunity here in China because China is not only having some developed areas like the coastal cities and the provinces, we have a vast inland, I mean, a lot of markets that they can develop further away. And we have a lot of connections with Belt and Road countries and they have different requirements.

So by the more certain and openness and connections, I mean all the MNCs will benefit from that, no matter from the resources, from the human energies and also from the different kind of technology. I think that we can have a better world by better integration.

And the Chinese premier also called on global executives to seize opportunities in China's huge consumer market, momentum in innovation and booming green economy. So could you elaborate more on that? What are opportunities in those sectors?

Well, it is true that China's EVs and also the solar panels and the wind turbines, these sectors developed so quickly in the past decade. I think that is because the market is huge. And Chinese people really want to be better, support the idea of green development.

So you can find that any provinces in China, they are developing their supply, I mean, by the energy of the renewable energy. And that is really our greener and good for the climate change. So no one will see that climate change will not affect us. I think even for the United States, they have a lot of

affections by the climate change to the agriculture, to the fires, and a lot of wildfires are changing that country. So we have to be very careful about the way we are going to live. I think Chinese companies are really good at reducing the cost of doing that as a solution, a package of reducing the impact of the carbon emission to the world.

Well, another side, I think that China's people's consumption style has been changed. Consumers are very likely or willing to consume those products with green technology or digital products and services. That is really special and that will have a better and even quicker improvement in the future.

That is Dr. Zhou Mi, Senior Research Fellow with Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation, speaking with Zhao Yang. This is World Today. Stay with us.

This is World Today. I'm Zhao Ying. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has called on China and Japan to speed up the transformation and upgrading of their trade and economic cooperation. He made remarks while co-chairing the sixth China-Japan high-level economic dialogue with his Japanese counterpart in Tokyo.

This is the first such dialogue between the two countries in six years. The dialogue concluded with 20 key consensus points on cooperation in areas such as green development, environmental protection, elderly care services and more.

For more, we are joined by Rongying, Senior Research Fellow at the China Institute of International Studies. The China-Japan high-level economic dialogue resumed after six years. What do you think prompted this resumption? Certainly, I think there are

several factors. First and foremost, of course, there's been more than six years since they met last time. But that was primarily because of the COVID-19 disruptions. So time is a very important matter.

Secondly, I think ever since President Xi and Prime Minister Ishiba's meeting last November, the two leaders reiterated the importance and the commitment to promote a kind of strategic mutually beneficial relationship

that suits to the new era for constructive and stable relationship. So we have the blessing of political leadership and strategic guidance and that provide a very important environment and certain conditions to resume that important dialogue.

And last but not least, I think the trade and investment relationship between China and Japan has always been steady, resilient, and plays a very important role. Even when the difficult time, the political relationship, diplomatic problems has been in a way that get in the way of the relationship. So the China-Japan trade relationship has always been a kind of a facilitator and promoter

for relationship. And of course, the changing international environment, particularly in the wake of Trump's looming tariff war, has also made it necessary for the two sides to accelerate the process of this resumption.

Well, you mentioned President Xi's meeting with Ishiba and also the political shifts in the United States. Well, some suggest this dialogue reflects Japan's shift under the Ishiba administration to improve ties with China. But how much of this shift do you attribute to Japan's response to global uncertainties like U.S. policy changes versus its own strategic interests?

Well, I think Japan certainly has very much attached its importance of its relationship with the United States. And as a matter of fact, Japan always said that Japan-U.S. relationship or alliance, it's been one of the three pillars.

for its diplomacy, for its foreign relations. So any change from the U.S. side would have bearings on Japan's policy. But I would argue that Japan has always been trying to keep a kind of a balance vis-à-vis China on the one hand and the United States on the other to pursue its own style or own characteristics of strategic policy

balance or strategic autonomy. So it is true the U.S. play looms large, particularly in this context. I think it is the calculation that how to manage these changes in a way that to further

follow through the agreements between China and Japan would help Japan in a better position to manage the shifts or the impact of the shift from the Trump administration. Well, the dialogue concluded with 20 key consensus points. How significant are they in providing economic opportunities

for both countries? These 20 key consensus are very important. They are largely for more or less, I think, three categories. First and foremost, they send out a message of commitment to further deepening and expanding economic trade relationship. We are talking about the second and the third largest economies in the world. We're talking about more than

300 billion US dollars of trade and 150 billion US dollars of investments. That's a huge amount of, I mean, huge states. So this is very much important. And secondly, it's very much related to the way that how the two sides have managed their differences or challenges arising from the changes

both at the bilateral level in terms of economic structure, economic relations, as we know that China's economy is undergoing structural changes, Japan too, and also the changes outside. So how to manage

These new issues, new challenges, certainly, should be put on the agenda. We noticed that out of these 20 key consensus, there are some new initiative ideas, for example, to further strengthen the dialogue between government on the one hand and the enterprises.

the business community on that. This is very important. There are also other new areas, for example, the third-party market. That's been, I think, been going on for quite a few years, but run into some difficulties. But now I think the fact that the two sides agreed to relocate again and follow through

are also very much important. Last but not least, I think the third category is talking about the multilateral cooperation. This is again in the context where unilateralism, trade protectism, getting in the way of the thinking that open regionalism and where, which I think both China and Japan has been advocating and benefited.

Yeah, but one of the more contentious topics was the discharge of Fukushima nuclear contaminated water. How do you assess the consensus reached on this issue and what challenges remain? Yeah, that's again, that's a very good point. I think China's positions, as we have noticed, remain unchanged.

That is, China opposed the unilateral release of these contaminated waters. But in the meantime, I think since September, back in September last year, 2024, when the two sides reached an agreement on how to manage this issue, I think

there are agreement or consensus how to manage that. That is the international, long-term international monitoring mechanism. And also I think China's own sort of sampling, I mean monitoring based on its own sampling will I think determine the decision that when China would

lift the restriction on the imports of Japanese seafood or contaminated

or perceived contaminants because of the release. But I would like to point out that China is not the only country that has been putting restrictions on that. This is a real, I think, serious, substantial concern by the regional countries, neighboring countries in particular, and the world at large. So Japan has to do a good job. And Japan should not make an issue by

pushing this issue on the agenda. The only thing is to do the work, homework, and make sure that the seafood imports, I mean, the standard, for me the standard, I think this issue can be resolved. But all in all, talks based on scientific monitoring and the result.

Well, in his meeting with Japanese Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwai, Wang Yi stressed that correctly understanding and treating history is an important prerequisite for Japan's post-war return to the international community.

What do you make of this? And do you think the historical tensions can be fully separated from economic cooperation today? Japan's relationship with China and other neighboring countries included and the region as a whole has also very much disturbed or has been undermined.

They always run some difficulties related to history issues. This is not the making of China, a neighboring country, rather it is because some of the Japanese, particularly these right-wingers, always wanted to deny or whitewash

the atrocities that are being made in its invasion, aggression. And that war has been part of the reason, the root cause of the history. And this year marks the 80th anniversary of the end of that war. And so a correct understanding of the history as

It touched upon the very historical foundation of the relationship, I mean political foundation of the relationship. So I think it is fair and reasonable for neighboring countries that have suffered from that history to remind the Japanese to continuously uphold its position.

and being more sensitive to the concerns of the historical issue. And we also noticed that in the recent years, we have seen some very erroneous remarks about the history part and related to that is the Taiwan question. For example, the so-called

Taiwan contingency is also the contingency of Japan. That is totally wrong. And also there are some people are talking about the so-called legal blindness of the full political documents, particularly that are calling in the legality of that. That is again, I think it will raise the concern of countries like Taiwan

I mean, China, because the full political documents and the spirit of that has touched upon the very foundation, not only the political foundation of bilateral relations between China and Japan, but also the legality, I mean, of international law arising from the end of Cold War. We're talking about the international order. We're talking about the justice issues.

While trade issues, the investment issues are important, the continuous challenges by some Japanese right-wingers or those who have the erroneous outlook of history will create problems to the steady development of relationship. That is that you really have to keep in mind if we talk about the future, the prospect of relationship.

Thank you, Dr. Rongying, Senior Research Fellow at the China Institute of International Studies. This is World Today. We'll be back. Welcome back. You're listening to World Today. I'm Zhao Ying. Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustam Umarov says Ukrainian and U.S. delegations have resumed talks in Saudi Arabia. He said the meeting's agenda includes proposals to protect energy facilities and critical infrastructure.

The talks came almost two weeks after Ukraine okayed a U.S.-proposed 30-day ceasefire plan in exchange for Washington lifting its paws on military aid and intelligence sharing. Russia has also sent a delegation to the Gulf country for a separate meeting with the United States on Monday. The Kremlin says achieving a ceasefire with Ukraine remains a complex challenge, and negotiations are still in early stages.

For more, we are joined by Kamal Mikhail Yaliev, Associate Professor at the School of Global Studies at the University of Gothenburg. Thanks for joining us. Thanks for having me. So what outcomes can we realistically expect from these talks in Riyadh? Well, first and foremost, we can expect results.

most likely incremental confidence building measures, for example, such as temporary arrangements as a limited ceasefire, for example, on specific targets and the, let's call it, restatement of the goal to reach a ceasefire on energy infrastructure.

So the ones that would be intended to lower the tensions and open channels for further negotiations, rather something like a more comprehensive ceasefire, they're probably also going to be a lot of emphasis on humanitarian and economic relief, for example, provisions to safeguard

civilians from hardship and stabilize regional trade routes like the one on the Black Sea. And also there's going to be a sort of attempt to create a roadmap for further negotiations. Although, you know, this full scale piece that the United States are talking about is very hard to reach.

There may be some kind of phased approach here that establishes like a trial period, for example, a 30-day of total ceasefire maybe.

And that can be served as a step forward in the broader political discussions around the conflict. I think that the sweeping breakthroughs are really, really unlikely, given that there is a deep divisions and ongoing hostilities. The react talks, they are more to deliver modest confidence building measures rather than, you know, take the whole situation in and solve it.

Yeah, well, actually, both Russia and Ukraine agreed last week to pause attacks on energy infrastructure. Yet we see that strikes continue. So what technical obstacles do you see in enforcing this even limited ceasefire? And how might the Riyadh talks tackle these challenges?

Well, if you talk about the overall enforcement, it's almost impossible to enforce anything on the ground if the parties do not want to do it themselves, then their political will is lacking. In terms of technical enforcement, that also means it's a huge geographical scale.

And just monitoring is very, very difficult. Energy assets such as power plants, oil and gas facilities, critical pipelines, they all take a lot of territory and it's very hard. And they spread over a lot of territory. So it's very hard to monitor them. But it's also...

Just technological limitations, even just monitoring through satellite imagery and drone technology is still very difficult given that the area of the front line is near 2,000 kilometers. Yeah, so all these are, you know, technical issues that are rising up. So even holding one side to a violation is very difficult in such difficult range and terrain.

Ukraine's defense minister actually called the Sunday talks productive and he said they focused on issues like energy. How do you read that? And what do you think are the top priorities for Ukraine coming into these discussions? It's true energy security is a core priority for Ukraine. It's primarily concerned with protecting its energy infrastructure, which is critical both to civilian life and its military logistics. And it wants to protect it from Russian attacks as much as possible.

But due to the battlefield situation right now, it's failing in most of the goals there. And that's why the talks are expected to circle around that from Ukrainian position. They want a stabilization and leverage to be achieved in the talk. So they'll try to be focusing on energy issues.

to secure guarantees for its own power supply and fuel sources to remain intact and then focus on the underlying issues. The priorities would be protection, rapid protection of critical energy facilities,

securing international guarantees for technical assistance, for example, to monitor and safeguard these assets. And again, this is a challenge of technical monitoring that we discussed previously. And then also they will try to utilize energy security as a bargaining chip in any future ceasefire or peace negotiations. So it's going to be taking a central place there as well. What about the Russian side? We know the talks between Russia and the U.S. have also started on Monday. What do you think will be the key focuses there?

I would say that there's going to be questions of how much the United States is going to be able to steer the sides in these negotiations, how much it has a diplomatic influence and is able to deploy sanctions for noncompliance. The U.S. can use its role for the international system, imposing and raising sanctions and mobilizing Western allies to pressure Russia and reassure Ukraine if it wants to.

It can also try to focus on military and economic ties and pressure Ukraine in that sense with supplies of arms and thinking about its global defense exports and can apply pressure of again limiting this to Ukraine. It's also going to be playing on Russian strategic calculations.

Russia may view U.S. pressure as an intrusion into the sphere of influence and limiting it would, you know, determine how much it's willing to consider in negotiations. And the U.S. is going to be playing on this side of the Russian foreign policy towards U.S. There is, you know, there is also a question of multipolar pressure. Will U.S. be able to utilize a narrative that would allow it to

ask other major players or even Global South to back its negotiations with Russia, mediating negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, because Global South previously rejected to do so. Yeah, well, Saudi Arabia is actually holding these talks. Actually, it has largely positioned itself as neutral in the war. What do you make of Saudi Arabia's role in shaping these discussions?

Saudi Arabia's role as a more or less neutral negotiator is quite well established.

It didn't outright reject Russia as an aggressor, it didn't involve itself as partisan in the conflict. At the same time, Riyadh is United States' close strategic ally and have been proven consistently that their interests in energy are intertwined on the global scale. So it's also for the security reasons.

and the distance and the territorial location considered as a safe haven for this type of talks that are very high level but also need a lot of security and remoteness in terms of the sensitivity of the talks to limit the spying activities and leaks that can damage the process as a whole, for example.

So there's a lot of this kind of small factors that make Saudi Arabia a really good negotiating place for Russia and U.S. and Ukraine. Well, thank you, Kamal Makhlou Aliyev, associate professor at the School of Global Studies at University of Gothenburg. This is World Today. Stay with us.

You're listening to World Today. I'm Zhao Ying. China's ambassador to the U.S. has described weaponizing tariffs as a boomerang that would only backfire. Xie Feng made a remark on Saturday in a video addressed to the second Jimmy Carter Forum on U.S.-China relations. The ambassador said China-U.S. cooperation is never a zero-sum game, adding that shutting the Chinese market and businesses out would be shutting out opportunities.

Ties between China and the U.S. have come under new strain after U.S. President Donald Trump slapped additional tariffs on Chinese goods. Early next month, Trump is expected to unleash a round of tariffs on all countries that tax U.S. imports, potentially including China.

Joining us now in the studio is my colleague, Ding Hong. Thanks for being here. Hello, Zhao Yan. Well, in this address, the Chinese ambassador shared a few numbers like U.S. exports to China and Chinese investment in the U.S. each support about 1 million American jobs.

And among American businesses operating in China, about 41% see China as their second largest source of global revenue and about 46% reported being profitable or very profitable in the past year. What is your take on these numbers of facts? Well, they are some of the best indicators that trade and economic ties between China and the United States are mutually beneficial.

A key argument of Donald Trump's tariffs is that he is trying to protect American jobs, right? So if that's really the case, then there is no reason why he should not care about the millions of American jobs supported by U.S. exports to China or Chinese investment in America.

In the meantime, many American businesses want to maintain or even expand their lucrative operations here in China. They find they are spotting new opportunities in China's perceived determination to open itself wider to foreign investment. Their concern and worry, on the other hand, is that they are getting caught in this crossfire of an intensifying US-China trade war. So,

If Donald Trump is really pro-business, as he loves to claim, then he also needs to seriously listen to the voices, the genuine voices from the wider American business community. So my feeling is that the Trump administration doesn't really care so much about the U.S. economy. I mean,

This administration has rolled out its global tariffs, knowing that these attempts will be bad for the U.S. economy as well as for the U.S. consumers. It is not backing down on its plan, despite the tumbles in the U.S. equity markets that we have seen recently. So,

It looks to me that the Trump administration cares more about really the goal of fulfilling its political rhetorics for the sake of fulfilling them rather than genuinely caring for the U.S. economy.

When Chinese Premier Li Chao met US Republican Senator Steve Daines in Beijing on Sunday, he called on China and the US to choose dialogue over confrontation. And Xie Feng delivered the same message in his address, saying that China is willing to resolve each other's concerns through dialogue and consultation based on equality and mutual respect. But how much room is there now for Beijing and Washington to have dialogue over trade?

Well, I wish I could say that the room is big, but let's be cautiously optimistic. On the part of China, I think the attitude has been clear and consistent. China's position has always been that China is willing to negotiate, that China is willing to go to the negotiating table, China is willing to have dialogue. Realistically speaking,

I don't think dialogue can resolve the structural issues in terms of the U.S.-China trade in the short term, but we still need it, honestly speaking, because this is a process whereby the two sides get to know each other's concerns better. As a reminder, Robert Lighthizer, the U.S. trade representative during the first Trump term, he...

he actually came to understand the position of the Chinese government better after many rounds of trade talks with his Chinese counterparts between 2018 and 2019 at the time. So the US and China need to talk. The uncertainty, I think, are really lying with the Trump administration, which can be seen as capricious. For example, last week we heard

Trump talking about flexibility being an important vocabulary for his global tariff strategy. He also says there will be room for talk on trade issues with China in particular. But let's also keep this in mind. In the case of Donald Trump, flexibility can also mean unpredictability. Okay, today he says there can be room for talks with China, but who knows what he is going to say the next day or the day after the next.

That's the way Trump is. How would you describe the way in which China has responded to Trump's tariffs and tariff threats this time? Well, China has retaliated. China has taken necessary measures to defend its own legitimate rights or interests in terms of global trade. But in the meantime,

This time, I have also perceived a sense of calm and reserve on the part of China compared to 2018 and 2019. There is absolutely no panic at all in China this time. I think this is primarily based on hard economic power of China because

If you check on the recent headline news, multiple international organizations and investment banks have recently upgraded their forecasts for China's 2025 economic growth despite a tariff from the United States. Morgan Stanley is the latest organization that has done so. And judging from the messages from the annual two sessions in China,

I think the Chinese government in general is really committed to tackling and resolving its own domestic economic challenges, boosting consumption domestically, while at the same time further opening up to businesses from all countries to stabilize the confidence of foreign investment. This is really the best response that China can have to Trump's tariff. Of course,

I mean, China takes the tariff threat from the United States seriously, there's no question about that, but that does not mean that the tariff issue should be the absolute dominating factor for the Chinese economy.

Well, one thing relevant is that the Trump administration is considering levying massive fees on China-made ships that made visits to the U.S. ports with an aim to revive U.S. shipbuilding. I mean, how does this idea sound to you? Well, in short, this idea does not work.

We have already seen some media reports suggesting that the relevant development in this regard is causing U.S. coal inventories to swell and stoking uncertainty in the agricultural market, for example, because U.S. exporters are finding themselves somewhat struggling to find vessels and ships to deliver their goods abroad.

If the proposed fees became real, the number I have read about is that it's estimated that the bulk agricultural exporters in America, for example, would have faced additional $370 million to $930 million in terms of their annual transportation costs. That would be a big blow to U.S. farmers, to be sure. And by the way,

You can't really revive US sharebuilding industry simply via these proposed fees. It's not that simple really. Because doing so would really require the right type of know-how, personnel, talents, infrastructure, industrial capacity, which would take many many years to rebuild.

Can Donald Trump wait that long? And can the U.S. as a whole institutionalize the necessary policy consistency? These things are questionable. Okay. Thank you, Ding Hong, for joining us. This is World Today. We'll be back.

You're listening to World Today. I'm Zhao Ying. South Korea's constitutional court has rejected the impeachment motion against Prime Minister Han Dexu. Han took over as acting president after the parliament voted to impeach Yun Suyong in December. However, lawmakers then impeached Han as well after he refused to fill three vacancies on the constitutional court.

Monday's verdict returns Han to office with immediate effect, replacing Finance Minister Choi San-mok as acting president. For more on this, we're joined by Dr. Cheng Jiaohe, professor of the School of International Studies at Renmin University of China. Professor Cheng, thanks for joining us.

Thank you for having me. So this marks the latest turn in South Korea's political turmoil. Can you first walk us through the court's reasoning and what does this ruling reveal about its approach to managing this chaotic period?

Yes, on December 27 last year, Han Dong-joo was impeached by South Korea's Assembly on the number of charges, including proactive participation of Yongxi Yue's impositions of March Law on December 3 last year, and his refusal to appoint additional constitutional court justice.

and he is illegally forming adjoined governance systems with ruling party leader Han Dong-hyu, and he refuses to promulgate two special council bills targeting Yun and his wife, Kim Kyo-il.

And in a five to one vote, the constitutional courts dismissed the motion tabled by the Democratic Party Controlled Assembly and Han was immediately reinstated as acting president.

From my observations, in contrast to the unanimous dismissal of previous aid impeachment motion proposed by the assembly, these votes for acting President Han was split.

Five justice decided dismiss the impeachment motion and one justice agree to impeach Han and two justice rejected motion entirely.

And the only one justice voted for the impeachment motion and this justice name is Chuang-Ti Sun and she was recently nominated by the Democratic Party and appointed by the acting president of Cui.

And he believed the Hans committed serious violations of relevant laws in his refusal to promptly seek candidate recommendation for permanent special counsel to investigate insurrection charges against Yun. So the four of the five justice voted to dismiss Hans' impeachment.

acknowledge the violates of constitutions and laws in his decision to defer the appointment of additional justice to the court, but noted it did not justify his removal from office. So I'm not a legal expert, but from international relations perspectives, I got some impressions

from the decisions about the Constitutional Court, their possible decisions about Yun's impeachment case. First, the justice is relatively easy to forge a consensus on less important impeachment cases, but a struggle to forge a consensus on more important impeachment cases

And on Han's cases, it's much more important than the impeachment cases against some of the senior leaders of the US administrations. And I believe that justice will become more split

on Yun San Yu's impeachment cases. That's the first impression. The second impression is that the Constitution Court seemingly tried hard to strike a balance on its ruling on impeachment cases. So far, they're almost unanimously dismissed. Nine impeachment cases in secession against the Democratic Party's will. And the court may vote

for Yun Xiuyue's impeachment in the near future. That's the second impression. Okay, so now that Han is back in office, he has positioned himself as a stabilizing force amid political chaos. But given the deep divisions in this country, as you just now mentioned, how realistic is his call for unity?

I think it's the hands made very, very symbolic gestures to call for some national unities. But from my personal perspective, his cause is not realistic because we know our society has been becoming increasingly

bipolarized. Democratic parties and the People's Powers Party have been locking in endless fights, disputes over a variety of issues. They have different domestic agendas and different foreign policy orientations. And the endless disputes and fights were calculated

How to be cultivated by democratic parties attempts to impeach more than 30 seniors officials of the administration and sudden impositions of martial law on December 3rd last year by President Moon. So I think the impeachment campaign is a legal process in the Constitutional Court

further undermines the South Koreans' national unity. And we witnessed in the past days, the large demonstrations sponsored by the competing political parties took place almost every weekend. And the South Koreans' state affairs have been partially paralyzed. And Han's return to power cannot end such a kind of

party political fight, dispute, competitions.

And Han himself is a limp dog. They cannot change anything in a very significant ways. So I believe the power game will continue on in South Korea. Well, one last question very briefly, because South Korea has seen multiple political leaders impeached or removed in recent history. Is this pattern a sign of a strong democracy holding leaders accountable, or does it reflect some deep-seated instability in a country's institutions?

I think it's on the one hand, the fight between the Democratic Party and the People's Power Party over all kinds of impeachment cases demonstrate that the mechanism of check and balance works. On the other hand, such kind of endless fights between the two major dominant competing parties demonstrate

Some big problem with South Korean political system, the ones that has something to do with is political culture. So it's when the cultures is quite immature. Even though this country's democratic system has been in place for nearly 30, 40 years,

And another one is... Well, unfortunately, we are running out of time. Thank you, Dr. Chen Xiaohe, professor of the School of International Studies at Renmin University of China. Thanks for being with us. 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. I'm Zhao Ying. Thank you so much for listening. See you next time. ♪

♪