중국의 글로벌 야망과 인권 논란

### 고조되는 긴장감: 중국의 글로벌 야망과 인권 논란
* 🌍 우크라이나와 가자 지구의 분쟁이 세계 강대국과 동맹을 시험하고, **중국이 현 세계 질서에 대한 도전자로 부상**하는 등 세계는 분열과 불확실성이 증가하고 있습니다.
* 🇨🇳 현재 3번째 임기를 맞이한 시진핑 주석은 영토 분쟁이 지역 및 전 세계에 영향을 미치는 더 큰 분쟁으로 확대될 것을 우려하는 가운데 **중국을 위한 야심찬 계획**을 세우고 있습니다.
* ⚔ 중국의 군사비 지출이 2024년에 **7% 증가하여 29년 연속 증가세**를 기록하는 등 급증하면서 일본, 인도, 필리핀 등 주변국의 우려가 커지고 있습니다.
* 🛥 중국이 "중국은 하나뿐이며 대만은 그 일부"라고 주장하면서 **매일 훈련과 사이버 공격을 포함한 대만 주변의 군사 활동이 강화**되는 것은 침략의 위협이 다가오고 있음을 시사합니다.
* 🕊 평화 통일을 추구한다는 주장에도 불구하고 **대만에 대한 중국의 공격적인 태도와 위협**은 특히 신장과 같은 지역에서 인권과 시민의 자유에 대한 중국의 약속에 의문을 제기합니다.
* 🔒 신장의 위구르족 무슬림에 대한 인권 침해로 인해 **50만 명 이상이 구금**된 것으로 추산되는 등 국제적인 조사가 진행되면서 중국의 소수 민족 처우에 대한 논쟁이 벌어지고 있습니다.
* 👥 전문가들과의 토론에서 **중국의 군사력 확장, 인권 기록, 지역 안정에 미치는 영향에 대한 상반된 견해**가 나오면서 상황의 복잡성이 강조되었습니다.
* 📉 긴장이 고조됨에 따라 **중국의 독재적 비전이 어디까지 확장될 것인지**와 서방과의 오랜 긴장이 **한계점에 도달할 것인가 하는 문제**가 남아 있습니다.

### 중국의 권력과 거버넌스의 본질: 복잡한 논쟁
* 🇨🇳 이 토론은 **중국의 법률 시스템과 중국에는 독재가 존재하지 않는다는 주장**, **"독재는 단순히 작동하지 않는다"는 주장**, 그리고 **민주주의는 현대화와 동일하다**는 주장을 중심으로 이루어집니다.
* 🤝 연사는 리더십에서 개인주의보다 팀워크의 중요성을 강조하며, **시진핑이 권력을 중앙집권화하고 임기 제한을 없애 법적으로 그를 권좌에서 끌어내리는 것이 불가능**해졌다고 지적합니다.
* 🗳 전국인민대표대회는 시진핑에 대해 **2,952대 0으로 찬성표**를 던진 것으로 알려졌는데, **1억 명의 공산당원이 있는 체제**에서 이러한 만장일치 지지의 진정성에 대한 의문이 제기되고 있습니다.
* 🔍 대화는 공산당 내 이견이 없는 것으로 전환되어 **"한 사람이 14억 인구에게 지시할 수 없다"는 점**을 강조하며 이 체제가 진정한 지지보다는 단결이라는 외관에 의존하고 있음을 시사합니다.
* ⚖ 최근 외무부 장관과 국방부 장관을 비롯한 고위 관리들의 실종은 **부패에 대한 무자비한 접근**의 신호로 받아들여지고 있지만, 비평가들은 이러한 조치의 **투명성과 공정성**에 의문을 제기하고 있습니다.
* 📜 이 이야기는 또한 **시진핑의 이름이 헌법에 포함되는 것**을 언급하며, 아이들이 학교에서 **'시진핑 사상'에 대해 배우면서 독재 정권의 상징**으로 여겨지는 인격 숭배를 암시합니다.
* 🌍 이 논쟁은 **티베트나 신장 등 반대 의견을 표명하면 가혹한 처벌을 받는 지역에 대한 처우**를 포함하여 국제적인 관점으로까지 확대되어 시진핑 통치하의 인권과 통치에 대한 의문을 불러일으킵니다.
* 🗣 궁극적으로 이 토론은 **중국의 언론의 자유의 한계와 거버넌스의 본질에 대한 비판적 질문**을 제기하며 서구의 민주주의 관행과 대조하고 통제된 환경에서의 열린 대화의 어려움을 강조합니다.

중국의 부상은 공격적인 군사력 확장과 심각한 인권 침해로 특징지어지며 중국의 야망에 대한 전 세계의 우려가 커지고 있습니다.

from Ukraine to Gaza, the world seems more divided and uncertain than it's been for years. Global powers and Western alliances have been put to the test, and amid the turmoil, China is rising to challenge the world order. Chinese president Xi Jinping, now in his third term in office, has high ambitions. [Music] Territorial disputes have sparked fears of a larger conflict that could have regional and global implications. You have approached the waters near Chinese J, including in the contested waters of the South China Sea. Your curse leaves and keeps F over and in Taiwan, where the threat of a Chinese military invasion looms larger. Meanwhile, at home, attacks on basic freedoms and human rights have become more severe, like in Xinjiang, where China continues to commit serious human rights abuses, some say a genocide against the Uyghur Muslims. So how far will China's autocratic vision reach, and will long-simmering tension with the West hit a boiling point? I'm M Hassen, and I've come here to London's legendary Conway Hall to go head-to-head with Victor Gal. He's vice

president of the Center for China and Globalization in Beijing, former interpreter for the late Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping, and a proud defender of the People's Republic. I'll ask him about China's global ambitions and its aggressive crackdown on human rights and civil liberties. Tonight, I'll also be joined by three experts: Steven Chan, a professor at the University of London's School of Oriental and African Studies; Rahan Assad, a human rights lawyer of Weer Heritage; and Martin Jacques, author of the bestseller When China Rules the World and a political commentator on [Music] [Applause] China. Victor Gao, thank you so much for joining me on Head to Head this evening here in London. Thank you for having me. China has upped its military spending, it's expanding its nuclear arsenal, it now has the biggest navy in the world. Chinese President Xi Jinping has said that the country's military should be capable of fighting and winning wars and told the military to focus all your energy on fighting, improve your

capability to win. Victor, who do you want to fight, and who do you want to win against? First of all, the Chinese military spending is the second largest in the world, but it is only a fraction of that of the United States. China has a very difficult geopolitical situation. China has 14 land and neighboring countries altogether and six Maritime Nations. For China, therefore, China's defense is defensive in nature, not for fighting anyone except those who want to invade China or to launch a war against China. China's military spending is for peace rather than war, and war will be forced upon China, and China needs to fight back. You say it's for peace, but your neighbors don't agree. Your neighbors are pretty worried about you. You go through the list. Japan has sounded the alarm, saying your military buildup is a very serious concern to them. India is worried about China on its border, and the Philippines president has warned that China is becoming a more pronounced and worrisome threat. He says those are the elected

governments of countries representing over 1.6 billion people in Asia. This is not the United States. This is not the West. This is Asian neighbors saying, We're worried about China. May you mention the three of the neighboring countries of China. Let's talk about one of them, one each of them very quickly. Japan unconditionally surrendered not only to the United States but also to China in 1945. And if you read very carefully the unconditional surrender document that Japan signed, then you will know how Japan needed to conduct its foreign affairs as well as its military troops with China and with all those countries that Japan unconditionally surrendered. For India is a great nation, and there is a territorial dispute between China and India. But that dispute was not created by China, neither was it created by India. It was created or left behind by the British Indian government. That's a great history lesson, but right now, China in 24, the defense spending is going up by 7%, the most for

5 years, you've had 29 consecutive years of military expenditure growth, the most of any country in the world. Since 2022, China has increased military drills around Taiwan. It's escalated since the new Taiwanese president was inaugurated in May. China is not a fan of him. Since then, there's been almost daily activity involving China's warships, drones, and cyber attacks against Taiwan. China is getting ready to invade Taiwan, isn't it? There is only one China. Taiwan is part of China, and the government of the People's Republic of China is the sole legitimate government for the totality of China. The exact status between the two sides of the Taiwan state is The Unfinished Civil War back in 1949. So ever since the beginning of the 1980s, China does not want to use a war to solve this unification problem. You don't want to use a war, but you're surrounding it with ships, drones, cyber attacks, and making lots of threats each time when the separatists in Taiwan want to push the edge of the envelope. They

will come across more and more demonstrations of the commitment of the Chinese Nation to eventually achieve peaceful reunification or otherwise. That's the lious test your defense minister said anyone who dares to pursue independence for Taiwan will be crushed into pieces and face destruction. Sounds like a truly peaceful guy. That's a real statement because if the separatists really want to put P the edge of the envelope with the aid of some big country, for example, which wants to use Taiwan as a proxy in its own geopolitical rivalry against China, then wait until you see what will happen. Reunification will be achieved, and China is the only permanent member of the United Nations Security Council which has not yet achieved a complete reunification. What I'm always amused with this phrase reunification because if it's one China, then clearly it's not One China. Clearly, you're accepting by definition if you need to reunify it. They are doing their own thing. And why this obsession with Taiwan.

you are a country of 3.7 million square miles, a population 60 times that of Taiwan, an economy 20 times the size of Taiwan. Why are you obsessed with Taiwan? Why not just leave them be? In terms of defending China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, any inch of land is not one inch too much, any one single person is not one person too many. So we need to achieve reunification, as even though they don't want to be part of your country, 12% of the people of Taiwan say they want to reunify with China. 12%? You can't get more unpopular than that. In that, it's not up to the people in Taiwan to decide about the one China policy. You're very blunt in your disregard for people's views, freedoms, dignity. You say that you don't care about what they think. You also said in an interview with the French newspaper Le Monde, Once we get the island back, we'll have to ask everyone's origins, those who have Japanese ancestry, who you basically

say cons constitute 10% of the population will have to pledge loyalty to reunification and writing otherwise will'll have to help them leave. You're basically calling for the ethnic cleansing of 2.3 million people in Taiwan. No, you remember back in 1945 when Japan unconditionally surrendered. A lot of people in Taiwan who originally came from Japan. They were the rulers of Taiwan at the time. They stay behind because of the magnanimity of the Chinese Nation. Now several decades later they account for about 10% of the local population in Taiwan. Now if you really do your homework you will realize that those Die Hard Taiwanese separatists include many of these Japanese. But okay but you would get rid of them. You would get rid of 2.3 million people. No after the reunification everyone in Taiwan need to make a pledge whether they acknowledge there is only one China and Taiwan is part of China. And if they don't make that pledge they us those who pledge wow for the one.

China policy. They are local. You didn't, by the way, you didn't say everyone. You said of Japanese descent. That is literally ethnical. You're picking people by their ethnic heritage, making them do a loyalty test. Otherwise, they have to get out of the country. There's not a loyalty test here, for example, in Britain. If you are a British citizen, you need to support the monarchy. You cannot say, I know I'm standing in Britain, don't support the monarchy. I don't like King Charles. No, you cannot say no. I just said it. I'm literally just saying it. You cannot take any action to oppose the monarchy system. But I don't have to sign a pledge saying I support King Charles. Well, each country is different. We are talking about China. China is very... and China has one policy, which is part of the Constitution, involves people in Taiwan who don't want to be part of your country. Let's bring in our panel who are waiting to come in and join. Let's see what they think. I'm joined by Steven Chan, professor at

the University of London School of Oriental and African Studies. Um, if you're in Taiwan today, how worried are you about a looming invasion? I'm not in Taiwan today; I'm going to be visiting next year. I've been there five times in all of the great cities of Taiwan, and what I've noticed most conspicuously is that nobody I've talked to wants to rejoin or reunify with China because of their sense of freedom and their sense of self-determination. So, I think that if you're going to say our sovereignty matters more than your desire for your own self-determination and freedom, then you're doing something that will not make you popular in Taiwan, and you won't win the argument for Chinese sovereignty over the island. Martin, uh, Martin Jakes is here with us, author of the bestselling book When China Rules the World. Martin, you've said in the past that China cannot, should not, be seen through a solely Western lens. So, I, and I agree with you, and there's issues there, but I began the show by asking Victor

about Japan and India and the Philippines separate Taiwan just the issues in the region. Do you think China is responsible for some of those issues, all of those issues, none of those issues? Well, China is obviously involved in inevitably in all of those issues. Um, I think that, uh, that actually, if you look at the rise of China over the last, you know, 30, 40 years, spectacular, biggest change we've ever seen in history, really. And, uh, inevitably, that is changing everything in the region, in the world. Uh, that doesn't, but the remarkable thing I'd say, Med, about China's R is how you quoted the military figures and so on, but China has not fought any wars since 1979. If you compare that with America, Europe, Japan at the same stage of development, they were extremely aggressive. Um, let's talk human rights, Victor. You've called Wagers in China's Xinjiang Province your brothers and sisters. How do you feel about the fact that at least half a million, some say more, of your brothers and sisters are being detained in camps by the

Chinese government that's 5% of the adult Uyghur population, one of the highest imprisonment detention rates in the world. The Uyghurs are a proud ethnic group, one of the 56 ethnic nationalities in China. The Uyghurs, as far as I'm concerned, are my true brothers and sisters. I know many of them. I travel to Xinjiang regularly, and I talk to many other Uyghurs. Now, if anyone is serious about accusing China of practicing mass injustice to the Uyghurs, give me the evidence. I think just did. Human Rights Watch say half a million people detained over the years, in recent years. You keep quoting Human Rights Watch, and I tell you, do you know where they got those numbers from? I don't know. Can I tell you? I don't know. I thought you were the expert. You to Xinjiang. You've spoken to Uyghurs. You never heard these numbers. I do not know. Where did they get the source? So their source is the Xinjiang High People's Procurator, which has published its

own statistics. Shinjang official body, which says it's convicted 54, 4,826 people prosecuted in the region since 2017. The United Nations office for human rights looked at satellite footage. They say 10 to 20% of the population. Amnesty estimates a million people in camps. Half a million is a conservative number. Many if you called that organization please be assured that that organization has been completely discredited for the false information they every so this. I love this game we're playing. You give me a source. I give you a source. They're discredited. They've said falsehoods. How can let me ask you a question. How many people are in detention in Shinjang? You give me a number. Listen, if you look at SH, you give me a number. If you look and I do not have the number. Why not? Yeah, hold on. You can't say it's not half a million and then say you don't have a number. I have a number. I have sources. How many people do you think a det? Let me give you my

reason no. I go to Xinjiang a lot. I travel almost your brothers and sisters. You go there a lot, but you can't tell me how many people are in detention. Listen, they are happier. They enjoy their life. They enjoy their Muslim practice and traditions. Listen, how many people are in detention, Victor? Many. Let me be philosophical. No, don't be philosophical. Be numerical. How many people are in detention? You said not to. No, to half a million. How about, okay, let's quarter of a million. Let me, let me, let me finish my point. Nope. If you answer the question, you can't filibuster, Victor, on the show. Anyone, many do think Independence. They will be dwelt with in how many of them are in court and how many detention. The very small minority. So, you don't have a number. You say they're all happy, but you won't let independent investigators. You won't letting journalists to go there. Why not there? I will be happy to escort you to Xinjiang. Really? I can make that promise. I will speak to the Chinese

government. Here's the problem. Chinese. I don't want escort. I don't want minders. I want to go freely. Will you allow that? I do not made that decision. Oh, a moment ago you were going to make all sorts of interruptions. Suddenly, I said, Let me go freely and speak to weas freely. Can I do that with no minders, no Chinese government escort? I will be happy to make your case. Oh, just now you said you'd organize it. Now we're about to make a case. You can't guarantee uh rahan Assad is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council international human rights lawyer. You are a weager uh who Victor says brothers and sisters. Your literal brother has been held in an internment camp in shinjang since 2016. I believe rahan. Tell us what happened to your brother and what is your response to Victor to what you've heard and what is the latest on your brother if you don't mind sharing with us. Yeah, my brother Akbar Assad is a prominent Tech.

entrepreneur in fact your own media Outlet called him bright star in the tech world right before his detention. He was invited on a state Galla dinner, and then he disappeared. How could you explain now M again in China? We have about 20 Muslim ethnic groups. You need to ask one question: Why the extremism existed mostly among the wial communities? Because there are extremists among the wigo community who want to separate Shin Jang away from your brother. Been convicted of any supported by CIA and other Western organizations. That's the real truth. Hold on. Talk to the hazaks. They don't support. Has your brother been convicted of a crime? Um, according to un, there's no trial has taken place. He just forcibly disappeared. Actually, it amount the en Force disappearance. But according to the Chinese government, he committed a crime of inciting ethnic discrimination while he's a systematically oppressed. And when I challenge that decision because under under the Chinese law, if you're committed with the alleged crime that you you have three years sentences, but he got 15 years. How do you in justify

that then they switch the crime. So how do you even explain this is a rule of law system? You mentioned that if people are not pro-independent, then they're fine in Xinjiang. My brother, by no means, is pro-independent. In fact, your media outlet sees daily media invited him to exchange information. Did he split the country when he visited Beijing? You okay with the treatment of her brother M in front of this very Augusto body? Let me make several very brief points. The real crime involved by some of the Wigo people are agitating for Xinjiang Independence. They violate the one China policy. Now set separate from that, you know different communities may find their own different problems which need to be sorted out in the course of law. And I hope but our brother's been detained for eight years. Well, I did not know the ch. I hope I can help you to really look at the case at the accusation against him. I hope your brother is not guilty of inciting for separatism of Xinjiang. If

that is the case, then let the law take its course. Well, your media out that called him a model citizen who is a promoter of ethnic unity in sh. Have you been able to speak to your brother or no? Not at all. Like, you know, for eight years he's forcibly disappeared. Up until like last months, for the first time, my parents saw him. What kind of justice system is that? You're making a mockery. You're not just detaining them, Victor. They're being tortured. Numerous testimonies the UN has collected. Are you okay with that? M. When you talk about torture, think about Guantanamo Bay prison. Oh my word. Rather than in Xinjiang. Xinjiang is a place of great peace and stability. Hold on, Victor. The accounts of detainees include being beaten with bats, electric bats, while strapped in a So-Cal tiger ch 158, being subjected to interrogation with water poured on their faces, prolonged solitary confinement, forced to sit motionless on stools for long periods like this. You're okay with this.

this is the proud China. Probably you are reading the case in Iraq committed by the American soldiers. I'm reading the U report in August 2022 from detainees who came out of camps in Xinjiang. You're brothers and sisters, but these brothers and sisters you don't seem to give a damn about. How do you know any torture happened in Iraq out of interest? I know how. I know for sure how. I talked to the Iraqi Ambassador in Beijing. Okay, he wept in front of me, and I'm sure Ran's parents have wept, and you don't seem to care. And I hope you will tell your brother, be a staunch supporter of one China policy, be a proud Chinese. She can't tell him 'cause she can't speak to him because you deny access. Victor, Victor, she can't speak to him. Are you going to arrange it? Are you going to arrange a visit now? I'd be happy to help you make a phone call. There's a lot of promises being made here, guys. You should

uh follow up on this office. You are all witnesses. We are witnesses indeed. Let me bring in Martin. Jake Martin, when you hear people say basically there's no torture, everyone's making it up, there's nobody in detention. Come on, that's ridiculous, is it not, Martin? Well, I mean, I don't know all the details of the situation in Xinjiang, but clearly there's been a big problem for a long time in Xinjiang in terms of the relationship between the Uyghur and the Han. And that came to a head in 2009 when there was a demonstration and 200 people were killed by the Uyghur. Then the Chinese inflicted the same kind of damage on the... So this is not... This is a deep problem in my view, and it's not easily passed up. There's no other problem in China of this kind. Yeah, but people consider that's a pretty big problem. It's a very big problem for them, yeah. And I do... The other thing I'd say is that um um

The point that's being made about separatism is true. I think that what the 30 million Muslims in China, the Ha, is the biggest single minority they have. They are completely integrated, but the problem, the problem is Xinjiang, is clearly the issue of separatism. Stephen, let me ask you this question. Victor's making a lot of promises tonight about me going to Xinjiang and rean going to Shin. Everyone's going to be fine. How safe, how okay are you with visiting China? How free do you think you are when you go to China? When I go to China, and I haven't been for some time, I'm watched almost 24/7. There's always someone I can spot is trailing me. So, I know when my hotel room is upgraded suddenly to a spacious suite, I'm now in a place which is bugged. So, someone who's a mild critic and a scholarly critic like me doesn't feel safe in China. By contrast, I feel safer in Taiwan. Victor, when you hear Steven

say he doesn't feel that safe going to China. Prefers going to Taiwan when we talk about freedom of speech. For example, in China, I live in the United States of America where I can say that Donald Trump is a, I don't know, hypothetically, an orange-haired narcissist. I also live here in the UK. I'm British. Here you have Rishi Sunak, the former prime minister, was called a pint-sized loser by a Labour politician. No one in China has that kind of fright freedom to talk about their government, to talk about President Xi Jinping in that way. You can't say anything like, you wouldn't dare say anything like that because you know what will happen to you when you go home. You know what will happen to your family. That's what China is. If you do anything, write anything, email or chat to your friends about taking any action against, let's say, prime minister of Britain, president of the United States, you'll be dealt with swiftly. Victor, you're a master of not what I said. I

said was called a pint-sized loser. Would you call Xi Jinping a pint-sized loser? Many each country has different sensitivities in UK. So you're admitting you can't criticize the Chinese government. No, no, no. You can criticize the government if you are positive inity. You can criticize the government if you're positive. Is that the new philosophy? No. If you can come up with your... You got to come up with nice insults. No, what then? Constructive advice. Constructive advice, for example, in dealing with an aging population. What should be the government do? What should this governor should do? But you can't say the president's lied. He's a liar. Nothing. You will be DeWalt with very swiftly in China. You cannot say that. That is the most honest thing you've said tonight. Victor gal, we're going to take a break. That's part one of head-to-head with our guest, Victor gal. In part two, we'll be talking about President Xi Jinping. We'll be talking about the issue of dictatorship and

we'll hear from our very patient audience here in London's Conway Hall. [Music] [Applause] Welcome back to head-to-head on Al Jazeera English. My guest this week is Victor Gao, former interpreter to the late Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping, vice president of the Center for China and Globalization in Beijing, and an ardent promoter of the People's Republic. We're also joined by an expert panel here in London's Conway Hall and a live audience who we're going to hear from shortly. Victor, before we get to the audience, in 2019 on this very show, I asked the question, Is Xi Jinping gearing up to be president for life, dictator-in-chief? I mean, he's the most powerful leader of China since Mao. He's abolished presidential term limits. He's now in his third five-year term as president. So I'll ask again tonight, Is he now president for life, a true dictator? For the record, first of all, Chinese president Xi Jinping will never be president for life. There will be a

time limit when it will be handled according to the Chinese legal system and Constitution. Secondly, there is no dictator in China. Why? Because dictatorship simply doesn't work. Democracy means modernization. And how can you explain the profound transformation of China over the past 45 years in China if you have dictatorship or authoritarian rule? No. Every leader in China will be put into a team, and teamwork will be much more important than individualism. Victor, maybe previous presidents did, maybe Jiang Zemin or Hu Jintao. Everyone knows Xi Jinping has centralized power, consolidated power, got rid of term limits. You say there's a way to get rid of him, but there isn't actually a legal way to get rid of him. He's in power for life, and he likes being a dictator. Why are we pretending? Med, allow me to remind you the Communist Party of China, which is the ruling party of China, has a membership of up to 100 million people. It's well-structured. Every province, every state-owned enterprise, etc., will have a party cell.

there's no division or debate within the Chinese Communist Party. Listen to me, no single person in China can dictate to a population of 1.4 billion people and 100 million membership of the Communist Party of China. Okay, let's test that. That's a mission impossible. Let's test that proposition. The president won a vote last year, won a vote. I'll put that in air quotes. Do you know the tally of last year's presidential vote in favor of Xi Jinping by the National People's Congress, part of that structure you just advertised to us? What was the vote? Can you tell our audience here? I think it's up to about 100%. That doesn't... 2,952 to zero. Yes, that's exactly what I said. Could you not find a few people just to make it look a little even? One or two? Many? It's not surprising. It's not surprising. 2,952 to zero. One R. The Chinese system. Everyone supports the Chinese president. That's... You just told us 10 seconds ago there's this huge system, a big party, one guy, and

then you're like, Oh no, but everyone supports him. Zero votes against him. One person out of 3,000 couldn't say she joining not my guy. What if he is the guy for all the Communist Party of China? You never know. Well, if that's the case, then your entire first answer is redundant because it doesn't matter if there's 100 million people. They all have to follow the leader. No, he does command huge respect among the Chinese people. As well as you say respect, I say fear. Do you know how many names were on the ballot papers that were given in 2013? How many names were on the ballot paper when they went to choose the president? Can you tell our audience? I think there is only one candidate. Yeah, there were no other names. That's a real secure leader, a guy who knows he has the confidence of his people. You get to vote, but only for me, and none of you can actually vote against me. Would you not want to end up in a situation with six

prime ministers in 8 years, yeah. So, you prefer a dictatorship? No, we prefer a system that works for the benefit of the Chinese people. I have not said a word about what works or not. You got great economic growth. Look at the dictatorship. There is no dictatorship. You just admitted that there's no name on the ballot paper, no votes against him, and they all just follow him. That's the dictatorship. When you have a say by name multiple times after, but it's a dictator. How many candidates are there on the ballot paper? How many? What? King? Queen? When the king succeeds the queen, how many candidates are there on the ballot paper? How many? How many does that make Britain not a democracy? Well, you're asking the wrong guy. I'm a republican, so I think we should be a full democracy and get rid of the monarchy. And I can say that here. You can't say that in China. You cannot take any action against that. Yes, I can actually. I can go out on the street. I can hold up a placard and

say let's get rid of King Charles. I can create a whole protest outside Buckingham Palace. You can't do that in China. You can't even put one other person's name on a ballot paper. That's how insecure Your Leader is. I'm a lawyer. In my capacity as a lawyer, I can give you a long list of things that you cannot do regarding the monarchy here in. I'm not debating that. I'm saying that we have an elected government. We get to choose. We get to swap six Prime Ministers, God help us, but we get to pick. Everyone in this room who's a citizen gets to pick. Listen, you end up with your mini budget, which bankrupts the whole country. That's an honest answer, Victor. But Victor, I admire that because that's an honest answer. Your answer is it's a dictatorship that works. At least say that. No, no, no, you can't. You keep dodging. One minute you say it's not a doip, then I show you it is. You say, but it's working. We've got growth. My pick one myy.

If that is your point, I will seriously urge you to do more homework about how the Chinese system works. Okay, let's talk about the Chinese system because I did a little bit of homework, a little bit of homework. Did you know that Xi Jinping put his name in the Constitution? That's weird. Well, the leader of the country put his own name in the Constitution while he's president. No, has done that since Ma. None of the other Chinese presidents, not Hu Jintao, not your old boss Deng Xiaoping, none of them did it, did they, or am I wrong? It's wrong. Did the Chinese Constitution has been most frequently amended compared with any other country? Am I wrong about what I just said? With my name was put into the Constitution. I.D.'s name was put into the while he was president, and J's name was put into the not while they were sitting presidents, and you know that. Tell our crowd here not while they were president. They didn't do it themselves. According to recollection, each of were put into the

cons while they were while the leaders were still alive. Okay, so I'm right, not while they were president. I love the little slip. Even Donald Trump, one of the great narcissists of our time, has not proposed yet putting his name into the US Constitution. If you are the president of China, you're elected without any opponents, no names on the ballot paper, zero votes against you. You put your name in the Constitution. Six-year-olds are taught about Xi Jinping thought in primary school. That is not just the dictatorship; that is a cult of personality. I don't think China believes in personal. So why are six-year-olds learning about Xi Jinping thought? I'm pretty sure no six-year-olds learned about Liz Truss's mini-budget. Victor, the Chinese system is such that once you orient the country in one direction, everyone follows the suit. Do they follow, or are they ordered to follow? They don't follow out of choice. No, it's like a vehicle with four wheels. Here, you have four wheels aligned in different directions. In directions in China, the

four wheels of a car all lined up in one direction. They don't go forward. They don't move. Let me give you an example. Former Chinese Foreign Minister Qin Gang was removed from his post and has not been seen in public since June 2023. A few months later, China's Defense Minister General Li Shangfu disappeared from public view for months and has now been expelled from the party, accused of corruption. That's at least two ministers that disappeared just in the last year. With apologies to Oscar Wilde, to lose one minister might be unfortunate; to lose two is careless, is it not? Do you know the point I want to make? This means China is really merciless in dealing with corruption of all kinds, even among the foreign minister and defense minister. Imagine Anthony Blinken and Lloyd Austin just disappeared tomorrow. We don't know where they are. We've never seen them again. That's not normal, Victor. Listen, corruption is rampant. How do we know they're corrupt? They just disappeared. Where's the trial? The trial finishes my point. Corruption.

of all kinds in China need to be dealt with. So where's the trial? Mercilessness. So where's the trial? Where's the trial of the former? For is we don't even know where he is. Many of those things you don't know doesn't mean doesn't happen. Where is the trial for this man? You're just accusing of corruption. Chang was my good friend for more than 20 years. Where is he then? He is involved in corruption. Where is he? And he is dealt with very swiftly. Where is he, Victor? Regardless of your good friend, you don't know where he is. Regardless of where is the foreign minister of China. This is not a hard question. We're not asking where Ran's brother in the middle of Xinjiang is that you can dodge. Where is the former foreign minister of China who disappeared? And by the way, he wasn't accused of corruption. The spokesman came out and said he has health reasons. Then corruption came later, by the way. Where did he go, your friend? That means there

is a process, and the process starts with one lie that he's ill, and then the next lie is he's corrupt. He may be ill; you never know. I mean, he's probably ill after he's been in a Chinese prison. He may be ill now; you never know. But at least Gong lost his job because of his corruption. Last question, that's the point. Where is he? He's somewhere in China. You will never see him. He is among the 1.4 billion people. No, it's not just him. There are many other people who have disappeared. The previous defense minister disappeared. The ministry of industry and technology disappeared. The former Interpol president disappeared in China. You just disappear if they don't like you. That's the rule of law in China. I'm so happy they disappear because if they keep doing their job, they will bring greater dis. Be careful what you wish for 'cause everyone's watching this show, and if you get something wrong tonight, maybe you disappear. If I is a beer, I hope you will.

bail me out. I'd have to find you first, and China is apparently a big country. Um, I want to bring in uh Steven Chan, professor at the University of London's School of Oriental African Studies. Um, Stephen, Xi Jinping's policies, his crackdown on dissidents. I mean, China was never a democracy. Other presidents were also dictatorial. But can we agree that Xi Jinping is on a different level when it comes to repression at home, the consolidation of power? I assume you disagree with Victor's description of him as part of a, I don't know, four-wheel car all driving in the same direction. Happily, he certainly consolidated his power. He is a very, very strong president. And I think that the real test of all of this is how China has treated Hong Kong with the increasing clampdown on dissent and free expression of opinion when they were meant to have a degree of freedom in a one country, two system way of approaching life. We can't see any evidence of vibrant debate in China and

I note that one of the great disappointments of my life is when I read Chinese academic works. Everyone toes a party line; no one does independent research to publish, as it were, anything critical of, for instance, not just Gan Ping, anything critical about Chinese foreign policy, or they might disappear, they might not get promoted. In any case, Rahan Assat is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council on international human rights law. Rahan, in part one, we talked in depth about the repression against the Uyghurs and your own personal situation in 2014. Xi Jinping privately called for an all-out struggle, quote, against terrorism and to show absolutely no mercy after a visit to Xinjiang. How much do you believe Xi Jinping is driving what's happening in Xinjiang? How much do you think he's responsible for the repression in China? Well, the matter of the fact is that all of it happened under the current administration, right? So many scholars are attributing it to him. It happened under his reign. He's the one who said absolutely no mercy.

stamping out roots and branches of the ERS, breaking out their connection, and these are the policies implemented under his leadership. So, it's very hard to separate Xi Jinping from the current policy. Shinan Martin, Jake's author of the bestselling book When China Rules the World, you heard Victor talk about, Well, we can't be a dictatorship because we're doing so well. The economy is doing amazing. We don't have Liz Truss mini budgets, etc. But then you get into the debate about, Can dictatorship and growth coexist? Do you need to have democracy to go alongside that? And I think about the pandemic, Martin, and I think about China's reaction to the pandemic. Is that where the dictatorship, the lack of transparency, the disappearances caught up with China? Because, of course, there was a black hole in China in terms of China's censorship methods, its draconian policies, the zero-COVID policy, the crackdown, which led some people to say to over a million, two million deaths. We saw protests in buildings, people screaming. Was that a moment where

China actually collided with reality and said this system can't survive long-term. Well, I beg to differ, okay, on the question of the pandemic because actually for two years, 2020 and 2021, actually China did under the circumstances extremely well and well outperformed the West. And the reasons for it are quite complicated. You've got to take into a very different kind of system. Now, one of the problems with the discussion, I think, so far on this question is that the country, it sounds as if the country doesn't work if you say dictator, despot, all these. But if, and you say not you personally, but, and one says there's no discussion, this is, I think, this is absolutely untrue. So, what we're presenting here is not an accurate picture. We've got, it's not about accurate picture, it's about balance, right? So, I don't deny what you're saying, but you're British. You would think it was a political earthquake if the foreign secretary and the defense

secretary disappeared in the space of six months, not arrested, disappeared, surely, yeah, yeah. And there is something on. Look, Ching Gong was a friend of mine as well, and I don't know what's happened to him. And I think it is odd, certainly to our eyes, it's weird that this can happen. But I think that the thing is that we've got to try and get beyond cardboard cutouts when we're talking about China and understand how it really works. Okay, um, let's bring in our audience who've been waiting here in London's Conway Hall. I'm going to go to the, yes, the lady there on the fourth row. Yes, you. My question is, as a dissident from Hong Kong, knowing that I cannot express freely in Hong Kong or in the UK without risking other people in trouble, I also know that you just now made claims about there's free speech in China and it's possible to criticize the Chinese government just now again. Can you please demonstrate that free speech and tell us

What are Xi Jinping's two worst mistakes in the past five years? Great question. If you can demonstrate to us that it's okay to criticize Xi Jinping, the Chinese government, and China, or even just say he kind of resembles Winnie the Pooh, will be good enough for me. Thank you, Victor. Do you want to take that question? Well, thank you. I would say China needs to make more prompt actions in dealing with the dramatic aging population in China and the dramatic demographic decline. Do you think Xi Jinping's to blame for not being fast enough on aging? No, I think the whole Chinese government, including the Central Committee, State Council, and local government, needs to take actions quickly to reverse that dramatic aging population problem and demographic. We're not going to get a criticism out of VI. Let's go back to the audience. Let's go to the gentleman here in the tie. Yes, you. Yeah, Alex. Sorry, Alex Vin, some Chatham House. My question is debt. So, there's been very bad riots for

example. It's been in the news in Kenya. Some of that debt that's causing the problem is owed to China. So, the question is how is China going to handle the increasing pressures for debt cancellation. At least 17 African countries are in particular distress this year. Thank you. I understand the Chinese debt in these large-scale connectivity projects is only a small portion of the overall national debt because they own debt to the United States, to Britain, to the international financing institutions, etc. They not just own debt to China but to many other countries. That's the reality. Secondly, there is accusation about the debt trap which is completely wrong and false because if you want to do connectivity projects, major project finance things, you need to have equity as well as debt. Debt is an indispensable part of the packaging. Okay, let's go back to the audience. Um, I say this gentleman, the time then go to the back, then we go to that gentleman there, you next after this one. My name is Sonam Frazzi. I would like

to ask you a question on Tibet. I was born in Tibet before the Chinese invasion of Tibet. Unfortunately, 1.2 million Tibetans have died since, and we have been made refugees. My question is: Tibet, after 74 years of Chinese rule, is still under lockdown. No journalists, no individual tourists, not even Tibetans are allowed to see their families. What is China afraid of to keep Tibet in such tight control, and Tibetans in such an inhuman existence in our own country, sir? Ever since the UN Dynasty, if not even earlier, Tibet has been part of China through different dynasties, different historical periods. I can assure you, during your lifetime and mine, Tibet will always be part of China. Why are you so insistent on ruling places that don't want to be ruled by China? No Tibet, we've been through Tibet, Taiwan, they're not happy in Xinjiang. Tibet being part of China doesn't depend on whether you like it or not. It's a mega trend of our time, a mega trend, and you need to accept that before

you will feel free to go back to China, visit Tibet. You sound like you're threatening the man. No, I'm not. He said you have to accept that before you can go back. He's from that place. You live in peace in Britain. That's good, but he's a refugee. But if you want to go back to Tibet, acknowledge Tibet is part of China, period. And what if he doesn't? He can't go back to his home. You cannot go back because China doesn't want to see anyone advocating for the independence of Tibet. Why can't no way there will that will never happen, Victor. Why can't China rest on its own merits? Why the bullying and the threats? We're going to break you to pieces, Taiwan. You can't go back until you sign this document or that declar. Why the insecurity? Second biggest economy in the world, major power. You sound so insecure, China. Security rests on the principle that there is only one China, and Taiwan is part of China. Tibet is part of China, and Shing Jang is part of China, period. And even if

The people there don't want to be part of it. You don't give a damn. The majority of the people live happily as Chinese citizens. Did you do a vote? I will go with you to. We're going to go to Tibet and we're going to talk to all the Tibetans. I can go to Tibet, but the guy who's from there can't go there. You sound ludicrous when you say this stuff, I'm sorry to say. Let us go back to the audience. Gentle at the back and then this gentleman here. My name is Isa Alun. I am a British Uighur. Except ran. And my question for many in the Uighur diaspora. We have not been allowed contact with our families at home vis-a-vis the Uighur autonomous region since 2017 when the Chinese government started detaining more than 3 million plus Uighurs into their high-tech surveillance concentration camps. My question to you, sir. What's the Chinese government trying to hide from us? Second, okay. Why can't we? Why can't we not talk freely with our families?

okay, another yet another wager. So many wagers, the same story, the same questions. I'm always very happy to see a Wiggly person wherever I go, because I do consider the Wiggles as my brothers and sisters, on one condition. Part of me is starting to feel sorry for your actual brothers and sisters, I'll be honest, on one condition though. Wiggles need to acknowledge that Xinjiang is part of China. That's a big precondition. If you do not accept that precondition, you are not my brother or sister. Hold on, so he... that's fine, you don't have to be brothers and sisters, but can he not talk to his family? It depends on where your family is. There are indeed a few separatists who want to promote separatism of Wiggle. Turn what about the people who are not separatists, just disappear. Turn Xinjiang into East Turkestan, this will never happen. Listen to this, call your friends to stick to the one China policy. He just wants to talk on the phone to a family.

member years I didn't speak to my mother. I want to speak to my mother. I am British. I want to speak to my mother. Do you understand? Literally support One China policy, support being part of China. Victor, period. Do you have no heart to see this man who can't speak to his 82-year-old mother? Separ. I wish your mother is here in this Hall talking to you. And why you let her go? Maybe she could, but then on one condition in China: Zero Tolerance of any separatist movement. 82-year-old woman is a threat to China. What does that say about China? I hope she's not a separatist, but if she's a separatist, she will be dealt with by law, period. Victor, before we finish, I have one question for you. We're in the UK. We're in Conway Hall, historic Free Speech Society. Could we do a show like this? Could I interview you like this? Could Rahan come be on a panel like this in Beijing, in say the Beijing International Convention Center? Can we

do a show like this. Audience members freely ask questions. You take questions from everyone. No one's vetted, no one's threatened. Could we do this in Beijing? Medy, if you ask me to line up all the support, you will do that, really. I can assure you that a show where every audience member gets to speak freely. No one turns up at their house afterwards. For many European countries, you do not need a visa to go to China. Pick up your luggage, buy a ticket, ask. I'm not asking foreigners, Victor, asking foreigners to come. I'm saying could a Chinese audience turn up and ask whatever they want, criticize Xi Jinping, criticize the government, ask you questions, talk about weers. Could you do it in Beijing, m in China? Don't criticize our president. So we couldn't do this unless you have glad you positive constructive proposal to make from criticism from the horse's mouth. Don't criticize unless it's posi. Is not the only goal. Criticism with constructive purposes will be a better free speech. Free speech is goal. We

cherish on this show. I'm glad to have offered you a platform for free speech. I wish you could offer me one back, Victor Gal. Thank you for your time. Thank you to the audience in Conway Hall, and thank you to everyone at home for watching this episode of Head 10. [Music] [Applause]

Is Xi Jinping’s China on a path to war? Mehdi Hasan & Victor Gao | Head to Head

#AlJazeeraEnglish, we focus on people and events that affect people's lives. We bring topics to light that often go under-reported, listening to all sides of the story and giving a 'voice to the voiceless.'

Reaching more than 282 million households in over 140 countries across the globe, our viewers trust #AlJazeeraEnglish to keep them informed, inspired, and entertained.

Our impartial, fact-based reporting wins worldwide praise and respect. It is our unique brand of #journalism that the world has come to rely on.

We are reshaping global media and constantly working to strengthen our reputation as one of the world's most respected #news and #CurrentAffairs channels.

Al Jazeera English

중국의 글로벌 영향력 증가와 군사력 확장

중국의 군사비 지출 증가와 핵무기 확장으로 인해 주변국들의 우려가 커지면서 더 큰 분쟁이 발생할 수 있다는 우려가 커지고 있습니다.

대만과 남중국해에 대한 시진핑 주석의 공격적인 태도는 중국이 군사 훈련과 사이버 공격을 실시하면서 긴장을 고조시켰습니다.

특히 위구르족 무슬림에 대한 중국의 인권 침해는 국제적인 비판을 불러일으키며 중국의 글로벌 야망과 세계 질서에 미치는 영향에 대한 의문을 제기하고 있습니다.

대만 인구의 12%만이 중국 가입을 희망하고 있음에도 불구하고 중국이 대만에 집중하는 것은 통일에 대한 강한 열망 때문입니다.

중국 정부의 접근 방식에는 일본계 대만인에게 충성 서약을 요구하고 추방하겠다고 위협하는 등 논란의 여지가 있는 조치들이 포함되어 있습니다.

패널 토론에서는 위구르족 대량 구금 의혹에 대한 증거를 요구하는 등 이 지역에서 중국의 영향력과 신장의 인권 상황에 대한 다양한 관점을 조명합니다.

신장의 공식 기관은 2017년 이후 4,800명 이상을 기소했으며, 수용소에 수감된 사람은 100만 명으로 추산된다고 주장합니다.

이러한 상황으로 인해 수감자들에 대한 출처와 숫자가 상충되는 가운데 격렬한 논쟁이 벌어지고 있습니다.

2016년부터 수용소에 수감되어 있는 저명한 기술 기업가의 형제가 가족의 투쟁과 중국 정부의 부당한 조치에 대해 이야기합니다.

중국의 인권과 거버넌스에 대한 논쟁

연사는 신장 및 이라크의 인권 침해에 대한 관심 부족을 비판하며 피해자 가족에게 미치는 정서적 영향을 강조합니다.

마틴은 신장에서 위구르족과 한족 사이의 뿌리 깊은 문제에 대해 이야기하며 분리주의 문제를 강조합니다.

대화는 중국의 언론의 자유 부족으로 옮겨가고, 빅터는 시진핑이 종신 주석이 될 것이라는 사실을 부인하고 비판에 대한 정부의 접근 방식을 옹호합니다.

중국 정치 시스템의 권력 역학 관계

중국의 정치 체제는 중앙집권적 권력 구조가 특징이며, 중국공산당은 최대 1억 명의 당원을 보유하고 있습니다.

시진핑 주석은 임기 제한을 없애고 전국인민대표대회에서 100% 지지를 받아 대통령 선거에서 승리하면서 권력을 공고히 했습니다.

이 제도는 개인주의가 결여되어 있고 실질적인 선거 경쟁이 없기 때문에 민주적 정당성에 대한 의문이 제기되며 독재 체제로 기능하는지에 대한 논쟁으로 이어지고 있습니다.

시진핑의 권력 강화와 중국 내 억압

시진핑의 리더십은 그의 이름이 헌법에 명시되어 있고 6세 어린이들에게 그의 사상을 가르치는 등 인격 숭배로 특징지어집니다.

중국 시스템은 엄격한 순응을 강요하며, 부패로 인해 고위 관리가 사라지는 등 무자비한 통치 방식을 보여줍니다.

시 주석의 정책은 반대 의견에 대한 탄압과 독립적인 연구 부족으로 이어져 신장 및 기타 지역의 탄압에 대한 그의 책임에 대한 우려가 제기되고 있습니다.

시진핑의 리더십과 중국의 도전 과제

시진핑의 리더십은 반대파를 탄압하고 통제를 유지하는 데 중점을 둔 중국의 현재 정책과 밀접하게 연관되어 있습니다.

팬데믹은 중국 권위주의 체제의 결함을 부각시켰고, 광범위한 시위로 이어져 이러한 체제의 장기적 생존 가능성에 의문을 제기했습니다.

중국의 고령화 문제와 다른 국가의 부채 위기 역시 중국 정부가 해결해야 할 시급한 과제입니다.

중국의 영유권 주장에 대한 논란

이 토론은 티베트와 신장이 중국의 필수적인 부분이라는 중국의 주장과 분리주의 운동에 대한 강력한 입장을 중심으로 진행됩니다.

발표자는 위구르족 구금을 포함한 중국 정부의 조치는 분리주의를 없애려는 열망에 따른 것이라고 주장합니다.

이 대화는 중국에서 언론의 자유와 열린 대화의 실현 가능성에 대한 의문을 제기하며 영국의 표현의 자유와 대비를 이룹니다.