China's bid for influence in Asia does not stop with Solomon Islands.

This is how Beijing gained a foothold in Sri Lanka

For weeks, Sri Lankans have been protesting and occupying their country's picturesque commercial capital Colombo, angry about a debilitating economic crisis that has stopped basic services.

But behind them, work continues on a noisy and dusty construction site for a Chinese-funded port city with major strategic value.

Chinese companies have built highways, ports, bridges, oil refineries, and industrial towns in Sri Lanka, a country at the centre of the Indian Ocean in a crucial vantage location.

It's a stark example of China's growing influence in the Asia-Pacific region.

"China is now part of the political architecture of Sri Lanka," said Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu, the head of the Colombo-based public policy organisation the Centre for Policy Alternatives.

"Irrespective of whichever political party is in power, China is here to stay because of the size of the investments that it has made."

An artificial sand island was built by Chinese investors as a port facility off the coast of Colombo.(Reuters: Dinuka Liyanawatte)

Mr Saravanamuttu said China offered major loans to vulnerable nations for projects with tactical importance for Beijing. But they don't necessarily help fix the nation's economic problems.

"It doesn't provide any quick return or indeed, any return to the country and its people and so in that respect, it is seen to be a situation of buying influence," he said.

The Solomon Islands has inked a security pact with China which could lead to a Chinese naval base in the South Pacific.

It's a slap in the face for countries like Australia and India, which are looking to reduce their dependency on China and its influence in the Indo-Pacific region.

But with China strengthening its hold in the Asia-Pacific for several years already, it may be too late.

China's tried and tested method to gain a foothold

After Sri Lanka's civil war ended in 2009, the country was facing the daunting task of rebuilding after thousands of deaths and almost 30 years of fighting.

Sri Lanka's then-president Mahinda Rajapaksa, who is now Prime Minister, had a vision to develop the country and usher in new jobs.

But he needed help to get there, and the Chinese government was waiting in the wings to assist.

"The Sri Lankan government moved towards a kind of post-war reconstruction boom and the Chinese were on hand with the cash — with the liquid cash — to help us to do that," Mr Saravanamuttu said.

"The Chinese also provided diplomatic protection to the government of Sri Lanka internationally in terms of war crimes and crimes against humanity."

Both sides in the civil war — the Sri Lankan government and the Tamil Tigers separatist group — have been accused of atrocities.

The UN has been collecting evidence against Sri Lanka alleging it committed war crimes, something its government denies.

But China was among a few countries that abstained on voting on a UN motion to accuse Sri Lanka of "obstructing accountability".

It's a tried and tested method for the Chinese government: Negotiate investments in countries facing war and in desperate need of help.

It has made similar moves in post-war African nations, and equipped countries like Bangladesh and Pakistan with military equipment — the latter now calls China a close strategic ally.

China has signed a free trade agreement with the Maldives.

In the Maldives, just 980 kilometres by sea from Sri Lanka, China has signed a free trade agreement, while encouraging its citizens and businesses to invest in the tropical nation.

China has also invested in road and housing construction, the expansion of a power station, and a bridge-building project, among other initiatives in the tropical paradise.

The billion-dollar deal

In 2017, Sri Lanka signed a $1.1 billion deal with China for the control of a deep-sea port in Hambantota, in the country's south.

There were concerns that the port could be used by the Chinese military, but Sri Lanka needed the money to pay off its already growing foreign loans.

Many of the debts were to Beijing itself.

China promised it would only run commercial operations from the port, and a state-run company was given a 99-year lease.

It led to protests and critics calling Sri Lanka a "Chinese colony".

China has now invested billions of dollars in the country.

"I wouldn't say Sri Lanka is a Chinese colony, but it is correct to say that China exerts a very different influence on the overall economic and political environment in Sri Lanka," Mr Saravanamuttu said.

"The Chinese have an interest in the maritime waterways around Sri Lanka, because a lot of their energy supplies goes through there.

"They are wanting to ensure ... that there will always be stable government in Sri Lanka ... the Chinese are now part of the Sri Lankan political architecture, and there is no way in which one can get rid of them."

The United States calls this "debt-trap diplomacy", but some researchers say it's more nuanced than that.

"China is slowly emerging to being the new superpower in the South Asian region," said R Ramakumar, a professor of economics at Mumbai's Tata Institute.

"But these are large commercial contracts being built across this region, these countries are tipped to benefit from these loans as well."

China declines to help Sri Lanka in its hour of need

Sri Lanka's economic crisis has been caused by huge foreign debts, some to China, others to Japan, India and major investment firms.

The country has officially asked the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for emergency financial help, but China is not offering much support for a problem experts say it partly helped create.

"In this particular crisis that Sri Lanka is going through where we desperately need assistance, China has distanced itself somewhat and said, 'Go to the IMF,'" Mr Saravanamuttu explained.

"Because if they were to bail out Sri Lanka, they probably will have a queue of other countries lining up to get similar assistance."

India and Australia have joined the US and Japan in a security pact called the Quad, which officials have all-but confirmed is a strategy to stand firm against China.

"There's a panda in the room," Australia's High Commissioner to India Barry O'Farrell said of the pact.

But researchers like Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu have said the animosity towards China needs to be reassessed, because the country has already locked itself into the region.

"The Chinese will look at the existing international economic systems as less of a threat if they are not being sort of made out to be some predatory, regional superpower that's trying to gobble up countries in the region," he said.

Source: abc aus

Patel personally approved Rwanda plan launch after civil servant concerns

Priti Patel had to personally approve plans to send some asylum seekers from the UK to Rwanda after her officials voiced concerns about the scheme's value for money.

The home secretary took the rare step of issuing a "ministerial direction" to push through the scheme, meaning she takes personal responsibility for it.

It is only the second time the Home Office has used the power in 30 years.

It comes as the UN refugee agency said the plans breached international law.

Home Office civil servants could not precisely quantify the benefits of the policy, and uncertainty about the costs meant Ms Patel had to take personal responsibility for it by issuing the ministerial direction.

A source close to the home secretary said "deterring illegal entry would create significant savings" and the fact that the savings could not be quantified precisely should not prevent action from being taken.

Ministerial directions have been used 46 times since the 2010 election, with two in the Home Office since 1990, according to the Institute for Government think tank.

The only other time the formal order was used by the Home Office was in 2019 by the former home secretary Sajid Javid, to bring in the Windrush Compensation Scheme before legislation was in place.

Under the £120m pilot scheme, people deemed to have entered the UK unlawfully since 1 January could be flown to Rwanda, where they will be allowed to apply for the right to settle in the east African country.

The government said the first flights could begin within weeks, initially focusing on single men who crossed the Channel in small boats or lorries.

The use of a ministerial direction highlights the unconventional nature of the government's refugee relocation plan.

As well as criticism of the policy on legal, moral and logistical grounds there is concern from officials at the home office about the cost.

The department couldn't say whether the scheme would be value for money, which is perhaps not surprising given ministers have openly admitted they don't know how much money will need to be spent.

Flying asylum seekers to another country is not a world first but it's a new and controversial approach for the UK.

The policy is testing the reach of the government's powers.

More than 160 charities and campaign groups have urged ministers to scrap the policy - which has also drawn criticism from opposition parties and some Conservatives.

Labour's shadow justice minister Ellie Reeves said the scheme was "unethical and unworkable" and would fail to deter people from crossing the Channel.

Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey said the scheme would be a "bureaucratic nightmare" and claimed it had been announced as part of a "cynical distraction" from the Partygate scandal surrounding No 10.

Ian Blackford, the SNP's Westminster leader, said it was "chilling" to think "vulnerable people" trying to enter the UK would be processed in Rwanda, before describing the plans as "evil".

The UNHCR said attempting to "shift responsibility" for claims of refugee status was "unacceptable".

Gillian Triggs, an assistant secretary-general at the agency, said such a policy- which is similarly used in Australia - could be effective as a deterrent but there were "much more legally effective ways of achieving the same outcome".

Australia has used offshore detention centres since 2001, with thousands of asylum seekers being transferred out of the country since then.

It has been frequently criticised by the UN and rights groups over substandard conditions at its centres and its own projections show it will spend $811.8m (£460m) on offshore processing in 2021-22.

Last year, the UK government raised concerns at the UN about claims of "extrajudicial killings, deaths in custody, enforced disappearances and torture" in Rwanda, as well as restrictions to civil and political rights.

But justice and migration minister Tom Pursglove said Rwanda was a progressive country that wanted to provide sanctuary and had made "huge strides forward" in the past three decades.

Mr Pursglove argued that while the short-term costs would be "pretty equivalent" to what the UK is paying currently to accommodate those claiming asylum, the new scheme would save British taxpayers money in the "longer term".

Speaking to ITV's Good Morning Britain on Friday, he said: "We are spending £5m per day accommodating individuals who are crossing in hotels. That is not sustainable and is not acceptable and we have to get that under control."

The scheme comes as part of broader efforts to cut the number of people entering the UK by crossing the Channel in small boats - with the Royal Navy taking operational command of patrolling the Channel from UK Border Force.

Some 562 people on 14 boats made the journey on the day the policy was unveiled, according to the Ministry of Defence. No-one making the crossing was believed to have arrived on UK soil "on their own terms", it added.

Last year, 28,526 people made the crossing, up from 8,404 in 2020.

Source: BBC

Marine Le Pen’s narrow path to victory

The far-right leader came in second place in Sunday’s first round vote, but the race to the Elysée is not over yet.

PARIS — The relief felt by supporters of French President Emmanuel Macron as election results rolled in late Sunday has been short-lived.

While the incumbent beat far-right leader Marine Le Pen in the first round of voting in the presidential election Sunday, with 27.6 percent versus her 23.4 percent, much could still change by the head-to-head second-round vote in two weeks.

While the fight is a repeat of the 2017 run-off, which then-political newcomer Macron won easily, Le Pen this time has a plan for success — although polls still point to Macron winning re-election for a second five-year term.

Le Pen’s campaign team hopes that France’s changing political landscape — the mainstream centre-right and centre-left parties have been virtually obliterated — and hostility toward Macron as the incumbent will help take her to the Elysée.

As Macron and Le Pen now scramble to pick up the votes of their unsuccessful first-round rivals, the far-right National Rally leader will be hoping that the so-called cordon sanitaire — which in the past saw voters sometimes hold their nose and vote for a candidate they didn’t support just to keep the far-right from winning — may be weakening.

According to her supporters, Le Pen also goes into this second-round race better prepared, with a stronger campaign and with plenty of untapped votes to draw on.

“Yesterday something happened. People realized that Macron can be beaten,” said Gilles Pennelle, a National Rally regional councillor. “We can beat Macron because another term for him would be a disaster for the French people and because we can show we are credible and capable of running the country.”

According to POLITICO’s Poll of Polls, Le Pen could win 47 percent of the vote in the April 24 run-off, and one poll taken after the first-round results showed Macron edging re-election by the slimmest of margins, by 51 percent to 49 percent.

Could it be third time lucky for Le Pen?

“The polling now doesn’t mean that’s how people are going to vote in 15 days,” said Jean-Daniel Lévy, pollster for Harris Interactive. “There’s a second-round campaign to come, a TV debate. Things are still going to shift.”

Le Pen’s early bets

Le Pen has taken several high-risk choices she hopes will now bear fruit as she goes toe-to-toe with Macron.

The cordon sanitaire may prove less of an obstacle as Le Pen has worked hard in recent years to detoxify the National Rally brand, abandoning unpopular positions such as a ‘Frexit’ from the European Union and euro currency, and making it more mainstream.

And she has gone further. In the run-up to the election, she dropped a focus on immigration and security and campaigned instead on pocketbook issues for the ordinary French citizen. Seeking to widen her appeal, she has proposed cutting income tax for young adults and slashing VAT on fuel and basic foodstuffs.

This could help attract votes from the left, whose candidates were all knocked out in the first round. The race for the presidency could hinge on what voters for far-left candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon, who ranked third with 21 percent on Sunday, decide to do in the second round. Mélenchon urged his supporters not to back Le Pen, but many say they are still undecided and 18 percent of his voters have said they could vote for her.

In a speech on Sunday, Le Pen echoed left-wing rhetoric in presenting herself as the champion of the oppressed, a politician who defends people against “the power of money” and fights for “solidarity” and the right to “retire in good health.”

According to the pollster Lévy, Le Pen has broadened her appeal and can attract new voters from among the right, the left and those who abstained in the first round. Much could depend on the TV debate between the two candidates, set for April 20. Five years ago, Le Pen was widely judged to have come off second best in a bruising televised clash.

“The French are not as worried about Le Pen as in the past … because when she speaks, people understand what she means,” he said. “She was also the first to speak about purchasing power, and that has helped normalize her, and include her in the national debate.”

Le Pen’s team will also hope that left-wing voters will be put off by Macron’s lingering tag as a “president of the rich” and by his plans to raise the age of retirement.

Silver linings

A key change in Le Pen’s favour from previous elections has been the arrival on the scene of Eric Zemmour, a firebrand candidate who added controversy to the presidential election and took 7.1 percent of the vote on Sunday.

The former journalist’s candidacy and his campaign on what had been Le Pen’s party’s core issues of law and order and immigration helped her effort to tack toward the centre from the far-right fringes.

His disappointing result can now be an asset for Le Pen, as he has galvanized voters who might have been discouraged by the National Rally’s mainstream drive. On Sunday, Zemmour called for his supporters to vote for Le Pen in the second round.

On Monday, Louis Aliot, the National Rally mayor of Perpignan, welcomed Zemmour’s move, but kept a distance between the two far-right rivals.

“Eric Zemmour is calling on voters to choose Marine Le Pen, that’s great,” he told French radio France Info. “[But] we’re speaking to the voters, there will be no deal with Zemmour.”

For the National Rally, this is the best of both worlds: getting his votes but keeping him at arm’s length as his inflammatory comments on French identity risk alienating voters on the left.

Le Pen’s strategy gives Macron something to think about as he, too, hopes to convince left-wing voters to swing behind him. Does he also now commit to social justice and fight to protect France’s vulnerable? Or does he appeal to their conscience in painting the far right as beyond the pale, and risk being accused of scaremongering?

On Monday, Macron showed he is not ducking the issue. Visiting one of France’s poorest towns in the National Rally’s stomping ground in the Hauts-de-France, Macron told reporters he was there to promote his welfare proposals. He also acknowledged that the cordon sanitaire no longer existed.

So can Le Pen be president of France? “She not only can, she must,” her father Jean-Marie Le Pen told BFMTV.

Source@ Polictico