Connexion
Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi said yesterday that “having renounced all rights and claims under the Treaty of San Francisco, we are not in a position to recognize Taiwan’s legal status.”
MFA Spokesperson responded: Prime Minister Takaichi deliberately chose not to mention the… pic.twitter.com/QyszJBUfOW
— CHINA MFA Spokesperson 中国外交部发言人 (@MFA_China) November 27, 2025
Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi said yesterday that “having renounced all rights and claims under the Treaty of San Francisco, we are not in a position to recognize Taiwan’s legal status.”
MFA Spokesperson responded: Prime Minister Takaichi deliberately chose not to mention the… pic.twitter.com/QyszJBUfOW
— CHINA MFA Spokesperson 中国外交部发言人 (@MFA_China) November 27, 2025
The complete statement:
Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi said yesterday that “having renounced all rights and claims under the Treaty of San Francisco, we are not in a position to recognize Taiwan’s legal status.”
MFA Spokesperson responded: Prime Minister Takaichi deliberately chose not to mention the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation—two international legal documents with full effect and underscored in the Sino-Japanese Joint Statement and the Sino-Japanese Treaty of Peace and Friendship, and singularly brought up the illegal and invalid “Treaty of San Francisco”. She even sought to play up the false notion that Taiwan’s status is undetermined. That just compounds the wrongdoing. China firmly rejects that and calls for utmost vigilance from the international community.
We once again urge the Japanese side to reflect on and correct its wrongdoing, retract the erroneous remarks at once, and take practical steps to honor its commitments to China and do what is least expected of Japan as a UN member state.
Japan’s opposition party leader argued that since Prime Minister Takaichi stopped referring to a specific contingency example, she has “effectively retracted” her remarks.
MFA Spokesperson responded: “Stop referring to” is not the same as “retracting” the wrong remarks. The two are completely different in nature. The Japanese side hopes to downplay Prime Minister Takaichi’s erroneous remarks and make it go away by “not referring to” them. That is just self-deceiving and wishful thinking, and China would absolutely not accept that.
tomorrow, 27ᵗʰ September 2025, the 2015 JCPOA “snap-back” sanctions will come into force. With disavowal from China and Russia, it will become a milestone day in the disintegration of the post-WW2 UN system.
with appreciation to Dr. Karl at karlof1’s Geopolitical Gymnasium.
One Major FM statement and two by main UN Representative Vassily Nebenzia
On 20 September, Russia’s Foreign Ministry issued a major statement about its views on the snap-back sanctions issue which was followed by two separate statements by Mr. Vassily Nebenzia that were made to the assembled UN Security Council. It should be noted that China, Algeria and Pakistan all hold similar positions as they expressed orally and via their vote. When this move was announced back in August, Russia published a paper expressing why this move is illegal and violates the JCPOA that I reported on in full. We’ll begin with the MFA Statement then go to the two statements by Mr. Nebenzia.
On September 19, the UN Security Council voted on a draft resolution submitted by the Republic of Korea as President of the UN Security Council as a follow-up to the August 28 appeal by the United Kingdom, Germany and France regarding Iran’s alleged material failure to comply with its obligations under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
The Russian side has repeatedly pointed out the provocative and illegal nature of the actions of the European countries participating in the JCPOA and the South Korean chairmanship of the UN Security Council, which is under their influence. These actions have nothing to do with diplomacy and only lead to a further escalation of tensions around the Iranian nuclear program. Until the last moment, we explained in detail and in a well-reasoned manner the reasons why the above-mentioned European appeal cannot be considered a notification within the meaning of paragraph 11 of UN Security Council Resolution 2231, which the British and the European Two are trying to shamelessly manipulate. Accordingly, the presidential draft put to a vote in the Security Council does not meet the requirements of Resolution 2231 and a priori cannot lead to the restoration of the previously lifted UN sanctions against Iran.
During a meeting of the UN Security Council on September 19, Russia, together with China, Algeria and Pakistan, strongly supported the preservation of the regime for the lifting of previous sanctions resolutions on the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI). Predictably, the European instigators of the current growing crisis around the Iranian nuclear programme, as well as the United States, which together exerted unprecedented pressure on the non-permanent members of the Security Council, forcing them to show solidarity with their unsuitable position, spoke out against this. As a result, those who succumbed to blackmail and threats have not been able to clearly explain the essence of their objections to the fact that the restrictions that have long lost their relevance and were in effect before the conclusion of the JCPOA remain lifted.
The position of the Republic of Korea, which abstained on its own draft resolution, is noteworthy in this context. We perceive this as self-exposure and a sign that Seoul is well aware of the legal and procedural nullity of its initiative, as well as the inconsistency of European claims on snapback. Apparently, the chairmanship is aware of the likely disastrous consequences of the political campaign unleashed against Iran, which threatens to negate constructive cooperation between Tehran and the IAEA and push the Iranian leadership to take tough retaliatory decisions.
The results of the vote on the South Korean resolution only indicate that this document did not find support and was removed from the agenda. This fact does not impose any obligations on other states to revive past restrictions against Iran. The notorious “snapback” cannot be considered to have taken place. Claims by the Western camp to the contrary mean that these countries are desperately seeking to legitimize their earlier gross violations of Resolution 2231 and to subordinate the rest of the world to their confrontational and fundamentally flawed policies. Their diktat and their legal nihilism in international affairs must be resolutely rebuffed, and attempts to use the authority and powers of the UN Security Council to settle political scores with Tehran must be rejected.
For the United States and European countries, the moment of truth has come. They will finally have to answer the question with certainty whether they are seeking a political and diplomatic settlement or are they once again preparing for the “dirty work” of plunging the Middle East into a new tragedy, similar to the one that took place in June, when the nuclear facilities in Iran under IAEA control were the target of missile and bomb strikes by Israel and the United States.
The Russian-Chinese draft UN Security Council resolution on a technical postponement of the implementation of the JCPOA and Resolution 2231 for six months, which is on the table, provides a real opportunity to rectify the situation, create conditions for the effective implementation of the agreements reached between Iran and the IAEA in Cairo on September 9, and provide space for a vigorous search for negotiated solutions that will make it possible to remove any suspicions and prejudices regarding Iran’s peaceful nuclear energy with due reliance on international law and consideration of the legitimate interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran. [My Emphasis]
Here’s the first Nebenzia statement:
Mr. President,
We have to take the floor on a point of order, because we do not see any legal, political or procedural grounds for any steps to develop the European claims to launch the snapback mechanism, including voting on the draft resolution submitted by the South Korean presidency.
We have repeatedly explained at various venues that the European parties to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) simply have no right to launch the mechanism provided for by OP11 of UN Security Council Resolution 2231. The United Kingdom, France and Germany themselves have chronically violated UNSC Resolution 2231 and the JCPOA, including by imposing illegal unilateral sanctions against Iran to replace the restrictions that expired in accordance with the Plan. These countries also grossly violated the procedure for considering disputes provided for by the JCPOA, in particular, they did not launch the Dispute Settlement Mechanism in accordance with the prescribed procedure at the Vienna platform.
We would like to remind you that Resolution 2231 is an integral document and does not allow for a gap between it and the JCPOA, which has been and remains an integral part of it. Attempts by European countries to present the situation as if they have the right to use the “punitive” provisions of the resolution without fulfilling their part of the obligations are hypocritical and untenable from both a legal and political point of view. That is why we do not recognise the complaint submitted by Berlin, London and Paris to the Council within the meaning of UNSC Resolution 2231.
In this regard, we do not see any need for the Chairman-in-Office to take any steps, including the introduction of a draft resolution. The hasty putting of it to a vote by the South Korean chairmanship, although there is still more than a week before the expiration of 30 days, is also perplexing. We regret that the Republic of Korea has chosen the path of playing along with Western destructive approaches, to the detriment of its duties as an impartial chairman.
On the whole, what is happening today evokes the feeling of a clumsy spectacle aimed at creating a false “parallel reality” that has nothing to do with the political and legal foundations of the work of the Security Council. After all, it is no secret that the United Kingdom, France and Germany do not care at all about the fate of the JCPOA or the authority of the UN Security Council. Their only goal now is to use the Council as a tool in their unscrupulous game, as a lever of pressure on an undesirable state that defends its sovereign interests.
Here is a clear illustration of the fact that our European colleagues reject diplomacy at the root, preferring the language of blackmail and threats. Last week in Vienna, we officially proposed holding a meeting of all the original participants in the JCPOA in order to discuss, so to speak, “in the family circle” ways out of the current crisis. Great Britain, France, Germany and the United States responded to our proposal with a refusal.
Therefore, in other circumstances, we would not even take part in such a shameful spectacle in the Security Council, which is now unfolding at their behest. We are doing this today only because the content of the submitted document implies the preservation of the regime for lifting sanctions against Iran, which is in line with our long-standing principled position. However, this does not lend an ounce of legitimacy to either the European statements about the launch of the snapback, or the actions of the presidency to develop them. I ask you to record this in the minutes of the meeting.
Thank you. [My Emphasis]
And here’s the second:
Mr. President,
Today we have already stated our principled position of rejection of either the attempts of European states to launch a snapback or the actions of the presidency to develop them, including the introduction of this resolution. Our position on this matter remains unchanged. The fact that the Russian Federation voted in favour of the draft should not be interpreted as a change to it.
We supported the draft for only one reason: its only operative paragraph was on maintaining the lifting of UN sanctions against Iran. This is the only correct, politically and legally justified decision, which we have been talking about for all these years. The logic laid down in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) assumed the gradual lifting of all restrictions on Iran, and we are firmly convinced that there is no reason why they should not expire on October 18 of this year. and we have all witnessed how Iran fell victim to the aggressive actions of Israel and the United States in June of this year, and then trying to “crush” it with UN sanctions is immoral, unfair and illegal.
However, this is exactly what our Western colleagues are now trying to do. We would like to remind you that everything, including Iran’s interaction with the IAEA, was going according to plan exactly until the United States took a destructive path in 2018 and officially withdrew from the deal. This was the “trigger” of the crisis around the JCPOA, the consequences of which the Council has to deal with now, but Western delegations are diligently hushing up this fact. Despite Washington’s illegal and brutal actions, Tehran showed restraint at that time and continued to comply with its obligations in good faith for more than a year – I emphasise that for more than a year. Only after another round of pressure on it, Tehran took retaliatory steps, while regularly noting that these actions were reversible. Unfortunately, our European colleagues were not interested in returning to diplomacy even then and did not follow the path of a normal conversation, which was a chance in 2022, when the parameters for restoring the JCPOA were discussed.
Violations by the United Kingdom, France and Germany of their obligations under UN Security Council Resolution 2231 and the JCPOA have long become chronic. We are talking about their inability to comply with their obligations to ensure economic returns for Iran from the lifting of EU sanctions that were in effect until 2015, and their illegal decision to resume unilateral sanctions pressure after the JCPOA Transition Day on October 18, 2023.
Our country has repeatedly brought to the attention of the members of the Security Council its position that the United Kingdom, France and Germany do not have the right to use the procedure for restoring the UN Security Council sanctions regime against Iran, as provided for in paragraph 11 of the operative part of UNSC Resolution 2231. A party that fails to comply with its obligations under any contract or agreement deprives itself of the right to use the tools provided for therein. This is clearly evidenced by the so-called “clean hands doctrine”, the principle of pacta sunt servanda, and the advisory opinions of the International Court of Justice.
Against this background, the so-called “notification” of the “European Three” about the launch of the “snapback”, distributed in the Council on August 28, has no legal and procedural force. It cannot serve as a basis for any decisions or actions of the Security Council. This position is set out in detail in the joint letter of the Foreign Ministers of Russia, China and Iran dated August 28, which was circulated in the Council.
Let us emphasize once again: from our point of view, there is no launch of the snapback procedure. The introduction of the draft considered today is a direct violation of Resolution 2231 and the JCPOA, which is an integral part of it. For this reason, the Russian Federation does not recognize either the alleged steps taken or any further steps in this context.
We would like to remind you that there is a real alternative to the lawlessness taking place today in the Security Council hall. This is the Russian-Chinese draft resolution, which is in the blue, which provides for the technical extension of Resolution 2231 for six months while demanding that all original participants in the JCPOA immediately resume negotiations in order to find a diplomatic solution. We call on all sensible members of the Security Council to support it when we put it to a vote.
Thank you. [My Emphasis]
Seems pretty basic: The E3 violated basic contract law and thus voided their ability to do anything, almost as if they had dropped out like their Outlaw US Empire Master. I haven’t read anything by China, Pakistan or Algeria, but do know that they echoed Russia’s position meaning Russia wasn’t the only nation pointing to the illegality of the E3’s actions and the unseemly behavior by the South Korean UNSC Chair. Maybe Trump should have attacked some more Korean factories so they’s know where they stand in his racist eyes.
The Cairo Agreement between Iran and IAEA has already been annulled by Iran as a result of the illegal UNSC happenings. Here’s the key quote from RT’s report:
“The ill-considered actions of three European countries regarding the Iranian nuclear issue… will effectively suspend the path of cooperation with the Agency,” Iran’s Supreme National Security Council said in a statement cited by state news agency IRNA. [Emphasis Original]
The UNSC action is very powerful proof that Law and Justice are absent within the world and need to be made reality via another institution; otherwise, what we’ll have in the law of the garden, which in reality is the jungle. As I have suggested, a UN Charter 2.0 is now needed more than ever with modifications made to the Security Council eliminating the veto and other past mistakes in its organization. Obtaining consensus can remain provided all UNSC members are not in current or past violation of the UN Charter—some form of strict disciplinary measures must be added to the Charter for those members who violate it.
It’s become very clear that Iran’s nuclear program isn’t the issue. It’s Iran’s government and the fact it remains independent despite 46 years of attempts to destroy it led by the Outlaw US Empire and its Zionist proxy. The only weapons not used against Iran are nuclear—chemical and biological weapons were used at the behest of the Empire by Iraq during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War who covered up their use by Iraq. The longstanding crime spree that was begun by the Outlaw US Empire and UK proxy in 1953-4 so Iran’s hydrocarbon riches could be controlled by the Empire continues. When the Shah was in power, the Empire, nor any of its proxies had any trouble with Iran having a nuclear program because the Empire controlled the Shah. That all changed when Iranians revolted and regained their independence, and all signs today are they relish it greatly and will not cede it under any circumstances. And to defend their independence, Iran has developed very sophisticated high-tech missile and drone capabilities that have shocked the Empire and its Zionist proxy, although they lie about everything about Iran. Today’s Iran isn’t that of 2015—it has very powerful allies and is much better economically. Plus, as the 12-Day War showed, Iran’s populace came together in mass solidarity with the government and military against what are called the Two Satans—Big and Small.
The Genocidal Don and Bibi will again attack Iran with the big question being will either use nukes to attain their goal. And the other big question is, did Iran obtain a considerable upgrade to its AD suite? For if Iran can kill the planes and/or missiles bringing the nukes, it will save itself and much more—but if it does so, how will we know nukes were used? Obviously, in a properly governed world, this crisis wouldn’t exist. If Humanity survives the next war on Iran, global governance will need to be altered whether some nations like it or not.
And as an ending by-note, Venezuela has held talks with Russia on what the MFA called, “Russian-Venezuelan consultations on international legal issues.” Here’s the important portion of the Press Release:
We discussed in detail the issues of coordination at the relevant platforms of international organisations and practical steps to combat the practice of illegal unilateral restrictive measures (sanctions). The issues of the functioning of international justice bodies, including criminal justice, are considered separately. Specific mechanisms and tools for the implementation of common positions have been outlined.
The consultations confirmed the parties’ firm conviction of the need to strengthen the rule of international law. Illegitimate sanctions were condemned, and rejection of the politicisation of international justice was expressed. The Russian side reaffirmed its full support for Caracas in its efforts to protect its sovereignty in light of current threats. [My Emphasis]
Trump has now blown up three boats and killed several dozen which merely adds to his bloody total—Genocide Don and Killer of Ukrainians. He had no business being at the Charlie Kirk funeral.
Foreign Ministry statement (https://mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/2019580/) on Kiev’s latest drone attack targeting Russian civilians (May 23, 2025)
[Latest from the Russian MOD: In the course of repelling a massive enemy drone attack (from 20:00 of 20 May to 8:00 of 23 May), the Russian air defence systems shot down (https://t.me/mod_russia_en/21397) 1,177 fixed-wing unmanned aerial vehicles, including 788 of them outside the special military operation zone.]
The Kiev regime is relentless in its terror attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure in numerous Russian regions, including Moscow.
According to the Defence Ministry (https://t.me/mod_russia_en), from May 20 to 8 am on May 23, the number of aerial attacks amounted to multiples of what it used to be with 788 strikes by fixed-wing UAVs and Western-made missiles targeting Russian territory outside the area of the special military operation. Our air defence forces destroyed 776 drones and missiles, though unfortunately, 12 UAVs made it through our defences and hit their targets.
Casualties have been reported. On May 22, an attack on the village of Panteleymonovka, the Donetsk People’s Republic, wounded eight people. On the same day, a drone strike in the Vasilyevsky Municipal District, Zaporozhye Region, killed a woman born in 1990 and injured four children aged 10, 9, 8, and 1.
On the night of May 23, a downed UAV triggered fire in an industrial zone of Yelets, Lipetsk Region, injuring eight people. Additionally, the Ukrainian forces launched two HIMARS missiles on civilian targets in the city of Lgov, Kursk Region, also resulting in casualties, including two children.
Notably, even after the Ukrainian forces had been ousted from the Kursk Region, they keep trying to infiltrate our territory and launch drone, long-range artillery, and missile attacks.
Under these circumstances, the President was compelled to make a decision on establishing a security buffer zone (https://t.me/MFARussia/25036) on adjacent territory in order to minimise the ability of the Ukrainian forces to infiltrate and to attack our border regions using various munitions.
The latest barbaric terrorist attacks by the Kiev regime were carried out in an attempt to thwart direct Russia-Ukraine talks facilitated by the US Administration, which are designed to settle the conflict definitively. They also appear intended to derail the implementation of initial agreements reached in Istanbul (https://t.me/MFARussia/24973) on May 16, including a massive prisoner exchange.
These attacks are part of the strategy pursued by Ukraine’s party of war, which also includes violations of energy and Easter ceasefires that Russia has strictly observed, as well as the unilateral ceasefire declared by us during the 80th anniversary of the Great Victory celebrations.
Without a doubt, Russia will deliver a matching response to barrages of terrorist attacks carried out by the Kiev regime.
Unlike the Ukrainian side, our targets will be strictly limited to military facilities and defence industry plants.
To reiterate, our fundamental commitment to a constructive search for a peaceful settlement through dialogue remains unchanged.
These are but words. At least something has been said on this level of the Russian diplomatic structures. Maria, the words from your permanent representatives at the United Nations are much better, much stronger and not so tentative.
I’m glad to hear you say that Russia is working Maria. But what are you working on? Words that are are more finely crafted? Words that are not so soft? What do you mean Maria – Rusia ‘does not approve’ and are ‘disappointed’.
This is a diplomatic cop-out and you know it!
Here is Maria Zakharova ….
Moscow does not approve of Israel’s decision to launch a large-scale ground operation in the Gaza Strip, stated Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova
“Of course, we are disappointed with this decision by the Israeli authorities, which will inevitably lead to a further increase in civilian deaths and new destruction,” she emphasized.
According to Zakharova, Moscow has repeatedly stated publicly that the only path to normalizing the situation in Gaza is through shifting the conflict’s resolution to a political and diplomatic track.
“This requires ensuring a complete ceasefire and resuming humanitarian aid to the population of the sector, which will contribute to creating conditions for relaunching the political process aimed at a just and long-term resolution of the Palestinian issue based on the established international legal framework,” the Foreign Ministry spokesperson noted.
Zakharova added that Russia is actively and consistently working toward these goals in cooperation with partners and like-minded parties, both bilaterally and on international platforms, primarily the United Nations.
Earlier, on May 20, it was reported that at least 43 people were killed overnight due to bombings and shelling of areas in the Gaza Strip by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).
—
Dear Maria, generally we love you and support you. But this stinks.
I do not approve of your mild message and am so disappointed that you are not calling this by name. It is a genocide by definition of the only reliable world court in our world, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and non-combatants and civilians are being shot, bombed, burnt, starved, deprived, arrested and tortured a hundred plus at a time. You may choose not to use that terminology, but then use ‘criminal large-scale killing with no impunity’. You are a diplomat and you have the words. I know it is difficult for Russia as you are in the SMO yourselves. But you don’t kill civilians and you don’t rejoice in unneeded death.
Your formal statement made my mouth feel as if it is filled with bitter ashes!
Russia can do better and indeed, we expect better.
—
https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xw/fyrbt/202504/t20250414_11594362.html
CCTV: The world is closely following the devastating impact of the Trump administration’s tariff hikes on other countries. As two major economies in the world, China and the EU have recently had quite a lot of high-level exchanges. Could you share with us the communication and coordination between China and the EU on additional U.S. tariffs?
Lin Jian: The U.S. uses tariff as a weapon to exert maximum pressure and seek selfish gains, and puts its own interests over the public good of the international community. This is a typical move of unilateralism, protectionism and economic bullying, which severely hurts the interests of China, the EU and the rest of the world.
As the second and third largest economies, China and the EU collectively account for over one third of the global economy and more than a quarter of global trade. Both sides are advocates of economic globalization and trade liberalization, and firm defenders and supporters of the WTO. The head of the EU underscored the vital importance of stability and certainty for a sound global economy. China and the EU are committed to a fair, free and WTO-centered multilateral trading system, and the sound and steady development of global trade and economic relations, which is in the interest of both sides and the rest of the world.
As a responsible major country, China has already taken resolute measures and will continue to do so to safeguard its legitimate interests. China stands ready to work with the international community, including the EU, to step up communication and coordination, share development opportunities, expand opening up and cooperation, and achieve mutual benefits. We will not only safeguard respective interests, but also defend international trade rules, fairness and justice.
China-Arab TV: The U.S. kept changing its tariffs policy and for now granted exemption on part of Chinese imports. What’s China’s view? Will China cut tariffs correspondingly?
Lin Jian: The spokesperson of the Ministry of Commerce has made clear China’s view on this. Facts have shown and will continue to show that there are no winners in a trade war or a tariff war and protectionism will lead nowhere. The tariff tsunami hurts the U.S. itself as well as other countries. We urge the U.S. to quit maximum pressure and resolve issues through dialogue on the basis of equality, respect and mutual benefit.
China News Service: Foreign Ministry Spokesperson recently said China will take firm countermeasures against the U.S.’s additional visa restrictions on Chinese officials determined to be substantially involved in the formulation or execution of policies related to access for foreigners to “Tibetan Areas.” Could you share more details on these countermeasures?
Lin Jian: Xizang affairs are purely China’s internal affairs. The U.S.’s arbitrary visa restrictions on Chinese officials under the pretext of the Xizang-related issues violate international law and basic norms governing international relations. In accordance with the Law on Foreign Relations of the People’s Republic of China and the Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law of the People’s Republic of China, China decided to impose visa restrictions on U.S. personnel who have acted egregiously on the Xizang-related issues.
Xizang is an open region. We welcome friends from foreign countries to visit, travel and do business in China’s Xizang region. At the same time, we oppose any country or individual using human rights, religion and culture as a false pretext to meddle in Xizang affairs. We oppose interference and sabotage by people with ill motives who would use visits to Xizang as an opportunity to engage in such activities.
Antara: Indonesia and China celebrated the 75th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations yesterday on April 13th. In his exchange of congratulatory messages with President Prabowo Subianto, the Chinese leader stated that we should enrich the China-Indonesia community with a shared future and it serves as a model of solidarity between major developing countries. My question is, amid the current complex and turbulent international landscape, what opportunities can be further explored to deepen cooperation between the two countries?
Lin Jian: Yesterday marked the 75th anniversary of diplomatic ties between China and Indonesia. President Xi Jinping and President Prabowo Subianto exchanged congratulatory messages, spoke highly the development of bilateral ties, and stressed that they will firmly support each other’s national development outlook, jointly advance along our respective modernization path, and lead the relationship to new heights. We have full confidence in a better future of the growth of China-Indonesia relations.
Both China and Indonesia are major developing countries and important forces in the Global South. The cooperation between the two countries has strategic significance and global influence. Amid increasing turbulence in the international landscape, the all-round strategic cooperation between China and Indonesia is all the more important. As we celebrate the 75th anniversary of our diplomatic ties, China stands ready to work with Indonesia to jointly uphold regional development, prosperity and stability, work for closer coordination between major countries in response to global challenges, keep the multilateral trading system and industrial and supply chains stable and smooth, and demonstrate the influence of China-Indonesia community with a shared future in the region and the world at large.
China Daily: In his remarks at the 2025 Central American Security Conference in Panama City, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth blatantly peddled the “China threat” narrative and made aggressive remarks on China’s military and companies. He said the U.S. must prevent war by robustly and vigorously deterring China’s threats in the Western Hemisphere. Deputy Secretary Landau made clear to El Salvador the importance of collaboration on 5G, cybersecurity, and AI, and stressed the need to prevent China from accessing it by only allowing trusted vendors. What’s China’s comment?
Lin Jian: The remarks of relevant U.S. officials are steeped in ideological bias and the Cold War mentality. There is not a single word of truth in them.
Who sees Latin America and the Caribbean as a backyard and forces the “Neo-Monroe Doctrine” on them?
Who keeps pointing fingers at the domestic affairs of these countries?
Who’s been coercing them with tariff threats?
Who’s engaged in massive global surveillance?
Who’s got military bases all over the Western Hemisphere?
Who’s letting small arms and light weapons and ammunition flow into Latin America and the Caribbean as a Zone of Peace?
The world knows full well the answer to these questions.
China’s cooperation with Latin American and Caribbean countries is South-South cooperation. It is always aimed at giving each other support and never driven by geopolitical calculations. China is committed to equality and mutual benefit in engaging with these countries and never seeks sphere of influence or targets any third party. The U.S. keeps vilifying China and peddling the so-called “China threat” in order to cook up a pretext to justify their action to control countries in this region, yet they will never succeed.
AFP: Russia launched a missile attack against the Sumy region in Ukraine yesterday. U.S. President Donald Trump called it “terrible” while other leaders have also condemned that. What’s China’s response?
Lin Jian: China’s stance on the Ukraine crisis is consistent and clear. Dialogue and negotiation is the only way out of the crisis.
AFP: The UK government this weekend said that it was taking control of British Steel from the Chinese company Jingye. The UK’s Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds also said that it was “naive” for Britain to allow the steel industry to fall into Chinese hands. Does the Foreign Ministry have a comment on the takeover and then also on the Business Secretary’s comments on the deal?
Lin Jian: As I understand, the Jingye Group you mentioned is a private Chinese enterprise that has business cooperation with the UK side on the basis of market principles. As for the current difficulties arising in the operation of British Steel, the two sides should resolve them through consultations in the principle of mutual benefit. We hope that the British government will treat Chinese companies investing and operating in the UK in a fair and just manner, protect their legitimate rights and interests, and refrain from turning economic and trade cooperation into political and security issues lest it should undermine the confidence of Chinese companies in their normal investment and operation in the UK.
Shenzhen TV: Last week, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez visited China, which received extensive and close attention. When speaking to the press during the trip, he noted that the aim of the visit is to consolidate Spain’s relations with China and enhance dialogue and cooperation with China. He also stressed that Spain and the EU support free trade and stand ready to work with China to address global challenges. What’s your comment on the visit by Prime Minister Sánchez?
Lin Jian: This is Prime Minister Sánchez’s third visit to China within three years. The visit is a great success and demonstrates the firm willingness and determination of China and Spain to further grow the bilateral ties. During the visit, President Xi Jinping met with Prime Minister Sánchez and Premier Li Qiang had talks with him. Leaders of the two countries had friendly and in-depth exchanges of views. The two sides jointly issued the Action Plan for Strengthening the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership, and proposed to build a more strategically resilient and dynamic comprehensive strategic partnership, to better serve the well-being of both peoples, inject impetus into China-EU relations, and make greater contributions to world peace, stability, and development.
Leaders of the two countries had in-depth and strategic communication on the growth of bilateral relations. They agreed to continue to respect and support each other. Spain reaffirmed its commitment to the one-China principle. They stressed the importance of leveraging their complementarity in cooperation, strengthening cooperation in trade, investment and other traditional areas, and tapping the potential in emerging areas like new energy, artificial intelligence and digital economy. They underscored the need to explore the rich historical heritage of the two ancient civilizations, give a stronger boost to cooperation in such areas as culture, education, youth exchange and tourism, and carry forward the deep bond between the two peoples fostered through the Olympics and panda cooperation.
They also exchanged views on China-EU relations, and international and regional issues of mutual interest. They stressed the need to boost the steady development of China-EU relations, and stay committed as each other’s partner for mutually beneficial cooperation. Both China and Spain are positive supporters of multilateralism and open cooperation. It is important for the two sides to uphold free trade and steady global economic order.
President Xi Jinping noted that as the international situation gets more complex and volatile, it is increasingly important for China and Spain to develop sound and stable relations.
China stands ready to work with the international community, including Spain, to
firmly stand on the right side of history,
be a firm defender of multilateralism, international order and rules,
firmly oppose unilateralism and protectionism,
jointly pursue openness and cooperation,
defend the common interests of the international community and
provide more confidence and driving force for world development and prosperity.
AFP: The UK’s Foreign Secretary David Lammy said that he was deeply concerned after a British Member of Parliament was denied entry to Hong Kong last week. He said he would raise the issue with the Chinese authorities. I just wonder if the Foreign Ministry could say why this MP was denied entry or provide any more details. And also what’s the Ministry’s response to the UK Foreign Secretary’s concerns?
Lin Jian: The Hong Kong SAR government has stated its position on that. Let me stress that border entry is a matter within a country’s sovereignty. The Hong Kong SAR government has the authority to handle individual cases of entry in accordance with relevant laws and policies.
Lateo.net - Flux RSS en pagaille (pour en ajouter : @ moi) 