பூகோளப் போட்டியால் இலங்கையில் தொடரப்போகும் ஆட்சி மாற்றங்கள்: கேணல் ஆர். ஹரிகரன் எச்சரிக்கை

 

Weaponization of Information in China

 We can expect to see China’s media strategy in full play in both domestic and international media, making it difficult to separate actual news from fake as it has weaponised the media. Regulators also appear to be concerned about the younger population straying from “patriotic path” under the influence of online media controlled by foreigners.

By Col R Hariharan | Column| India Legal | November 5, 2021

https://www.indialegallive.com/column-news/weaponization-of-information-in-china/

In the biggest clean up since the Covid-19 was brought under control, China has recently launched a multi-pronged regulatory crackdown on a broad range of industries, thus raising a lot of uncertainties. This can be interpreted as China’s Communist Party (CCP) under President Xi Jinping’s way of reminding tech giants and other big businesses who are calling the shots.

According to China watcher and author Deter Tiff Roberts: “Beijing is intent on strengthening control over private companies and foreign investment,” reserving shares in essential sectors like semi-conductors for domestic use and boosting the role of state-owned firms. More importantly, the regulators also appear to be concerned about younger population straying from “patriotic path” under the influence of online media controlled by foreigners.

President Xi Jinping laid down the rules of conduct for the use of cyberspace for informatization process as early as February 2014, in his address to the Central Cyber Security and Informatization Group (CCSIG). He said: “The Internet is not a place outside the law. Using the Internet to promote the overthrow of state power, instigate religious extremism, promote national separatism, instigate violent terrorist activities, etc., such behaviour must be resolutely stopped and cracked, and must not be allowed to prevail.”

He added that using the Internet to conduct fraudulent activities, spread pornographic materials, conduct personal attacks, peddle illegal items, etc must be “resolutely controlled” and must not be allowed to prevail. This would indicate that weaponization of information was always part of the CCP agenda.

In the same meeting, Xi called the core technology of the Internet as “our biggest hidden danger as the core technology is restricted by others.” He compared any Internet company heavily relying on foreign countries to core components relying heavily on foreign countries where the lifeline of the supply chain is in the hands of others. He said it was like building a house on someone else’s wall, no matter how big and beautiful it was. It may not be able to withstand wind and rain, and may even be vulnerable. He said that “if we want to grasp the initiative in our country’s Internet development and ensure Internet security and national security, we must break through the core technology problem and strive to achieve ‘curve overtaking’ in certain areas and aspects.”

A few days back, Yahoo Inc. pulled out of China, citing an increasingly challenging operating environment. In a a statement, the internet service provider said: “In recognition of the increasingly challenging business and legal environment in China, Yahoo’s suite of services will no longer be accessible from mainland China as of November 1.” Yahoo’s withdrawal is largely symbolic as China’s digital censorship has already blocked many of its services.

The entertainment industry in China has been asked to shun artists with “incorrect political positions”, strictly enforce pay caps for actors and cultivate a “patriotic atmosphere” for the industry. It is part of the State’s efforts to crush celebrity fan culture. Already, sale of fan merchandise has been banned.

Gaming companies have also faced the wrath of regulators who slapped restrictions on the amount of time players under the age of 18 can spend on online games on weekends and holidays to curb game addiction.

China has already started tightening the rules for big tech IT companies. Last year, it halted at the last moment the planned IPO of Ant Group, a giant internet finance company in New York. Now, it is framing rules to ban internet companies, whose data poses potential risks from listing outside the country.

Cloud computing is also facing uncertainties as China is building its own State-backed cloud system that is likely to challenge tech giants like Alibaba, Huawei and Tencent Holdings. The State is also seeking to tighten the oversight of algorithms tech companies, including e-commerce companies and social media platforms, use to target users. The Cyberspace Administration of China has said that companies must abide by business ethics and principles of fairness and should set up algorithm models that do not entice users to spend large amounts.

The Chinese government has also introduced regulations to bar private tutoring companies from raising capital overseas. The rules say tutoring centres must register as not-for-profit companies. Now they will not offer subjects taught in public schools; holding classes on weekends and holidays is banned. China has a highly competitive education system like India; this has made tutoring services popular with parents.

The banking sector has issued regulations to tighten control of online loans by finance companies. The Cyberspace Administration of China has asked Didi Chuxing, the top ride hailing company, to stop accepting new users after it went public on the New York Stock Exchange last June. Already financial regulators have slapped curbs on cryptocurrency sector, barring banks and online payment firms from using cryptocurrency. Provincial governments have also barred use of cryptocurrency. The government is also sorting out the issue of property management sector to improve order. Efforts to curb rampant borrowing in real estate sector is in place; caps have been imposed on borrowing of developers and property loans by banks.

In this turbulent environment, we can expect China to tighten control of media, both at home and abroad. Last March, a report of the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of China (FCCC) said that China used coronavirus prevention measures, intimidation and visa curbs to limit foreign reporting in 2020, ushering in a “rapid decline in media freedom”. The FCCC annual report said in the 150 responses it received for a third year in a row that no journalist said the working conditions had improved. The report said: “All arms of State power, including surveillance systems introduced to curb coronavirus, were used to harass and intimidate journalists, their Chinese colleagues and those whom the foreign press sought to interview.

BBC’s Beijing correspondent John Sudworth has reported that in addition to the heavy restrictions it places on foreign journalists trying to report the truth about its far western regions of Xinjiang, China used the new tactic labelling independent coverage as “fake news”. He had reported their own experience of intimidation by unidentified persons while travelling along Xinjiang’s desert highways. They forced them to leave one city by chasing them out of restaurants and shops, ordering the owners not to serve them. Their report on thousands of Uyghurs and other minorities being forced to pick cotton based on China’s own policy documents, were dubbed as “fake news” by China’s Communist Party-run media.

On the other hand, the results of a global survey carried out by the Inter­national Federation of Journalists (IFJ) of its affiliated unions showed China had used the Covid-19 pandemic to boost its image in global media coverage. More than half the countries surveyed in 2020 said that the coverage of China in their national media was more positive since the start of the pandemic. The Chinese were probably taking a more interventionist approach on local media coverage of China.

The report also said that more than 80% of the countries were concerned about disinformation in their national media, though only a third of them said China was responsible for it.

The report said when the pandemic started spreading, China activated the existing media infrastructure it had placed globally to seek positive narratives about China in national media and used novel tactics, such as disinformation. This is not surprising, as for the last two decades, China has been reshaping the global environment to expand the reach of its own share of state-run news outlets in tandem with its growing global reach.

According to IFJ, China appeared to have increased its own domestic and international news offering tailored for each country in non-English speaking languages. This is significant as international media was struggling to survive due to the adverse fall out of Covid-19 pandemic on economy.

We can expect China’s media strategy in full play in both domestic and international media, making it difficult to separate actual news from the fake one as it has weaponised the media. The latest example is the report in Financial Times that China had tested a nuclear-capable hypersonic missile, last August. It said the weapon “circled the globe before speeding towards its target”. However, China denied the report and said it was an experimental spacecraft and not a weapon.

The Financial Times report quoted “five people familiar with the test” to say that the rocket carrying the hypersonic glide-vehicle flying on a low space orbit missed the target by “about two dozen miles.” The report said the test showed China had made “astounding progress” and wondered why the US often underestimated China’s military modernisation. Whether China has actually carried out the hypersonic missile test or not, the report has aggravated global paranoia about China’s capabilities because hypersonic missile can penetrate the missile shield. 

—The writer is a retired military intelligence specialist on South Asia associated with the Chennai Centre for China Studies.

 

Sri Lanka: Politics of Majoritarianism, Security and Scams

Col R Hariharan

Sri Lanka Perspectives October 2021| South Asia Security Trends November 2021 | www.security-risk.com

 

Happenings in Sri Lanka during the month of October 2021 can be summarised as “Politics of Majoritarianism, Security and Scams.” President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, known for goal-oriented action. But two of his recent decisions, abolition of the use of chemical fertilizers and introducing “one country one law” are having ripple effect not only on economy and ethnic peace, but also on relations with China and India. The name of one of the Rajapaksa’s figuring in the Pandora papers is probably yet another scam in the making. The month saw India making news more than once in the media. Visits by Secretary for External Affairs Harsh Vardhan Shringla and Indian army chief General MM Narvane, Indian and Sri Lankan armies’ joint exercise and visit by six warships of Indian Navy highlighted India’s sustained interest in making India-Sri Lanka relations multi-faceted.

President Gotabaya Rajapaksa had imposed a total ban on agrochemicals including fertilizers and pesticides in May, to make farming totally organic. It also helped the cash strapped government save around $400 million for import of fertilizers. The President’s action was ill timed, as the economy was already reeling from the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic. Tea industry and farmers cried hoarse as shortage of fertilizers peaked and food prices shot up. In August, the government placed an order for the import of 96,000 tonnes of organic fertilizer with Qingdao Seawin Biotech Group, a Chinese company. The samples of the imported fertilizer were found to contain Erwinia and other harmful bacteria when tested by Sri Lanka’s National Plant Quarantine Service. The Chinese embassy in Colombo condemned the tests, questioning the competency of the testing agency and maintaining the fertilizer was found sterile on testing before export. The Department of Agriculture banned import of all fertilizers from China and the agriculture ministry suspended the $ 63 million contract awarded to the company. To make up Sri Lanka’s urgent needs, India organised the supply of 3.1 million litres of nano liquid fertilizer, which were tested and found to be free of contamination.

The whole episode was a big loss of face for China. China took exception to Sri Lanka scientists’ action and wants the samples tested at another laboratory “acceptable to both sides”. The Chinese embassy has black listed the state-owned Peoples Bank of Sri Lanka for not paying the contracted amount. Sri Lanka has now announced that it was reversing the decision on import of fertilizer to help growers of Ceylon tea, one of the main foreign exchange earners.

President Rajapaksa’s appointment of a 13-member Presidential Task Force (PTF) headed by the controversial Buddhist cleric Galagodaathhe Gnanasara to implement the concept of “One Country, One Law” (OCOCL) has drawn a lot of flak from opposition parties and civil society on many counts. The PTF is tasked to “make a study of the implementation of the concept ‘One Country One Law’ and prepare a draft Act for the purpose and submit a report by February 28, 2022.”

The announcement of a PTF on OCOL comes as no surprise; the President had used it as a slogan during his 2019 presidential campaign to garner Sinhala Buddhist votes. Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) in a statement has pointed out the concept of “One Country, One Law” smacks of majoritarianism. It added that it was “by no means an expression of a desire for equality or equal protection under the law.” It also questioned the President’s style of governance through task forces.

The appointment of Gnanasara Thera to head the PTF, surprised many. Opposition Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) MP Harin Fernando pointed out the PTF is headed by someone who is blamed by the Presidential Commission of Inquiry which probed the Easter Sundays attacks of April 21, 2019 and whom the Commission has also called to be prosecuted. The Colombo daily Island aptly editorialised: “It defies comprehension why the President has handpicked as the head of the PTF as person who was granted a presidential pardon while serving a sentence for contempt of court, which in other words means causing an affront to the dignity of the judiciary”. Its question “How come the President thinks a person sentenced to jail for violating the law is fit to carry out his one country one law project” though relevant will continue to remain unanswered.

Moreover, the PTF is constituted a few months after the cabinet took a decision to amend the country’s Muslim personal laws. At present, The Kandyan Law and Thesawalamai Law apply to Sinhala and Tamil communities respectively. In view of this it is doubtful the PTF composed of nine Sinhalese members and four Muslims but no Tamils is competent to sit and evolve OCOL that would deliver justice to all ethnic communities.

India-Sri Lanka relations appear to be seriously undergoing some repair. After India came with a supply of nano nitrogen organic fertilizer to bale out Sri Lanka from the fertilizer crisis, Sri Lanka was reported to be seeking $500 million credit from India to pay for petroleum purchases as petrol shortage reached a critical stage.  India may accommodate Sri Lanka’s request as oil shortage can cripple the country’s economy, already battered by the impact of  Covid-19 pandemic. In this context, it is interesting to note the issue Sri Lanka finalising India’s longstanding offer to develop the oil tank farms at Trincomalee came up when India’s Foreign Secretary Harsh Shringla called upon the President during his three-day visit to Colombo. Elevating bilateral relationship of to a strategic level, bolstering foreign investments and expand strategic cooperation in defence and Indian Ocean security are probably some of the issues the Foreign Secretary discussed with the President and the Prime Minister during his Colombo visit. He is said to have stressed the importance taking forward long pending projects beneficial to both countries and enhancing air and sea connectivity. He reiterated India’s position on complete implementation of the provisions under the 13^th Amendment to the Constitution, including devolution of powers and holding of provincial elections at the earliest.

A week after the Indian Foreign Secretary’s visit, Chief of Army Staff General MM Naravane visited Sri Lanka. He is also said to have underscored the importance India attaches to expeditiously taking forward mutually beneficial projects. During his meeting with the President, General Naravane said India “highly expects” the stability of neighbouring countries for regional security. According to the Presidential Media Division, a specially designed training course for 50 army officers will be provided to Sri Lanka in the near future at the request of the Chief of Defence Staff and the Commander of the Sri Lanka Army. It is interesting to note India-Sri Lanka joint army training exercise Mitra Shakthi was being held during his visit.

[Col R Hariharan, a retire MI specialist on South Asia and terrorism, served as the head of intelligence of the Indian Peace Keeping Force in Sri Lanka 1987-90. He is associated with the Chennai Centre for China Studies. Email: haridirect@gmail.com  Website: https://col.hariharan.info]    

 

Time to support democracy in Myanmar

The recent ASEAN snub was a huge loss of face for the junta chief. But can India and the international community wait for the group to take action while Myanmar burns?

Col R Hariharan (Retd) |Opinion| 1^st November 2021

 https://www.newindianexpress.com/opinions/2021/nov/01/time-to-support-democracy-in-myanmar-2378098.html

The 39th ASEAN summit that met on October 26 had a notable absentee—Gen Min Aung Hlaing, head of Myanmar’s ruling junta. The ASEAN, which had Myanmar’s internal situation on its agenda, decided not to invite him after he refused to allow the group’s special envoy to meet Aung San Suu Kyi, who is imprisoned along with other leaders. Meeting political leaders was an important item on ASEAN’s five-point proposal for mediation. After taking the unprecedented action, the group offered a sop. It invited Chan Aye, permanent secretary at the Myanmar junta’s foreign ministry, to attend the summit. Rejecting the offer, the Myanmar military spokesman said, “For us, attending a meeting that doesn’t place Myanmar at the same level as others is like an assault on the sovereignty of our nation.” Neither the ASEAN chair nor the secretary general chose to refer to Myanmar’s absence at the summit, sending a clear message that the group was prepared to deal with the Myanmar junta chief on its own terms. It was a huge loss of face for Gen Hlaing, as his presence would have partly fulfilled his quest for legitimacy of the junta government. 

The junta chief has also missed attending the 16th East Asia Summit (EAS) held virtually after the ASEAN summit, with the participation of leaders from Australia, China, India, Japan, Russia, South Korea and the US in addition to ASEAN leaders. American President Joe Biden in his address at the EAS was unequivocal in condemning the military takeover. He said, “In Myanmar, we must address the tragedy caused by the military coup, which is increasingly undermining regional stability.” He added, “The US stands for the people of Myanmar and calls for the military regime to end the violence ... and return to the path of democracy.”

On the other hand, the brief statement issued by the PMO and MEA said the important regional and global issues discussed at the EAS included Indo-Pacific, South China Sea and Myanmar. Pointedly, it said the “PM reaffirmed ‘ASEAN centrality’ in the Indo-Pacific and highlighted the synergies between ASEAN Outlook on Indo-Pacific (AOUIP) and India’s Indo-Pacific Oceans Initiative (IPOI)”. The reaffirmation of ASEAN centrality indicates that India is probably not thinking beyond facilitating the group’s efforts at mediation in Myanmar. The same approach was likely adopted when the issue was discussed at the 18th ASEAN-India meeting on October 28. 

The UN, which had been preoccupied with the turbulence in Afghanistan, had also banked upon ASEAN’s five-point proposal for resolving the Myanmar issue. However, after ASEAN’s refusal to invite the military junta chief to the summit, the mediatory process could be indefinitely delayed. 

The moot point is, can India and the international community wait for ASEAN to take action while Myanmar burns? Thomas H Andrews, UN Special Rapporteur in Myanmar, has warned that the nation was heading for full-blown civil war in his report presented to the UN human rights body last month. Andrews said the crisis in Myanmar had become grave, with the army continuing to commit mass atrocity crimes. According to pro-democracy sources, as on October 23, under the military regime, 1,196 people had been killed and 9,175 arrested. These largely conform to the findings of international agencies. 

The newly elected members of the NLD and ethnic political parties have formed the National Unity Government (NUG) to visibly reinforce their legitimacy. Though its presence on the ground is shadowy, its official website and interactive social media sites keep the people informed of its activities. The NUG has demonstrated its multi-ethnic character by making the 1st Vice President Duwa Lashi La, a Kachin, the acting President and Mahn Win Khaing Than, a Christian Karen, the PM. The NUG has decided to repeal the 1962 Citizenship Law and replace it with a new law based on “proper” citizenship criteria. These actions meet the demand of not only Rohingyas but also “stateless” people of Indian origin in Myanmar. 

The NUG’s call for a civil disobedience movement against the junta has kept up the spirit of protestors. Many soldiers have deserted their posts. In August, the NUG formed the Peoples’ Defence Force (PDF), laying down a code of conduct for its fighters. It is carrying out attacks on Myanmar troops. It is significant that these attacks are taking place in regions like Sagaing and Magwe, Mandalay and Tanintharyi  (bordering Thailand), and Chin State (bordering Mizoram), which had not seen such protests in the recent past. The coup has almost killed the ceasefire that was in force with nearly 14 ethnic insurgent groups. Such ethnic groups in Northern Shan and Kayah states are regrouping to fight the Tatmadaw. In Rakhine state, the Arakan Army has consolidated its presence.

According to Myanmar media, the ruling junta has deployed thousands of troops to carry out operations in Chin State bordering Mizoram. A few days ago, Radio Free Asia reported the torching of a whole village by Tatmadaw troops after the Chin defence militia attacked a military convoy. Ethnic affinity of tribes living on both sides of India’s border with Myanmar makes it porous, as free movement for 16 km across the border is allowed. Mizoram is already facing the spillover of the conflict in Chin State, with nearly 13,000 people taking refuge with their ethnic kinsmen. It has become a political issue in the state after the Centre refused to treat them as refugees. Last week, the Nagaland government said an unknown number of Nagas from Myanmar have sought refuge in Mon district following military operations in the Sagaing region. 

Destabilisation along the border is a threat to the security of both India and Myanmar. Realising this, the armed forces of the two countries have been cooperating to maintain security and stability in their border areas and not to allow sanctuaries for insurgent groups in their territories. This has helped India curb insurgency in the Northeast. 

Myanmar is India’s gateway to the East and vital for India’s Act East Policy. India is involved in executing two strategically important projects in Myanmar: the Kaladan Multi-Modal Transit Transport Project and the Trilateral that connects the Northeast with Myanmar and Thailand. During the last decade, India has built multifaceted, robust relations with Myanmar and its development assistance portfolio there is now over $1.75 billion. 

India’s efforts to build a win-win relation with Myanmar will go to nought if civil war continues. The writing on the wall is clear: The military cannot crush the fight for democracy and the international community is in no hurry to recognise the junta regime, which is running out of cash. The NUG has taken a number of affirmative actions, which need to be encouraged. 

As early as last April, a MEA spokesman said: “We condemn any use of violence. ... We stand for the restoration of democracy in Myanmar.” Words alone are not enough. It is time India used its good offices with the Tatmadaw to make it rethink its strategy and get ready for peace parleys as suggested in the ASEAN mediation process. 

Col R Hariharan (Retd) 
Former military intelligence specialist on South Asia and terrorism
(haridirect@gmail.com)