2024年8月21日 19:11

China in 2024 the defense spending is going up by 7% the most for five 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, 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 Strait 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 demonstration of the commitment of the Chinese nation to eventually achieve peaceful reunification or otherwise. 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 push 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 achieved a complete reunification. I'm always amused with this phrase reunification because if it's one China clearly it's not one China. Clearly you're accepting by definition if you need to reunify. 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, 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. 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. 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 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 baselessly say can constitute 10% of the population, will have to pledge loyalty to reunification in writing. Otherwise we'll have to help them leave. You're basically calling for ethnic cleansing of 2.3 million people in Taiwan. 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 stayed 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'll realize that those die-hard Taiwanese separatists include many of these Japanese Taiwanese. But you would get rid of them, you would get rid of 2.3 million people. No, after the reunification, everyone in Taiwan needs 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're out. Those who pledge for the one China policy, they are local. By the way, you didn't say everyone, you said of Japanese descent, that is literally ethnically, you're picking people by their ethnic heritage, making them do a loyalty test. Otherwise, they have to get out of the country. It is 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'm standing in Britain, I don't support the monarchy, I don't like King Charles. No, you cannot say. I just said it. I literally just said 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. Let's talk human rights, Victor. You've called Uyghurs 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 of the Uyghurs. Now, if anyone is serious about accusing China of practising mass injustice to the Uyghurs, give me the evidence. I just did. Human Rights Watch say half a million people detained over the years in recent years. You keep quote 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, and you've been to Xinjiang. You've spoken to Uyghurs. You've never heard these numbers? I do not know. Where did they get the source? So their source is the Xinjiang High People's Procuratorate, which has published its own statistics, Xinjiang official body, which says it's convicted 540,826 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. Mehdi, if you quote that organisation, please be assured that that organisation has been completely discredited for the false information they came up with. I love this game we're playing. You give me a source. I give you a source. They're discredited. They've said falsehoods. Mehdi, one thing... Let me ask you a question. How many people are in detention in Xinjiang? You give me a number. Listen, if you look at Xinjiang... I'm listening. You give me a number. If you look at... 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 are in detention? Let me give you my reason. No, no, no. I go to Xinjiang a lot. I travel almost throughout Xinjiang. So they're your brother 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 practices and traditions. How many people are in detention, Victor? Mehdi, let me be philosophical. No, don't be philosophical. Be numerical. How many people are in detention? You said no to half a million. How about... Okay, let's let quarter of a million. Let me finish my point. Nope. You answered the question. You can't filibuster, Victor, on this show. If anyone promotes Xinjiang independence, they will be dealt with in court. Got it. How many of them are in court? How many are in detention? A very small minority. So you don't have a number. You say they're all happy, but you won't let in independent investigators. You won't let in journalists to go there. Why not? They're not allowed to go there. I will be happy to escort you to Xinjiang. Really? I can make that promise. Really? I will speak to the Chinese government. Here's the problem. To the Chinese embassy. I don't want escort. I don't want minders. I want to go freely. Will you allow that? I do not make that decision. Oh, a moment ago, you were going to make all sorts of intros. Suddenly, I said, let me go freely and speak to Uyghurs freely. Can I do that with no minders? I'll be happy... 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. Make a case. You can't guarantee. Rehan Asad is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, international human rights lawyer. You are a Uyghur, who Victor says, brothers and sisters. Your literal brother has been held in an internment camp in Xinjiang since 2016, I believe. Rehan, 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? Yeah, my brother Akbar Asad is a prominent tech entrepreneur. In fact, your own media outlet called him a bright star in the tech world. Right before his detention, he was invited on a state gala dinner, and then he disappeared. How could you explain that? Again, in China, we have about 20 Muslim ethnic groups. You need to ask one question. Why did extremism exist mostly among the Uyghur communities? Because there are extremists among the Uyghur community who want to separate Xinjiang away from China. Has your brother been convicted of any crime? Supported by CIA and other Western organizations. OK, Rehan. That's the real truth. Hold on, hold on. Up to the Hazards, they don't support. Has your brother been convicted of a crime? According to the UN, there's no trial has taken place. He just forcibly disappeared. Actually, it amounts to enforced disappearance. But according to the Chinese government, he committed a crime of inciting ethnic discrimination while he's systematically oppressed. And when I challenge that decision, because under the Chinese law, if you're committed with the alleged crime, that you have three sentences, but he got 15. How do you 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 invites him to exchange information. Did he split the country when he visited Beijing? Are you okay with the treatment of her brother? In front of this very august body, let me make several very brief points. The real crime involved by some of the Uyghur people are agitating for Xinjiang independence. They violate the one China policy. Now, separate from that, different communities may find their own different problems which need to be sorted out. In the course of law, and I hope... But her brother's been detained for eight years. Well, I do not know the charge. I hope I can help you to really look at the case and 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. Your media outlet called him a model citizen who is a promoter of ethnic unity in Xinjiang. Have you been able to speak to your brother? No, not at all. Like, you know, for eight years, he's forcibly disappeared. Up until, like, last month, for the first time, my parents saw him. What kind of justice system is that? You're making a mockery of the rule of law. You're not just detaining them, Victor. They're being tortured. Numerous testimonies the UN has collected. Are you okay with that? Mini, when you talk about torture, think about Guantanamo Bay prisons. Oh, my word. Rather than in Xinjiang. Xinjiang is a place of great peace and stability. Victor, the accounts of detainees include being beaten with batons, electric batons, while strapped in a so-called tiger chair. 158 being subjected to interrogation with water poured on their faces, prolonged solitary confinement, forced to sit motionless on stools for long periods. You're okay with this? This is the proud China? Probably you're reading the case in Iraq committed by the American soldiers. No, I'm reading the UN 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 Rehan'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 of Chinese people. I cannot tell him he's in prison. She can't tell him because she can't speak to him because you deny access, Victor. Victor, she can't speak tomorrow. Are you going to arrange it? Are you going to arrange a visit now? I'd be happy to help you. Oh, wow. There's a lot of promises being made here, guys. You should follow up on this afterwards. You are all witnesses. We are witnesses indeed. 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 freedom to talk about their government, to talk about President Xi Jinping in that way. You can't say anything like that. 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. Mehdi, 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. I didn't say that. You'll be dealt with very swiftly. Victor, you're a master of fraud. That's not what I said. I said Rishi Sunak was called a pint-sized loser. Would you call Xi Jinping a pint-sized loser? So you're admitting you can't criticise the Chinese government? You can criticise the government if you're positive? Yes. Is that the new philosophy? You're going to come up with nice insults? Constructive advice? For example, in dealing with the ageing population, what should the government do? What should this governor do? But you can't say the president's lying. He's a liar. That will be dealt with very swiftly in China. You cannot say that. That is the most honest thing you've said tonight. 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, 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 modernisation. And how can you explain 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. Maybe previous presidents, maybe Jiang Zemin or Hu Jintao, everyone knows Xi Jinping has centralised 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? 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, 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 memberships of the Communist Party of China. OK, 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 favour 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. 2,952 to zero. That's one-man rule, my friend. 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, Xi Jinping, not my guy. One. What if he's 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. He does command huge respect about the Chinese people as well as the ruling party. 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 was only one candidate. 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. Many. We do not want to end up in a situation with six prime ministers in 80 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've got great economic growth, but you're a dictatorship. There is no dictatorship, many. You just admitted that there's no name on the ballot paper, no votes against him, and they all just follow him. That's a dictatorship. When the king succeeds the queen, how many candidates are there on the ballot paper? 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. Many. 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. 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 bankrupt the whole country. But 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 dictatorship. Then I show you it is. You say, but it's working. We've got growth. Many. Pick one. Many. 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. The leader of the country put his own name in the constitution while he's president. No one's done that since Mao. 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. The Chinese constitution has been most frequently amended compared with any other country. Am I wrong about what I just said with my little bit of homework? Mao's name was put into the constitution. That's what I said. Deng's name was put into the constitution. Not while he was president. And Jiang Zemin's name was put into the constitution. 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 my recollection, each of those names were put into the constitution Not while they were sitting president. 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 a 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. 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. It's like a vehicle with four wheels. Here, you have four wheels aligned in different directions, opposing directions. In China, the four wheels of a car all line up in one direction... Well, they don't. ...going forward. Well, they don't, Victor. Let me give you an example. Former 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 defence 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. This means China is really merciless in dealing with corruption of all kinds, even among the highest ranks. Your foreign minister and defence minister, imagine Antony 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 in China. How do we know they're corrupt? They just disappeared. Where's the trial? Where's the trial, Vic? Let me finish my point. Corruption of all kinds in China needs to be dealt with with... So where's the trial? Mercilessness. So where's the trial? Where's the trial of the former foreign minister? We don't even know where he is. Andy, those things you don't know doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Where is the trial for this man you're just accusing of corruption? Xin Gang was my good friend for more than 20 years. Where is he then? He is involved in corruption. Where is he? And he's dealt with very swiftly. Where is he, Victor? Regardless of his seniority... He's your good friend. We don't know where he is. Regardless of his seniority... Where is the former foreign minister of China? This is not a hard question. We're not asking where Rehan'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... 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. Exactly. But at least Xin Gang 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's among the 1.4 billion people. And no, it's not just him. There's many other people who've 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 disaster. Be careful what you wish for because everyone's watching this show. And if you get something wrong tonight, maybe you disappear. If I disappear, I hope you will bail me out. I'd have to find you first. And China is apparently a big country. 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 Xi Jinping kind of resembles Winnie the Pooh, would be good enough for me. Thank you. Victor, do you want to take that question? Well, thank you. I would say China needs to take 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, local government need to take actions quickly to reverse that dramatic aging population problem and demographic decline. We're not going to get into that. Let's go back to the audience. I would like to ask you a question on Tibet. Tibet, after 74 years of Chinese rule, is still under lockdown. No journalists, no individual tourists, even Tibetans are not allowed to see their families. What is China afraid of to keep Tibet in such a tight control and Tibetans in such an inhuman existence in our own country? Sir, ever since the Yuan 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 is part of China. 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 megatrend of our time. A megatrend. And you need to accept that before you will feel free to go back to China to visit Tibet. You sound like you're threatening the man. No, I'm not. You 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 China? No way. That will never happen. 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 have signed this document or that declaration. Why the insecurity? Second biggest economy in the world. Major power. You sound so insecure. China's security rests on the principle that there is only one China. And Taiwan is part of China. Tibet is part of China. And Xinjiang 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 Tibet. 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. From many in the Uyghur diaspora, we have not been allowed contact with our families at home within the Uyghur Autonomous Region since 2017, when the Chinese government started detaining more than 3 million-plus Uyghurs into their high-tech surveillance concentration camps. My question to you, sir. What's the Chinese government trying to hide from us? Second, why can't we not talk freely with our families? Yet another Uyghur. So many Uyghurs. The same story. The same question. I'm always very happy to see wherever I go, a Uyghur person, because I do consider the Uyghurs as my brothers and sisters. On one condition, though... Part of me is starting to feel sorry for your actual brothers and sisters. On one condition, though, Uyghurs 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. 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 Uyghur separatists who want to promote separatism of Uyghurs. What about the people who are not separatists who just disappear? Turn Xinjiang into East Turkmenistan. 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. He is old. Seven years, I didn't speak to my mother. I want to speak to my mother. I am British Uyghur. I want to speak to my mother. Do you understand? Literally, support one-China policy, support Xinjiang being part of China. Victor, do you have no heart to see this man who can't speak to his 82-year-old mother? Is she a separatist? I wish your mother is here in this hall talking to you and... Why don't you let her go? So then maybe she could. But then, on one condition, in China, zero tolerance of any separatist movement. An 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 Reihan come be on a panel like this in Beijing, in, say, the Beijing International Convention Center? Could 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? Mehdi, if you ask me to line up all the support, you will do that. Really, I can assure you of 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 and buy a ticket. I'm not asking foreigners. Victor, I'm not asking foreigners to come. Could a Chinese audience turn up and ask whatever they want, criticize Xi Jinping, criticize the government, ask you questions, talk about Uyghurs? Could you do it in Beijing? Mehdi, in China, don't criticize our president. We couldn't do this. Unless you have a very positive, constructive proposal to make. Criticism is not the only goal. Criticism with constructive purposes will be a better free speech. Free speech is a 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 Gao, 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 to Head.