China outlines key tasks to deepen rural reforms and advance rural revitalization.
Three years into the Ukraine conflict, how U .S.
President Donald Trump's return has shifted the dynamics.
An exit poll showed that Germany's conservative bloc has won the federal election.
Welcome to Road Today, a news program with a different perspective.
I'm Gueyanna in Beijing.
To listen to this episode again, or to catch up on previous episodes, you can download our podcast by searching Road Today.
China has unveiled this year's number -one central document, aligning priorities for deepening rural reforms and advancing rural revitalization.
The document emphasizes strengthening China's ability to supply key agricultural products, such as grains and enhancing rural industries.
It says one of the top priorities is to safeguard the country's food security.
The document also says the country will ensure that no large -scale lapsing or relapsing into poverty occurs, maintaining targeted support for vulnerable groups, such as low -income earners and the relocated rural populations.
For more on this, our Zhang Yang spoke with Yao Shujie, Chang Kong professor of economics at Chongqing University.
Professor Yao Shujie, thank you very much for joining us.
China has unveiled its number one central document for 2025.
What are your main takeaways from this document regarding the agriculture, rural areas, and farmers?
What are the policy priorities for the year?
I think, first of all, it's the number one document emphasizing the agricultural low low in farmers.
This is a consecutive for many, many years.
As regarding the contents of the document, I think first of all, food security is the one top priority because China had 1 .4 billion people.
We're still the largest population in the world as a single country.
So it is fairly important to make sure that food security is tightly controlled so that the social economic stability particularly depends on how the agricultural sector is going to supply the harmful product for the requirement of the people.
Not only the basic needs, but also the quality of the dining tables.
So this is a very important issue.
Secondly, I think because you cannot just ask the farmer to do the agriculture.
You also need to create non -farm employment opportunity for the farm so that they can earn adequate income to make sure they move up from the low income level to a medium and to a high income level as in the urban counterparts, so LULO, especially at the county level economic development, social are very important, and certainly I think the document emphasize technology innovation, the so -called new productive forces.
It means the agricultural production is going to move away from the traditional production mode where we only employ more farmers and employ more land and other materials.
We also want the production system to be more efficient.
And in order to be more efficient, I think you need to enable all production systems, including the farmers, the land, and also the equipment that is employed in the agricultural production process.
They have to move into a higher level of quality.
And in order to do so, given the current stage of technological developments, I think digitalization and artificial intelligence, and all these kinds of things, e -commerce, they're going to be popularly applied into the agricultural system in the rural construction area.
So these are fairly comprehensive documents.
So as you mentioned, one of the top priorities is ensuring the country's green security.
So how would you assess the importance of scientific and technological innovation in safeguarding the green security?
You know, China has limited agricultural resources, particularly land, and also in terms of labor.
I think during the last few decades, China has experienced a very rapid process of urbanization and industrialization.
So a lot of agricultural labour has been absorbed into the urban sector and the industrial sector.
This means that the absolute amount of labour in the agricultural system has been declining fairly steadily.
And the agricultural land has been fairly stable and, to some extent, has been slightly declining.
So it means that the traditional input like labor land, they actually are contracting.
But the amount of agricultural output has been increased phenomenon.
And why have we this situation, why the traditional input has been declining and the output has been increased?
This is purely due to technological progress.
Now, agriculture technology can be classified into different categories.
For example, biotechnology, where you have the breeding of new varieties which produce high yield per hectare of land.
You also have some sort of chemical technological innovations that use more efficient chemical fertilizers and organic fertilizers.
So then the land can become more productive.
And the third branch of technological progress is the machinery and digital technology.
Machinally, such as tractors, harvesters and transplantors, all those different kinds of machinery employed in the agricultural system.
They become more powerful, more efficient, so they put units of agricultural machinery really they can cultivate, or looking after a much wider area of land.
So these three branches of technology together, enable labor input to be declined and land area to be stable, but at the same time, the agriculture system produced far more products than before, including not only ground, time, but also fisheries, animal husbandry, and other things.
So the Chinese people have enjoyed plenty of food on their dining table, and if you have an international experience, you know that the Chinese consumers are probably enjoying the most plenty supplies of agricultural products in the world.
And yes indeed and in this year's document China for the first time used the term new quality productive forces in the agriculture sector.
And so professor Yao, so beyond green security, China also vows to prevent the large -scale relapse into poverty and this is also a key task for this year and beyond the so what do you make of that and why is it so important for China?
Well, China's ambition is to build up modernization of socialist country.
And the modernization of socialist country with the characteristics, in the betterment of life, is not only just for the urban few but also including the low -income people.
and much of the lower income people are actually living in the countryside.
So are the farmers.
Farmers can have two kinds of employment.
The first employment is that they migrate into the urban area to take on you know industrial and service employment.
But there is a significant proportion of farmers who are left behind in the countryside.
And what they do? They actually do traditional agricultural jobs, but they can also do low -low industry jobs, such as food processing, tourism, e -commerce and so on and so forth.
So what the government wants to do is to create a conducive environment, so that the farmer has ample employment opportunities.
They can, you know, have these kinds of high -income earning opportunities.
But in order to have these high -income opportunities, the government and the society have to invest heavily.
First of all, it increases the low -low infrastructure, transportation, and so on and so forth.
And also the internet system.
And secondly, it enables the countryside to use the internet pass and also the digital economy so that not only the employment opportunities are created, but also there is a significant opportunity for people to enhance the income generating capability.
And also, you know, for those people who are living in a fairly absolute area where, you know, productivity is constrained by the difficult environment, the government should be able to help those people by improving their production condition, and education, and health care, and also social security to help the fairly unable people, for example, the sick and also the disabled are unable to protect themselves, the government should also give more social security to support those people.
Yes, indeed. And the documents also highlight the importance of county level economic development in driving the rural prosperity.
So Professor Yeoh, so what other steps needed to achieve that, and what are needed to attract more talents and funding into the rural areas?
Yeah, at the county level, you know, development is a very hot issue.
So we need to attract sufficient numbers of people who are willing to stay in the countryside.
But staying in the countryside, you also need the so -called urbanization, anti -level urbanization.
The country is the centre, and the major township is some sub -centred to attract local people.
In order to attract local people, I think the most important constraint is social services.
For example, healthcare, the quality of hospital and medical care, and also the quality of the anti -level schools and also the township -level, village -level school education.
So education support is probably the most important, and visible, investment that the central government pays serious attention.
There is a significant gap in terms of education quality between the multi -town and medium city and between medium city and large cities.
Actually, urban law should be integrated together in terms of providing the high -quality services.
That was Dr. Yaohsu Jie, Cheonkong Professor of Economics at Chongqing University.
Coming up, three years into Ukraine conflict, how U .S.
President Donald Trump's return has shifted the dynamics.
Stay with us. Hello.
My name is Alessandro Golombiev's déchédas.
I'm a professor of Public Policy Management.
at Xinhua University in Beijing.
I am a great listener of the world today.
In my opinion, the world today is one of the best China radio programs.
In the world today we can get the best news and analysis in what is happening now in the world.
So please, come to join us.
You are listening to Broad today.
Monday marks three years seeing the Russian -Ukraine conflict began.
A CNN report says Kiev has lost 11 percent of its territory and a generation of Ukrainians is growing up in war.
Once seen as a hero in the West, President Vladimir Zelensky now faces political uncertainty.
Hopes for peace talks have deemed after U .S.-Russia negotiations excluded Ukraine and Europe.
Meanwhile, fighting rages on.
On the eve of the anniversary, Russian launched its largest drone attack, over 260 drones.
Zelensky made a surprise statement, saying he'd step down if he mean peace or NATO membership for Ukraine.
If to achieve peace, you really need me to give up my posts, I am ready.
I can trade it for NATO if there are such conditions.
But I don't want to talk about it for a long time.
I am focused on Ukraine's security today, not in 20 years.
I am not going to be in power for decades." He also urged U .S.
President Donald Trump to extend security guarantees and meet him before speaking with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
For more on this, joining us on the line is Dr. Jiang Xin, deputy director of the Center for Russian Studies at East China, Noemore University.
Professor Zhang, let's assess the current state of the conflict first.
As we enter the third year of the Ukraine conflict, how would you evaluate the current military situation on the ground, and what are the key developments and challenges faced by both sides?
Overall, I think, into 2024, then onward toward 2025, the overall situation on the battlefield can be summarized as Russia overall is on the offensive, Ukraine is overall on the defensive.
Then, except for the Kursk incursion last summer, when the Ukrainian military, for the took the initiative to enter Russian home territory and held on a substantial chunk of Russian land for a while, except for that I think the pattern just described hold for most part of 2024 onward to 2025.
And in this War of Attrition we might call Russia seems to be holding the upper hand overall in In terms of manpower, in terms of the supply of ammunition, the basic things you need on the battlefield, and also the overall advantage in aerial control of the aerial space.
In terms of missiles and long -distance drones, Russia is still also on the relative bigger advantage.
But this attrition war is still going on.
Ukrainian army still has intense fighting, especially in Donetsk.
As all the push for negotiation go on, we actually see Ukrainian army in the past few days having launched some counterattack in Donetsk.
I wouldn't rule out the possibility even when the negotiation in different forms will be conducted through multiple formats with multiple participants, the warfare on the battlefield may still going on for a substantially long time.
The situation remains very complex but professor under the previous U .S.
administration, the United States mainly influenced the situation in Ukraine through NATO and arms cells.
But since President Donald Trump took office we have observed a more direct and assertive intervention.
For instance, Trump stated the conflict wasn't Russia's fault—a view that significantly diverges from the mainstream Western narrative.
What do you think is the political intent behind such statements, and how might this affect the U .S.
position within NATO and its broader stance on international affairs?
President Trump has already made very clear in his election campaign that you want to end the Russian Ukraine conflict.
And overall, he has been on a relatively good relation with his Russian counterpart.
They seem to be able to talk to each other on a personal level much better than the relation we see between the mainstream political establishment in Europe and the Russian political elites.
And then for the past few days, we do see some dramatic statements from President Trump and his top -level diplomats, including the phrase that Ukraine actually provoked the beginning of the war.
Russia is not responsible for the beginning of the war.
Some phrases along that line.
I think his intention is obviously to try to modify, really calibrate the narrative about the causes of the war, also the nature of the conflict, so that there will be more space for the United States and the Russia to reach some deals to end the warfare.
And to some extent that we already see the results.
Russia side responded overall to the American initiatives in a positive way.
Those recalibration of the cause and nature of conflict so far hasn't gone very well with most of the European mainstream political establishment as well as political key political figures from Ukraine.
The really response is that this is a complete manipulation of reality.
To some extent it's a misinformation campaign, right?
So I think those divergent of views about the causes of the war, the the nature of the conflict will haunt the transatlantic relations for the weeks and months to come.
Maybe the beginning of the end of the transatlantic alliance, as we have seen since the end of the Cold War.
Professor, President Trump also recently threatened that Ukraine should repay Washington for his aid with 500 billion US dollar in mineral resources.
Could you elaborate on why Trump has recently focused on Ukraine's mineral resources?
How significant do you think this proposed a mineral deal is in shaping the U .S.
approach to resolving the Russia -Ukraine conflict?
I will say on the one hand that this is seem to be very consistent with President Trump's overall modification, or re -collaboration of the U .S.
grand strategy. He seemed to be interested in withdraw certain strategic resources from Europe, reduce U .S.
involvement, investment in that part of the world, and move resources to the key potential battlefield in the future, Asia -Pacific or Indo -Pacific, and also further strengthening U .S.
control efforts in the near neighborhood.
So I think that possible demand for Ukraine's mineral resources, and even beyond that that we see in the past 48 hours, U .S.
rhetoric is not only covering critical minerals or natural resources from Ukraine in exchange for US continuing support.
I think the US top officials are also indicating the ports and some other critical infrastructures can be included in this list.
So that's very consistent with Trump's suggestion or insistence on bringing Canada to be its the 51st state, it's insisted on reclaiming control of the Panama Canal, and the possibility to purchase Greenland.
I think in that sense, the mineral story is consistent with Trump administration's modification of US grand strategy.
On a practical level, there are still a lot of details we don't know about the mineral deals.
And Ukraine, if you look at really the statistics, its mineral reserves are not that abundant.
It's mostly linium and titanium, and the reserves are relatively limited.
And most of them are in the Russian control territory.
So if we factor that in, I would say the push for the mineral story is also part of President Trump's negotiation strategy tactics using this maximum pressure to both push Ukrainian government to be on his side in the possible deals he would work out with Russia and also function as something the Trump administration can manage to sell to its domestic audience.
He can say to the U .S.
audience, U .S. domestic voters to see like, now our deal with Ukrainians, is we're not going to waste our tax money endlessly in that part of world distant part from US.
If US is going to further evolve, there will be a material guarantee.
So that can be also part of is negotiation and tactics both for Ukraine as they have pressure for Ukraine, but also something you can sell to the American audience.
But Professor initially, President Zelensky expressed a willingness to strike a deal with Trump, but later rejected the deal.
What does this shift in position reveal about Ukraine's internal considerations?
And from Ukraine's perspective, we talked about the security guarantees.
And the Lynski said he'd step down if he meant peace or NATO membership for Ukraine.
How likely will that happen?
I think from a Ukrainian government's perspective, it came as somewhat a surprise, a shock.
It took some time for them to have a pulse of what it really means.
And also the possible details.
So it's not surprising President Zelensky would change some of its attitude towards a mineral deal.
Overall, unfortunately, I think the Ukrainian side, including President Zelensky himself, do not have that much of, we might say, bargaining chips on a table.
Ukraine is not even on the negotiation table between Russia and the US right now.
So I think the recent statement shows some sort of a desperation from President Zelensky to say, well, if there is a credible security guarantee and NATO membership, he's willing to step down.
But look at all the things coming out of the mineral deals.
I don't see anything credible from U .S.
about the exchange of mineral resources or maybe even a critical infrastructure with a credible security guarantee.
The US wasn't even mentioning that, they didn't seem to be committed to that at all, even if the minerals are going to be controlled by the US.
So I think that also feeds into President Zelensky's statement of desperation.
One last question, Professor, from Russia's perspective, what do you believe are Russia's core demands in these talks?
How might Trump's eagerness to end the war affect the geopolitical dynamics between the US and Russia?
Now, I think the ball is on the Russia side overall.
I think the Kremlin will probably see a really big space opened up for them to request or even demand more from the possible ceasefire or maybe even political agreement to end the Russian - scenarios.
conflict. The top U .S.-Russian officials already openly stated the negotiation between U .S.
and Russia is not going to be just about the end of the conflict in Ukraine.
So I think they will use the opportunity to demand more, either compromise or more exchanges in spheres beyond just ending the conflict on the battlefield.
So including long -term security arrangement.
in Europe, and also including so -called a grand deal between many other policy dimensions, including, for example, nuclear negotiations on the U .S.
and Russia bilateral side.
I think the Russian top decision makers are going to really exploit this possibility to demand more from, again, mostly in the security sphere in Europe, and also between Russia and the U .S.
That was Dr. Jiang Xun, deputy director of the Center for Russian Studies at East China Normal University.
More to come, we will take a look at Germany's election result, you're listening to Broad Road Today will be back after a short break.
You've been listening to Road Today with Micah Anna in Beijing.
Actual posts show that Germany's conservative bloc has won the federal election.
Frederick Mez, who leads the Christian Democratic Union and the Christian Social Union Alliance, has pledged to restore Germany's prominence in Europe and demonstrate that it is being reliably governed.
Mez is facing messy coalition talks after the Alternative for Germany Party achieved its best result in second place.
The Social Democrats tumbled to their worst result since World War II, and Chancellor all of Shaw's considered defeat.
He said he would remain in office until a new coalition government is formed.
So to talk more on this, let's have Dr. George Zugopoulos, director of U -China programs and senior research fellow at European Institute of Knees.
Thanks for joining us, Professor.
Thank you for having me.
Professor, while the conservative bloc won the election, but their vote share was at historically low -level, what do you think this reflects about the mindset and demands of German voters today, and what potential impacts could this have on the future direction of Germany's politics?
Well, Germany finds itself at crossroads, and although the conservatives, the Christian Democratic Union, won the election, indeed its increase, the increase of its percent in comparison to the previous Bundestag speech four years ago is not spectacular.
And I would say that this is indicative of the current situation in Germany, where mainstream politicians do not necessarily send reliable messages to voters.
And for these reasons, voters themselves are not particularly confident that a change in the governmental policy will necessarily solve the problems which have been created in the last three or four years.
So this can explain why the Christian Democratic Union, although it won, the election has not scored our particularly high percentage in yesterday's budget.
Beauty on that the far right of populist party alternative for Germany has achieved a higher vote share.
How do you think this will affect Germany's political landscape, especially in areas like immigration policy and social integration?
Well, indeed, if we are looking at the numbers, the alternative for Germany party scored a very impressive result.
It almost doubled its power and comparison to four years ago, and especially in the eastern part of Germany it is particularly successful.
I would say that being the main opposition party, as it is the likely scenario right now, the alternative for Germany Party will play a very important role in German domestic politics.
And it will certainly influence the political debate towards several directions, not only social integration and the migration crisis, but also Germany's economic policy, which will certainly be an issue of high interest for the years to come.
So with the alternative for Germany Party in the main opposition, I expect that political divisions in Germany will possibly increase in the months and years to follow.
Then Professor, what's your assessment on the socio -democrats, because we saw they have a sharp deploy in both, dropping from around 26 % in 2021 one to just 16%, in your opinion, where did the SPD lose their voter support?
Well, this is a very important question.
And your remark is very correct concerning the fall in the percentage of the aspect, the social democratic party in Germany.
I would rather attribute this fall to the current status of the German national economy, which finds itself in recession.
And obviously, the policies of the German government in the previous three years and a half did not help the German economy maintain its status in Europe, which, for many years, was the leading economic power in the Eurozone.
It's not any longer the case.
And although it was a coalition which was formed of three different parties, certainly they're all of the chancellor, all of sorts, and of the espede, the Christian, the social Democratic Party was to blame for the dynamic performance of Germany's economy in the last three years and a half.
So again, it's the economy which led to this disastrous result for the social Democrats in Germany.
Professor, as you mentioned, Germany is facing multiple crises, including economic and foreign policy challenges.
The mayor has promised to restore Germany's strong leadership position in Europe?
What concrete measures do you think he will take to achieve this goal?
Well, I would say it is too early to say because the most important priority right now for Germany is to form a coalition government.
And possibly this coalition government will be formed by the winner of the election, the Christian Democrats, and the Social Democratic Party which lost yesterday's election.
But in order for the government to be formed, the two will need to agree, and this will not be very easy, also judging on the previous experiences in 2017 in particular.
So Mertz, as the new chancellor of Germany, will certainly attempt to play a role in order to see his country back to the epicenter of the European attention.
But again, problems which have lasted for three years approximately cannot immediately disappear.
So I would rather employ a wait -and -see approach for the government to be formed, and also for all other international developments to take shape in order to comment on Germany's new role in the European Union.
Let's shift gears to Germany's foreign policy challenges.
Kismez emphasized the importance of independence in dealing with U .S.
President Donald Trump and managing relations with the U .S., Aiming to gradually distance Europe from American influence, how do you assess such a goal, and what do you think are the key challenges and opportunities Germany faces in achieving this goal?
Well, to start with, the general objective of Germany to become autonomous or independent from the United States is not a decision that Germany itself is taking.
It's a decision which is a result of what President Donald Trump is saying and doing, So, the European Union is responding to that and the European Union and German in this case will certainly attempt as much as possible to protect national and European interests in a changing world where President Donald Trump does not really value the role of the European Union.
Once again, challenges will be tremendous for the new German government because it all Well, depends on whether the United States and Russia reach an agreement on Ukraine, because this will certainly influence the new German foreign policy as far as relations with Russia are concerned.
So again, I would say that Germany is not having the leading role right now.
On the contrary, it is waiting to see what others, Russia and the United States in particular, are doing, and this will be the critical factor to save Germany's foreign policy in the years to come.
Then on China -Germany relations, well -made new government continues stance from previous one on economic policy towards China, for example, or might there be changes?
If so, in what areas could these changes manifest?
Well, again, I would say that it all depends on how the new coalition government in Germany will be, will formulate its foreign policy.
but judging again on history and what Chancellor Merkel did as far as German relations with China were concerned, I would expect the new Chancellor Mertz to follow a pragmatic foreign economic policy vis -a -vis China, because China is a critical actor in the international system.
And obviously China's economy is quite significant for Germany, especially taking into account ongoing challenges, especially with electric vehicles, and so on.
And also Chancellor Salz, in the last 3 years, attempted to save Germany's foreign policy vis -a -vis China from a pragmatic point of view.
And if a coalition, a government, is to be formed on the basis of such an agreement between two main parties – the Christian Democratic Union and Social Democratic Party – I expect the German is following an economic policy vis -a -vis China to be based on logic and for ties especially in the economic sphere to expand despite existing challenges.
Thanks, Professor, for your insightful opinions.
Now was Dr. George Zhugopolis, Director of EU -China programs and Senior Research Fellow at European Institute of Nice.
Coming up, Israel delays the release of Palestinian prisoners over the dispute on hostage Hanover.
We'll be back. Hello, I am Dr. Digby James Wren, a political analyst and international relations scholar specializing in China area studies.
World Today offers unmatched in -depth perspectives on China's politics, economics, business, technology and society.
World Today's team of reporters and contributors provides valuable information from all of the world's major economies.
I hope you can join me on World Today for the very best insights and news from China on China and helped to build a better understanding of China's role in the world today.
You have been listening to World Today.
Israel has postponed the release of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners, citing concerns about how Hamas conducted recent hostage handovers.
The Israeli government stated the delay was in response to what it called humiliating ceremonies during the handover process.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accused Hamas of violating ceasefire terms and using hostages for propaganda purposes.
In return, Hamas condemned Israel's decision to postpone the release, calling Israel's claim that the Hanover ceremonies were humiliating a false claim, meaning to avoid its responsibilities under the ceasefire agreement.
Senior Hamas leader Mahmoud Madaweh declared that Hamas would not engage in any further ceasefire discussions until Israel releases the 620 Palestinians who were supposed to be freed on Saturday.
So for more on this, my colleague Zhao Ying is joining us in the studio.
Thanks for joining us, Zhao.
Thanks for having me.
Israel and Hamas have both accused each other of violating the ceasefire deal.
Can you please tell us more about what specific violations each society is alleging and how these claims are affecting the truth?
Well on the Israeli side, Israel accuses Hamas of violating the ceasefire spirit by staging high -profile releases for Israeli hostages.
They're described as humiliating ceremonies by the Israeli side.
For example, there are masked militants flanking hostages during handovers, and one captive was filmed kissing on Gomian's head.
And also, there's a video showing two others, really hostages, being forced to watch three of their fellow captives being released.
And they pleaded on camera for their freedom.
Israel said, these are part of the psychological warfare.
And while the ceasefire text doesn't explicitly ban such acts, Israeli argues that these acts exploit hostages for propaganda.
And they use this as a justification for delaying the release of over 600 Palestinian prisoners.
And Benjamin Netanyahu, who said the release was now going to be delayed until the next ten over of hostages by Hamas was guaranteed and without what he called the humiliating ceremonies.
Well, Hamas, on the other hand, claims Israel is violating the ceasefire's explicit terms by postponing the release of these 620 Palestinian prisoners.
They were supposed to be released on Saturday, but families waited hours in vain in the West Bank of Gaza and this fueled Palestinian anger, and Hamas caused this blatant violation and accuses Netanyahu of inventing excuses to sabotage the deal.
And Hamas also accused Israel of humiliating Palestinian prisoners and detainees during the release process, mistreating them until the very last moments and banning their families from holding celebrations.
And Hamas argues that these acts contradict the agreement's humanitarian intent.
And, also, Hamas condemns Israel's deployment of tanks to the West Bank and ongoing assault on refugee camps, which displaced 40 ,000 Palestinians.
And Hamas framed this as part of a broader pattern of Israeli aggression, which undermines the ceasefire agreement.
As we mentioned, Israel cited humiliating ceremonies during the hostage handovers as a reason to delay the release of Palestinian prisoners.
From your perspective, is this a legitimate concern or an excuse to stall the process?
Well, of course, from Israel's point of view, this is about maintaining the integrity and respect for the hostages.
But from Hamas's side, they argue that Israel is using the ceremonies as a pretext to avoid fulfilling its commitments under the ceasefire.
But I think the core issue here is the fundamental lack of trust on both sides.
The agreement, as we know, was structured in three phases.
and each of the three phases requires new negotiations, so now each side is accusing the other of violations, but the underlying problem is that both sides have little faith in the other's willingness to adhere to the terms.
And also Hamas is particularly concerned that Israel will secure the release of the most vulnerable hostages, and then once these hostages are safe, they may resume military operations.
And on the other side, Israel has its own concerns about Hamas' ability to follow through, and they claim that Hamas has already violated the deal multiple times since it began.
So I believe the lack of trust on both sides is the biggest barrier to peace.
Speaking of that, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has indicated Israel is ready to resume fighting if necessary.
country, how does this threat affect the already fragile ceasefire, in your opinion?
Well, I think a clear message we can get from Netanyahu's threat is that he views the ceasefire as temporary and conditional, instead of a pathway to lasting peace.
And for Hamas, this, I believe, reinforces suspicions that Israel is negotiating in bad faith.
And it's important to understand that any sign of a potential military escalation can immediately destabilize the negotiations, especially when both sides have already shown a lack of trust in the agreement.
And Netanyahu's comments could also be seen as a pressure tactic, signaling that Israel is unwilling to make further concessions.
On the other hand, this also plays into Hamas' own concern about Israel's intentions, given the public statements from Israeli officials suggesting that the second phase of the ceasefire may involve a military resumption if conditions are not met.
So I think now both sides are teetering on a knife's edge and any misstep could easily trigger a return to full -scale conflict.
The temporary ceasefire is set to expire on March 1st.
What are the chances of an extension?
Well, I think the chances remain uncertain and there are a number of factors at play on the one hand.
The around hostage exchanges have given both sides a vested interest in maintaining some level of calm that the trust deficit between Israel and Hamas is deep and both sides have shown skepticism about the other side's commitment to the deal.
Israel has made it clear that it's wary of Hamas using any ceasefire extension to regroup while Hamas remains concerned that Israel might resume fighting once it secures the release of the key hostages.
And these competing interests will likely make it very difficult to extend the ceasefire unless there is a significant breakthrough in those talks, but at the same time we have to understand that Netanyahu is facing increasing domestic pressure from his right -wing coalition, which could add to the uncertainties of the ceasefire.
So, I mean, if Netanyahu feels his government stability is at risk, will he prioritize his own political survival over extending the truce?
And also the international mediators such as the U .S.
will also play a role, because Donald Trump did play a role in brokering the ceasefire deal, but I think his pro -Israel stance may also create significant challenges for the ceasefire deal to hold and he actually said on Friday that he is really fine with any decision Israel makes as whether to continue to a second stage of the ceasefire deal or to return to war in Gaza.
So as we know, both sides need to make compromises for negotiations to move ahead, but Trump's rhetoric kind of emboldens Israel and further complicates this delicate balance of the ceasefire.
So I mean, we really need to wait and see.
Thanks to Zhao for your insightful analysis that was Zhao Yun on the recent development of the Gaza crisis.
Coming up, China's Trade Promotion Agency urges U .S.
to lift two -way investment curves.
Stay with us. Hi. I'm Einar Tengen, a political and economic analyst and senior fellow at the Independent Taiha Institute.
World Today is news without the hype and business commentary that is informed and up to date, presenting the facts and asking incisive questions.
So join us if you are someone who needs to know what is happening in China as it is happening.
You are listening to World Today.
The Chinese business community says it opposes Washington's repeated generalization of national security concepts and obstructions of bilateral economic and trade exchanges.
The China concept for the promotion of international trade is urging the U .S.
to lift curbs on two -way investment related to the American First Investment Policy memorandum.
U .S. President Donald Trump signed the memorandum on Friday.
He contends provisions to encourage investment from allies in strategic industries while limiting mutual investments between the U .S.
and China. The Trade Council says the measures will severely impact the decision -making of enterprises, undermine the international economic and trade order and disrupt the security and stability of global industrial and supply chains.
To delve into this, joining us on the line is Professor Leo Bauchung, Director of the Center for International Business Ethics at the University of International Business and Economics.
Thanks for joining us, Professor.
Yes, it's a pleasure.
Professor, compared to presidential executive order or congressional bill, a presidential memorandum is not legally binding, and it's more about express policy direction.
But what tangible impact do you think this memorandum will have on bilateral investment between China and the United States?
It's going to cause a lot of confusion within the business community from China and U .S.
on both sides because the memorandum, I counted the 12 times they mentioned China, although they identify foreign adversaries that are targeted.
So the communities are waiting and see, but it seems that the new Trump administration is pretty much determined to go towards the trajectory of decoupling with China on all rounds.
Actually, since his first term in 2016, Chinese investment in the United States has been declining very steadily over the years by 10 times until the end of 2012.
So these restrictions will further deter the first of the US firms to invest in China, particularly in the high and sensitive technology area, and then it forces Chinese firms to shift also their investment into other regions with more predictability, for example along the road in the Southeast countries or Middle East and also Europe.
And given that he is also getting so provocative to Europe, it seems that there is good reason that EU is going to work more closely with China and his leverage on the technology compact where EU is going to be weakened.
And then the capital market is also holding the money and wait and see if this is really turning into the real implementable policies or laws.
So that's also going to disturb the whole global, the capital market, given that both China and the United States are strong in the capital flow, and also in the stock exchanges.
And that was the disruption of investment...
and global supply chain will also have to deal with adaptation and also readjustments.
Professor, the memorandum mentions reviewing the potential suspension or termination of the 1984 U .S.-China tax treaty.
If this agreement is suspended or terminated, what kind of ripple effect do you think this well have on trade and economics changes between Chinese and American businesses.
Well, further costs will have to be added in doing business because the treaty is there to prevent double taxation on companies.
They operate in both countries.
Without it, business will have to face increased tax burdens, and given the volatility of the policy.
They will also face more uncertainties, so that's going to reduce their enthusiasm to invest.
And the U .S. companies in China now are also there to have to consider some investment plans and to deal with some contingencies.
And they also have to make different type of budget, market, even though they are determined to stay put in China.
And then the trade and finance market will also face the impact because if more of the financial and tax risks will be present, that can really discourage the small and medium sized enterprises to participate in the China -US investment and trade schemes.
We know the U .S. claims that this policy is aimed at protecting national security interests but in reality it severely hampers bilateral investment between China and the U .S.
so how do you view the U .S.
approach of using national security as an excuse to implement investment restrictions?
Very obviously the U .S.
particularly under the Trump administration they have been politicizing and even weaponizing the whole trade relations with China.
This definitely violates the global rules, for example, by WTO, to discriminate a particular member of WTO in their trade policy and investment policy.
This will further hamper any prospect to resume the talks over the bilateral investment treaties, because until 2016, both countries had made tremendous efforts and spending years to negotiate on the bilateral investment treaties to further relieve the restrictions on investment on both countries.
And now it seems that the prospect is going to be extremely bleak, because global investment does not only involve two countries across the Pacific.
Investment portfolios will be arranged on the entire global front.
So now with this one that's possible in place, this is also going to disturb the investment flow of the global financial market.
Unfortunately, we ran out of time for this edition of World Today with Mige Ena.
Thank you so much for listening.
