Daily News and Analysis.
We keep you informed and inspired.
This is World Today.
Hello and welcome to World Today.
I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
Coming up, Hamas says it will allow aid for hostages if Israel halts airstrikes.
Latest inflation and jobs figures are sparking concerns over U .S. economy.
China warned against the group politics after FBI unveiled plan to open office in New Zealand to counter China.
And South Korea begins removing propaganda loudspeakers on border with North Korea to reduce tensions.
To listen to this episode again or to catch up on previous episodes, you can download our podcast by searching World Today.
day. Hamas says it is prepared to coordinate with the Red Cross to deliver aid to hostages it holds in Gaza if Israel meets certain conditions.
The conditions set by Hamas include Israel permanently opening humanitarian corridors and halting airstrikes during the distribution of aid.
The statement came after Hamas released a video showing the images of the hostages who have spent almost 22 months in captivity.
The video has fueled renewed calls to reach a ceasefire and hostage release deal.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has spoken with relatives of two hostages who appeared in that video, expressing shock over the content of the video.
Tens of thousands of people rallied in Tel Aviv over the past weekend weekend to urge Netanyahu's government to secure the return of the remaining hostages.
So for more, joining us now on the line is Dr. Tim Anderson, Director of the Center for Contra -Hedronic Studies, a Sydney -based think tank.
So thank you very much for joining us, Dr. Tim Anderson.
First of all, is there any chance that Israel is going to accept those certain conditions raised by Hamas?
It's not certain, but I think there's a very slight chance, only a very slight chance, because in the past, the Israelis have not agreed to provide any sort of security guarantees to the Palestinian resistance.
They don't believe that their existence is legitimate.
They want to wipe them out.
And they've said many times that they want to take over the entire Gaza Strip.
And many people in the government have been saying they're ready to kill every man, woman and child there.
And in the past, they've shown their indifference to the Israeli prisoners because they've killed them with some of their airstrikes.
And we know even back from October the 7th, almost two years ago, that they quite deliberately killed their own people.
So to prevent the possibility of a prisoner exchange, which is, of course, why one of the main objectives of the resistance operation in October the 7th was to have a prisoner exchange for the many thousands of Palestinians held in Israeli prisons.
So to Hamas, what do you think the remaining hostages mean?
Well, the initial objective of their operation, Al -Aqsa Flood in October 2023, was to destroy the garrison surrounding Gaza, the Gaza garrison, and to take prisoners for a prisoner exchange.
That was always an important part of their aim.
But now, of course, they're very concerned to lift the stage on all of the Gaza population, which includes all of the civilians and, of course, also the few remaining Israeli prisoners that are still there.
So they've always wanted a prisoner exchange because there are many thousands of Palestinian prisoners being held by the Israelis and in very poor conditions, usually in much worse conditions than those being held in Gaza.
So that's been the concern of Hamas.
Hmm. The domestic pressure that Netanyahu's government is faced with is nothing new, really.
But do you think the domestic pressure has reached a turning point nowadays?
I'm afraid I don't think so.
You're quite right that there's a lot of domestic pressure.
There have been demonstrations for a long time on the part of Israelis that want to see their prisoners of war are exchanged, but the Netanyahu regime has been very resistant to this because they have these strategic objectives of taking over Gaza and the limit trying to expel the population from there.
And unfortunately, they've now had almost unconditional support from the Trump administration, so that's emboldened them, I think.
I think Trump's support has emboldened Netanyahu and his cabinet to continue with their policy and really, although they look bad in the eyes of some of their own population, they look terrible in the eyes of the world, I think Trump is reinforcing that position of intransigence.
Why do you think now Washington has an unconditional support for Tel Aviv?
For example, how would you distinguish between Washington's support to Israel during the Biden era and now with the Trump administration?
Well, there's not a lot of difference except in the language.
Trump has always been more overt in his and crude, perhaps, in his language, whereas the Biden administration often resorted to these more nuanced type of suggestions that they were supporting the idea of humanitarian relief and so on.
They were against the settlements and so on.
Trump has always been more direct in his language, but in actual fact, the practice is very similar.
Hmm. Now, in the meantime, the United Nations Children's Fund has issued a warning that children in Gaza are dying at an unprecedented rate, quote unquote, due to, for example, due to famine, as well as the deteriorating humanitarian conditions on the Gaza Strip.
The U .N. agency estimates that more than 18 ,000 children have been killed in Gaza since the beginning of the conflict.
What is your thought on this?
Yes, every genuine UN agency and the independent aid groups and so on have united in this about the condemning really the terrible situation that they face with the blockade, with the ongoing bombing, with the failure to make any real concessions.
The only thing recently was there has been some small amounts of aid drops just in recent days and a small amount of aid coming in, but it's very, very small in relation to the need.
I think the UN agencies have said they need something like 600 trucks a day to meet the current needs of the famine in Gaza.
And, of course, many people who are seriously wasted, and particularly children who are seriously wasted from this famine, it's not that easy.
Even if food arrives, they've deteriorated so bad that their health condition is very uncertain.
So it's a dire circumstance.
It's a terrible circumstance.
It's entirely created by the human beings that are enforcing this blockade on Gaza, which includes the US.
Yeah. So, by the way, do you see any immediate solution for this for this children's crisis?
Well, the the ingress of food has been critical, the immediate thing, ingress of food.
But of course, they're still bombing the aid sites.
This agency that was set up called the Gaza Humanitarian Fund, which backed by the US, but really run by the Israeli military, has become, as is now notorious, a killing field again.
So unfortunately, there's no real significant change in the attitude of the Israelis.
And I thought for some time we need some international intervention, but people are afraid, I suppose, to support an Israeli regime that is so unconditionally supported by Washington.
Now, in Australia, tens of thousands of demonstrators have marched across the iconic Sydney Harbor Bridge, calling for peace and aid deliveries in Gaza.
Gaza. So can you tell us more about the general public sentiments regarding the war in Gaza over there in your country?
Well, it was a very impressive rally.
But of course, I think it mirrors the situation in many countries, not just in the Global South.
Of course, the Global South has been pro -Palestine for quite a long time.
But also the populations in the Global North are turning around.
As we see in Sydney, basically, the police said there there were almost 100 ,000 people.
The demonstrators themselves say there were much more than that.
But certainly every media outlet, all of the political agencies in Australia recognise that there was a huge groundswell of support and sympathy for the Palestinian people and demand to relieve their conditions.
But unfortunately, the Western elites around the world who feel very tied to Washington, are afraid of angering Washington, have their own form of intransigence.
I think it's pressured a little bit like the...
It's pressured the Israelis to the extent that there have been a few small aid drops, as I said, and a small amount of aid coming in to try and turn around the idea, the impression that the Israelis are these terrible criminals.
The Israelis are sensitive to that to some extent, but really to a very limited extent.
They're making some pretenses at changes, but there hasn't been much fundamental change in their approach to the siege on Gaza.
Okay. So exactly more about that.
We know last week a joint statement by Australia and more than a dozen other countries expressed the willingness or the positive consideration to recognize the state of Palestine as an essential step towards the two -state solution.
Do you see possibility for Australia to set an exact time to recognize the Palestinian statehood as Britain and France have done recently?
way? Well, I'm afraid not, because the two -state solution is a cruel myth that's been held out for almost eight decades.
Basically, they've been talking about a Palestinian state, but it's become a cover really for the Israeli state, which is the only state that exists in historic Palestine, to keep doing what they're doing.
So it's really delaying the possibility of delivering any sort of other concrete measures like putting an arms embargo on the Israelis.
I think one European country has done that, imposing a boycott and sanctions on the Israelis.
It hasn't really happened.
The Western agencies may be trying to distance themselves from the U .S. I think they feel they don't want to identify entirely with the Trump administration because his image is not a very good one, even amongst Western countries.
But they don't want a break.
And this two -state solution is really part of a type of doublespeak that has made a cover for the Israelis to keep doing what they're doing.
The Israelis have never been there's never been any serious attempt to agree to a state run by the Palestinians, except like a municipality, which the Palestinian Authority runs at the moment.
There's no sense that they would allow the Palestinians to have their own control over security and economy and the sort of things that really make a state.
So, by the way, to Australia, what's at stake when we talk about whether or not it will recognize the two -state solution?
Well, it's really an image factor.
You see from the rally in Sydney and other parts of Australia that there's a huge dissatisfaction with the government.
I mean, the Australian government has admitted recently that they are providing parts to F -35 fighter jets.
And ridiculously, they suggested these were non -lethal parts being provided to these warplanes.
So they're squirming under the pressure, under the public pressure there.
There's a big gap between the public opinion and what the governments do.
And I think this applies in a lot of the European countries at the moment.
I've been listening to recently to some MPs from Spain, for example, talking about the Spanish rhetoric.
The Spanish rhetoric appears rather progressive in European terms, but Spain still has this close relationship with the Israelis and still has some contracts with the Israeli military.
So the Western governments are trying in some respects to create a third space for themselves, distance themselves from the Trump administration, but they're not really doing much in terms of opposing what the crimes that the Israelis are carrying out in Palestine at the moment.
So the final question before we let you go, And this is very much related to your previous points just now.
Going forward, do you think the war in Gaza will become a point of contention between other Western nations and the United States?
Yes, I think there is that tension already, but there's not really, we haven't seen much of a real clear move to break with the United States rather to try and reposition themselves as the Australian government is trying to do.
There is one European state, Slovenia, which has placed an arms embargo on Israel.
And that's a very good start.
And I think it may be that some other European countries may make that initial break to at least place an arms embargo to not actually direct provide weapons to this regime that's committing these horrible crimes.
But it's very difficult for them because they're so embedded in the US economy.
They fear the consequences of breaking with the US and they fear the reprisals from the the Trump administration, which, of course, is a very vindictive administration against any of its so -called allies and friends that seem to be taking a different path.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Dr. Tim Anderson, director of the Center for Counter -Hegemonic Studies, a Sydney -based think tank.
Coming up, latest inflation and jobs figures are sparking concern over U .S. economy.
You're listening to World Today.
Stay tuned. You're back with World Today.
I'm Ding Han in Beijing.
U .S. employment growth was weaker than expected in July.
The latest monthly jobs report showed that the U .S. labor market added 73 ,000 non -farm payrolls last month, bringing the unemployment rate to 4 .2%.
Some analysts say the weaker jobs figures are putting a September interest rate cut by the Federal Reserve back onto the table.
The US Fed decided to hold interest rates steady in its latest July meeting.
It was a cautious move, but not everyone agrees with the decision.
In a rare break from consensus, two Federal Reserve Governors voted for a rate cut, highlighting growing division within the central bank.
So where is the U .S. economy heading next?
What will be the biggest risks for the rest of the year?
My colleague Zhao Yang spoke with Li Lun, Assistant Professor of Economics with Peking University.
So Professor Li Lun, thank you very much for joining us.
First, given the weaker -than -expected job figures, what does it say about the U .S. economy?
The Federal Reserve Chairman Jeremy Powell described the economy as in good shape.
but how would you assess the current health of the U .S. economy?
Yeah, so I think the problem of the U .S. economy right now is basically the job market is underperforming and it's not, you know, a new phenomenon in July.
But if you look at, for example, from May and June, the job creation has already stalled.
So if you take the three -month average, the monthly average job creation is only like 35 ,000, which is the slowest level since 2020 in the midst of pandemic.
So if you look at the unemployment rate, it rose to 4 .2, which is equivalent to the level in late 2021.
So these pretty weak job reports combined with future uncertainty about the terror policy, future uncertainty about inflationary pressure.
I think overall, despite the statistics, the U .S. economy is doing OK, especially on inflation, inflation, especially if you look at 4 .2.
You don't think it's a very high or a extremely high number.
But I think in the future there's lots of uncertainties, and probably that's why the Fed is still not cutting the interest rates.
And talking about the Federal Reserve decision to hold the interest rates steady last week, it seems that the Federal Reserve are taking a wait and see approach. What signals are they likely waiting for before making a move?
move, and now with the weaker than expected job figures, how likely is the Federal Reserve to cut the interest rates in September?
So I think besides a headline CPI, a core CPI is a very important measure to look at.
So Powell also called this the primary compass.
I think besides core inflation and headline inflation, there's still the gross prospects and the expected inflation that's also taken into account.
Also, I think what complicates the matters is that the tariff is already – many of the tariff from partnering countries from 10 percent to 50 percent is already being implemented.
and this is going to cause an inflationary pressure on the U .S. consumers.
So even even though it's not in the statistics yet, because, you know, tariffs has not happened, has not, you know, facing to the inventories is not reflected in the price of the products on the shelf yet, it's expected to cause inflation to further go up.
So if you cut the interest rate now it's going to cost the U .S. dollars to be weaker, weaker, which is going to cause, you know, higher import prices.
So that's going to further kind of increase the inflationary pressure.
So I think that's also part of the reason why, you know, the Fed is taking a wait and see approach, because nobody honestly nobody knows how much of these tariff policies is actually going to cost on the CPI.
And what do you make of the U .S. economy?
What impact does Trump's big and beautiful bill and his tariff policies have on the US economy?
Yeah. So I think you mentioned that the Fed is taking a wait and see policy.
I think the Trump's big, beautiful bill is causing a wait and see kind of reaction or response in a lot of the sectors.
So, if you break down, for example, the July job count, out of the total 73 ,000 increase in the jobs, primarily I think the addition comes from healthcare, which is a sector that's continued to grow since the post pandemic recovery.
So, if retail added around 60 ,000 jobs, the finance sector added 15 ,000 jobs, but there's There's also a cut in the federal government employment.
So I think relatively a lot of the sectors, including retail and financial, they're just adding not many jobs.
So in terms of hiring, people are observing and trying to look at how these tariffs are going to impact the economy.
So I think this beautiful bill combined with the tariff policy is putting a pause on a lot of sectors.
So, for example, in the green energy sector, people are pausing the investment and going to see what the further policy is going to be.
So, I think this wait and see policy in the Fed and also in the private sectors is going to be very problematic for the U .S. economy.
And President Donald Trump has openly pressured the Federal Reserve to cut the rates.
How unusual is this kind of political pressure on the Central Bank and is it influencing decisions?
Yes, I think. Well, it's not unprecedented fact or phenomenon before.
For example, President Lyndon Johnson, during the Vietnam War, has also pressured the Fed Chair, William Martin.
So there is a famous quote that, you know, Lyndon Johnson shoved the Fed Chair, Martin, to the wall.
So this is not like a new phenomenon.
But this time, I think President Trump is going beyond these political pressures and actually taking some actions.
For example, we have already seen in the data that Trump fired basically Erica, the head of BLS, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Erica McIntyre, basically because he doesn't like the stats.
So he decided to fire the chief official who is responsible for it.
So we're seeing actual actions that Trump is taking to kind of materialize these pressures, which is honestly more unprecedented.
And the Federal Reserve Chairman Jaron Powell explicitly pointed to the Trump administration's tariffs as a risk to both growth and inflation.
So how do tariffs complicate the Federal Reserve's job right now?
Yes. So if you think about these tariffs, they're like a negative shock to supply because they both raise inflation.
They also dampen demand.
So these are basically creating a conflicting objective for the Fed, because typically when demand is overheated, inflation is also up.
So that's when you naturally cut interest rates.
But now the inflation is expected expected to raise but demand is expected to go down.
So these conflicting, you know, objectives making the Fed, you know, it's basically giving the Fed a harder time to do.
And also I think in terms of manufacturers, you know, abroad, they face higher costs and uncertainty.
So these for U .S. economies, especially for U .S. importers and, you know, supermarkets both serve to kind of a forced to discourage hiring, which is already, we have seen from the July data, the job market behavior is already kind of below expectations.
So in the future, if the U .S. companies are further cut hiring, this is going to cause further trouble on the unemployment rate.
I think combined with all of these factors, this is really bringing a lot of trouble and complication to, you know, to the decision -making process of the Fed.
And under the backdrop of the new tariff from the Trump administration, what does this tariff mean for the U .S. consumers and the U .S. economy?
Where is the U .S. economy heading next?
Will it go into the stagflation?
Yeah, so it's obviously it's still pretty early to see.
But my prediction is that I think especially for import heavy household items such as, you know, fridge or, you know, washing machines, you know, and also the durable goods that needs to be imported will definitely have a price gain.
And these higher prices is also going to erode people's purchasing power because when the wage rate doesn't increase as fast, your real purchasing power is going to decrease, and that's going to generate basically a slower increase in actual demand.
And that demand is going to loop through the economy and create a even slower kind of supply.
And this is going to kind of further weaken the job market as well.
So it is very, I think it's likely that the economy will slide into the stagflation -like scenario.
But I don't know how deep or how fast that's going to happen is beyond my prediction.
share. Yeah. And then what do you think will be the biggest risk to the US economy in the second half of this year?
Is that inflation? Is that tariffs?
Is that policy uncertainties or something else?
Yeah. So I think tariff is definitely on top of the list of the biggest threats.
I do think that if the tariff is actually passing through to consumer prices, the Fed that is actually, is definitely going to take some actions to compensate for that increase.
I think political uncertainty, I think, are also the bigger threats.
Dr. Li Lun, Assistant Professor of Economics at Peking University, talking with my colleague Zhao Yang.
Coming up, China warns against the group politics after FBI unveiled plan to open office in New Zealand to counter China.
You're listening to World Today.
I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
We'll be back after a short break.
You are listening to World Today.
I'm Ding Han in Beijing.
China has voiced strong opposition to the groundless acquisition from the head of the U .S. intelligence agency, FBI. The remarks follow the FBI's announcement of the agency's first -ever permanent office in New Zealand and move the agency says is meant to counter China's influence in the region.
FBI Director Cash Paddle has labeled China as a quote -unquote a threat to the Indo -Pacific.
In response, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson said the move undermines peace and stability in both the Asia -Pacific and a broader region.
So for more, my colleague Xu Yaowen earlier spoke with Dr. Warwick Powell, adjunct professor at Queensland University of technology.
The FBI recently opened its new office in Wellington, New Zealand, and its director Kash Patel said in a recent video that countering the CPC in the Pacific region is one of the most important issues.
What do you make of his remarks and the U .S. latest moves?
And do you think this is just another step in your broader strategy to counter China, or is there more to it?
Well, I think it's quite clear that the United States has embarked on and continues to pursue a strategy aimed at containing China.
It clearly sees China as its most significant peer adversary in many regards, and certainly its most significant competitor and, from its point of view, threat to its dominant and primacy position globally and, of course, in the Pacific.
Pacific. Moving into New Zealand really reflects I think a lack of confidence from the United States in New Zealand as one of its main partners.
This is because it is now having to deploy its own infrastructure into New Zealand to do the job that in the past they perhaps would have expected New New Zealand to carry out.
And I think that this is in some regards, if I was New Zealand, I would see this as something of a slap in the face.
New Zealand's reaction seems a bit cautious.
On one hand, it allowed the U .S. to open a new office in its country.
But on the other, it avoided to call on China.
Given that New Zealand is a member of the Five Eyes alliance and China is New Zealand's largest trading partner, do you think the country funds this a difficult position?
Look, I think quite clearly countries like New Zealand are in what has become a challenging and difficult position.
It's become a difficult position because the United States insists on forcing countries to choose sides, so to speak.
By and large, most countries would prefer to be able to go about their business, so to speak, without being put into a position where they have to choose either American provided security or continued economic benefits through expanding and deepening interactions with China.
But of course, the United States only sees the world through black and white or zero sum games, where if you're not with us, you are against us.
And as a result of that, the United States continues to put pressure on its allies, its security allies in the Pacific, including New Zealand, to in effect make a choice.
Now, New Zealand is doing its best quite clearly to navigate this difficult position and perhaps it hopes that at some point in the future circumstances will change whereby it will have greater room to pursue a more autonomous or sovereign security and foreign policy.
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun has strongly criticized the U .S. move, saying that China has always advocated for cooperation between countries and does not target any third parties.
And the move undermines peace and stability in the region.
What do you think China's next steps might be in response to these actions?
Look, I think China pursues a very judicious and prudent approach to how it responds to actions by third parties, and in particular, the United States, that are quite clearly targeting China and aim to contain China.
China's historic approach has been to focus on what has been very, very good at, and that is contributing to the economic and social development of countries through the provision of infrastructure and services and support, training, personnel, know -how, technologies and those sorts of things.
And in the first instance, I would expect that China will continue to do that.
China has a strong record in the Pacific in terms of contributing to the needs of countries, and it does that by listening to what these countries um say that they need on the other hand western powers who've dominated the pacific ever since the end of the second world war have never actually fundamentally changed the economic circumstances of pacific island nations pacific island nations have always been subjected to limited provisions of of aid funding but none of it has actually transformed pacific island Island economies in a way that enables Pacific Island economies to find a pathway to economic
sovereignty. And so I think China's contributions over the last 10 to 15 years has focused on not just the hard infrastructure that you need to build an economy, but also the soft infrastructure through education and training exchanges.
And I would expect in the first instance that China China will continue to do that.
Medium term, of course, I think China has an ability to project itself a little bit further into the Pacific, should it so wish.
And in the last six months or so, of course, it's done that with some naval visits into the Pacific area.
And lastly, Professor, the new Burlington office will also, as they put it, take on regional responsibility for Antarctica, Samoa, Niue, and the Cook Islands, as well as Tonga.
Given the growing cooperation between China and the Pacific island nations in recent years, how will the latest move by the U .S. threaten mutual trust and regional cooperation in the Pacific?
The United States, of course, has had an on -again, off -again relationship, particularly with the island nations in the Southern Pacific.
The United States, in large part, controls the Northern Pacific through its protectorate regimes.
regimes and the Southern Pacific had historically largely been left to the likes of New Zealand and Australia to deal with from a security and broader geopolitical point of view.
And that's why I say that this move by the United States really is a vote of no confidence in New Zealand, as far as the United States are concerned.
And the United States are now taking measures into their own By establishing an office in Wellington, it means that the United States will be able to have permanent personnel in the area within close proximity of these island nation states and therefore in a better position to actively intervene and participate, shall I say, in the affairs of the region.
And this compares with an approach that was a little bit from a distance where the United States really expected New Zealand and Australia to do the heavy lifting.
And it's interesting that the United States is now doing this because it clearly sees its position in the Pacific as being under substantial threat.
And let's not forget that as the Second World War concluded, the big debate in America really was the extent to which America should actively or rely upon its erstwhile partners in the region to control what the Americans themselves called America's lake.
My colleague Xu Yaowen speaking with Dr. Warwick Powell, adjunct professor with Queensland University of Technology.
Coming up, China's summer box office surpasses 7 billion yuan mark.
You're listening to World Today.
We'll be back. Hello, my name is Aleksandr Golombievsky -Steisheda.
I'm a professor of public policy management at Tsinghua 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 World Today.
I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
Jin. China's 2025 summer box office has exceeded 7 billion yuan or more than 970 million US dollars.
The performance comes amid a robust recovery for the country's film industry.
According to the China Film Administration, the box office for this year's first six months reached more than 4 billion U .S. dollars, up by almost 23 % year on year.
And a film about the 19 massacre in 1937 has maintained its ongoing dominance at the summer box office in China.
That rights, as the film is called, has grossed about 210 million U .S. dollars within just the 10 days of the film's debut.
So joining us now online is Dr. Chen Jiahe, Chief Investment Officer at Novant Akin Technologies.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Hi, thank you for having me.
So actually, Jiahe, this year's early summer box office season here in China only drew some lukewarm figures.
So with that in mind, what do you make of the performance so far?
Well, basically, we have got a very good performance of the box office and the first half of this year, which I got the data saying that is increased by almost 23 percent compared with last year.
And with the summer box office, we have seen its growth is slightly lower than the previous record. And this is basically because if you look at the overall growing of box office, it's actually not a very stable number.
It's a very fluctuating number because Because sometimes you've got very good films and sometimes you've got smaller films with smaller box office.
But overall speaking, when we look at the growing of China's box office and film industry in the past few years, we can see that its growth is really stable.
And we see this industry is growing bigger and bigger.
Actually, when we trade in stocks in the stock market, we can see many related companies are performing pretty good.
Okay, good to know, actually.
So why do you think it is this film, this particular film about this historical tragedy, Nanjing Massacre, that has really dominated China's ongoing summer box office season?
Well, I think that there are two very important reasons.
So first of all is that this is a very good film.
I mean, by watching this film, you can really feel the history.
So this is very first thing is that it's a really good film.
And the second goes to the fact that what this year is the 80th anniversary of China wins out in the Second World War.
During the war that China has been conducting with Japan for over a decade, Japan invaded China and did, I mean, the Japanese army back then did a lot of bad things to Chinese people.
There was a lot of painful memory in this nation.
So people share this kind of painful memory.
And when these good films come out, many people just go to the cinema to watch the film.
So, Jiahe, I'm not sure how many times you have personally visited cinemas over the course of the ongoing summer in China.
I mean, apart from this film, Dad to Ride, is there any other films that you would personally recommend for the current season?
Yeah, I definitely like going to the film.
I mean, it's one of the main activities I do, you know.
Spending two or three hours in cinema is really good relaxing.
I heard there's a comedy film.
I haven't been watching this yet, but I heard there's a comedy film called The Stage, which has been pretty good.
So this is her say, so I heard it's really good.
So it's probably Cheers the Arts during the summer.
Another film I have been watching I think about one months or two ago.
It's out of the cinema right now, but it's a really good film that came out this year.
It's called The Trading Floor.
It's basically a film that is about the investment banking business.
I'm recommending it because I have personally been working in the investment bank for two years.
That's the early stage of my career.
And I watched this film, I thought, okay, this guy really knows about investment banks.
So this is a really good film.
I mean, if you want to know about investment bank, go to watch this film, I would say.
Okay. So these guys know what they are talking about, right?
So China's first half year box office represented the best first half performance since the year 2020.
Basically, we saw figures returning to the peak levels that we previously saw, for example, in the year 2018 or 2019, what do you think has really driven this robust recovery?
Basically behind this is the stable growth of China's economy in the past few years.
If you look at China's economy, we've got two main pressures in the past two, three, four years.
The first one comes from the tariff fall from the United States, everybody knows that, and the second is a softer landing of the property market, which has brought some pressure to economy.
But China has sustained all this.
Currently, if you look at the economic growth of China, it's stable at 5 percent per year.
It's amazing. I mean, think about it.
This economy got a property market problem.
It got pressure from the United States.
We still got 5 percent growth.
And behind this growth rate is because China's government has been putting a lot of efforts.
And one of the main efforts that China has been doing is encouraging the growing of the the consumption market.
We really put a lot of efforts to boost the consumption market in China in the past many years.
And, you know, the film industry is a very important cornerstone of the consumption market.
So it's really benefited from the growing of China's consumption market.
A very important cornerstone to quote from you.
So based on that, to what extent does box office, can box office serve as a barometer of China's overall consumption pattern?
Yeah, definitely. I mean the box office is one part of the consumption market and it's basically when people get more money, they feel relaxed, they would be more likely to go to the cinemas to watch the film.
So it's a pretty good indicator of the growing of the consumption market, market, especially when you look at the long term, you'll see the consumption market keeps on growing.
You'll see the box office jumps from one year to another.
But one thing we have to notice is that it's not a very good short term indicator because the box office jumps too much, because sometimes you've got a very good film, then the box office goes to like 20 or 30 percent higher.
It doesn't mean the consumption market is 20 or 30 percent higher than last year.
It means this box office has been rising because of this good film.
And sometimes for one month or two, sometimes three months, you don't have really good films in the cinema.
The box office can stay flat or even drop by 10 % compared with one year ago.
It doesn't tell you about the overall consumption power either.
So it's a really good indicator in the long term.
But for the short term, you have to think about its problems. So the final question before we let you go, to what extent do you think China's film industry, including the revenue from the box office, the revenue from the cinemas, to what extent do you think this industry is vulnerable or is resilient in the face of external shocks?
I mean, is there any interlink or interconnection between external shocks and this internal market?
For example, do you think this market can be affected by, say, things like tariff war from a certain trade protectionist country?
Well, if we talk about external impacts, then if you ask me this question 20 years ago, then the answer would be yes.
Yes, because at that time, if you look at China's film industry, most of the box office winners are coming from United States.
You know, Hollywood was producing most of the films that Chinese people were watching back then.
So if you got it, you know, if they say, OK, we're going to add tariffs, we're not going to export films to you.
Then it would be very possible back two decades ago that Chinese people don't have a lot of box office winners.
But this year, well, in the past five or 10 years, I think I think the whole thing has been changing.
China's own film industry has been growing at a very tremendous speed.
I mean, if you look at what's going on with the film industry in China right now, a lot of films are produced by Chinese local companies.
They put a lot of local history, local culture, local habits into these films. They are good sellers in China.
China, well, they're not yet good sellers in the global markets because they put too much Chinese culture and history into it.
So they want some clients from the global market who are interesting with China, but not all of them.
So this is something that China's film industry is still lacking behind the Hollywood.
But in China's market, they are winning out.
So with this winning of the, and the growing of the domestic companies, China's film industry These trees now, you know, I would say half or 70 % domestic producing.
So external impact will be much smarter for this industry.
Thank you very much. Your point is well taken.
Dr. Chen Jiahe, Chief Investment Officer with Novena Key Technologies.
Coming up, South Korea begins removing propaganda loudspeakers on border with North to reduce tensions.
You're listening to World Today.
We'll be back. You are listening to World Today.
I'm Ding Han in Beijing.
The South Korean Defense Ministry says the country has begun dismantling propaganda loudspeakers along the border with North Korea.
The ministry says the move is aimed at helping ease tensions between the two sides.
The administration of South Korean President Lee Jong -un switched off propaganda broadcasts, criticizing North Korea shortly after he took office in June this year.
North Korea, however, says it has no interest in terms of talking to the South.
So joining us now on the line is Dr. Rong Ying, Chair Professor with the School of International Studies, Sichuan University.
Welcome back. Thank you.
Thank you for having me.
So first of all, how long have these loudspeakers existed?
And do you think this kind of, let's say, Cold War -style psychological warfare campaign is still working today?
It is indeed a kind of Cold War psychological warfare that has been, I think, used by both sides, the two sides, repeatedly.
But this round of propaganda loudspeakers we're talking about was set up in June, back in June 2024, by the South Korean side as a kind of countermeasures to North Korea's trash looms. And yes, so, and afterwards, I think the North Korea also responded by setting up their own loudspeakers, which very much, I think, I would not say effective, but rather it's a kind of provocation and counter measures aim that becomes a very sort of a naughty, not nasty.
because one side was trying to not only send out messages, for example in the case of South Korea, the K -Pop songs, and also anti -North Korean messages.
The North Korean side, I think instead of sending messages, they're sending noises, high -pitched noises that sound like the scrapping of metals.
So it's become a very confrontational, but I don't think it's so effective in terms of psychological, I mean, the purpose of psychological warfare.
So why do you think the message from Pyongyang is that it is not interested in talking to Seoul?
Is this because North Korea has no trust in South Korea and for that matter, the United States?
Or is it because North Korea has other diplomatic priorities right now?
I would only say that possibly the time is not ready.
Conditions are not ready for at least from the perspective of the North, despite the repeated sort of overtures by the South.
uh and we know that the first when the new government president lee came uh it the the one of the first of steps that i'm taking is the suspension of that loudspeakers as we now talking about now the dismantling of the land and afterwards there are also uh some efforts in this regard and there are also of course repeat reportedly news that uh uh in the coming uh APEC summit meetings they would also like to invite I mean North Korean leaders that and which were being dismissed and sort of by the North Korean side.
So the reason I think are quite simple.
First and foremost I think this is North Korea always prioritized its relationship with the United States over South which regarded as not calling the shot and never call shot secondly I think I think it's very much related to the style of president Trump's and its priorities the WWE the so -called unpredictable it is and the way that knows I mean president Trump dealing with its allies on the question of tyrant so and so forth and the fact that south korea was able to secure a kind of a deal that not helped create an impression that that advantage and the situation has been changed and thirdly
i think north korea very much i i guess uh feels they are very much advantaged in this new round of major power, so the interactions the dynamics and the impacts under where I think North Korean feel now there are more advantages with that.
Last but not least I personally asking something more as we have seen that because these over tombs the the dismantling of Laos, because it's just for them, it's just a small potato, not a big deal.
The big deal you're looking for is a kind of a first, for example, like the coming, or planned military, bilateral military exercises and others.
So, I think the South Korean side has indeed, has difficulties in making the case, or in persuading this North to become more sort of active, or more proactive in terms of their responses to their other teams. But they are doing, I mean, they're both working in the right way, if I can say.
Yeah, in the right way.
And obviously, a tremendous amount of difficulties and challenges remain in terms of re -establishing dialogue between the two Koreas.
So do you think South Korea could somehow redeploy these propaganda loudspeakers to the border area if somehow tensions fled up again between North and South?
Theoretically, that can happen.
I mean, either for this administration, which is regarded very much, I think, progressive and determined to pursue a kind of reconciliation or deter with the North.
and also for the purpose of pursuing on India's political and agenda and economic as well.
But I don't see the reasons and the need for this administration to do that.
Rather I would argue that if one looks that the diplomatic agenda I think it would have very much help the South President Lee.
When it's balanced or pragmatic diplomacy sort of makes progress, that would give them a better advantage vis -a -vis the North in managing, in stabilizing the inter -Korean relationship.
Your points well taken.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Dr. Rong Ying, Chair Professor with the School of International Studies, Sichuan University.
Unfortunately, that's all the time for this edition of World Today.
A quick recap of today's headline news.
Hamas says it will allow aid for hostages if Israel halts airstrikes.
Latest inflation and drop figures are sparking concerns over U .S. economy.
China warns against the group politics after FBI of the United States unveiled plans to open a new office in New Zealand to counter Chinese influence.
influence to listen to this episode again or to catch up on our previous episodes you can download our podcast by searching world today i'm dingheng in beijing thank you so much for listening bye for now
