We keep you informed and inspired.
This is World Today.
Hello and welcome to World Today, I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
Coming up, Hong Kong completes its election of the 8th term Legislative Council.
U.S.
Defense Chief Peter Hexus claims not trying to strangle China's growth nor change the status quo over Taiwan.
China accuses Japan of interfering with the PLA Navy's training operations and downloads of Xiaohongshu app searched in Taiwan after regional authorities' announcement to restrict the app's access.
To listen to this episode again or to catch up on our previous episodes, download our podcast by searching World Today.
First up, all 20 members of Hong Kong's 8-term Legislative Council have been elected.
They include 40 chosen by the election committee, 30 elected by functional constituencies and 20 by geographical constituencies through direct elections.
They will begin a four-year term in January.
The central government has congratulated the SAR on this election.
The Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office of the State Council says the election was an important achievement in the development of high-quality democracy.
In line with the one country, two systems policy.
So for more, joining us now on the line is Bai Xianyue, partner of Grand Down Law Firm.
So thank you very much for joining us today, Bai Xianyuan.
This time, voter turnout in the election committee constituency, functional constituencies and geographical constituencies all exceeded that of the previous term.
What do you think this tells us?
Thank you, a pleasure to be here.
This is certainly a positive development to see happening, which might reflect the willingness and hope of the general public to be more actively involved in election and the political process.
That might have an impact on the day-to-day life of the average citizen in Hong Kong.
So, as a kind of principle, the elected official should be held responsible for their mandate and power vested in them.
In the meantime, on the other hand, constituents and voters are also expected to exercise their power, making their own choices, their voices, to be heard by casting their votes.
The political process needs input from citizens to voice their concerns and opinions, to make the election an effective and a vibrant one.
So it takes, and the effort of everyone, really of the city, to move forward and to proceed with this political and democratic process.
So when the election entered the campaign stage, a deadly apartment fire brought severe trauma to Hong Kong and Hong Kong residents.
Now, first of all, how would you comment on the ways in which the Hong Kong government has responded to this fire?
Well, it's really a tragedy to watch the fire devouring the buildings, and many lives are lost due to the terrifying incident.
We probably, many of us have watched video on the news, some of the reports.
I guess the Hong Kong government has, after this happened, this tragedy happened, has taken what it can to carry out swift reactions and measures to implement disaster relief efforts.
I guess the government basically has been quite effective, I would say, and very efficient in doing what it is supposed to do.
So, you know, the fire is something that nobody really expected.
It's such a tragic event.
I guess the government has done a pretty good job, I think, in reacting to that.
Now some say this disaster has made voters in Hong Kong understand the significance of the election more deeply.
What is your take about this point?
I'm not extremely sure that election has any sort of a major reason to do with the fire itself, because election is a has been arranged a long time ago.
It has a timetable itself.
However, the election definitely will have a major significance for every citizen of Hong Kong and definitely will have a long-term impact on people's well-being and the livelihood of the city, for sure.
It must have been a dramatic moment and experience for those who are affected as a result, who have lost their loved ones or whose property has been lost due to the fire.
So definitely the election results and those who are elected will take that into account and do what they can to make improvement and, to you know, find out what is the reason behind this incident and this tragedy.
So in that sense, there is something, you know, correlated with each other, I guess.
Now Hong Kong Chief Executive, Mr John Lee, says holding a smooth election during a difficult period for the city carries profound significance, adding that he expects the elected lawmakers will work with the Hong Kong government to drive systemic reforms following this fire.
So in your opinion, what systemic reforms are needed?
Well, this tragedy really reflects or exposed some of the areas that definitely will need some reforms.
I believe there are many issues that need to be carefully and thoroughly reviewed due to the fire, such as, for example, the safety of the construction building maintenance.
As everybody knows, there are many really old buildings that have been around for many years, even 40, 50 years some of them.
So the safety of construction materials, the fireproof of some of the construction materials and the buildings themselves, firefighting instruments and facilities and the measures of provisional fire of a fire when they do break out.
And also the safety oversight, how that is carried out, how that is maintained in these industries and how those measures are implemented, and whether there's any effective and efficient channels to report, flag or trigger an alarm system whenever there's any potential sort of risks of a fire, for example.
And also just like anywhere I mean construction business.
There's a lot of space and possibilities or opportunities for corruption.
So the potential sort of corruption problems in various sectors, whether those are effectively, you know, deterred or prevented or stamped out.
So those are some of the immediate issues that I can think of.
But of course it has a lot to do with how the government itself, at various levels, are run or administered.
And a fire itself reflects the safety itself.
But it does have something to do with other various levels of government and various issues how the government is run, is administered, and whether there's any other issues that we should be careful and should watch out, etc.
So, in terms of the reforms, I guess it's a whole package of different things that needs to be reviewed and a lot of other measures that need to be taken to prevent this type of a tragedy.
So it's not necessarily a fire prevention itself.
I think we probably need to take a more systematic perspective of this issue, because on the face of it, it's a fire.
But behind the facade of this issue, there are probably many other areas of issues that we need to be aware of.
And the government needs to really take a deep, you know, take a serious look at what really happened and what are the things that went wrong.
Now, this was the second legislative election in Hong Kong since the implementation of this Patriots governing Hong Kong principle began more than four years ago.
So in what ways do you think this principle has enhanced the democracy in a city?
Well, I guess this is something pretty recent.
The democratic process is not something that you can easily achieve.
It takes a lot of efforts and takes many experiments because it's constantly a work in progress.
There's no such a thing as a perfect democracy.
I guess everyone in every the so-called democratic states or countries.
They are constantly on the way of exploring different things and new challenges, because there are always new challenges coming your way wherever you're living across the world.
And Hong Kong is the same thing.
The same sort of law applies to Hong Kong.
The process of a democracy takes inputs and efforts from various sectors of the citizens.
And I guess Hong Kong has its own characteristics and the people in Hong Kong have their own choices.
So going forward, I guess, whatever happens, I guess it's the people who make the decision in Hong Kong.
They should have their own say.
They should have their own ways of making their decision, making their mind of how to carry out this.
And this principle that began since the last legislative election, I think so far has proved to be pretty effective.
I think
Of course, I believe there are critics.
Of course, we need to take into different voices, take into different perspective, into consideration how to make things better and how to make improvements in the future.
So bearing that in mind, I think there are still many other work, I guess.
We need to take into account and hopefully things will improve step by step.
We have to do things once at a time.
And it takes a bit of time and effort.
Yes.
So the final question before we let you go.
During this election, we saw some forces attempting to capitalize on the on the sense of sadness being felt by Hong Kong residents for this apartment fire and attempting to incite them to abstain or cast invalid ballots.
How would you comment on the behaviors of these forces?
Well, I guess the question is really how to distinguish between different opinions from those, like what you said, those forces attempting to capitalize on the sentence of Hong Kong citizens.
So, as a democratic process or as a democracy such as Hong Kong we are, I think we should be open for, for critics, for different opinions and different perspectives of looking at things that are always pleasant.
You know, as I said, democracy really involves all our welcome to different opinions.
Different opinions should be taken into account in our future policies in how to make things better and how to make improvements.
So that is the vibration and the very nature that Hong Kong is such a great place for international investors, for people, you know, with different colors, with different paintings, with different ethnic minorities, with different you know, whatever different industries.
So variety and diversity and a vibrant nature of Hong Kong should always be celebrated.
As you said, a clear distinction is very important.
Distinction between good-intentioned criticism and ill-intentioned negative behavior or comments.
I guess
That's the ultimate message that you're trying to send to our listeners.
But thank you very much for joining us.
Bai Xianyue, partner of Grandel Law Firm.
You are listening to World Today.
I'm Dinghe Lin, Beijing.
We'll be back after a short break.
You are listening to World Today.
I'm Ding Han in Beijing.
U.S.
Secretary of War Peter Hackset says Washington is now trying to strangle China's growth.
The U.S.
Defense Chief made remarks on Saturday at the 2025 Reagan National Defense Forum held in California.
Hackset also said that the United States is now trying to change the status quo over Taiwan.
The remarks came shortly after the Trump administration said that it aims to prevent conflict with China over the Taiwan question in a new national security strategy document.
So for more.
Joining us now on the line is Professor Shen Dingli from the Institute of International Studies, Fudan University.
Thank you very much for joining us, Professor Shen.
My pleasure.
So, on the issue of China, the US defense chief said on this very occasion in California that quote thanks to the leadership of President Trump, relations between the US and China are stronger than they have been in many years and that the United States War of Department is committed to opening a wider range of military-to-military communication with China's People's Liberation Army aimed at de-escalation and de-conflication unquote.
What is your interpretation of his remarks regarding China?
Well, I hope what the U.S.
Secretary of War has stated is true that the China-US are enjoying their stronger partnership, including those meal-to-meal military cooperation.
But this may not always be true, because even for Trump's second term, for the past 10 months since his inauguration, China-US relationship again have experienced greater turbulence for tariff for fentanyl, for chips and for Taiwan.
But I'm glad to see that, with five rounds of negotiation on tariff, the two presidents met in Busan, South Korea, on October 30.
And the two sides have agreed a lot to promote a positive relationship, to suspend the trade war for at least a year.
China is going to buy more US soybeans and the US possibly would more relax its export control against China.
So I do think the Secretary of War has made some points.
But I still see as the report, U.S.
National Security Strategy report has also indicated that the US does not want to provoke China, but also want to maintain status quo or stability across Taiwan Strait.
The stability, the status quo is there is no unification of China.
If this would be maintained for decades to come, That means US would not allow Chinese across Taiwan Strait to achieve their ultimate mission to reintegrate all Chinese across the water into oneness.
So the same report has actually still stressed strategic need of the US to prevent China from attaining Chinese dream.
So, unlike the Biden administration previously, the Trump administration in its new national security strategy document largely avoids indicating how it would respond to any future potential conflict over Taiwan.
So is this a sign that the current US administration has made a more realistic assessment in terms of its China policy, including on the Taiwan question?
I think ever since China-US normalized this relationship from January 1979, China as a US government means executive branch of the US government always try to create a strategic ambiguity as to whether the US military would be used in a Taiwan contingency.
Except for President Biden.
During Biden's tenure in four years, he made it clear for five times that if there was something happening in Taiwan, the US military would be involved, like what the Japanese prime minister has recently stated.
For the first four times his spokesperson in the White House came out to clarify that US one-China policy has no change.
But for his last mentioning of such a provocative stance, There is no ratification from the US government.
But of course Chinese side would always be prepared that the US would militarily intervene into this question.
But therefore we would build up our muscle to make a Chinese deterrent to prevent foreign military from intervening credible.
So at this time, I think President Trump, like his first term, try to return to the US normal quote-unquote track.
Don't make any statement clear.
Don't say U.S. military must be involved.
And don't say U.S. military would not be involved.
He tried to return the normal U.S.-Taiwan policy.
Don't make a clear statement.
This is a smart policy but given mainland China's ever-increasing credibility of either conventional or unconventional deterrent, the US feels increasing amount of pressure from Beijing that the US deterrent may less and less be plausible.
This is the strategic background for Secretary of War, his statement, and also for the coming out of the US, the new edition of National Security Strategy Report.
So in other words can we put it this way, Professor that there is a fear on the part of Washington today that it is gradually losing the Taiwan card?
Because previously, for decades, playing the Taiwan card has been a basic policy in Washington's China approach, I guess?
Yes.
The US, I think for a long time, initially since 1949, when PRC was founded has supported a one China policy, which is mainland, is a part of the so-called Taiwan system.
And the U.S. helped Chiang Kai-shek to return to mainland to restore his government.
But in October 1964, 15 years after PRC was founded, Beijing exploded its nuclear weapon to testify.
We are a new nuclear weapon state.
That dramatically shifted the U.S. strategic position in this question.
Ever since then, U.S. abandoned its old policy to support Taiwan to unify us.
But rather US tried to have a deterrent policy preventing mainland from launching a military reunification offensive.
And this has been maintained for the last 60 years.
From 1964 to this year, US had tried to dissuade Beijing from launching a military fashion in order to achieve unification.
But now the US sees more and more credible mainland military rights.
That makes sure the US intervention possible.
Intervention would be very costly and may still lead to a failure.
So U.S. does not want to have a failure.
U.S. does not want to win with a great cost.
US only want to dissuade Beijing from using this approach by increasing its deterrent and also by sheltering the burden with American friends and allies.
Yeah, your point's well taken.
And a relevant issue here is that the document vows to build a military capable of denying aggression anywhere in the chain of violence stretching from Japan to Southeast Asia, but also says that American military cannot do this alone.
So I guess, with that in mind, a lot of pressure can be expected in terms of to be faced by American's Asian allies in terms of collective defense.
But thank you very much for joining us.
Professor Shen Dingli joining us from Fudan University.
You're listening to World Today.
I'm Dinghan in Beijing.
We'll be back after a very short break.
You're back with World Today, I'm Ding Han in Beijing.
China has warned that Japan's repeated interfering with the country's naval exercises in the East China Sea are provocative and dangerous.
A Chinese military spokesperson says that Japanese military aircraft disrupted the training of China's Liaoning Aircraft Carrier Group, seriously threatening flight safety.
Japan claimed that its fighter jets were targeted by Chinese radar, an allegation that Beijing has formally rejected.
China is urging Japan to stop smear campaigns and to restrain its frontline forces.
For more.
My colleague Song Ruixin earlier spoke with Dr Rong Ying, chair professor with the School of International Studies Sichuan University.
Dr Rong, the Chinese spokesperson, accuses Japanese aircraft of repeatedly approaching and disrupting the Liaoning's training, seriously threatening flight safety.
Japan.
However, let's see typically frames such actions as necessary monitoring of Chinese military activity.
How do you interpret the conflicting narratives of disruption versus monitoring in those waterways?
It is true.
I think we have two different narratives which I think it will be very important for our audience to have a right understanding what happened on the ground or in the air, so that to make our own judgment.
As we know that this kind of incident is not the first time.
I remember back in a few years when the relationship, I think, between China and Japan there was a tension and even though no tensions, if I can say that that incident happened.
I mean like that, when the Chinese Navy trainings exercises, the Japanese side always send the aircraft and others to do the so-called monitoring.
So the critical issue is how that happened.
For this incident.
Clearly, I think, if you look at the statement, the accusations and the counter-accusations, it was caused by the Japanese side.
The Chinese, I think, was undergoing sort of normal trainings.
And I think if one judges from the statement of Japanese side, it can easily understand the situation.
The question is that, whether the Japanese were doing a kind of so-called normal or doing in a way that has been acceptable or recognized as acceptable in according to the sort of norms on the rules of that incident,
So I think the conclusion, my conclusion, is that it is a kind of a repetition of a kind of a Japanese narrative which aimed at, I mean, winning the making publicities.
And also I think, for as far as I can see, that tried to shift the blame or the danger of that incident on the Chinese side.
As Japanese, since in the wake of the I mean Prime Minister Takeuchi's wrongful remarks regarding Taiwan, it had a huge pressure, for I mean both at home and abroad to answer the question that what Japan's sort of uh, military i mean and in this case i mean the so-called self-defense forces up to, and it's very much related to the japan's defense, to change that defense, so the posture and defense budget of course in the case, and the impact for the region as a whole.
Then what do you believe is behind Japan's action this time?
Is it part of Japan's long-term military ambition?
Very much so.
I think, as we know, that the Chinese side, for these military trainings, it has in well advance made its announcement, clearly delineate the scopes, the zones for training.
And this is, of course, a normal standard, a normal practice, mainly to maintain the safety and security of the exercise, so that I think there'll be no unnecessary or unplanned encounters taking place in this context.
And the incident took place in the international waters or above, and the air of the international waters tells a lot, I mean, loud and clear of the sort of the background of this incident and I think I can only say like the chinese foreign i mean the spokesperson of the chinese military it the japanese uh his side is playing the game again posing as a judge but it definitely is kind of a chinese saying goes a thief calling stop stopping thief wanted to shift the blame of this incident and i think to gain to gain some uh taking um so-called i mean grant i mean diplomatic And the moral ground out of this incident.
And also, I think, prepare the ground publicity at home for Japan, so that its responses on its military, changing military defense expenditure, posture and expenditure will win sympathy and support at home.
How does this challenge the universally accepted norms meant to prevent incidents and ensure safety for all military forces operating in international waters and airspace?
That's a great question.
I think there have been over the past decades, and particularly in recent years, as the region I mean the airspace and water has become increasingly more and more congested or more and more contested in the wake of the, I think, the growth or the development of the capabilities.
And in this case I think there have been efforts in the past that between China and its regional countries in particular and how to ensure that activities would, first and foremost, not lead to miscalculations and misunderstandings.
And for that I think, there are efforts for making rules and norms, And at the very fact that the Japanese side has, through its so-called normal activities, has maliciously, I think, in the case of China, this incident monitoring and harassing the Chinese training, the Chinese Navy's and normal trainings, is an incident and an example of that.
It first and foremost, of course, highlight the importance to have agreement on this rules and the norms.
But the most importantly, I think, is the Japanese side should exercise and show more restraint and more respect to the Chinese sort of activities, which it's beyond debate that it is doing, a normal exercise in line with international laws and international norms.
Dr Rong, my final question looking beyond today's immediate acquisitions, there's a broader historic parallel that many strategists are contemplating.
I mean, over 80 years have passed since the attack on Pearl Harbor.
Today, we still witness encounters in the East China Sea.
Then in your view, does this pattern carry a risk of a modern day failure of anticipation?
December the 7th marks 84th anniversary of the outbreak of the Pearl Harbor, which I think Japan, for the so-called executes of survival threatening situation, launched a surprise attack on the United States which led to the expansion or enlargement of the conflict.
And ever since then, despite the defeat and the surrender of the Japanese Imperial Army, we have seen repeated efforts by the Japanese sort of right wing and conservative forces to whitewash that part of history, to even honor the militarism and justify the crimes of atrocities and crime.
So we have to be really the region as a whole and the japanese public in particular, i think have to really have to be really god against that sort of development.
In the context of what we have seen, and for that i think japan has a imperative as to take up the historical responsibilities to ensure that it would continue, should continue, its road for peaceful development.
And I think it is also responsibility of countries like China, Korea and other regional countries and the world as a whole to take up the responsibility to ensure Japan will continue to go along this and the road for peaceful development, despite that trend or that resurgence of push for remilitarization or for militarism.
This is something I think will really have to be managed to work very closely.
And this is very much, I think, the common shared responsibilities for the allied countries, including certainly China, United States.
And also, I think, as we have seen most recently, the visit of French President Macron and others.
So we need to work hard.
We need to keep our vigilance and we need to really work together to guard against the resurgence of Japanese militarism.
Rong Ying Chair, Professor at the School of International Studies, Sichuan University, talking with my colleague Song Ruixin.
You're listening to World Today.
We'll be back.
You're back with World Today, I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
China's growth prospects are once again in the global spotlight.
The OECD has lifted its forecast for China's economy in 2025 to 5, citing stronger-than-expected performance, resilient exports and robust fiscal support.
Other major institutions, including Goldman Sachs and Standard Chartered, have also raised their projections, pointing to gains in productivity, expanding consumption and the rapid rise of the digital economy.
So what's the current state of Chinese economy?
What has shone down to cope with the challenges?
For more.
My colleague Zhao Yang spoke with Yan Liang, professor of economics with Willamette University.
So, Yan, the OECD is projecting that China's economy will grow 5% this year.
What are the main factors behind China's growth despite the global headwinds?
Well, the OECD ascribes China's steady and solid growth to two major reasons.
One is they argue that the fiscal policy has remained very supportive.
For example, the fiscal deficit to GDP ratio this year was 4, which is one percentage point higher than last year.
So there is the active fiscal policy, for example to roll down the trading program to support consumption growth.
So the kind of fiscal support has helped the economy.
And the second major factor has to do with the very strong export performance of China's economy.
As we know, the United States has waged the tariff war, but China so far has weathered this tariff very successfully.
It has been able to maintain and export growth.
And so that also helped to really support its economy.
So, given those two major factors, I think OECD has confirmed that they forecasted the China's growth is going to be 5 this year.
And, as you mentioned, despite the US tariffs, China's exports remain resilient in November and also in the whole year.
So what explains China's ability to adapt to the global trade headwinds?
Well, I think that has to do with two major reasons.
One is that China is able to diversify its trading partners.
When you look at this year's export growth, most of it's coming from trade with Global South, trade with BRI countries.
That have really helped to fill the gap, because export to the United States has declined by around 15.
But the export to Southeast Asian economies, to Africa, to Europe, to South America, all these have gone up.
So in a way, China is able to diversify its trading partners to really or offset the decline of trade with the United States.
So that's the first factor.
And the second factor is China was able to upgrade its trade structure, moving from those low value added exports to the more high value exports.
So when you look at electronic and electrical and machinery exports, those accounted for over 60 of China's total exports.
You know these exports because they're high value added.
They're not going to be affected by tariffs that much.
For the high value added sector, they stay very strong.
So I think you know giving the values chain upgrade that helped also China to weather through these kinds of tariff impositions from the United States.
And do you think we are seeing a structural realignment of global trade, given China's steepening ties with Europe and other countries?
For example, the recent French President Macron's visit to China.
One of the things he talked about is an expansion, the deepening of trade relations between the two countries.
So how important is this visit by President Macron?
And what does it tell us when China and France talk about expanding relations?
Now, I think, France as the second, I would say, largest economy in Europe.
I think this visit is significant.
I think it shows that both sides China and France, and Europe in the broader sense would want to uphold the multilateral system, as the two leaders both stated.
And they would also want to resolve any trade through negotiations and dialogues.
So I think that's important right to show that both countries are committed to the open and multilateral trading system.
And second, I think, as you mentioned, you know, both China and France have established really extensive trading relations and have always cooperated in areas like nuclear and aviation and aerospace, as well as certain consumer goods sectors.
But now I think both sides are willing and eager to expand the kinds of trading relationships now to more digital economy, green economy and even service industries when it comes to investment opportunities.
So I think that just shows there are a lot of potentials for both countries, and also China and you, to cooperate in trade and investment and in technological partnership in green economies.
And I think that is important for both sides and also for the global trading system, to stabilize the kind of trading relationships and also really trying to resolve any sort of difficulties disagreements, through dialogues and negotiations.
And so I think that would help for both countries and for the global economy at large.
And for China's economy and the consumer spending.
Now we know that the consumption contributed about 53 in the first three quarter of this year, compared to 445 for the whole year of 2024.
So how important is consumer spending for China's economy?
Well, I think consumption, as you mentioned, is still the major driver of economic growth.
Right.
Given China's large economic size, demand has to be coming from domestic primarily, even though China does have really strong trade competitiveness.
I think trade only, you know, especially when it comes to net exports only account for three percent of GDP, although this year it does help to contribute quite substantially to China's GDP growth.
But that said, consumption is still by far the largest force for economic growth.
And I think that it's also important in the sense that consumption growth indicates that household living standards are being improved.
So I think that there are a lot of policies that are already put out to stimulate consumption, because there is room for consumption to grow.
So I think again many of these Western narratives that paint the picture somehow the Chinese demand, consumption demand, is collapsing or it's very weak.
I think that is completely nonsense.
Again.
You know the retail sales in terms of consumer goods have gone up by 43 so far this year, I mean for the first 10 months.
And the consumption of services grow even faster than that.
Last year, it was 6.3% growth rate.
And this year, it's again, 5.3%, 1% points higher.
And so what that means is that, you know, consumption growth is solid in China, and more and more consumption now is also shifted towards the service sector.
And the government is keen to support more consumption growth.
So the trading program that I mentioned earlier, and now the State Council also just launched 18 points of consumption stimulus plans.
And that includes not only, you know stimuli, consumption on goods, but also a lot of you know in terms of services like tourism entertainment, cultural events, sports and health care, health care and so on and so forth.
So again, I think the fact is that China's consumption growth is steady and is solid, and there is room for more growth.
And the government is launching many different policies to trying to boost more consumption growth.
And China is also taking the lead in developing the digital economy.
It will bring in more than 11 trillion US dollars this year.
So how central is the digital economy to China's goal of driving the future productivity growth?
Well, I think digital economy is very important.
And as you mentioned, it's becoming more and more significant portion of the Chinese economy.
Now the 11 trillion US dollar, that is over 50% of China's GDP and that it's higher than last year.
So year over year, you see that digital economy is growing.
The economy is becoming more and more digitalized.
And that is very important for both the supply side of the economy and the demand side.
So for the supply side, when you digitalize, you're able to use data more efficiently and you're able to do automation more efficiently.
And couple that with the AI boom, I think that would really help to upgrade the supply side, upgrade the production structure, provide more productivity growth.
And so that is essential for the supply side upgrading and for productivity-driven growth.
And on the demand side, I think when you look at the online purchases, when it comes to online retail sales, it always grew double the rate of the general retail sales growth.
So again, e-commerce in China has been very vibrant and it has been helping to boost consumption growth.
So I think with more digital economy, more digital platform, more digital delivery of goods and services, we're likely to see the digital economy help to boost consumption growth.
So again, from both the production and for consumption, we're likely to see digital economy playing a more and more significant role in the economy.
Not to mention, I think again, this is a really important catalyst to drive technological innovations and the AI development.
Professor Yan Liang from Willamette University talking with my colleague Zhao Yang.
You are listening to World Today, I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
Downloads of the mobile app Xiaohongshu has surged in the App Store's social networking app ranking for the Taiwan region, reaching number one at one point over the past weekend.
The development came after Taiwan's DPP authorities announced a one-year restriction on access to the platform, under this excuse that the platform could become a high-risk venue for online fraud.
Following the announcement, many Xiaohongshu users in Taiwan expressed concerns about potential impact on their daily lives and work.
So for more.
Joining us now on the line is Dr Shao Yichun, Director of the Institute for Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau Studies.
Shanghai Institute of International Studies.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Thank you very much for having me.
So some people say the policy announcement from the DPP authorities in Taiwan has ended up being a free publicity for Xiaohongshu in Taiwan.
What is your take on this?
And also, Xiaohongshu could become a high-risk value for online fraud.
Do you think this is a legitimate ground for Taiwan authorities' move to restrict Xiaohongshu's access?
It's definitely.
It's a kind of a free publicity for Xiaohongshu in Taiwan, because it's just a social networking app.
And why to restrict it?
People would feel kind of very curious about this, because there must be something interesting about this app or something great about this app.
Otherwise, why bother to restrict it?
So actually, the policy has backfired.
And I don't think the policy has any legitimacy because it's very interesting.
If you look at the numbers of the online fraud for all those social networking apps in the Taiwan region.
If you look at the numbers of online fraud, of course Facebook Instagram, Google Line all these are much.
The numbers of those platforms are much higher than Xiaohongshu.
So why not restrict those apps, but only Xiaohongshu, right?
This is the first thing.
The second question is how to deal with the online fraud.
Of course, we need kind of comprehensive policies to deal with it.
Just like we have a lot of telecom scams, then do we need to ban cell phone?
Right.
People would naturally ask this kind of questions.
Why do you do that?
Because we know that the DPP authorities have talked a lot about the so-called national security.
They have the so-called national security concerns and they said to the Taiwan people that because of the Chinese mainland, they use the United Front work and try to infiltrate into the Taiwanese society.
So it's a kind of a demonization of the Chinese mainland in order to support its policy of decoupling with the Chinese mainland.
It is reported that Xiaohongshu has 3 million users in Taiwan, meaning that about 1 in every 8 people on the island uses Xiaohongshu.
So how do you think this platform might help with the people-to-people ties and exchanges between the two sides of the Taiwan Straits?
The users in Taiwan, the users of Xiaohongshu in Taiwan.
Most of them are interested to know the food the tourists makeup brand, beauty products, celebrity fashion.
These are the topics that the users are interested on Xiaohongshu.
So I think for most of them are kind of a younger generation.
So I think Xiaohongshu is a very good platform for the young people in Taiwan to know their peers on the mainland, to know the real situation on the mainland.
Because we know that in Taiwan a lot of green media try to describe the Chinese mainland as a kind of a warmonger, or a very poor place or a foreign country which has nothing to do with Taiwan.
So for the users of Xiaohongshu, they can understand, they can know about the Chinese mainland from their own reading listening, watching about the things on the mainland.
I think this is very important for the younger generations on both sides of the strait to have the same memory.
So, apart from Xiaohongshu, DPP authorities are also targeting other platforms, including Weibo Douyin, WeChat and Baidu Cloud, under similar kind of reasons or excuses.
So in a situation like this, Dr Shao, for the younger generation, for the young people in Taiwan who are interested to learn more about the Chinese mainland, what would be your suggestion to them?
First of all, if the conditions are okay, I think it's best for the young people in Taiwan to visit the Chinese mainland and to stay here, or to study here, or to work here or just to have fun here, to stay several days, to know the people here, to have some friends here.
And then when you go back to Taiwan and you can have information from your friends on the mainland, not to only limit your information sources from the medias in Taiwan.
And also if you are really interested about the Chinese mainland.
Right now on the internet You can have various reports, media reports books, online information about mainland.
So a lot of ways to have a true understanding, knowledge about the Chinese mainland.
But I think the best way is to visit the mainland by yourselves.
Yeah, thank you very much for your perspective.
Dr Xiao Yiquan, Director of the Institute for Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau Studies with the Shanghai Institute of International Studies.
That's all the time for this edition of World Today.
To listen to this episode again or to catch up on previous episodes, you can download our podcast by searching World Today.
I'm Dinghan in Beijing.
Thank you so much for listening.
Bye for now.
