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.
China's national legislature vows to put economic growth at the top of agenda as its annual session is set open.
China rolls out 20 measures to boost science-tech insurance in support of self-dependence.
Trump criticizes the UK's Keir Starmer after a rift over strikes on Iran.
And South Sudan is risking a return to a full-scale civil war as violence escalates.
To listen to this episode again or to catch up on our previous episodes.
You can download our podcast by searching World Today.
First up.
China's national legislature has pledged to put economic growth and domestic demand at the top of its agenda as its annual session is set open.
Lawmakers will review the draft outline of the 15th Five-Year Plan, examine this year's National Economic and Social Development Plan and deliberate on the government work report.
Key legislation under construction or under consideration includes an environmental code and new laws on child care services, social assistance and medical insurance.
Deputies to the 14th National People's Congress will also focus on measures aimed at boosting consumption and strengthening the domestic market.
An MPC spokesperson says that China will expand the supply of high-quality goods and services, enhance services consumption and improve consumer trade-in program.
So for more, joining us now on the line is Professor Qu Qiang from Minsu University of China.
So thank you very much for joining us today, Professor Quqiang.
First of all, why do you think economic growth and domestic demand will top the agenda of the annual session of China's MPC?
Well, I do think currently economic growth and domestic demand is the top priority.
I think number one.
I think everybody would understand.
Currently we're facing a very, very challenging time.
I think the outside environment can be very turbulent.
Geopolitical conflicts are happening.
Actually, it's not just a conflict.
I think we're facing several major wars that are going on.
So I think we have so many uncertainties, which means we need to, more than ever, stabilize our domestic market and to strengthen and stabilize our supply chain.
It's not only for China, but also, I think, it's a very important topic for the whole world and the whole world economy.
And secondly, I think currently Chinese economy are facing a structural conflict in the supply and demand.
On one hand, our export has been hitting a record high and our economic situation are growing very, very well.
And I think Chinese manufacturing capability actually has become the number one of the whole world with most comprehensive industry supply.
I think that's a very, very phenomenal achievement.
But on the other hand, I think we still need to match up our domestic demand with this kind of productivity so that we can make sure our GDP growth basically can be more than 5 and also make sure our CPI within a certain range, proper range.
And also, I think the reason why we're talking about this topic is because 2026 is the beginning year of the 15th five-year program, which is from 2026 to 2030.
So I think how we're doing this year, the opening year, and how we set up the tomes for the next five years is actually going to decide how we're going to evolve, how we're going to develop the In a very longer term.
For example, actually we're taking this five-year program as how we're going to march towards 2035, you know, modernization target.
So I think that's the reason why, in this year's CPPCC and also the MPC we both mentioned, we need to prioritize our economic growth and domestic demand.
Now some Western media outlets say, the gap between China's high-tech, artificial intelligence-driven ambitions and the hard realities of slowing growth.
It's the backdrop for the country's annual political season.
Would you agree with the observation here?
I mean, can China's gesture, can China's move to double down on technological and scientific self-dependence help drive the country's economic growth?
Well, they do see this phenomenon.
I agree, but I think this is just a shallow understanding of really what is going on.
I think the whole world, not only China, are facing what we call the K-shape of the growth pattern because, on one hand, the traditional capacities are falling and slowing down.
Not only in China, I mean everywhere it's the same thing.
It's like traditional housing sector, traditional architecture and the construction sectors, traditional heavy industries are slowing down.
But, on the other hand, high technology are emerging.
For example, right now we've been facing uh, lots of the uh growth and the uh ai and this has been emerging as a very promising future.
So i think that probably gonna promise our future grows in the next uh, you know, 20 years, but still it's in the body moment.
Uh, we still need to fix all this kind of, you know, newly emerging problems until ai can actually take over all the capacities that we need to do so.
I think this is the what they call the k-shaped growth.
Yes, so on one hand, people are saying okay, you have a huge investment on ai and so many other priorities on ai uh, but why not the full uh and a more comprehensive growth are happening?
I think the same question you can ask for america, right?
America has the same kind of issues because the seven ai or high tech related companies basically take over more than 40 percent of the you know stock market gross, Like the NASDAQ, right?
Like NVIDIA, like the Apple.
But the other 2,000 middle-sized companies actually are making nowhere.
So I think this is a structural problem we need to see.
But only it happens in the short term, because eventually, in the mid-term and longer term, I think this breakthrough of the technology is actually – will support our longer-term growth, because in the longer run, we're going to need the green technology AI RoboTAC, aviation and aerospace technology to help us to fill up a higher ground of economic achievements.
So I think this kind of structural problem is just temporary and we're going to shake off the old platform and welcome a new platform in the next five or ten years.
Mm-hmm.
In what ways do you think improving China's laws on child care services, for example, social assistance and medical insurance?
In what ways can these efforts help drive domestic demand here in China?
Oh, yes.
I think we are talking about the two ends in Chinese economy.
On one hand, it's growing at unprecedented speed, like the AI, like the robot, like the drones.
But, on the other hand, we still need to watch over and watch out for our most vulnerable groups who are in urgent need.
I think the children, the senior, the physically challenged people.
And those people actually what decided the floor or the baseline of our economy and social achievement.
And also I think they are – this group actually what decided how much of the domestic consumption potential can be released?
A lot of people are facing challenges in their daily spending.
For example, raising your kids can be expensive.
The jobless period can be expensive, and also saving for your senior days, for your retirement, can be expensive, and also the medical bills all the others can, you know, take out and eat up.
Uh, your your money in your pocket.
So people will hesitate to spend more money in a longer run if they can get a you know, a guarantee or an insurance about.
Uh, feel assured about the longer expenses.
Well, the country will watch out.
We'll always be there for them to support them, so they will feel very sure and safe to make a long-term spending plan.
Like well, I don't have so much a burden, so I will probably down put more of the money on the 20 years of the housing purchases, or to put down more for the children's education fund, or to spend some money for our annual vacation travel.
All that actually will require the very active role of the government and social security systems.
So if we can build that, it's not just for what we call the inclusive development purpose, but more for a more solid economic growth.
China has actually pledged that it will remain steady, fast in terms of expanding high-standard opening up and promoting liberalization of trade and investment so as to provide more certainty, or more certainties, for global development.
Do you think China's efforts I mean in terms of boosting domestic demand can end up advancing the country's agenda to pursue high standards, opening up?
Oh, yes, absolutely.
If you want to open up to the other countries, first of all you need to understand how can you open up.
It's not like, okay, I want to open up and everybody should run to me.
No, it's not like that.
If you want to open up with a high standard, first of all you make sure Your economy, your market, is very attractive, right?
So it's like in America and the European Union.
The reason why they're so open up is because their markets are very attractive.
Everybody wants to get in and also their governments actually get a very positive feedback loop out of it.
So i think if you can make sure that you have a large market and also people's you know attraction in there, it's very, it's great and people would like to come in china.
Right now, we have 400 million of middle income class and 14 billion of the population and this is effective population.
What does that even mean?
It means if you've got 1 billion people, but those people are, you know uh, stay in the poverty.
They cannot buy anything, this ineffective market.
But china actually, we are the largest middle income class and the middle income group in the market is basically the size of latin america plus asian nations together.
So I think that's the first attraction we can provide to the whole world.
And because of that we have, in the first place, condition that all the foreign countries and investors and players would like to get into China.
They bring in us, capitals, technologies, and also the international standard.
So they can help us to further improve our opening up and the qualities of domestic demand.
So it will form a very positive feedback loop in China.
And also, we're doing that.
We're going to improve our supply chain in China because of the technology standards, qualities from outside world.
And then we're going to contribute to the whole world and world consumers.
More you know the services and the better products that we can.
And after we've been seeing the feedback loop, I think the government will have enough of the drive to institutionalize all this kind of opening up, to form them into institutions, rule of law and regulations.
So this is going to form a positive feedback loop, as we're just talking about.
It's just like a spiral up.
And we're going to – I think everybody is going to welcome that kind of fact.
Not only China, but also, I think the whole world is going to see a rising healthy, sustainable market pop out because, let's just face it,
American market and European market, they're facing certain challenges right now.
It's never a problem to have another choices, better choices waiting right now.
Definitely.
But thank you very much for joining us, Professor Qi Qiang from Mingzhu University of China.
You're listening to World Today, I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
A political advisor in China is calling for a major push to boost services consumption, arguing it's key to driving the next phase of China's economic growth.
The comments come as China's national political advisors gather in Beijing for the annual session of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, or CPPCC.
Lu Ming, a CPPCC member and a professor of Antai College of Economics and Management with Shanghai Jiaocheng University says, as incomes rise, consumption should shift from material goods to services like education, healthcare and tourism.
For more, let's take a listen to a conversation between my colleague Song Ruixin and Professor Lu.
Professor Lu, what are the key issues you are most focused on during this year's two sessions?
I would like to discuss two problems.
The first one is the overtime work in China, because many people work very hard and overtime in factories in their companies.
This is very harmful for the consumption in Chinese economy.
And also the workers welfare is also harmed.
I would like to call for a regulation from the central government to improve the life quality and work condition, to reduce the work time.
Over work time in China.
So that can allow people to rest a lot and consume a lot, especially for consumption in services.
That's the first one.
The second thing is how to increase consumption in China, especially in services, because in today's China the consumption of materials is already enough.
So in the future, I expect that the Chinese people will consume more services as their income rises, so that I call for some policies to improve the consumption in services.
That's the focus of today's issue.
You mentioned boosting consumption, especially in services as one of your major concerns.
Then let's talk about specifically about this idea.
I mean, consumption, because that's something you've been tracking closely.
In 2025, China's service retail sales grew by 55 year-on-year and per capita consumer spending on services rose by 45, which is now accounting for over 46 of total household consumption.
How do you interpret these figures?
First of all, people's income rises.
The consumption's contribution to GDP growth will rise continuously.
I think that's a general rule in economic development.
That's the first thing.
The second thing, which is also very important if you compare China with other countries, we can see that, at the same stage of economic development, China's consumption over GDP ratio is still relatively low compared to other countries.
And China has a structural issue that we have over capacity in a lot of manufacturing sectors.
But in services, the supply side is still not enough to satisfy people's need.
If you look at people's service demand like education, medical care, even amusement and tourism, people always complain that the quality and quantity are not enough to meet people's need.
So I think in the future we still need to increase the supply and improve the quality of the services to satisfy people's everyday life.
Then if we look at these figures, do this growth rate and spending share fall within your expectations?
I think so.
I think so.
Because in recent years the Chinese central government has already implemented a lot of policies to boost consumption.
And on the other side the overcapacity on the production side issue is also dealt with by the government seriously.
For example, the fair competition review by the central government is regulating the oversupply of manufacturing goods.
But on the service side, the supply side quality and quantity are being improved by the government.
So I think this is very helpful for us to see a rising contribution of the services and consumption in the GDP growth.
So from what you are saying, service consumption still has a kind of considerable room to grow.
If we look back at the 14th five-year plan period, what milestones would you highlight in the development of China's service consumption?
I think the most important change in the past five years was September 2024.
In that month, nine ministries at the central level together announced that need to boost service consumption from multidimensional tools using different policies to boost service consumptions.
Because, different from manufacturing goods, service consumption is actually managed by different government agencies.
Different government agencies have different policies to regulate the market.
Sometimes you will feel that the consumption is regulated by some entry policies in specific sectors like Asian people services, childcare etc.
Sometimes people feel that in educational services people don't think the quality is high enough to meet their demand.
So I think different policies should be implemented in the future from different government agencies to boost consumption in different dimensions.
And in recent months I observed another trend, that is, the usage of AI agents to help consumers to make decisions in consumption more efficiently.
Because in today's China's development, the usage of different apps on cell phones are very popular.
People.
When they make decisions on consumption, they need to switch between different apps, which is costly for consumers.
So the usage of an agent can help people to switch between different apps very effectively.
That's a new trend.
I think this new trend should be a new trend for the government to think about how to use policy tools to encourage the different platforms to develop more friendly usage of agents based on AI technology to boost their consumption, to make consumption more effective in the future.
This transition needs logic.
I mean, time and quality of life affect consumptions.
You have also raised concerns about involution-style overtime culture.
What prompted you to highlight this issue and why does it matter?
Because I think, in the era of consuming manufacturing goods and the new era of Chinese people to consume more on services has a very huge and significant difference, because people need time to consume services.
That's quite different from manufacturing goods.
For example, if you buy your car, buying a car is a consumption on materials.
That's very easy and not requiring that you have time to buy it.
But when you drive a car, it actually consumes services.
For example, if you go outside to have a sightseeing or to eat with people in the restaurants, it's actually consuming services.
But that needs time.
So nowadays, when we see that the service consumption in consumption share and the service in GDP share are both rising as a trend, it means that people need more time to consume services.
Okay, then let's step back to the bigger picture of service consumption.
If you had to choose one or two indicators to judge whether service consumption is truly upgrading I mean not just expanding in volume, but improving in quality what would they be?
I would pick two indicators.
One thing is the satisfaction score, if we can have it.
Actually, in my research, I always use the review and comments on the platforms to measure whether people are satisfied with the quality of their consumption of services.
That's one indicator.
With the big data, from the platforms actually can do this using their big data.
The second thing is also very important, that is the diversity of consumption.
This is also measurable using the big data from the platforms.
Actually we can find that, for example, in my study.
I do see that in the city with a larger population scale the diversity score will be also greater.
And I also find that when a city has a higher indicator of diversity, people living there will also be happier.
And the people from outside, from other cities, are also willing to move to that city with higher score of diversity.
And the housing prices are also higher there, which means that people are willing to pay higher housing prices to live in the city with greater diversity.
We see beyond diversity and satisfaction.
Another dimension that's drawing attention drawing increasing attention is sustainability.
So Professor, why is accelerating this shift particularly important at this stage of China's development?
Because usually, especially in the year of manufacturing development, there is a contradiction between economic development and environmental protection, because it is very carbon consuming when you spend more money to consume material goods like manufacturing goods like cars.
But in today's comparison between different countries, China does have a lot of carbon emission in economic development, not only within the country, but also because of the export.
We also consume a lot of carbon for other countries' consumption, actually.
This means we are sacrificing China's environmental protection to subsidize international consumers in their country through China's exports to other countries.
So in the future, China has already promised that in the coming decades we will reduce our carbon emission to better the environmental quality in China.
So now I think two things are very important.
One thing is structural transformation by developing more services rather than manufacturing goods, which means that service, compared with manufacturing, is more friendly to environmental protection.
That's one thing.
The other thing is try our very best to reduce carbon emission in our consumption.
For example, we can save energies, we can use better technology to make our production more green in the future, and also consumption.
We can increase the efficiency by using a lot of digital technology to reduce the carbon emission when we consume more goods.
So that's very important.
Okay, then in reality, we have also heard some concerns.
Actually, I've visited a farm a few days ago.
The farmers there say green products often come with a price premium and policy implementation can face hurdles at the grassroots level.
So how do we bridge the gap between policy ambition and real consumer willingness to pay?
That's why we need subsidy from the government.
We do have some subsidy already because the environmental protection is an issue with a very heavy issue of externality.
Externality is a word we use to describe a situation that the costs are burdened by specific individuals or producers, but actually the benefits are got by the whole society.
So the willingness to pay for production with green technology or greener way of consumption is not that high at the individual level or producer level.
So this is why we need to use public policy to improve the environmental protection.
Dr Lu Ming, a CPPCC member and a professor with Shanghai Jiaotong University, talking with my colleague Song Ruixin.
You're listening to World Today.
We'll be back after a short break.
You're back with World Today, I'm Ding Han in Beijing.
China has announced new guidelines to accelerate the high-quality development of Scientech insurance.
The document sets out 20 measures across six areas, aiming to build a Scientech insurance system that is better aligned with technological innovation.
The country's SciTech insurance has played a stabilizing role in terms of offsetting the high costs, long-term development cycles and inherent risks that are associated with tech innovation.
Last year it provided about 8 trillion yuan in risk coverage, or 12 trillion US dollars, with premiums rising 44.
For more.
My colleague Zhao Yang spoke with Dr Yan Liang, professor of economics at Willamette University.
So China unveiled a guideline including 20 measures in six areas to accelerate the establishment of a science and technology insurance system.
So tell us more details of that.
What are some of the new measures to support the country's science and tech innovation?
Well, this is a very important guideline because it covers the insurance support for the various sectors and the areas and the kinds of companies that would be eligible to the kinds of insurance support.
And I think this is important in the sense that We know that China has been trying and has been actually creating a lot of technological innovations and breakthroughs and also have the deep integration of technologies and science into its industries.
So I think this insurance will help to promote technological innovations and development, especially for small and medium sized enterprises, because we know innovations take time and it's also, In a way, very high risk.
So this insurance programs will help to serve as a shock observer and also stabilizer, as the Ministry of Science Technology put it.
So that would help to promote, you know, innovations and technology development.
So I think this is at a really good timing and it helped to clarify exactly you know what this insurance, how this insurance would work.
So I think this is an important guideline.
As you mentioned, tech innovation is inherently high risk and long cycle.
So can the traditional insurance truly price the frontier technologies like quantum computing, like AI today?
Well, I think that this is just one part of the promotion policy because I think in China there are many foundational research, like you talked about, some of the cutting edge technologies that have really high upfront cost, that many small and medium sized enterprises alone cannot do the kinds of research.
So you have large companies.
There are also large science labs.
There are all these national labs and also other research institutions that are working on these foundational research.
But in addition to that you also have many other kinds of enterprises that are more trying to do applied research and also commercialize some of this research, to turn this research from one to many, one to N.
So this kinds of research and this kinds of science development, you know, happen at the grassroots, at these small and medium sized enterprises.
So I think the insurance would be very useful for these kinds of enterprises that need kind of extra support.
Now, that said again, I think that there are also, you know national, you know the innovation funds.
There are many other venture capital that are also helping to finance and share the risks of some of these breakthrough innovations.
So it's not just insurance policy, but this insurance policy is definitely helpful not only for medium, small-sized enterprises but also, I would say, for some of the major national sci-fi tasks.
Because we all know this Chinese insurance sector has actually provided 139 trillion worth of risk coverage in the first three quarters of 2025.
So this is not a trivial amount.
And so this is one part of the entire, I would say, programs and policy packages to promote science and technology development.
And the guideline clarifies what to ensure, how to ensure, and who to ensure.
So yeah, in practical terms, what problem can it address?
And how will this help to boost the innovation?
Well, I think that this guideline really helped to clarify, as you mentioned, what to ensure, right?
So I think this provides support for major national sci-fi missions, some of the tech-based small and medium-sized enterprises and also some of the key in terms of sectors.
And they, you know, specifying the kind of sectors that would be more sort of eligible or to the focus right.
So the frontier sectors like AI, integrated circuits, quantum technology, brain computer interfaces.
So these are the sectors that would be the focused.
And it also talked about other supported areas, such as improvements in science and technology, insurance products and services.
And it provides a guideline for investments of insurance funds and some regulatory safeguards, as well, as it covers some of the key regions that these insurance would particularly support, such as the Beijing Tianjin Hebei region, the Yangtze River Delta Guangdong, Hong Kong, Macau Greater Bay Area.
So in a way, I think it really provides a lot of guideline to who and how these insurance policy would cover and how it works.
And I think it also provides important signals for enterprises.
If they wanted to take up certain technological innovations, they would know what are the sectors that are the policy focus.
So I think that's important right to provide the guidance, to provide the direction and also the assurance for enterprises that wanted to continue to innovate and promote technological development.
And how does this fit into China's broader drive for technological self-reliance, especially under the current international situation?
What does this mean for China's innovation ecosystem and long-term competitiveness?
Well, I think this is part and parcel right of the I would say almost a whole nation sort of efforts to promote technological innovations and deep integration of science and technology into the broader economy.
So as we know, you know, this is really the priority for the 15th five-year plans proposal.
And it's very likely to be a, you know, policy, the top policy priority.
So as you mentioned, you know, there is very complex and evolving international environment.
So even though even though now, you know, the U.S. and China relationship sort of stabilize.
But still, I think the technological self-reliance is very important.
It's very critical to really remove some of the tropos that the Chinese, you know, technological system to sort of to continue to develop.
And also to be able to promote the new quality productive forces to promote a high quality development.
China needs the kinds of technological development to promote the kind of innovation led and productivity driven growth.
So that's why there are many policies, including this current guideline for insurance, to achieve that goal.
So now, the insurance funds in China have been now increasingly channeled into technological innovation and fostering a supportive ecosystem for venture investment and to inject new cash and capital into the innovation pipeline.
So as we know, these insurance funds, again, it provides a great risk sharing mechanism.
It also, in a way, provides some patient capital for these kind of innovative projects.
So this is part of, I think, an important policy as part of the holistic policy to promote technological self-reliance and also technology development sort of productivity-driven growth.
Dr. Yan Liang, professor of economics at Willamette University, talking with my colleague Zhao Yang.
Coming up.
President Donald Trump is criticizing the UK's Keir Starmer after a rift over striking Iran.
This is World Today.
We'll be back.
Welcome.
I am Chu Chu Zhang, Deputy Director at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies at Fudan University.
On the World Today program.
We will dive beyond the headlines to uncover the stories, trends and impacts that connect states across the globe.
Join me on World Today.
You are listening to World Today.
I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
U.S.
President Donald Trump has lashed out at one of his country's closest allies over its limited support for US-Israel's strikes on Iran.
Speaking at the White House on Tuesday, Trump compared British Prime Minister Keir Starmer unfavorably to Winston Churchill.
The comments were the U.S. leader's third broadside against the British leader this week.
The military campaign against Iran has raised concerns among some US allies and partners, who see the war as reckless and a violation of international law.
So far, Britain has not directly taken part in the attack on Tehran, but it has somehow allowed the United States to use its bases to launch what Stalmer calls defensive strikes.
Starmer has been criticized from all sides at home for that very decision, with opponents on the left calling on him to condemn the military action.
So joining us now on the line is Dr Zhang Chuchu, Deputy Director of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies, Fudan University.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Thank you for having me.
So, Dr Zhang, what is your thought when you saw President Donald Trump speaking of the UK leader by saying that quote this is not Winston Churchill that we're dealing with unquote.
Well, you know, Trump, actually, I think his remark is classic blunt force Trump diplomacy.
So it seems that he always used this kind of colorful, personal rhetoric.
And he always tried to show his transactional worldview in this kind of discourse.
So right now he's trying to use historic stories.
He's trying to invoke Churchill as the ultimate symbol of unyielding resolve against existential threats.
And he tries to imply his dissatisfaction of Stamberg's initial hesitation when he asked him to cooperate with United States actions.
So currently we know that the United States and Israel attacking Iranian targets and Trump wants immediate full-throated allied backing.
However, his allies, including the United Kingdom, are very reluctant to join this sort of operations and they are worried about the high risks it could bring.
And right now, that is the context why Trump has delivered this kind of discourse, and I think it highlights Trump's style.
That is, to reward his allies who align fully and to shame those who don't.
So how would you comment on Prime Minister Starmer's decision here in terms of allowing the United States to use the bases of the UK to launch limited defensive strikes?
What could be Starmer's calculation?
I think Starmer's move to green light limited defensive use of the UK bases strikes me as a calculated pivot.
And I think, as you said, there are several very important calculations, which are very pragmatic.
The first one could be he's trying to protect the special relationship between the United Kingdom and United States.
However, he doesn't want full entanglement in this issue.
So right now he's just trying to keep Washington happy enough to avoid total rupture, while signaling Britain acts in its own interest.
So he's trying to make a very difficult balance.
And the second issue here is that he's trying to manage domestic politics, because right now polls show strong public opposition to this attack.
So that is why he's trying to frame it as a defensive only action, so as to protect himself in this context.
And also I think he's trying to send a signal that destroying missiles in storage is presented as a collective self-defense against escalation of the conflict.
And he wants to show that he's not ready for an open-ended war.
So, in sum, I think he's still trying to avoid deeper involvement, but he's trying to make a balance in order to be pragmatic.
Now talking exactly about a poll published on Tuesday 49 of the people in Britain opposed the US and Israeli strikes on Iran.
So, with that in mind, Dr Zhang, what lessons do you think Britain can somehow learn from its participation?
Learn from its involvement in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, which was based on a false claim that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.
Right.
From my perspective.
Actually, Britain has learned a lot from the 2003 Iraq precedents that rushing into war on contested intelligence arose public trust for a generation right.
And I would say until now, Britain is still suffering from this kind of experience and lessons.
And also, I think the Iraqi issue showed how very limited interventions can spiral into occupation in the end and massive costs in blood and treasure and humanitarian crisis.
And also, this kind of military action might not achieve what you originally wanted and it could bring unintended consequences.
For example, in the case of Iraq.
In the end, they saw the regional destabilization and even they saw the consequence of the rise of ISIS.
In the end,
So these are very important reasons why right now the UK adopts a more cautious position, because even many British people emphasize that the attack this time lacked justification.
And that is why they now demand far higher sanctions, evidentiary thresholds before backing military action.
So, until recently actually, Starmer had managed to maintain upbeat personal ties with President Donald Trump.
So to what extent do you think this particular rift over Iran conflict could affect this so-called special relationship between London and Washington?
Well, there is an impact, of course, and also actually, the rift is there, as you already mentioned, and it's real.
And in fact I think it doesn't just depend on the UK but also the United States, because Trump himself, he has repeated the slogan of American first, which means that he does not emphasize he no longer emphasizes his allies.
That much right.
And also Trump himself has already said many times that the relationship between himself and the UK, as well as the other European countries, is not what it was.
And right now also Stalmer and Trump, so these two people themselves are not close in their personal relationships.
However, I think so far the United Kingdom and United States still share many common interests and they have a strong need for interdependence, because the United States hopes that its European allies, including Britain, will cooperate with its actions and help the United States share more of its costs to maintain its hegemony, whereas Europe, from a on its behalf, it needs the United States support in many areas, especially in the economic investment sector.
And also currently, since it's very hard for European countries to get enough energy, they depend even more on American energy.
And also, of course, they always need the military protection from the United States.
So right now, I think both sides are maintaining their relations on a transactional base.
In the meantime, why do you think NATO Secretary General Mark Rudy has clarified that the military alliance is not involved in the latest escalation in the Middle East?
I mean, in a bigger picture sense, we can raise a question like this, Dr. Zhang.
Trump is not a U.S. president known for treating America's allies well, like you mentioned earlier.
So do you think the US leader should expect those traditional US partners, traditional US allies, to get involved when it comes to striking Iran?
Right.
I think when we talk about his allies, Trump shouldn't automatically expect traditional allies to pile in on offensive strikes against Iran.
Because like I said, Trump has always repeated his slogan of American first.
And right now he attempts to publicly hammer NATO spending allies.
You know trade practices and perceived freeloading.
And all these things has conditioned his partners to be more cautious about open-ended commitments.
And moreover, I think Trump always seeks to maximize his gains with minimal investment.
Right now, he wants to just maintain his global hegemony without bearing the associated costs.
So his strategy is very simple.
That is to have his Western allies share the burden.
So this has fueled resentment and dissatisfaction towards the United States among the European countries.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Dr. Zhang Chuchu, Deputy Director of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies, West Fudan University.
Coming up.
South Sudan is risking a return to a full-scale civil war as violence escalates in the country.
This is World Today.
Stay tuned.
Hello, I am Dr Digby James Ren, 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 help to build a better understanding of China's role in the world today.
You're back with World Today.
I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
The United Nations has expressed deep concern following a mass killing in South Sudan.
On Sunday, at least 169 people were killed after armed youth raided a village near the country's border with Sudan.
Local officials have attributed the attack to intercommunal violence, which comes amid growing political instability in the country.
The UN mission in the country says it is sheltering more than 1000 civilians in its base in that area.
South Sudan has been beset by civil war, ethnic violence and poverty since it was formed in 2011.
So joining us now on the line is Ina Tengen, Senior Fellow with the Centre for International Governance Innovation at Canadian Think Tank.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Thank you, Tengen.
So South Sudan has witnessed intense fighting between government and opposition forces since December, and what is believed to be behind all this is a power struggle between the country's president and the now-suspended vice president.
So, Ina, do you think it was a surprise that we saw such a mass killing recently?
No, dang, unfortunately not.
What we have here is a country that has come about in 2011 and by 2013 they were already basically at civil war between Salva Kiir, the president, and the vice president, Riek Macher.
And it's just.
You know, it's primarily fueled by ethnic lines Dinka on one side, New York communities on the other, but it's also exacerbated by poverty issues about land and also water.
So this is a situation where separatism leads to extremism, leads to, you know, terrorism.
And this is exactly what you have today.
This idea that you can split countries apart isn't working.
It just increases or draws lines around different interests that are literally tearing these countries apart especially, right now, South Sudan.
Actually, in 2018, the president and the vice president actually signed a peace deal, ending a civil war and creating a unity government consisting of two parties.
Why do you think the implementation of the 2018 deal has barely got off the ground?
Well, everything looked good on paper power sharing, security reform and integration of rival forces.
In practice though, it stalled, because they required trust, and institutional capacity just does not exist.
Our groups were not fully unified, especially this issue of oil revenues.
It's the country's primary income.
But it was basically treated as a source of patronage rather than national development.
Political elites, once again, benefiting from the fragmentation.
And separatism, as I said, just hasn't been able to solve these issues.
Every single country in the world is a mosaic of different interests, put together by accident, of either who ruled them or colonial interests.
And this idea that separating all the parts is going to make it all work, no, it doesn't.
It just makes things worse.
It's time to look at countries as a mosaic and accept them and learn to live together.
So what can be done by the international community to try to address the concerns about fighting and violence in South Sudan?
Well, that's a problem.
You know, we always there's this tendency to say, oh, the rest of the world can solve it.
But the rest of the world hasn't been solving it.
What you've had is special interest.
People who are concerned about you know access along the sea, things like this.
They are the ones who are fueling it.
I mean, these kids didn't come up with, you know, make their own guns and the ammunition was supplied to them.
These groups are often just proxy forces for other entities.
They want to say, oh, it was just an uprising.
It wasn't me.
But who gave them the guns?
Who gave them the ammunition?
And this is really the issue.
It's time for countries to draw back, to say to these groups we want you to be peaceful, but it requires you to do that.
We can't tell you to do that.
Telling them, as we saw in 2018, doesn't work.
It has to be a consensus-driven model that gets rid of this kind of separatism that has become the kind of Western equation of peace.
So currently, I mean what's going on in this country represents a massive humanitarian crisis, that's for sure.
But currently, do you think it is somehow being overshadowed by hotspots issues elsewhere?
Absolutely.
I mean we can't ignore the effect of what the US is doing and basically drawing down the international order.
They're basically saying there is no order.
So if it's the law of the jungle, OK, I will.
That's what I will do.
I will take my voice and we'll go over and kill those people because they have stuff that I want.
The attack on Venezuela, then Iran.
I mean, this underlines this idea that the powerful take what they want.
And this is just pure poison.
You think these young men are studying the complexities of geopolitical machinations?
No.
They just see and they react by example.
So I mean it's very sad that you know, as I said, people have looked outside their countries for solutions when in fact the real solutions are within their country and a lot of the problems are coming from outside it.
So I know we still have about one minute before we need to finish.
I mean, South Sudan represents the world's youngest country.
What do you make of the key lesson, the painful lesson that we need to learn from the tragedies in this country since its independence?
Well, I think the important lesson is an example, and that's the SCO, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which has clearly indicated and shown that countries can be strengthened when you do not allow separatism, extremism and terrorism to develop.
And that's what we have here.
These kids are following this line.
Their leaders are basically leveraging this for their own purposes.
It's time for the world to put aside this liberal idea that separation will create benefits.
All it has done is allowed outside forces to ruin the domestic situations of these countries.
And this is a prime example.
A new country that was supposed to solve the issues has made them worse.
Yeah.
So thank you very much for joining us.
Ina Tengen, Senior Fellow with the Center for International Governance Innovation, a Canadian think tank.
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 for World Today.
I'm Dinghan in Beijing.
Thank you so much for listening.
Bye for now.
