Daily news and analysis.
We keep you informed and inspired.
This is World Today.
Hello and welcome to World Today.
I'm Ding Han in Beijing.
Coming up, China and France are seeking to strengthen ties in strategic dialogue.
South Korea appoints a former president's son to be ambassador to China.
Syria's interim president El Shera seeks to redefine ties with Moscow in his first visit to Russia.
Trump says he authorized the CIA operations in Venezuela, as President Maduro says no to regime change.
To listen to this episode again or to catch up on our previous episodes, download our podcast by searching World Today.
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has called for building a more strategically stable and forward-looking China-France relationship.
He made a remark while co-chairing a China-France strategic dialogue with Emmanuel Bowen, who is the diplomatic advisor to French President, in the city of Hangzhou.
Wang Yi has called on both China and France to continue to deepen cooperation in traditional fields, explore cooperation in emerging sectors and tap into local cooperation potentials.
Bowen, for his part, said France adheres to its tradition regarding independent diplomacy and opposes trade war or can-based confrontation.
So for more, joining us now on the line is Ina Tengen, chairman of Asia Narratives Substack.
So thank you very much for joining us today, Ina.
China is ready to deepen strategic mutual trust and promote all-round cooperation with France.
This is one message sent by Wang Yi in this strategic dialogue.
And another message is that China hopes that France could provide solid political guarantees for bilateral relations.
So how would you look at these expectations on the part of the Chinese side?
Okay, first off, we're referring to the China-France dialogue strategic dialogue in Hangzhou, which was just held.
And it was chaired by Wang Yi on its side, and then the French sent their trade representative.
This is when you talk about strategic mutual trust.
You know the focus is on predictable, sustained political dialogue and clear channels to manage the disagreements.
And so cooperation can proceed.
And what this really is about is China is saying, look, France, we want to cooperate.
There are opportunities between us.
Obviously, France is part of the EU.
And you know there are tensions out there definitely wants France to adhere to the one China policy, which it has done.
And it also wants to say OK, given the situation, there isn't going to be blanket statements, the US, etc.
But there can be very, very detailed processes and procedures of how each side can get along and in specific areas.
The two sides have also mentioned civil nuclear energy aerospace, agriculture and food, artificial intelligence and new energy as areas for more cooperation.
What do you make of the potentials for China-France cooperation in these fields?
Well, in nuclear energy, both are very advanced.
They're the two the one apart from Russia that have advanced 35 and approaching 40 reactor systems.
And these are much more efficient systems that provide safer nuclear energy and things like that.
So some sort of cooperation literally give them a tremendous advantage working together than apart.
Right now, energy is something that has to be solved.
So it's not.
Yes, there is competition for developing projects and getting contracts.
But in the end it's better for everybody, especially Europe at this time when it's beset with these issues about expensive gas and things like that.
A nuclear solution would be very, very useful.
So really large there.
In aerospace.
You know there's joint research and development, once again, sustainable aviation technologies, especially when it comes to green fuels and things like that.
And a lot of this has to be underpinned by restrictions and security rules that are harmonized so that they can work together.
Ag and food, obviously, France and China have a lot of overlap there.
French wines, cheeses, etc.
China produces, well, China is more of a market, I would say, for France than a Chinese, and France is a market for China.
But that is changing and growing.
China is developing its own wines.
It has very specialized foods.
The number of people from China who visited France over the years has introduced new ideas, and the French are always interested in anything to do with food and wine.
Artificial intelligence, lots of opportunities there.
I think a lot of it goes towards these issues of standards for data management.
They have to deal with these kind of export controls, but also investment going on both sides.
New energy, obviously, that kind of follows the nuclear energy side.
There is a need to have sustainable energy that is a lot less expensive than the price of LNG, and this is something that would be very, very important to Europe going forward, and France, and I'd say Europe generally.
Domestically, France is currently mirrored in its arguably the worst political crisis in some decades, with an underlying issue pointing to its mounting budget deficit.
So in economic sense Ina, what do you make of the importance of maintaining a benign relationship with China to France?
Well, it has to be a little bit more than benign.
And France, remember, you have to go back.
I mean, it seems always seems worse during the time you're at.
But France has been largely resilient over the years.
It's right now it's down to personal politics.
And you know overall France, like the rest of the developed world, is experiencing extremely low growth.
And the question is, how do you jumpstart that?
And China, with its huge markets, investment potential all over the place, makes sense as a partner.
Like I said, the dangers here, or let's say the impediments, are political in nature.
The US wants to prevent the rise of China.
There's a longstanding relationship.
They're all part of this kind of Western, previously colonial powers.
They kind of want, they like to say that they share the same values, but recent actions by the US have made it almost impossible to see it as a long-term reliable partner.
Remember, Trump was not elected once but twice, and there is an ongoing concern in Europe that the bookends of American politics have been reset and that it's going to be very difficult.
So they're in between a rock and a hard place, and they're trying to make the best of it as they can.
Some French scholars and policy advisors argue that China's rise is a matter of concern for the US but not a problem for France.
Do you think they have a point in this argument?
And what's the logic behind this argument?
Well, France has always gone its own way.
I mean it's very important to the French character that they're not seen as appendages to US foreign policy.
You remember there was an objection to French fries.
They were called freedom fries because France wasn't willing to go along with the some of the wars and silly ideas that you can conquer your way into people's hearts.
So, yeah, France sees this as different.
But France has another calculus in mind as well.
I mean, they're important.
They're one of the leading economies of the EU and a very divided EU.
It really helps France in terms of a calculus to have a bridge to China already established.
What it does is, you know, other countries look at that.
If it's working, they say, hey, we need to be more pragmatic and go in that direction.
You have others in the EU who are very, very much mind locked in terms of what's going on in Europe, especially Ukraine.
But, you know, France has shown that it is fairly facile when it comes to these issues.
It's able to compartmentalize things.
And I think this works well with a pragmatic China.
Now, France has long been emphasizing strategic autonomy, not only for itself, but also for the European Union on a bigger scale.
So if Paris or the Brussels wants to pursue this idea regarding strategic autonomy, how should they manage their bilateral ties with China?
Well, that goes back to what I was saying earlier.
I mean, France wants to be the leader.
Macron Sarkozy, they all had this idea.
You know Europe should listen to them, kind of completing Napoleon Bonaparte's idea that there should be a united Europe under France.
But it never really comes to fruition.
Having said that, if France is taking the lead on, you know, creating industrial policy, supply chain um, an investment with china uh, it does put them in a situation where they can be, as i said, they can leverage the other countries.
They can also point out that says look, we're doing well with this.
This is something you can, you should consider, and you know the.
The situation in europe is basically the same all over um, you know you have countries that are hurting economically uh politically, things are in disarray, uh.
You have the rise of the right um, and you know the.
The center is desperately trying to find something that's pragmatic, they can hang on to and prevent what they see as kind of a rising fascism that is kind of creeping in.
So, by the way Aina, why do you think we are seeing very frequent high-level diplomacy and engagement between China and Europe in general recently?
Well, it goes to the unreliability of Washington.
Donald Trump is, as we have seen, he's not viewed in Europe as somebody who is reliable.
Europe does not collectively, is not in love with the picture of Donald Trump sitting at the Resolute Desk lecturing the heads of the EU like they're a bunch of schoolchildren who didn't do their homework.
This, you know, the optics are wrong.
Also they.
I don't think Europe believes that US has its interest at heart when it says make America great again.
You know the tariffs, everything that that has gone on, the barbs that have been trade back and forth, the necessity of, you know, flattering Donald Trump and nominating him for peace prizes and things like this.
This wears very, very thin.
You know, Europe is used to having vessels, not being vessels.
And this rubs them the wrong way in many ways.
But economically, it just isn't making sense.
U.S. is not giving anything away.
In fact, they're demanding more.
So what do you have?
You have to start looking for markets and opportunities elsewhere.
And that goes also to currency.
There are concerns about that, although they're involved in it.
They're also concerned about.
You know what could happen to them if they run afoul of the US and whether the US dollar could be weaponized against them.
Thank you very much for joining us today.
Ina Tengen, chairman of Asia Narrative Substack.
Coming up, South Korea appoints a former president's son to be the new ambassador to China.
You're listening to World Today.
We'll be back.
Washington wants to keep Chinese airlines out of Russian skies.
A US proposal would bar major Chinese carriers from flying over Russia on routes to America, claiming it's about leveling the playing field.
What's behind this move?
Does Washington have the legal authority to impose such a restriction on foreign carriers?
Could it trigger new turbulence in China-U.S. relations or even redraw the global aviation map?
And what countermeasures might Beijing consider?
Join us as we unpack the legal, economic, and political stakes in the chat lounge.
Wherever you get your podcasts, and on CGTN Radio.
You are listening to World Today.
I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
South Korea has appointed the eldest son of former President Rong Tao as the country's new ambassador to China.
The foreign ministry in Seoul announced the appointment of Mr. Rong Jia-heng on Thursday.
The ambassadorial post had actually been vacant for about nine months.
China and South Korea officially established their diplomatic ties in 1992 during the President Rong administration.
Rong Jiahong himself has also long dedicated his career to advancing ties between China and South Korea.
So joining us now on the line is Professor Chen Xiaohe from the School of International Studies Renmin University of China.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Thank you very much for having me.
So first of all, Professor, can you tell us more about this new ambassador to China?
How does his career look like?
Yeah, you see, Ambassador Zhou is not a professional diplomat.
And he is not active politicians in South Korea and he even has not served with any South Korea's government.
Basically, he is a layman to politics and diplomacy.
But on the other hand, he had a very close relationship with China, Chinese people, Chinese scholars and Chinese companies.
We all know, after his father was arrested and prosecuted on a number of the charges, he basically disappeared from public state.
But in the year of 2012, he returned to the public eye.
He established one important institute called Korea Journalism.
He himself served as this institute directors.
So it was hard to promote culture and academic exchanges between South Korea and China.
And also in 2018, he helped to set up institute on one belt on one road study.
And he served as a co-director So he has been a frequent visitor to China.
I believe he has built a quite wide network of personal connections that help him to promote his ambassador work in China.
So what does the appointment of Mr Rong Jiaheng tell us about President Li Jiangmeng and his administration's China policy?
As I mentioned a little bit earlier, Ambassador Rose, and he's not a politician, he's not a professional diplomat, but nonetheless President Lee Chai-min appointed him as a new ambassador to China.
I think on the two accounts, number one, Ambassador Rose has a very strong family background.
His father was former President Roh Tae-woo.
Under the leadership of Ru Taiwu, South Koreans established diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union in 1990 and with China in 1992.
So his father did a great job. to normalize China and the South Korean relations.
So that constitutes a very important setting point for a new ambassador.
And second, the new ambassador, as I mentioned, has a very good connection with China in the past.
15 years.
He worked so hard to promote China and the South Korean relations and made great contributions in that regard.
So, by pointing the role of Cai Hong as new ambassador, I believe of very, very strong hope on him to normalize, to stabilize the restrained relationship between China and the south koreans.
Now talking about south korea establishing diplomatic ties with china under president ron tauu in 1992.
Actually there was a policy that is, that was known as northern diplomacy in seoul at the time.
What do you make of the legacy of that very policy, and does that legacy still matter today?
I think the legacy still matters.
And Ambassador's father, Ru Tai-Wu, promoted so-called Northern Diplomacy to cultivate the relationship with socialist countries including the former Soviet Union, China and Hungary and Czechoslovakia all kinds of countries and did achieve significant progress in that regard.
And I think it's such a kind of a North diplomacy was designed to break South Korea's diplomatic installations, to build diplomatic ties as many as possible.
I think that's the spirit, I think will be carried on by his song to not to cultivate but to stabilize, safeguard the already established diplomatic ties between South Korea and other countries, particularly South Korea's relations with China.
And he did a great contribution in that regard.
I remember, in 2022, in celebrating the 30th anniversary of diplomatic relationship between South Korea and China, and the new ambassador once said I feel it is my mission to open up the future of South Korea and China relations for future development.
On the same occasion, he also expressed his willingness to work on a positive picture of the future of Korea-China relations, who should go beyond regular neighbors to become neighbors that cannot live without one another.
End of core, so not speech.
I think it's a.
It's a very, very stimulating, so very informative for as the new ambassadors carry his new job in the future.
I take your point.
Now, earlier this week, Chinese authorities announced sanctions against the five American subsidiaries of a South Korean shipbuilding company over their involvement, or possible involvement, in Washington's investigation of China's shipping and shipbuilding industry.
What does this case tell us about the challenges facing South Korea against the backdrop of US-China tensions?
And over the longer term.
Professor, how do you think South Korea can manage to become a bridge connecting the United States and China, rather than end up being caught in the middle when we talk about major power competitions?
I think China's announcement sent quite a clear message across the world.
Number one, if any country's company seeks business in the United States, That's okay.
They enjoy the freedom to seek business opportunity in the United States.
But at the same time they cannot do so at the expense of transnational interests, otherwise they're going to take grave consequences.
So by sanctioning five American subsidies of South Koreans San Juans shipbuilders, I think that message is quite clear.
And also, as we all know, even though South Koreans sometimes try to serve as a bridge between China and the United States.
But that is a mission South Koreans struggle to accomplish on two accounts.
Number one.
South Korea is a United States ally, that they have built such a kind of allied relations for more than 70 years.
Li Chaimin's recent visit to the United States indicates South Korea's maneuvering space and its relationship with China and the United States has been significantly shrinking.
On the other hand, you see China and the United States' strategic competition has become increasingly tense and recently escalated a little bit.
So, against such a background, the South Koreans who once made allergies to the relationship between China and the United States.
They portrayed China and the United States as big whales.
Indeed, our time is limited, unfortunately, so we have to let you go.
Professor Chen Xiaohe joining us from the School of International Studies Renmin University of China.
Going forward, let's hope best regarding the South Korea-China relationship.
You are listening to World Today.
I'm Ding He in Beijing.
We'll be back after a short break.
You are back with World Today, I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
Russian President, Vladimir Putin, has met with Syrian interim leader Mohammad al-Shira in the city of Moscow.
Putin said ties between the two sides have always been exclusively friendly.
The Russian leader also praised the recent parliamentary elections held in Syria, saying the process would strengthen ties between all political forces.
Al-Shera told Pudding that he is seeking to restore and redefine ties with Moscow.
He assured that Damascus would honor all past deals with Russia.
Russia has been hosting former Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad since his exile from his own country 10 months ago.
So joining us now on the line is Dr Zhang Xin, Deputy Director of the Center for Russian Studies, East China Normal University.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Thanks for having me.
So, first of all, why do you think the Syrian leader has assured Mr Putin that Damascus would somehow honor all past agreements with Moscow?
It shows the current Syrian leader takes his ties with Russia very seriously and is trying to make all efforts to keep that kind of ties uh, especially in um in a time the new government still are.
Uh is at a very early stage of uh some people call it the mild state building, which needs potential support from all kinds of different forces, including multiple international partners.
Right now, it seems uh syrian leader wants to get whatever help is available from multiple external major players, including even US, as well as Russia.
So to ensure that Syria will honor all its past agreements with Moscow is the first step to go.
Although I need to point out, some of the key issues in the relation between Syria and Russia are not completely confined by past agreements.
Now there's new issues For example, the fate of previous Syrian leaders, etc.
Those are not completely confined by past agreements.
So whether Syria can really maintain a good functional relationship with Russia also depends on those issues that are beyond past agreements.
Now, a follow-up regarding one point you raised earlier.
It appears that Mr. Al-Shera has made a request to Moscow to hand over Bashar al-Assad.
Is Moscow likely to do that?
Of course, those are still rumors.
I haven't seen actually a confirmed information source about this specific request.
If there is such a request, I don't think Moscow is going to do that.
According to al-Sharah's request.
I think the most likely scenario is Moscow is going to still keep the former Syrian leader, Bashar Assad, although it may make some partial compromise, give up certain gifts.
I'll share some other conditions in return, but i don't think moscow is ready to return the former syrian leader.
I think that will be a way too much sell out of russia's previous geopolitical position.
Yeah, it's just just shows that moscow is not a credible, credible partner in any sense if it's going to just instantly return the former leader to the current new regime.
But again, I'm not convinced that al-Sharra has actually made this request.
Yeah, it's all in media reports, but no official confirmation, I guess.
So, in terms of rebuilding Syria and in terms of showing up the international legitimacy for the current Syrian government, What kind of support is Russia capable of giving?
There are a couple of major policy lines that Russia is of particular importance and relevance for state building or state rebuilding for the current a new syrian government one is in the economic sphere russia has been giving providing important energy sources to syria both for the previous regime as well as the current government and also in terms of in the field of Either in the form of aid or a trade through trade, grains and other agricultural products.
Russia has been very active doing that kind of deals with multiple countries in the Middle East, which I think Syria is in desperate need and also for long-term economic rebuilding.
Russia's both capacity and interest in energy related infrastructure and other type of infrastructure infrastructure building is also important.
I think the some top officials in uh, russian state energy company, already openly indicated they are both capable and interested in uh investing in uh infrastructure building related to energy um energy delivery in syria.
So those are the economic significance and also political and geopolitically russia may be taken by syria as a potential counter force against israel in the current middle east.
It's an extremely complicated political situation.
I think that potential counterforce is very much important for Syria too.
So Russia has an air base and a naval base in Syria, in the coastal region of Syria, I think.
Now, Elshira's assurance that he will honor all past deals with Russia suggests that those two particular Russian bases will probably continue to be there, continue to exist.
To Moscow, what's the strategic significance of managing to keep these two bases?
I agree with your assessment that the two Russian bases are very likely continue to be present in Syria, although the scale or the format of presence of the two bases very likely will go through some adaptation.
Actually Russia, around the time of the regime change in Syria, already withdraw quite significant facilities and as well as fleets from the naval base in Tartus.
So the base will very likely be there, but the total size or the scale of these two bases and what will be present there very likely will go through some changes.
The significance of keeping these two bases for Russia.
Overall, these are the important bases for Russia's presence in Middle East, not only in Syria, but in Middle East.
Russia's overall influence in the Middle East went through a dramatic decline in the early 21st century.
It's around 2014 and 2015, if you recall.
Russia experienced this so-called return to the Middle East mostly through its involvement in the Syrian civil war, essentially with relatively limited direct military input, but significantly increased its overall influence in Syria, as well as the whole Middle Eastern region, through its involvement there.
And then these two bases are the foundation of Russia's direct involvement in Syria and the potential in the whole Middle East.
So I think that's the key significance for Moscow to keep these two.
The final question before we let you go in a briefly, I mean going back to a point you you made earlier regarding Israel.
I mean, Israel is now nowadays demanding a wider demilitarized zone in southern part of Syria.
And I guess President Al-Shira wants to have Moscow's backing, whatever it might be to resist the demands from the Israeli side.
So is Moscow likely to offer specific support to Syria in this regard?
I'm not convinced that Russia is going to offer very concrete support, visible support, in the form, for example, presence either troops on the ground or even military police as a guarantor of further Israeli expansion of the demilitarized zone or other forms of for Syrian perspective encroachments.
But Russia may offer some other type of support through, for example, either UN mechanism or through regional mechanism, where Russia still plays an important role, to show support to the Syrian government in containing Israelis' overextension in its so-called demilitarized zone.
I think that's symbolic diplomatic support likely but concrete presence of troops or police on the ground.
I don't think so.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Dr. Zhang Xin, Deputy Director of the Center for Russian Studies, East China Normal University.
You're listening to World Today.
We'll be back after a short break.
You are listening to World Today.
I'm Ding Han in Beijing.
China has just concluded its 14th five-year plan, marked by historic strides in technological innovation, a green transition and strides in high-quality development.
As the country unveils its 15th five-year plan.
My colleague Wang Guan sat down with Dr Grigory Kolodko, a former Polish finance minister.
Professor Claudico is also a long-time observer of the Chinese economy.
During the conversation, he shared his assessment regarding China's long-term economic resilience, as well as the prospects of China-EU dynamics amid an increasingly complicated global landscape.
Professor Kolotko, let's talk about the Chinese economy, something you have been focusing substantially on from a scholar's perspective.
What do you think are the most important milestones features of the past five years under this 14th Five-Year Plan?
What do you consider as the most important?
I think it's still remarkable progress.
Pretty often in the West, one may hear that China has slowed down.
Somebody is even expecting so-called hard lending.
Fortunately, because of the wisdom of macroeconomic management and development strategy, it has not happened.
Still, the average rate of growth, 55 in terms of increment of GDP, is over twice higher than the world average and much higher than in the developed, advanced economies of the west.
So for that reason, coming to the end 14 five year plan period, china has caught up with the developed world still farther and i think it's remarkable also because of improvement of microeconomic management, growing quality of the human capital.
And despite what I have to stress, unfavorable international circumstances, China very much depends upon what is going on outside of China as far as economic development is concerned.
And it was not that easy to sustain over 5% average rate of growth during these five years.
But it has been a mixed bag, if you look at it, isn't it?
There are bright spots.
For example, this year marks the 20th anniversary of President Xi's theory of lucid waters and green mountains, or mountains of gold and silver.
There has been this very aggressive campaign focusing on Working towards a grain transition is taking place everywhere you go in China.
Grain industries, electric vehicles, lithium batteries, county level villages, booming tourism, ecotourism.
But also, on the other hand, consumption in China has been a little underwhelming, let's put it mildly.
Chinese are saving more than they spent.
How do you look at these competing dynamics marking the Chinese economy in the past five, six years?
I believe that dynamics would be even higher if China's strategy economic policy was more successful in shifting from investment and export as two major driving forces behind economic growth to increasing the importance the role of consumption.
I was a couple of times Deputy Prime Minister for Economic Affairs in my from China's perspective small country, Poland.
I would be happy to have such a challenge how to raise the rate of consumption within the GDP?
We have completely different problem in Poland.
We have very low, too low, rate of investment and in China, I think is still a room to shift a part of absorbed GDP from investment to consumption and to give a boost to consumption as a driving force behind the economic development.
Professor Kalotko, discussions on the 15th five-year plan is underway.
What is your outlook for China's growth potential under this latest blueprint?
And in your opinion, which reforms should be prioritized in this 15th five-year plan?
It's very important.
And I do appreciate that China still is using this mega instrument, that is, the long-term planning.
Yet it has changed the character.
It is not anymore mandatory uh, quantitative planning, as it used to be in the past.
It is more of an indicative character.
I think that the business people of souls also of the private entrepreneurship, which do not have to follow the orders of the central government, are carefully listening and watching to direction, to the accents, to the instrumentation which will be presented in this five years plan for 2026 2030, because it's a kind of guidance how to act at the time where the market forces are more and more important than in the past.
And my second comment is elsewhere In this word we have another leader Trump 20, as I referred to, the 47th president of the United States.
There is nothing like long-term planning, long-term development strategy.
There's only this megalomania, America first, make America great again.
President Xi Jinping is not shouting, may China great again.
Both America and China are great economies and great countries and so on.
But China has the ability to manage the long-term process of development beyond the horizon.
We are talking about the five years plan for 2026 2030, but it is an instrument, it is a step towards what already China's strategy is taking into account, looking toward 2050.
So I'm taking a look for the 15th National Plan for Economic Development in China as another segment before we will have subsequent for five years plans which will bring China to 2050.
So there is the determination, there is the accountability, there is the vision not an illusion how to keep the things under control, to move the progress of economy and society forward.
So for me, as a macroeconomist, which are also trying to follow what and why and for what reason is occurring in China, This 15-5 years plan is just an instrument of the long-term, more balanced, sustainable development which, of course, will raise China's well-being of Chinese people still further without shouting.
May china great again, as it is happening in some other countries.
You wrote articles on that very issue.
You said basically that the alienation of europe is inevitable, given trump's 20, trump's america first policy.
Can you elaborate on that for us, especially shedding light on what that means for china european relations?
As we know for a fact, beijing has been very keen on improving and fixing relations with Europe, despite their differences.
I have published recently a book on second presidential President Trump and his I won't hesitate to say so inadvised policy.
This Trumponomics, that is, the economic thinking and acting of the second Trump administration, is neither fruitful, positive for America's US development and definitely it is negative for the global economy development.
I think that one of the driving force behind Trump 20, this Trumponomics and Trumpism, is to contain China's development.
President Trump is not making it a secret that he is anti-Chinese in his feelings and doings, sometimes acting in quite an irrational way as far as his protectionism and trade war policies are concerned.
So for that reason, I think that at the end of the game because it is a kind of geopolitical game I know the name of the winner.
The winner will be not the United States, contrary to the illusion of President Trump.
The winner will be China.
It is not making I mean Trumponomics, economic policy development of china's economy anyhow easier.
It is even more difficult because of making more difficult uh access for chinese uh industries to still very huge american market, because of turbulence we have in the international trade etc.
But geopolitical situation is changing in favor not of the united states but in favor of china.
That was Professor Greg Gortz, a former finance minister of Poland, talking with my colleague Wang Guan.
Coming up.
Donald Trump says he authorized CIA operations in Venezuela, as Maduro, the Venezuelan president, says no to regime change.
You're listening to World Today, stay tuned.
You are listening to World Today, I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
US President Donald Trump has confirmed a report that he authorized the CIA to conduct covert operations in Venezuela.
His confirmation came after New York Times reported that his authorization would somehow allow the CIA to unilaterally carry out operations in Venezuela or as part of any wider American military activity.
Since early September, US forces have conducted at least five strikes on what Washington claims were suspected drug-carrying boats in the Caribbean region, killing 27 people.
The confirmation has provoked outrage from Caracas.
Venezuelan President, Nicolas Maduro, has taken to the airwaves to warn against the escalation, saying formally no to regime change.
So joining us now on the line is Dr Cao Ting, Director of the Center for Latin American Studies, Fudan University.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Thank you for the invitation.
So how would you comment on this particular action of authorizing the CIA to conduct operations, covert operations, in Venezuela?
Well, we all know that since this August, the US has carried out military operations near the waters of Venezuela under the pretext of combating drug trafficking cartels in Latin America.
And yesterday, Trump authorized the CIA to conduct secret operations in Venezuela.
This means the Trump administration is increasing pressure on the Masuro government in an attempt to completely destroy this region.
And the U.S. has deployed troops and naval warships in the region.
And the authorization of CIA secret operations may trigger a series of chain reactions leading to increased instability in the region.
And this practice of the Trump administration has also triggered criticism within the U.S.
Senator Gene Hashen of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee has stated that the Trump administration's authorization of the CIA to take secret actions is pushing the US closer to a full-scale conflict that lacks transparency or clear preventive measures.
So currently it remains unclear regarding whether the CIA is actually planning operations in Venezuela, inside Venezuela, or whether those plans are just being kept as a sort of contingency, for example.
But in the meantime Professor, in your observation of the region, in your study, how does the track record of CIA's activities, operations in Latin America or South America look like?
The CIA typically achieves the goal of subverting regions by supporting anti-government armed groups or military officials, assassinating leaders of target countries or launching military coups.
The CIA's track record in South America is highly controversial and has brought instability to the region.
And, as we know, in 1961 it organized the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba to subvert its revolutionary government.
And in the same year, the agency also supplied weapons for the assassination of the Dominican Republic through Rio.
And in 1964, it participated in Brazil's coup, reshaping its political landscapes.
And in 1973 it supported Pinochet's military coup to undermine Chile's socialist leader agenda in the election.
So we can see it always violated South Americans' nation's sovereignty and human rights, drawing in persistent international criticism.
So, frankly speaking, does Venezuela play any role when we talk about this Caribbean region's drug trade?
Well, Venezuela is geographically positioned as a transit country in the regional drug trade.
It shares a long border with Colombia, the world's largest producer of cocaine.
And this location makes it a natural transit point for drug traffickers moving cocaine from Colombia to North America, the Caribbean and Europe.
And traffickers often use Venezuela's coastline, remote border areas or informal ports to smuggle drugs, taking advantage of gaps in border control and maritime surveillance.
But its role is often overstated or politically weaponized.
Many international observers and Latin American governments argue that the Trump government has used anti-drug as a political tool to justify sanctions and pressure on Venezuela.
So on one hand, we see President Nicolas Maduro appearing on TV and appealing for peace with the United States.
But on the other hand, he has also, for example, ordered military exercises in a suburb of the Venezuelan capital Caracas, and as well as in a neighboring state.
So is Venezuela capable of repelling a possible US attack on Caracas, if that happens?
There are many favorable factors for Venezuela.
As we know, the U.S. military has overwhelming superiority in terms of overall strength.
The U.S.
Navy has a large number of advanced warships and its air force is equipped with advanced fighter jets.
In addition, Venezuela is located in the backyard of the US, and so the US has the geographical advantage of being close to the battlefield.
But I think Venezuela also has some means of resistance.
It has a defense missile system and, at the same time, Venezuela has mobilized a large number of militia.
This militia can quickly pick up weapons to resist the invasion in case of war.
So I think it's hard to say if Venezuela is capable of repelling the attack from the U.S.
Anyway, we don't want to see the outbreak of another war on the earth and hope the two sides can resolve their difference through dialogue.
Yeah, really hope that peace will prevail and justice will prevail.
But thank you very much for joining us.
Dr. Cao Ting, Director of the Center for Latin American Studies with Fudan University.
That's all the time for this edition of World Today.
To listen to this episode again or to catch up on previous episodes, download our podcast by searching World Today.
I'm Dinghan in Beijing.
Thank you so much for listening.
Bye for now.
