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 has hit back on US port fees with retaliatory levies.
We will explore why Washington is escalating trade tensions with China.
China's express delivery volume has topped 150 billion parcels so far this year.
World leaders signed Gaza peace deal after Israel and Hamas completed a hostage prisoner swamp.
And in France, President Emmanuel Macron says he will not resign amid renewed no-confidence motions against his new government.
To listen to this episode again or to catch up on our previous episodes.
You can download our podcast by searching World Today.
China's port fees on U.S.-owned, operated, built, and flagged vessels have officially come into effect.
China's transport ministry announced the fees last Friday.
The fees are a countermeasure to U.S. port fees on China-linked ships starting on Tuesday.
Vessels owned or operated by a Chinese entity are now facing a flat fee of 50 US dollars per net tonnage per variate to the United States.
The US fees are part of a broader attempt by Washington to revive domestic shipbuilding and weaken China's commercial shipping power.
China's commerce ministry says Beijing's countermeasures are self-defense, aimed at safeguarding fairness in the global shipping and shipbuilding markets.
On Tuesday, China also announced sanctions against the five American subsidiaries of a South Korean shipbuilder over their involvement in Washington's probe into the Chinese shipbuilding industry.
So joining us now on the line are Ina Tengen, chairman of Asian Narrative Substack, and Professor Jiang Gong with the University of International Business and Economics.
So thank you very much for joining us today, Professor Gong and Ina.
Professor Gong, to start with you.
First of all, do you think China is justified to slap these port fees on US-owned, US-operated built or flagged vessels, as well as to sanction these five US subsidiaries of South Korean shipbuilder Hanwha Ocean?
Well, I think this is in response to what the Commerce Department in Washington has done.
As a matter of fact, if you look back in history of the trade span between the United States and China, at every turnover event it's all because of China reacting in response to actions by Washington.
So the Chinese government will have to respond in a way that can bring Washington back to the negotiating table.
So I think it's more like posturing before negotiation.
And I hope a solution will be worked out to avoid this kind of retaliatory, this kind of actions that hurt trade for most countries.
So Aina, turning to you, in what ways do you think China's countermeasures we're talking about here could help safeguard fairness in the global shipping and shipbuilding markets?
Well, I mean, China is – and I completely agree with Professor – well, John.
This is a situation where China is reacting defensively.
They're basically just – if the U.S. does something crazy, they kind of respond.
But let's keep a couple of things in mind.
First off, China is building far more ships.
I think it was like hundreds of ships versus 10 ships in the united states.
Um, the shipping industry in the us isn't going to rebound anytime soon.
I know that because our family was involved in the shipbuilding business in the great lakes.
We built 28 submarines, we built all sorts of cargo ships and things like that.
It's just not competitive.
But that was a decision that wasn't made in china, that was a decision made in the us because we wanted a strong dollar.
Now, in terms of the uh sanctions on this uh korean charitable that has subsidies in the US, they said oh, we're going to put 5 billion into US shipbuilding.
And they were offering information their perspective on Chinese shipbuilding, which is ironic because this is an entity that has a very close supply chain relationship with China, including a very large shipbuilding operation in Shandong.
They put together segments of the ship and then they're pushed over to South Korea where they're put into final assembly.
So I think this is a situation which is really endemic.
It shows that what is happening today is companies are being pushed around.
You know, this company, for whatever reason, whether it was pressure or they felt it was in their economic interest to do this, cooperated with the US.
That gained the ire of the United States.
I mean, of China.
And obviously now they're caught in the middle.
So we'll have to see where it goes.
But in terms of everything that China is doing, you know, it can only do so much.
It can't demand that there's fairness.
All they can do is, as John said, try to get people to negotiating table and try to figure out something that makes the global economy grow, as opposed to what the US is doing, which is making it shrink.
So, talking about being caught in the middle, Professor Gong, there could be cases in which a particular shipping company's container vessels, for example, are hit by both the US port fees and the Chinese port fees.
If I mean if they have some of their ships that are built in China and now owned or operated by the United States.
So for any such shipping companies, or whatever companies there might be, how can they navigate the current complexities?
All right.
Unfortunate.
And they're caught in the middle.
I'm skeptical they can get around it with this.
I think it's something they have to pay.
Here's my view about this whole thing.
The Commerce Department does this, saying that because of China's shipbuilding industry is too large, there's not much incentive in the United States to build ships anymore.
But I'm very skeptical.
Measures like this can indeed propel the shipbuilding industry to move back to the United States.
There are fundamental economic forces that are working.
Shipbuilding was a lot of labor.
It's hard labor, actually.
You have to do welding and the sun.
If you ever visit a shipyard, shipbuilding yard, I've done one.
I've visited several shipbuilding yards in the past.
And you look at the workers' working condition, look at the color of their skin.
They've been working on the sun for a long time and it's hard work, actually really, really hard work.
So i don't think of these economic forces can be somehow just mitigated by some these tap down ships coming from china.
I think the real purpose here is um is to collect money for the federal government.
I mean Secretary of Commerce Ludnick is noted for advocating this view that somehow big money can be collected from trade with China.
He has this very simplistic view that China has about $400 billion of exports to the United States.
You can get 100% tariff on that.
That's 400 billion, the United States government's coffee.
Um, it's just ridiculous argument in my view.
So i think he's doing this uh, eagerly trying to demonstrate to president trump that somehow he has a scheme to collect some big money for the us federal government, and and he, without understanding or even considering the consequences of doing this um, and i can even sense a, i would say, a division among the trump team.
Um, you know this report that the USTR, Jonathan Greer, called to try to reach his counterpart in China, and that's Mr Li Chenggang, and the call was turned down.
So I think this action seems to indicate that there's just lack of coordination within the Trump team and there's some kind of a division between the Scott Benson, Jamison Greer team with the with Ludnick who is heading the Department of Commerce.
I think there's no coordination and there's a port of public going on right now.
Now, division or a lack of coordination or communication was not a new problem during the first Trump term, during the trade negotiation between Washington and Beijing back then.
We also saw this kind of similar kind of division.
Now, according to the industry analysis I have seen, last year, for example, Chinese shipyards built more than 1000 commercial vessels, while the United States constructed fewer than 10.
So Ina, do you think slapping port fees on China-linked commercial vessels can somehow help revive the shipbuilding domestically in America?
The simple answer is no.
And I'm speaking from a family experience in that it's just not going to happen.
What John said about the need for labor and the conditions and things like it, it has improved.
Safety has improved in the industry.
The ships are huge, though, and you need a complete supply chain.
It's one thing to say, oh, I want to set up a shipyard in the U.S.
Okay, where are you going to get all the parts?
Guess what?
A lot of them are going to be coming from China unless you develop a complete separate supply chain.
So that isn't going to work.
But I want to address part of the question you asked, John, and that is what happens?
I have a lot of friends who are in the maritime industry.
They're ship brokers, ship owners.
They're in the – supply chain business.
What happens is it just becomes this kind of foolish game where I can't change the origin of my ship.
But if it's going to be a problem in the US well, I sail it to a Caribbean island and I put it onto smaller ships and I send it into the United States, or I sail to Canada, depending on whatever the supply chain is, whatever is lowest in terms of tariffs for the supply chain.
But all this does is add cost, because it's you know, although I'm weighing how much I'm paying, you know, the tariff versus pushing it to somewhere else.
That means that there's an extra step involved.
And this is kind of a silly games that Lutnuk is playing.
Even by his colleagues, he's not regarded as particularly bright.
And you know there's been things said in the cabinet about him uh, but yeah, he has a very simplistic view of these things.
Uh, he wants to, you know, please his boss uh, everyone.
You know there's rarely a team when everyone is just trying to please the boss.
Um, it's just, you know, it's everyone for themselves, trying to gain favor.
So this isn't working well.
It's not going to be to america's advantage to do this um, but it's like many things that donald trump has talked about in the past.
He likes to make a big splash.
He likes to say he's doing big things, for instance, in health care.
In 18 years, he's been saying he's going to deliver a new health care plan in two weeks.
I mean, literally, he's been saying that for 18 years.
Moon asked just before the election, what's your, you know, what's the big plan here?
He said you know, he had a you know a bunch of ideas, a framework of ideas.
I think was the exact quote there.
And since he got elected, we really haven't heard much, although he's talked about reducing prices.
So there's no comprehensive plan in what Donald Trump does.
It's just get some optics, try to grab some money, see what happens.
Now Ina.
This particular clash over port fees and shipbuilding industries is only one aspect of the bigger or broader trade tensions between the United States and China right now.
So why do you think the Trump administration is escalating the trade tensions with China now, despite this positive atmosphere we seem to perceive from the previous rounds of China-US trade and economic talks?
Well, there's a number of explanations.
One Trump's favorite negotiating tactic is his quote, a madman theory which, if he is just completely unpredictable, somehow this will gain an advantage from his position.
Actually, that might work when you're in real estate, but it doesn't really work in international trade, where everybody is looking for predictability and he's destroying that.
In terms of the other things, he is desperate to turn attention away from his Epgate, the Epstein files situation.
It really bothers him that there is a division within the MAGA base, that they're calling for it.
They've had to shut down Congress at a time when you know they should be meeting to try to figure out how to restart the government.
It's been closed down by the Speaker of the House because he would have to swear in another newly elected representative who would bring the total to 218, which is necessary to pass for not a request but a demand that the Epstein files be shared.
So there's so many things going on in Washington.
Donald Trump is very happy at the moment.
He's sad about losing the Nobel Prize thing, but now he thinks he's assured of getting it next year because of what happened in the least.
I don't think that's assured, but it goes to this notion that he likes to create a lot of, you know, publicity.
You know, he said he knows what's going on in Xi's mind the other day in reaction to these tariffs.
You know, it's incredible.
The market actually went up.
I don't know why anyone listens to him when he says he understands what Xi Jinping is saying.
But they did.
Obviously, in the East, no one really took that as the gospel.
So, you know, you're dealing with a very, very difficult situation.
Donald Trump is trying to do his madman theory, but it's not necessarily working out for the world.
Professor Gong, when the Trump administration unveiled its latest tariff threat of as high as 100% additionally against China last Friday, It cited Beijing's recent move to tighten China's rules for rare earth exports.
What is your take on Beijing's recent move regarding rare earth exports?
I think it's all bluff.
You know, you look at the Islam post.
I've never seen him written such a long post, by the way.
I think he's just very angry and he decided to do something like this.
Of course, it's not going to be good for China as well.
And we have gone through that stage before.
It's not like both countries haven't experienced more than 100% tariff before.
It was a disaster for both sides.
Back in April this year, I remember there were two weeks of time when both sides tariffs are way above 100 I think 120 in fact and trade virtually stopped between the two sides.
And then you have the CEOs of these leading retailers Target, Walmart those company executives going to the White House to warn him that the shelves at these stores are going to be emptied.
And this is a scene America has never seen before.
So he understands that this is a path American economy can't afford going down.
But nevertheless, he's just saying that he might do this and he's threatening to do this.
Uh, this is a very good.
I don't just talk about president trump's uh negotiation style.
He would come up with something outrageous and then, you know, negotiate down from there.
This is a tactic i would say, maybe probably workable with some you know, small crap bit of a country.
Uh, it's not gonna work, you know.
So a country like this is not gonna be scared off by some tactic like this.
So I think well, I mean, you look at what Scott Benson said.
It's very clear to me that he's indicating that this thing can be avoided.
So I think you know the nature of this whole idea is to essentially, you know, pre-negotiation possibly and I call it bluff.
So let's wait and see.
Both sides will definitely work on something before the end of the month.
So, by the way Ina, what do you make of this latest development in the Netherlands, where the Dutch government has granted itself the power to intervene in this company decision at Dutch-based Chinese-owned chipmaker Nexperia?
I mean.
The Dutch government, of course, claims that this move is meant to safeguard the availability of this company's products in case of emergency situation.
But do you see correlation between this case and Washington's policy on China?
Oh, absolutely.
I mean we saw what kind of pressure that Washington put to bear on making sure that ASML would not sell its best machines to China.
They rolled over like a puppy dog and they're doing so again.
But, you know, here's the thing.
There's a tremendous number of Dutch businesses here in China.
And just this year alone, investments in China were up 75% by Dutch companies.
So, I mean, this is one of those situations where you scratch your head.
Why are you antagonizing a huge trade partner while you're investing in it.
I mean, it doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
What are they actually doing?
They're saying they have control over the executives, they have control over the decisions made by the company.
This is just a wholesale robbery.
There's no war going on.
There's no exigent circumstances.
There's no threat by China to say oh, we're going to take away, you know, our company in the Netherlands and prevent them from providing chips or anything like this.
This is just simply, you know, out of the blue doesn't make any sense at all unless you look at it that somehow the Dutch government feels it has to obey the whatever Trump wants.
So Ina, what do you think can be done right now to try to ease this reignited trade tension between Washington and Beijing?
Well, I mean OK.
So I'm always asked this question around the world on different television and radio stations and I said unfortunately it is not up to Beijing.
It is up to Washington.
Washington has this, you know it's hell-bent on getting maintaining its economic and political hegemony.
It wants to contain China.
Well, you know, how am I going to deal with you?
Like I walk in your house and say, I want to burn your house down.
And, you know, I don't I don't like you.
How do we negotiate?
It's very, very difficult.
What China is doing, from my perspective, is that they are slow playing Donald Trump.
They have a tremendous amount of levers in Beijing. that they can use.
Rare earths is not the last.
There are many other ones as well.
They have to do with critical supply chain issues, etc.
So, you know, China, you got three years and another three, four months of this guy.
We just have to, you know, last it and then see what the future brings.
It's no guarantees.
But this guy is very difficult.
And the attitude in Washington is really tough.
The U.S. right now looks like it's on a collision course. with an internal issue.
Money is very scarce.
People are very worried.
And you see these pictures of basically the armed forces and the citizenry going at it.
So at this point, China's best bet is to slow play the situation.
Do what is necessary to maintain its position, not give in, but also show the world that you don't have to roll over for Donald Trump.
That if you, you know, and at some point I believe, that countries will come together and they'll say look, we need to start acting together.
This guy's a bully.
He doesn't respect anything except power.
The only way to show him the power is for us to collectively imagine the EU.
And also BRICS coming together, not to do a trade group or anything like that and not to create a new UN or anything.
Just simply go to Donald Trump and say knock it off.
We don't care how much tariffs you charge your own people, but you're not going to pit us against each other in some cynical colonial game where we're trying to vie for your favor so that instead of 15 we have 10 tariffs.
It doesn't make any sense.
So at some point hopefully, the countries of the world will realize that they're better off working together than being picked off individually.
So, Professor Gong, finally and very briefly, your final thoughts regarding how to ease this renewed tension between the US and China over trade.
I think the Trump administration needs to understand that Beijing is not a country that can be easily pushed around.
I think many members of the Trump team tend to think in a habitual way that China would be just like other countries that can be simply pushed around.
And I think persuasion doesn't work here.
They have to be quite persuaded by real actions coming from Beijing.
And just as they're seeing right now, as more countermeasures coming from Beijing come and they will start to realize that this is a different country, they have to adopt a different approach and both sides have to negotiate on an equal footing.
It's no longer a unipro world anymore.
Thank you very much for joining us, gentlemen.
Professor John Gong from the University of International Business and Economics and Ina Tengen, Chairman of Asian Narratives, Substack.
You're listening to World Today.
I'm Ding Han in Beijing.
We'll be back after a very short break.
You're back with World Today, I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
China's express delivery volume has surpassed 150 billion parcels so far this year, hitting a milestone more than a month ahead of schedule.
From bustling coastal hubs to remote mountainous villages, China's logistics network is running at full speed, powered by smart warehouses, autonomous vehicles and even drones.
Analysts say this milestone reflects the resilience of China's consumer market, as well as the broader economy.
With online retail sales surging by nearly 10 in the first eight months of the year, logistics has become not just a service, but also a strategic engine for fulfilling domestic demand and industrial transformation.
So, to delve deeper into this, my colleague Zhao Yang spoke with Dr Li Lun, Assistant Professor of Economics with Peking University.
So, Professor Li Lun, China's express delivery industry has hit 150 billion puzzles more than a month earlier than last year.
So what does that tell us about the state of China's consumer economy right now?
Yeah, so we're seeing that China has passed this milestone, so more than a month earlier than last year.
So this means that we can expect that in 2025, the total amount of parcel deliveries is going to grow at a much faster pace than before.
So we're seeing, for example, between January and August the parcel volume is already rising by 18 year on year.
So this, compared with, for example, the total retail sales, which only rise by 46, is showing that logistics is basically developing and amplifying some of the spending patterns and shortening the delivery cycles.
And we are also seeing, for example, in the data that cross-region commerce is also surging.
So between cities, basically these intercity deliveries is growing by 19% year on year.
So this, I think, reflects that we're going towards a unified domestic market where people can buy their product from different cities at a much faster pace and at a much larger volume.
As you mentioned, from January to August, the retail sales rose by 46 year on year, while the online retail up nearly 10.
So how do you interpret these figures?
Yeah.
So we're seeing that online retail between January and August is almost 10%.
And in total retail, basically the penetration of e-commerce is almost 25%.
So which means that 25% or a quarter of all products that a household buys is from e-commerce.
And that number is is projected to be even increased further.
So if you look at the detailed categories, we can see a trend towards you know renovating or refreshing the home.
For example, we're seeing household appliances growing by 28 percent uh, year on year.
Uh, sports recreation 20 percent, furniture 22 percent.
So we're seeing a pattern of you know households renovating or buying stuff in their home, in their house and you know getting to, you know equipment for sports and you know living a higher quality life.
So i think this reflects a very healthy you know trends towards you know the growth in real consumption and not just you know nominal or the or the numbers, but reflects a you know a change in lifestyle, which is a very healthy you know development towards the future Yeah, and science and technology innovation has injected new momentum into the industry development as drones and unmanned vehicles being used for deliveries, thousands in operation and millions of parcels delivered.
So is China leapfrogging the West in logistics automation?
I do think so because automated delivery is definitely going to be the future of all deliveries.
Because of economy of scale, because it can cover areas that traditional trucks or ships is hard to cover.
I think a good city case study is Shenzhen, because in Shenzhen, right now, every day.
So the drones are delivering more than 20000 parcels a day and the unmanned ground vehicles are delivering more than 70000 parcels a day.
So it's already doing that in a city in a day-to-day basis.
So whether it can, for example, expand to other cities where the population are dense, when the technologies are better.
I do think it's very likely and it's going to develop in a fast pace.
For example Meituan, as a corporate leader, has already secured a nationwide drone delivery license.
So, which means maybe in the future we can see, you know, the Meituan drones delivering a volume.
You know, delivering a package or a food delivery.
You know, in drones.
And not only in Shenzhen, but in all the cities in China.
And what role do you think is AI, robotics and smart logistics playing in improving the efficiency and lowering the costs?
So traditionally these logistics are commonly used in sorting the parcels and making sure they're routed in a correct way.
But recently, I think, especially in regions like Inner Mongolia, in Xinjiang.
I think that these AI and, as you say, robotics are basically making the last mile possible where you know traditional roads are very tough to build.
So these are, you know, for example, I think, you know, Mongolia is a really good example.
The region is basically the authority has issued a plan to build 500, more than 500 drone fields and, you know, loading pads, basically to all in in the low attitude logistic routes.
And I think it's very, you know, sensible because you know the local beef and lamb and also the dairy products can be shipped out.
And also you know stuff from outside can be shipped in, so that you know we can first benefit from.
You know the, you know the good products from inner Mongolia and also people in the city, in the region can benefit from, for example, the furnitures or the toys that's manufactured in other regions of China.
So I think this is going to also apply to other Western or central regions of China.
And I'm very optimistic about the development.
And actually growth in expressed volumes in the central and western regions exceeded 30%.
So how significant do you think is this for regional rebalancing?
Yeah, so that's a very, very good question.
So uh, previously we're thinking that, you know, the central and western regions are usually just, you know, catching up to the eastern and they they oftentimes fail to do so, but in in terms of you know express volumes we're seeing actually, the national share of these regions are are growing, which means that, you know, these regions are actually taking the lead in some of the you know, fast delivery uh, you know area, And I think this reflects what we call an economic spillover between the eastern areas, or the manufacturing hubs, to the less populated, to the farther end of China, in terms of taking the faster delivery parcels, making sure all the benefits of modern technology can spill over to other regions in China.
Some economists describe express delivery as a leading sector linking manufacturing and consumption.
So does it suggest logistics is strategic infrastructure and not just a business service?
I do think so.
So, in terms of a leading sector, I do think it's almost like you know how the blood circulates around the body.
So basically the express delivery is like how goods and products circulate around the nation.
So in that sense, it's very important.
So we need to make sure that in all cases, whether it's an economic slowdown or in other geopolitical conflicts, we have to make sure that goods and products can circulate around China in an efficient and timely manner.
And I do think that we're definitely going towards that direction at full speed.
So it's a very good, yes, it's a very good sign.
And do you think China's digital logistics model could become an exportable innovation shaping the global e-commerce logistics in the future?
I do think so because traditionally, when we're thinking about these deliveries, we often think we have to build roads locally.
We have to build the infrastructure.
But with drones, especially automated drones, you know these obstacles or roadblocks can no longer be a problem, because you know the technology can become much more portable.
For example, we can, you know, directly fly from a big ship or port to the areas that needs the delivery.
And, you know, maybe all other business patterns can emerge, which is, you know, much more portable than the traditional business model where you know you have to build roads first.
Dr Li Lun, Assistant Professor of Economics with Peking University, talking with my colleague Zhao Yang.
Coming up.
World leaders have signed a Gaza peace deal after Israel and Hamas completed a hostage prisoner swamp.
You're listening to World Today.
We'll be back.
You are listening to World Today.
I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
Leaders from more than 20 countries have witnessed the signing of a Gaza ceasefire deal in the Egyptian city of Sham al-Sheikh.
The United States, Egypt, Qatar, and Turkey signed on as mediators and guarantors.
They committed to the full implementation of the deal's first phase and immediate Gaza governance talks.
Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi has called this deal an unparalleled historic opportunity.
The signing of the deal comes as Israel and Hamas have completed a hostage prisoner swamp under Phase 1 of this particular deal.
So joining us now on the line is Dr Zhang Chuchu, Deputy Director of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies with Fudan University.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Thank you for having me.
So, first of all, what is your main takeaway from this document signed in Egypt and what remains to be uncertain?
Well, we can see that the signing of this document right now shows that the Gaza war has entered a new phase.
And what is certain is the release of the final 20 living Israeli hostages held by Hamas, along with the remains of 28 deceased hostages, in exchange for Israel freeing nearly 2000 Palestinian prisoners and detainees.
Also, according to What has been negotiated over these summits, there will definitely be an involvement of the mediators, including the United States Egypt Qatar Turkey, in overseeing the implementation of the agreement.
But meanwhile, of course, many things remain uncertain until now.
On the one hand, the long-term governance of Gaza remains uncertain because until now, we still don't know what are the potential roles for the Palestinian Authority or the other entities, as the deal envisions eventual Palestinian Authority involvement, but lacks specific details about it.
And, on the other hand, many observers also doubt the sustainability of the peace, especially given early reports of violations and also given the fragility of the enforcement without direct Israel-Hamas buy-in.
Both Hamas and Israel were not present when the deal was signed in Egypt.
Do you think this is likely to prove to be a problem in the foreseeable future?
Well, I think in a short run, this is not going to affect the agreement so far, since they both have agreed about the agreement.
But of course the absence of direct representatives from Hamas and Israel at the signing ceremony could pose challenges in the long term, because without face-to-face commitments either side could just claim ambiguity in interpretations.
And that might lead to further disagreements, disputes, or even violations.
And also in Israel right now.
Netanyahu also face internal pushback to accept the deal, especially from the far right.
And the hotliners might exploit the indirect signing to undermine it.
So I think in general, the absence of the warring parties creates conflict, greater uncertainty about the later phase of the implementation of the agreements.
To U.S.
President Donald Trump, does this deal represent a big political win, either internationally or domestically?
Why or why not?
I think currently for Trump, he tries to label this deal as a big victory for himself.
So he's trying to frame this both internationally and domestically.
For example, his set speech in Israel declaring the war is over, and his attendance at the Egypt signing, you know, amplified global attention to himself and he tries to make a big show of himself.
And also he even counts on this so-called achievement to potentially aid his future political ambitions or even his try to aim for the Nobel Prize right.
And as for the domestic audience now, he tries to create an impression that, while Biden failed to finish the Gaza war, he managed to facilitate the deal.
And in doing so, he tried to appeal to his base and the pro-Israel voters.
Egyptian President, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, has said that a two-state solution is the only way to secure lasting peace for Israelis and Palestinians.
In the meantime, we have also heard the King of Jordan making this comment that Somehow the Middle East will be doomed without a Palestinian state.
So, looking ahead, Dr Zhang Shuchu, what do you think could be the main hurdles for a two-state solution?
Well, absolutely.
The two-state solution is the only way to secure the long-lasting peace for the region.
Because without it, it means that the fundamental problems between Israel and Palestine remain.
And there can be a new cycle of violence anytime in the future.
But right now, there are still a lot of challenges and hurdles.
The first thing is really political opposition, because Netanyahu and also his coalition have kept rejecting the Palestinian Authority involvement in Gaza governance and also he tries to oppose statehood.
He views it as a security risk and also he calls it as a certain encouragement of the Aqsa movement.
So right now we can see that the recent deals, like the Abraham Accords and related agreements, actually prioritize normalization, but they have not talked much about the Palestinian statehood issue.
And the second hurdle might be the settlements and territorial disputes.
Because right now, if you say OK, there is a Palestinian statehood, but where is the border and where is the territory?
And right now there is really no fragmented political landscape in Gaza.
And the third issue is the Palestinian leadership and unity, because to now.
The Palestinian Authority lacks popularity in Gaza, while Hamas' role post-deal is very unclear.
And also there might not even be a role for the Palestinian Authority in the immediate post-war era in Gaza.
So I think internal divisions might hinder negotiations.
We know, in Israel, tens of thousands of people are gathering in the city of Tel Aviv to celebrate the return of these 20 living Israeli hostages.
So how does the political future of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu look like right now?
Well, Netanyahu is trying to use this deal and also the return of the hostages as a leverage, and he's trying to to change his image.
So the hostage return allows him to claim victory and rewrite his narrative as a resilient leader who achieves all goals, at least one goal.
And also Netanyahu tries to frame the deal as a strategic win rather than concession, which could currently stabilize his coalition ahead of elections, and tries to reduce the disagreements between himself and the far right in Israel.
But of course, there are a lot of challenges in front of him.
The first issue is that the opposition leaders like Lapid criticizes him for prolonging the war for political gain.
And it seems very hard for him to argue against it until now.
And the second issue here is that the public sentiment in Israel at the moment is very much divided.
As we can see, while hostage families celebrate broader war, fatigue and also economic strains might fuel protests or, you know, early elections.
And also we can see that the speech of Donald Trump has also received very polarized reactions within Israel.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Dr. Zhang Chuchu, Deputy Director of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies, Fudan University.
Coming up.
In France, President Emmanuel Macron says he will not resign amid renewed no-confidence motions against his new government.
This is World Today, stay tuned.
You're listening to World Today, I'm Ding Han in Beijing.
French President, Emmanuel Macron, has rejected calls to resign, as two no-confidence motions threaten to bring down his latest government.
Macron is blaming his political rivals for destabilizing France.
Last Friday, President Macron reappointed Sébastien Le Corneau, who had resigned as prime minister earlier in the week.
Many top jobs in Likunu's new cabinet remain unchanged.
France is mirrored in its worst political crisis in decades.
Basically, a succession of minority governments has been seeking to push deficit-reducing budgets through a parliament split into three ideological blocs.
So for more.
Joining us now on the line is Professor Cui Hongjian from the Academy of Regional and Global Governance, Beijing Foreign Studies University.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Hi.
So we know, Prime Minister Lukunu has pledged to name some ministers in his new cabinet who would somehow embody renewal or diversity.
So, with that in mind, Professor Tsui, why do you think many of the top jobs within his new cabinet actually remain unchanged?
Yes, if we look at the reason why the first government organized by Lukunu, I think a very, very direct reason is it got so many criticized from outside, from inside, about some top jobs for the ministers.
And so that's the reason why this time President Macron called Mr Necro should have maybe some more new faces for his cabinet.
But even for this reason we can find out.
Yes, this government changed something different from the last one.
It tried to attract some more, you know, and also some political figures from civil society.
But indeed for some top jobs, including the foreign minister and also defense minister or some other uh, it's just to have a very, very narrow choice for the new government because, as we know, the government, the major job for the government, is try to practice.
Uh, there is this reform program, a program from the president macron, so i think that's the reason why It has, you know, changed something but could not change substantially.
So do you think Prime Minister Lukunu will survive an upcoming no-confidence vote?
Why or why not?
No, it looks like very, very difficult for Mr Lukunu, you know, to survive for this upcoming no-confidence vote.
As we know, according to in the current format of the parliament in France.
They just needed some more than 285 votes, and the non-confidence motion could be passed.
But so far yes both, as we know, the far-right party and also hard-left coalition.
They submitted the motion of a low-confidence vote.
Both those two parts of the parliament, some of the state has exceeded, you know, this half of the state in parliament.
So it's very difficult, technically, for Mr. Lacroix to survive from this no confidence vote.
Talking about President Emmanuel Macron, many of his political rivals domestically say that the only way out of the current political crisis is for Macron to either call fresh legislative elections or to resign himself.
Of course, both of which we know Macron has refused to do so.
What is your thought regarding this, Professor Twain?
Now it looks like a very, very difficult situation for President Macron.
And I think that's why he always tried to ask Mr Nacrou to organize the government, not only just for one time and for the second time.
It's Mr Macron's tactics to try to stop the tendencies that he has to.
You know choose, you know, have a new election.
As we know, according to this current, you know, support from people.
Certainly the far right party went along a lot of support.
So once there are some new legislative election in France certainly it's very, very there will be very, very bad situation for President Macron.
And then not only just the legislative elections issue, including this resigning requirement from both left and the far left and the far right when also give a very, very big impact on the credibility of President Macron.
So I think now his tactic is trying to have a firewall between so-called organized new governments one and two and then to stop any kind of attacks or any kind of unfavorable environment for his presidency.
Now uncertainties stemming from the political instability has cost France at least 02 percentage points of growth.
That's according to this country's central bank.
In a bigger picture sense, Professor Cui, what do you make of the broader economic or political impact that could be felt across Europe due to this ongoing political crisis in Paris?
Certainly, I think that once there are some more uncertainties in politics for France, it will suffer a lot, especially this instability of society and the uncertainty for the economy.
If we look at the response from markets to these uncertainties of politics in France, we can find out that it will give some very, very direct negative impact and then as we know France is a second biggest economy within the European Union and also France try to play a more, you know leading role in more and more European affairs So once there are some more uncertainties certainly it will undermine the confidence from market and also from other member states of European Union towards France and And now, as we know, for France and some more European countries, they are in very, very big difficulties to face a lot of challenges, not only just of the Ukraine issue and also this very, very difficult relations with the United States, especially this tariff issue.
So once there are some more uncertainties in France, it will give lower and lower I mean participation from outside European economy.
And then how could France play a more leading role to help the European Union as a whole to get out from the current difficulties?
So certainly, I think it's an issue of confidence.
The issue of confidence.
And of course we know the bigger context here is that France actually has the Eurozone's largest scale deficits.
That's very worrisome to economists and political observers as well.
And I guess it's very important to get to know the root cause.
But politically I guess it's very difficult for Paris and French politicians to try to address this particular issue.
But thank you very much for joining us.
Professor Cui Hongjian from the Academy of Regional and Global Governance, Beijing Foreign Studies University.
That's all the time for this edition of World Today.
I'm Dinghan in Beijing.
Thank you so much for listening.
Bye for now.
