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 criticizes Japan's Prime Minister for seriously damaging ties over Taiwan comment.
Trump vows to help Syria after landmark meeting with Al-Shira.
Gazadasto has topped 69,000 as peace plan for the region faces continued uncertainties.
And we're going to explore why Brazil has designated the city of Belém as capital during COP30.
To listen to this episode again or to catch up on our previous episodes.
You can download our podcast by searching World Today.
China has lodged serious representations with Japan over its prime minister's remarks concerning Taiwan.
A Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson said on Monday that the remarks violate the one China principle, the spirit of the four political documents between China and Japan and the basic norms of international relations.
He said the attempt to interfere in Taiwan affairs not only provokes the post-war international order, but also harms China-Japan ties.
The spokesperson is urging Japan to stop provocations and oversteps.
Last week, Japanese Prime Minister Sonei Takeuchi said a military conflict over Taiwan could be a survival-threatening situation for Japan, warranting the exercise of collective self-defense rights.
So for more.
Joining us now on the line is Dr Liu Kuangyu from the Institute of Taiwan Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
So thank you very much for joining us today, Dr. Liu Kuangyu.
First of all, Does it make sense to suggest that the use of military force over Taiwan or over the Taiwan question is a survival-threatening situation for Japan and that Tokyo should be allowed to engage in military action alongside US forces?
I suppose that Takahashi's remarks are absurd and distorting the facts.
On one hand, we see that from a legal standpoint, Taiwan is an inalienable part of China.
And the Taiwan question is entirely China's internal affairs.
So this means this is an indisputable legal fact.
And the Japanese government have also, in the past 40 years, consistently acknowledged this fundamental position.
Therefore, they have no right or reason for interfering China's internal affairs and obstruct the legal legitimacy of China's reunification under any so-called pretext or in any form.
And also, on the other hand, we examine Japan's domestic legal framework.
We see that neither is continuously revised security legislation nor their adjustments to the three strategic documents.
Neither of them incorporate the so-called Taiwan contingencies into its definition of Japan's so-called existential crisis.
And at most they refer only to very vague concepts of peripheral contingencies, which means wars or conflicts in neighboring countries.
So that does not include Taiwan.
So consequently, the Japanese governments.
They possess no legal authorization to engage in any kind of military intervention in regarding any purported Taiwan Strait so-called contingencies.
Also, we know that, from Japan's own security perspective, China's reunification efforts will not infringe upon any legitimate rights or interests of any other country.
On the contrary, China's reunification will inject more positive energy and certainty into peace and prosperity of the Asia Pacific region and the whole world at large.
We will also benefit Japan in its long-term development if there is a peace and prosperity in Taiwan Strait.
If Japan persistently approaches China's reification with such sort of a paranoid mindset, even considering obstruction as a policy option, and choose to engage in any sort of like arm race, while encouraging external powers to intervene in the Taiwan Strait and Sino-Japanese affairs, would only push Japan to a more perilous situation.
And such actions could genuinely trigger a crisis that threatens Japan's own very survival.
Hmm.
Yeah, so indeed.
I guess in many ways it's very much to the point when the Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson made this point, that Takeuchi's remarks violate the spirit of the four political documents between China and Japan, as well as the basic norms of international relations.
So what signals do you think the Japanese prime minister's remarks here Could it end up sending to those political forces seeking Taiwan independence?
We know that Takayoshi's remarks send very we can say extremely actually misguided signal to the separate forces, which is advocating Taiwan independence so-called, potentially leading them to misjudge the situation and become even more emboldened in their pursuit of so-called independence and thereby exacerbating tensions and instability across the Taiwan Strait.
And this also places Japan itself, like what I said, an extremely dangerous position and forcibly linking Japan's so-called survival to China's internal affairs accounts to harnessing Japan to the Taiwan independence called chariots.
So should japan actively intervene militarily in taiwan question, in the taiwan street conflict will only invite disaster among itself.
It's very simple logic, but they just choose to know it.
Actually, in the recent years we can see certain forces in japan have very actually pursued a strategy of using iwan independence to con, contain china and revealing their intent to intervene in this straight inclusion with the us, with other forces.
So we can see recently there is a report in the US saying that the US think tank recommend that the US government, they should support China's reunification and oppose and discard so-called Taiwan's independence.
So again, this backdrop, I think that certain elements in Japan, those factions in Japan, they continue to strive to serve as the back force behind the Taiwan independence.
And this reflects their strategic anxiety and political gambler mentality of the so-called Japan's right-wing forces.
They fear that maybe Washington, D.C. will retreat from their stance on Taiwan.
And so consequently, they have chosen to adopt a more aggressive role, and they seek to hijack US policy towards Taiwan through very radical statements bolstering so-called legitimacy of US-Taiwan alliances intervention on Taiwan Straits.
So that's what I see.
There is a very extreme strong support for Taiwan independence.
Okay, I take your point.
We know, Chinese President Xi Jinping met with Takeuchi on the sidelines of this recent APEC summit in Taiwan, in South Korea.
And during the meeting, President Xi called on a Japanese side to uphold important agreements regarding historical issues and Taiwan, so as to ensure that the foundation of China-Japan ties remain intact and unshaken.
Takeuchi's controversial remarks here came just a week or so after her meeting with the Chinese president.
So can we, With that in mind, can we still be hopeful that Takeichi has the sincerity to well manage Japan's ties with China?
Well, pretty difficult, because we, as you said, we have shown very open signals of kindness and sincerity.
We want to improve the Sino-Japan relationship.
You mentioned the APEC summit, the person she's remarked.
And also we left the ban on the Japanese schools of imports.
So there were good signals.
But in return, we got Takayoshi's remarks and also their interactions with Taiwan authorities.
So they are very bad signals.
Also, we can see the Takayoshi's remarks.
This is setting very dangerous precedent that could have serious consequences and negative impacts on China-Japan's relations and regional stability we see that her comments on taiwan are not isolated incident but a part of japan's political right world shift and also polarization of politics so behind them lies the political calculation of the conservative factions of the ldp and which these see to diverse domestic conflicts by stoking external crisis and advance its agenda of constitutional revision and military expansion And also, we see the yesterday editorial in Asahi Shimbun pointed out that the exercise of collective self-defense is subject to very strict constraints.
And Takahashi's remarks have opened the door for Japanese government to expand its legal interpretations.
And we see that her reckless comments on Taiwan question will only deepen China's distrust towards Japan and Taiwan.
Maybe she will immediately launch extreme provocation against China's core interests upon taking office and also in the future, which will severely undermine the political foundations and stability.
So this makes it very difficult to harbor expectations for improved bilateral ties during her tenure.
And also China remains.
We know that China remains committed to the path of peaceful cooperation, but Japan should first Brexit serenity actions, eliminate negative impacts on bilateral relations and create conditions for improving the bilateral ties and stabilizing the regional security.
It's interesting to note here that, regarding why Britain supports a two-state solution for this conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer says that Britain bears a historical responsibility.
When we talk about the Taiwan question, do you think Japan bears a historical responsibility to help China seek solutions rather than adding fuel to the fire?
Well, in my opinion.
First, Japan possesses no so-called historical rights or stand anything or perspectives on Taiwan question.
What it has only is a historical responsibility that demands profound reflection.
We know that in the year 1895 the Japanese imperialism forcibly seized Taiwan and the Penghu Islands, aggressive warfare and posing colonial role over Taiwan for 50 years.
So its crimes are too numerous to recount.
So inflicting profound suffering upon the people of Taiwan.
So that Japan bears this historical responsibility towards the whole Chinese people, also including the Taiwanese people.
And regarding to the Taiwan question.
They should therefore exercise utmost caution in its words, both in its words and actions.
But we see that today Japan has never sincerely and thoroughly regret for that fact.
And even Takahashi, she's visiting, you know, the shrine.
Yasukuni's shrine also failed to follow the convention by expressing the unified position of former prime minister's on Japan's historical issues Murayama.
So if Japan's far right continues to pursue this erroneous path on historical matters, I think more and more Chinese people will have greater expectation to settle both old and new accounts.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Dr. Liu Guangyu from the Institute of Taiwan Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
Coming up, Trump vows to help Syria after landmark talks with Al-Shara.
You are listening to World Today.
Stay tuned.
Berlin is setting up a committee to re-examine its security-related trade policies toward Beijing.
This comes as China just overtook the United States to become Germany's number one trading partner.
What's driving this sudden rethink?
Is it politics, pressure, or protectionism?
How will Germany's biggest companies from autos to chemicals react as the rules of engagement shift?
And where will a possible new phase of Sino-German relations lead?
And what might it mean for Europe and the world?
Join us on this week's You are listening to World Today.
I'm Ding Han in Beijing.
U.S.
President Donald Trump has vowed to do everything he can to help Syria after hosting this country's interim president for a White House meeting.
Ahmed El-Shera visited Washington DC on Monday, marking the first ever trip by a Syrian president to the US.
Capitol.
The White House says that El-Shera's visit is part of President Donald Trump's efforts in diplomacy in the pursuit of peace.
Ahead of this particular visit, the U.N.
Security Council voted to remove El-Shera from the ISIS and al-Qaeda sanctions list, and the White House followed suit.
So joining us now on the line is Greg Barton, professor of global Islamic politics with Deakin University.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Thank you.
Great to be back with you.
So this is the third meeting between al-Shira and Trump since this interim Syrian leader was brought to power.
To what extent will meeting with the US president give al-Shira and his government international legitimacy?
I think it's a really key step.
This appears to have been a successful meeting.
It's interesting.
It's actually the third meeting between President Trump and Ashara.
But it's Ashara.
It's the first, of course, in the White House, the first time a Syrian leader has been in the White House, the first time a former international terrorist, a listed terrorist, has been in the White House as a national leader.
It's a really big symbolic move.
And because the US is prepared under Trump to make this move, it opens the way for other countries.
Europe has been trying to rehabilitate relations with the newer Shira regime in Damascus.
But taking the US leadership here is critically important.
So we understand Al-Sharaf's chief aim, or one of his chief aims in Washington was to push for full removal of Americans sanctions against Syria.
I mean when Trump and Al-Shara first met each other in Saudi Arabia six months ago.
Mr Trump wavered his country's sanctions against Syria, and now his administration has just announced a 180-day extension of the waiver.
So looking to the future, do you think a phone removal is likely to occur?
I think it's very likely.
I think that's the intention here.
Of course, Trump always likes to keep his options open, likes to be seen as the master of the art of the deal.
And he does pivot and change course, so nothing is ever fixed.
But I think the expectation and I think this is what Ashara will be working towards is that, well before we come to the end of the six months, 180-day suspension, that this will be permanently lifted.
And it is easier to do in several steps rather than sort of going all out and announcing complete dropping of sanctions all at once.
The sanctions, of course, were designed against the Assad regime and for very good reasons.
This is a very different government.
It's not a government we expected, but it's a welcome transitional government.
And it makes sense that they're helped rather than hindered, by dropping these sanctions, so that they have the best chance of making a success of the new Syria.
Now some people hope that a repeal of these sanctions will help Assad drive or spur global investment in Syria, which the World Bank estimates will take more than 200 billion to rebuild after a 14-year-long war, especially a civil war.
So what do you think could be on the minds of President Donald Trump in terms of rebuilding Syria?
Well, to be frank, I think President Trump, as he's said himself, desperately wants a Nobel Peace Prize.
He wants recognition as somebody who's bringing peace.
He hasn't got a great track record.
His government is really facing some headwinds at the moment.
The recent elections in eastern states, including New York City, bring that to light.
He desperately needs some wins, and he's got a good chance in Syria.
This is Syria going ahead with the rebuilding of Gaza, but it's linked, of course, because Israel's relationship with its neighbours Lebanon and Syria are critical to any hope of lasting peace in the Middle East.
And so, you know, I think things have aligned very well.
I think Trump's interests, which are always, you know, very much focused through the interest of self-interest, align with Syria's interests and frankly, the globe's interests and certainly the Middle East's interests at this point.
Hmm.
Now, after this meeting at the White House, Syria agreed to join the International Coalition to Combat the Islamic State, which we know was a focus of Washington for the meeting, judging from the messages from White House officials prior to this meeting.
In real practice, Professor Barton, do you see any complexities for this particular issue?
Yeah, there's lots of complexities.
I mean there's a lot of Islamic State alleged terrorists and families in prisons and camps in northeast Syria under the control of the Syrian Democratic Forces.
They, the SDF, have reluctantly come into accepting the new regime in Damascus, and that's very welcome, but it is precarious.
Of course, outside of northeastern Syria, that third of Syria beyond the Euphrates, in the deserts below between, in the essentially deserts between Syria and Iraq, you still have a number of Islamic State insurgents.
You know, they're still active.
The government in Damascus will need all the help that it can to bring about the security of Syria.
There's a common interest then, between the Ashara government interim government and the interests of Washington.
I think it makes perfect sense.
Of course, Ashara's background.
He was linked with Jabhat al-Nusra, which started life as an al-Qaeda affiliate.
He was, therefore, as a terrorist and al-Qaeda leader.
Al-Qaeda, of course, broke over this question of Jabhat al-Nusra and al-Jalani, as it was known, then leading in Syria.
And that's led to this enmity between Al-Qaeda and Islamic State.
Now there's good reason to believe that Jawani now Ahmad Ashara, his birth name really has turned his back on that terrorism.
But there's sort of multiple reasons there why he is committed to dealing with remaining Islamic State insurgents in Syria.
So I think this all makes sense.
But none of it's simple.
It is very complex.
Yeah.
So, geopolitically speaking, Washington seems to view today's Syria as a field, as an arena to counter Iran's regional influence.
But in the meantime, Professor, you know better than I do.
We also see Mr al-Shera seeking to rebuild ties with Russia and a Russian president, Vladimir Putin.
They are an ally, a close ally of Tehran.
So what is your observation regarding whether Damascus, whether Al-Shara's government, will act to Washington's liking in this regard?
Well, once again, I think there is common interest here.
It's hard to imagine a stable Middle East without this new government in Damascus being successful.
And, of course, Al-Shara's men, his people he was fighting for years in the field were on the receiving end of Russian airstrikes and fighting Iranian proxies.
So they've got a lot of experience.
There's no love lost with Moscow.
I think the reaching out to Moscow was entirely pragmatic.
I think, as much as anything, it's also not just something that the government in Damascus has to do because of Russia's presence in Syria historically.
But also it's a way of putting pressure on Washington to lift their game and to make it clear that Washington has to lead, that America has to lead.
And I think that there's a good chance of this succeeding once again because of convergence of interests.
But it is messy.
Okay.
So, in the meantime, we understand between Israel and Syria – there is this bumpy relationship between the two sides either regarding the disputes over the Golan Heights and other issues, for example Israeli's military pressure against Syria along the southern border of Syria.
So how would you expect Washington, how would you expect the Trump administration to position itself when we talk about the relations between Israel and Syria?
Well, I think this is the really tough element.
And I think that what the Trump administration, what Trump himself, would be saying to Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel, is Bibi, this is your best chance for peace in the region.
If you can have good relations with Lebanon and Syria and governments you can be comfortable with.
Think of what you've had historically with Egypt and Jordan.
That's been critical to peace, the stability that Israel's enjoyed.
And so I think Trump will be saying to Bibi you messed this up and you've got all sorts of problems you can't handle, but this is an opportunity, so don't mess it up.
What Israel has achieved in Lebanon has been remarkable, but they keep threatening their own success by breaking ceasefire and continuing pressure, And some of the actions in Syria have been very hard to understand.
I think Trump will just be reading the riot act to Netanyahu and saying you've got to behave on this because it's in your interest to do so.
And certainly our interest.
And we're going to we're going to hold firm on this.
OK, thank you very much for your observation.
Dr Greg Barton, professor of global Islamic politics with Sticking University in Melbourne, Australia.
More to come.
Gazadasto has topped 69,000 as peace plan for the territory faces continued uncertainties.
And we will explore why Brazil has designated its poor city of Belém as capital during COP30.
You are listening to World Today.
To listen to this episode again or to catch up on our previous episodes.
You can download our podcast by searching World Today.
I'm Dinghan 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 robotics and artificial intelligence industries are moving at full speed.
This month, two major events in the country are putting that transformation in the spotlight.
In Shanghai, the 2025 China Robot Industry Development Conference is bringing together global experts to discuss frontier technologies in robotics and embodied intelligence.
Meanwhile, in the nearby city of Wuzhen, the World Internet Conference has just concluded, where Chinese companies unveiled cutting-edge humanoid robots, robotic docks and even lunar AI robots for space missions.
From factory floors to healthcare, from disaster rescue to outer space.
Embodied intelligence and artificial intelligence are redefining what machines can do and how humans work with them.
As China is now holding 60 of the global AI patents, the question now becomes how far and how fast can this robotics revolution go?
To dig deeper into this, my colleague Zhao Yang spoke with Dr Li Lun, Assistant Professor of Economics with Peking University.
So, Professor Li Lun, we are seeing a surge in robotics events across China, from the Shanghai Robotics Conference to the Wuzhen Internet Summit.
So what is driving this momentum and how does it reflect China's broader strategy of high quality development?
Yeah, so I think what's driving this momentum most importantly is the remarkable growth that we're seeing for China's robotic industry.
So, for example, we're seeing that for the first three quarters of 2025, the output in this industry has already surpassed the full year figure in 2024.
So in the first three quarters, the industry's revenue is growing by almost 30% year on year.
And we're seeing that the output of these industrial robots have reached almost 600,000 units.
So basically, we're seeing a very rapidly growing industry.
And that's, I think, one of the key reasons what's driving the momentum.
But also, I think there's a lot of policy support.
And so we're seeing basically, both at the Shanghai Conference and Wuzhen Summit, they're showcasing, you know, the embodied intelligence and also its applications, you know, in a lot of sectors.
But basically we're seeing, you know, interest from the investors, support from the government.
We're seeing, you know, the economy of scale is being, you know, gradually, you know, adopted.
Basically, you know, a lot of more factories, a lot of more, you know, robots are being deployed.
So it's a we're seeing, definitely seeing the industry, you know, growing from basically a very small section of the economy and growing into a larger part of, or more crucial part of, the economy.
And embodied AI has become a buzzword this year.
So what exactly does it mean and why is it considered the next frontier beyond the large language models?
Yeah, so generally speaking, embodied AI means artificial intelligence or AI systems that are grounded in the physical world.
They can learn through their perception, through their sensors, and they can perform actions to help human beings.
So, for example, generally speaking autonomous vehicle, even though they don't look like robots or look like human.
They can also be called embodied AI.
But what we usually refer to embodied AI right now is humanoid robots or quadruped robots or robot carts or robot arms and so on.
So why it matters now is that I think the large language models basically mastered our language system, But for things that beyond language or communication, things need to be done.
There are heavy weights that needs to be lifted or complex tasks that needs to be performed.
So I think embodied AI can close this gap with, for example, their sensors, their motors, their joints, and actually perform the things that can help people in the physical world.
So that's the biggest difference between this buzzword and also between this buzzword and the, you know, large language models.
And China has been the world's largest industrial robot market for over decades.
So Professor Li Lun, how is AI integration changing the nature of manufacturing and factory work?
Yeah, so we're going to see a lot of more automation in China.
So right now we're actually at a pretty advanced level already.
So if we look at the robot density, so how many robots are being deployed for every 10000 workers?
The number is around 470.
So we're right now ahead of Germany in terms of the level of automation, which is probably not many people have realized.
But I think more importantly, the whole ecosystem have changed.
So a lot of suppliers for this market is now domestic.
So we don't have to rely on foreign suppliers for these auto parts.
So this can further reduce the cost of deploying additional robots in the future.
And I think basically about manufacturing and factory work in the future.
I think with the participation of robots, the task is going to be very mixed in the future.
So a lot of fixed, repetitive works will be left to robots and some flexible or in terms of helping or assembling the robots coding will be left to humans.
So I think the mix is going to be very interesting and different in the future.
And with service robots entering the fields like healthcare and logistics.
How do you see the relationship between humans and robots evolving in the next few years?
Yeah, so I think a lot of people worry that robots are going to replace humans.
I do think it's similar to large language models.
So you can think of them as helpers or coworkers, not necessarily as substitutes or replacements.
For example, in hospital, in elderly care, we may have a human that's taking care of the elderly, but when it comes to, for example, helping the elderly to carry things or to help them change the bedsheets and so on, we could use the robots in addition to human.
And in factories, for example, we're definitely going to see more the so-called purple collar jobs.
So instead of a traditional blue color.
I think it's a blend of blue color and white color, meaning that you know, these jobs are going to be the intersection of manual work and also technical work.
So in the AI context, you know, these operators, these technicians, these coordinators will kind of supervise and maintain these robot systems in the future.
So it definitely requires a more you know advanced or comprehensive skill mix of you know of human beings in the future.
And China holds about 60% of the world's AI-related patents right now.
So what makes it and what does it mean for the global collaboration and competition in robotics and AI?
Yeah, 60% means that more than half of the world's AI-related patents are from China.
And even though patents are not equivalent to products being made, but in the future, in the middle to long range, I think they definitely lower risk for legal problems, for intellectual property problems that we're seeing, for example, in a lot of other industries where foreign entities and governments sue our company for violation of their patents or IP.
So this is not going to happen, because this, from the beginning, is something that's originated and innovated by Chinese companies.
So I think this is definitely going to have a lot of further impact in the future, especially when the foreign companies want to use Chinese patents and want to basically adopt the same robot, robot system in their economy.
And definitely there's going to be a lot of you know reward for these innovation and patents in the future.
And how might china's growing role in embodied ai redefine its global image from the world's factory to the world's innovation hub?
Yeah, so i think the key definition is the you know is the new productive force.
So so previously i think china takes role of you know doing the manual labor, the difficult, the hard labor of the world.
But right now, I think first we're going to have more productive factories.
So we're still going to have to be able to manufacture a lot of things and export to the world.
But the key difference is that from a labor intensive sector is going to become more and more capital intensive.
So there's going to be a lot more investment in, you know, chips in robots and, you know, in the advanced production line.
That's going to be very different in terms of the labor and capital input in the production sector.
And besides that, I think along the process we're going to have a lot of innovation and this is going to have some demonstration effect and it's going to become more cost efficient for other countries.
So foreign countries are going to see that our products are going to have even higher cost advantage.
So this is going to also bring additional advantage to our export market as well.
And at the World Internet Conference in Wuzhen many companies showcased embodied AI, the humanoid robots, robotic dogs drones, etc.
So what's the outlook for the future of this embodied intelligence?
Yeah.
So I think the future, I think one of the innovations that strike me the most is the so-called lunar AI.
So basically, we're going to have a robot on the surface of the moon in 2029 and the robot is going to perform a scan, the QR code for payment action, so that it's going to verify basically, whether it's possible to do the communication from lunar surface to the earth.
So I think this is going to be a milestone for the human history, because for the first time, our mobile payment is being used in another outside of earth.
And in the future, I think we're definitely going to see more of these sci-fi moments.
That is driven by innovation because, For example, robots participating more in our space exploration.
I think it's something that we need to pay attention to.
Dr. Li Lun from Peking University talking with my colleague Zhao Yang.
Coming up, Gazadasto has topped 69,000 as peace plan for the region faces continued uncertainties.
This is World Today.
We'll be back.
You are listening to World Today, I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
Health officials in Gaza say more than 69,000 Palestinians have been killed in the Israel-Hamas war.
The latest hike in the death toll occurred as more bodies were recovered or identified in Gaza since a ceasefire took effect last month.
The toll includes Palestinians who were killed by Israeli airstrikes after the ceasefire began.
Israel claims that the continued airstrikes are targeting remaining Hamas forces.
On Monday, US mediator Gerard Kushner met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to discuss this very fragile ceasefire.
So for more, joining us now on the line is Dr. Wang Jing, professor with Northwest University in Xi'an, China.
Thank you very much for joining us.
It's my pleasure.
So, first of all, in your observation, Professor Wan, what are the main factors leading to this vulnerability of the current ceasefire?
I think the biggest challenge comes out of the different understandings of the future in the Gaza Strip, because from Israeli perspective they believe that Hamas should be marginalized and should be totally disarmed and should totally be eliminated from the Gaza Strip political structure in the future.
And also from the perspective of the international community and from the United States and including from many Middle Eastern countries, Hamas role should be limited.
So this is a very idle pattern of the political structure in the gala strip, according to different understandings.
But then, from the other perspective of hambas, they are actually uh, i mean de facto the most important actor in the gata strip and they are the most influential factor in actor in the gala strip and any kind of the political and economic reconstruction plan cannot be implemented without the role from Hamas.
So that's why I think this kind of division and very conflicting understandings actually finally led to the the very dilemma that what we are seeing
On the one hand, that some actors, they hope that the peace and ceasefire could be maintained.
And, on the other hand, the trust between Israel and Hamas.
The divisions between international communities with Hamas in the future catastrophes do exist.
So that's why this is the biggest challenge.
On Monday, Kushner and Netanyahu.
They discussed the plans for the disarmament of Hamas, the deployment of international security forces for Gaza, as well as the establishment of a technocratic government in Gaza.
On these issues.
How much leverage do you think Washington is holding either over Israel or other forces that are involved?
I don't think this kind of pressure externally would be turned into the very direct pressure towards Israel, because Israel they have their own decision-making circle, they have their own circumstances at home.
They have their own political backgrounds that they have to take into consideration very carefully.
So that's why I mean, although United States and other external factors, they hope to give new pressure towards Israel, but I don't think this pressure will turn directly into the decision factors for Israel.
So that's why Israel, maybe they will maintain the peace or they will violate the peace, but both of these actions will be calculated based upon their own understandings of the, your own perspective and based on your own internal public opinion.
Okay, I take your point.
So, despite this perceived vulnerability of the current ceasefire, actually the exchange of remains the exchange of dead bodies between Hamas and Israel.
We know that's a central part of the first phase of the current ceasefire deal that is actually still going on.
So do you think this fact gives us any confidence or a sense of optimism that somehow this 20-point peace plan by President Donald Trump will proceed?
Well, very briefly, I think of course these are the very positive news because when the, The bodies would be transferred successfully from the Gaza Strip to from the Hamas to Israel.
That would be very important motivation factors for the future peace maintenance between Israel and Hamas and also will become an important motivation forces for the future possibilities of dialogue between the two parties.
So that's why the peace should be maintained.
The prosperity of the possibilities for the chances of peace should be protected very carefully.
So the final question before we let you go, Professor Wang, do you think Israel's continued strikes on Gaza is the elephant in the room when we talk about the vulnerability?
Because, I mean, obviously that's going to undermine the trust.
I'm not sure how much trust there is, but there is definitely a lack of trust between Israel and all those countries.
Arab or Islamic countries that are involved, for example Turkey, for example other nearby countries.
Yes, but I think the problem right now is that the trust between Israel and the Arab states and other Middle Eastern countries, as you mentioned, are not so much.
But the problem is that the trust between these different actors are not enough.
I mean when we are looking at the trust and the very solid foundation for the trust between Saudi Arabia and Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Qatar and the Emirates.
Maybe these actors, they have their own understanding, they have their own calculations.
So we cannot say that Israel on the one side and then all the other actors could be very strongly unified together with each other.
So that's why I think we're talking about the geopolitics in the Middle East, which is filled with distrust, which is filled with misunderstanding.
So that's why dialogues and peace chances are very, very valuable to be maintained and very important in the future for the international community to mediate into the ongoing uncertainties, to protect carefully of the peace chances.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Dr. Wang Jing joining us from Northwest University in Xi'an, China.
You are listening to World Today.
I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
Brazil has symbolically moved its capital city from Brasilia to the port city of Belém for the 30th United Nations Climate Change Conference, or known as COP30, starting on Tuesday.
The move is aiming to draw global attention to the Amazon region, a major focus of this UN summit.
Some 50,000 delegations from over 190 countries and regions are attending this 11-day event.
Core issues to be discussed include a push to deliver on national climate commitments and a transformation of the global financial system.
For more.
My colleague Xu Yaowen spoke with Dr Cao Ting, director of the Center for Latin American Studies, Fudan University.
Brazil is moving its capital from Brasilia to Belém for the COP30, and this isn't the first time the country has done so for a major event.
What do you think about this symbolic move, and what makes Belém a special choice to host the COP30?
Well, I think, yes, we know that Brazil has done it in 1992 for the Rio Earth Summit.
This time they moved the capital to Berlin again.
And I think it made everyone focus on the environment, on the issue of the climate change, because they are doing it for the COP30.
Instead of just talking about the Amazon, they are basically saying Let's have the world's most important climate meeting right here at its doorstep.
So it forces everyone to look at what's at stake.
At the same time, Lula also needs to deal with some important issues.
And we know he has to stay in Berlin during these days.
So it's better to move all the important institutions to Berlin to facilitate Lula's administration.
So I think these are the important reasons for this move.
As we see it, this year's COP30 is taking place amid significant geopolitical and environmental challenges.
With the growing urgency around climate change, global attention is focused on the outcomes of this conference.
In your view, what key issues being discussed at the event are of particular global significance?
Well, we see that there are six action agendas in this conference.
They include energy, industry and transportation, forest solutions and biodiversity, agriculture and food systems cities, infrastructure and water, human and social development and cross-cutting issues.
We know that this year marks the 80th anniversary of the United Nations and a critical junction the 10th anniversary of the Paris Agreement.
So with the finalization of the climate finance and carbon market framework at COP29, the commission of COP30 will shift from negotiating rules to delivering results.
Whether nations can submit more ambitious climate action plans, honor their financial commitments and activate the global carbon market will determine the feasibility of the 15-degree temperature control goal.
As you mentioned, this year marks the 10th anniversary of the Paris Agreement, which requires all participating countries to update their nationally determined contributions.
With the last decade being the hottest on record.
Some are questioning if enough progress is being made.
How do you assess the progress countries have made in reducing emissions through their NDCs over the past few years?
And what role do you see China playing in this effort?
Well, actually, we're making progress, but it's nowhere near enough.
On the positive side, there is some real momentum.
The biggest success story is the explosive growth of renewable energy.
It now makes up over 90% of new or new power capacity.
And major players just like Europe and China are starting to lay out their new climate plans for 2035.
But here is the problem.
We are still moving way too slow.
The last decade was the hottest on record and with our current pledges we are still heading for a dangerous warming of over 23 degrees.
That blows right past the 1.5-degree goal.
There are two main issues.
First, action isn't matching promises.
Many countries aren't even on track to hit their existing targets.
Second, the money isn't there.
There is a huge funding gap, especially for developing countries that need help to transition.
So we need to make more efforts to meet our climate goals.
In recent years, the Chinese government has taken a series of measures to reduce carbon emissions, including promoting clean energy, improving energy efficiency, developing green transportation and strengthening forest protection.
As a major power, China's participation in the Paris Agreement is essential for the Pact's legitimacy.
China adheres to the principles of common but differentiated responsibilities during the negotiations of the Pact of Climate Change, while strengthening coordination and communication with all parties and balancing the demands of developed and developing countries.
China is also assisting developing countries to carry out climate change mitigation and adaptation projects, enhancing their climate resilience.
So China's role is quite crucial and important for the conference and also for the future of the world.
Well Professor, you just mentioned that some countries' actions are not matching with their promises.
Here's an example.
Like last year at COP29 in Baku, developed countries promised to mobilize 300 billion per year by 2035 to help developing countries finance their energy transition and adapt to climate change.
But it seems this promise was poorly realized. received by many developing nations.
So how is it going to affect the countries in the Global South?
Well, most of the developing countries think this money isn't enough for their transition.
They require an estimated about 310 to 365 billion annually by the mid 2030 just for climate adaptation and in 2033.
International public adaptation finance flows to developing countries amounted to only 26 billion, creating a massive shortfall that leaves vulnerable nations without the resources to protect lives and economies from escalating climate impacts like sea level rise and extreme weather.
So the funding shortfall, the debate over loans versus grants and the Broken trusts are severely hindering climate action in the global south and leave them more vulnerable and deepen the north-south divide.
And one last question, Professor Tao.
We know the White House has confirmed that the U.S. will not send any officials to the event.
And given that the US has withdrawn twice from the Paris Agreement, how would you assess the Trump administration's climate policy, as well as its policy push for other countries to shift away from renewable energy?
We know that Trump thinks that climate change is false or is not true.
And Trump's administration's climate policy represents a fundamental rejection of the multilateral climate actions.
And this policy has profoundly negative impacts on the global fight against climate change.
First, the absence of the world's largest economy.
We know US is the largest economy and also important emitter of greenhouse gas.
So the absence of US from the Paris Agreement creates a massive leadership and ambition gap and undermine the credibility and collective spirit of the pact.
And it created critical climate finance shortfall.
The Trump administration canceled $2 billion pledge to the Green Climate Fund.
And overall US failures to meet financial commitments have left developing nations without crucial support from their energy transitions and adaptation efforts.
In a sense, the Trump administration stands for these other nations to shoulder a greater burden and makes global climate goals more expensive and difficult to achieve, and represents a significant setback at a time when accelerated action is urgently needed.
Dr Cao Ting, Director of the Center for Latin American Studies, Fudan University, talking with my colleague Xu Yawen.
That's all the time for this edition of World Today.
To listen to this episode again or to catch up on previous episodes, you can download our podcast by searching World Today.
I'm Dinghan in Beijing.
Thank you so much for listening.
Bye for now.
