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 North Korea agree to work together to counter hegemonism and unilateralism.
Iran weighs confrontation or diplomacy after UN sanctions are reimposed.
China braces for holiday travel rush and Nigeria is eyeing certification of China's C919 jet for local airlines.
To listen to this episode again or to catch up on our previous episodes.
You can download our podcast by searching World Today.
Chinese Premier Li Qiang says China is ready to continue deepening coordination with North Korea to better safeguard common interests.
He made the remark while meeting with North Korean Foreign Minister Chao Songhui.
Premier Li said China is ready to work with North Korea to further carry forward traditional friendship and strengthen strategic communication.
Chao said North Korea hopes to strengthen high-level exchanges with China and further boost bilateral cooperation.
And Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has also met with his North Korean counterpart here in Beijing.
The senior Chinese diplomat reaffirmed Beijing's commitment to consolidating ties with North Korea, saying that it is a strategic decision by the Communist Party of China and the Chinese government.
Wang Yi also said that China is ready to strengthen coordination with North Korea on international and regional affairs and jointly oppose hegemonism in any form.
So for more.
Joining us now on the line is Dr Yang Xiyu, Senior Research Fellow with the China Institute of International Studies.
So thank you very much for joining us today, Dr. Yang Xinyu.
First of all, why do you think it is in the interest of China and North Korea to work together to counter hegemonism and unilateralism in international and regional affairs?
I think the common interest and the common ground stem from two aspects.
On one hand, both China and North Korea are facing increasingly pressures and challenges, even threats from the unilateralism and based on hegemonism.
Therefore, the two countries, from their respective national interests, need to join hands to oppose the common challenges.
On the other hand, as responsible countries, both China and North Korea regards the unilateralism, behaviors and the hegemonism are major causes for the unstable, uncertain world, threatening the stability and the peace.
So, both for their own national interests and for the justice and the fairness world, Both countries have determined to make further cooperation to oppose such hegemonism and unilateralism.
In the meantime, why do you think consolidating and developing ties with North Korea represents a strategic decision by the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese government?
Actually, you mentioned very key factors for Chinese communist parties and Chinese governments.
Historically it's well known that China and the North Korea bilateral relation has formed a very unique structure that is stemmed from the party-to-party stage-to-stage cooperations and the coordinations both in the war time and the peace time.
Therefore, both sides regard the bilateral relation contains both greater tradition and greater opportunities nowadays.
Therefore, for Chinese side, consolidating the coordination and cooperation with North Korea, not only from the historical tradition but also from the existing shared interests and for the future of the more justice and more fair world, not alone our respective national interests.
In short, the closer cooperation, the closer coordination, the better for both of the countries, for the region and the world as well.
According to North Korean media, Chao Shunhui cited North Korean leader Kim Jong Un as saying that The balance of friendship between Pyongyang and Beijing cannot be altered and that their relations should be developed in line with the demands of the times.
So, in your understanding, what are the current demands of the times for the development of China-North Korea relations?
It's a great question.
Actually, let me put it this way.
In terms of the general currency of the current world.
No matter how contradictions among countries, the common, the shared interests by all peoples, all nations are peace and sustainable peace and sustainable prosperity.
In other words, peace and development remain the core and the key for the current trends for China and North Korea.
Both of the sides needs to keep the peace and the development, not only for their own national interest, but also for the interest for all over the world.
Simply because no, any single country's national interest can be separated completely from the.
A whole change of the world.
The more stable, the more peaceful world, the better for every country.
Therefore, based on the common needs and the common interests for development and the peace, the two sides has determined to strengthen the further cooperation and coordination for the peace and stability, especially for the region both of us live in.
Now the North Korean foreign minister said that his country views China's concept of a community with a shared future for humanity, as well as China's global governance initiative, as important contributions to the promotion of a multipolar world.
So in what respects do you think the two concepts here matter to North Korea?
I think the core of the initiatives that we mentioned really meet North Korea's interests in the current situation.
For example, the unilateralism, the hegemonism, are really increasing threats to North Korea's sovereignty and security.
Only by strengthening the multilateral-based global governance and the global security, the environment of the region, the environment of North Korea can be better.
So from North Korea's perspective, the general initiatives address the general challenge but also meet North Korea's interest to face the challenge.
Therefore, they gave the initiatives a very high appreciation and also gave a firm support for the initiatives.
That means China and North Korea will strengthen the new area of cooperation for enhancing the initiatives for better interests of both sides, for better interest of global as well.
Now, dr young, let's talk a little bit about the situation on the korean peninsula.
We understand the new leader of south korea, compared to his predecessor, young suyo, is much less hostile towards the north.
At the UN General Assembly he has even talked about say, working hard to put an end to this vicious cycle of tension with Pyongyang.
But in the meantime, so far from the North Korean side, so far there has been no demonstrated intention to try to talk to the South.
Why do you think we're seeing such a scenario right now?
And from Chinese perspective, how does the position of the Chinese government look like regarding the interaction between North Korea and South Korea currently?
It's a very challenging question, not only facing both of the Koreas, but also facing the countries within the region, say Northeast Asia.
I have noticed that the new administration in Seoul has dramatically adjusted the new policies and attitudes towards Pyongyang compared with the previous administration.
However, from Pyongyang's perspective and analysis, Such adjustments and changes by the new administration is only at the level of the tactics, not at the root of the nature.
The root of the nature.
The so-called root of the nature means the basic mindset and the framework of the policy, say the Cold War mindset and the framework of the Cold War.
Such a framework and the mindset means, no matter how different between this existing administration policy from the previous one, the nature say, based on the Cold War mindset, based on the framework of Cold War, remain unchanged.
As long as the Cold War framework unchanged, I don't think the inter-Korean relation will have substantive changes.
That is the basic reason I think North Korea doesn't show any interest of changing their attitudes and policy towards, simply because of the no change of the new Cold War framework and no change of Cold War mindset from the South.
So early this month, Chinese President Xi Jinping, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and Russian President Vladimir Putin appeared together at this grand event marking the 80th anniversary of the Chinese people's war of resistance against the Japanese aggression and the world anti-fascist war.
Now, some observers see that scenario as a challenge to U.S. dominance in international affairs.
Do you agree?
What is your take?
I have to say it's very unfortunate to have such analysis and perspective towards this great justice event early this month.
Actually, the great event reflects the shared interests of all states and all nations, all peoples who took part in the anti-fascism operations, including the United States, just like President Trump pointed out earlier in other events.
The great events in Beijing say September 3rd is events for all the nations, all the peoples who make joint efforts in that anti-aggression war, especially anti-Japanese aggression war.
Unfortunately, some analysis from the Western media make analysis based on the Cold War mindset can contribute negatively to the conflicts and the contradictions among nation the peoples in the region, can contribute negatively to the peace and the abilities and in the region simply because such a cold war mindset really threats the stability and peace and also are really the root of the zero-sum game of the Cold War in this region.
Therefore, I think, no matter how some Cold War mindset people regards the events, China will continue, firmly continue their cooperation with all people, all nations, for the shared future, for the shared interests of the peace and development both for China and for the world as well.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Dr. Yang Xiyu, Senior Research Fellow with the China Institute of International Studies.
Coming up, Iran weighs confrontation or diplomacy after UN sanctions are reimposed.
This is World Today.
Stay tuned.
Hello, I am Dr Digby James Wren, a political analyst and international relations scholar specializing in China area studies.
World Today offers unmatched in-depth perspectives on China's politics economics business, technology and society.
World Today's team of reporters and contributors provides valuable information from all of the world's major economies.
I hope you can join me on World Today for the very best insights and news from China, on China, and help to build a better understanding of China's role in the world today.
You're listening to World Today.
I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
The United Nations has confirmed the reinstatement of sanctions against Iran over nuclear issues.
The Iranian parliament has denounced the sanctions as illegal.
Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bakh Galibaf says retaliation is possible, but diplomacy will always be on the table.
The chief of staff of the Iranian Armed Forces says the military is fully prepared to respond to any threat.
The sanctions are freezing Iranian assets abroad, stopping arms deals with Tehran and penalizing any development regarding ballistic missiles in Iran.
So joining us now on the line is Dr Zhang Chuchu, Deputy Director of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies, Fudan University.
Thank you very much for joining us.
So, first of all, this action to reimpose sanctions was initiated by France, Germany and Britain via a mechanism called, or known as snapback that was included in the 2015 JCPOA deal.
Why did these three European countries trigger this action?
Well actually, if we look at what has happened recently, we can note that France, Germany and Britain triggered this snapback mechanism, citing Iran's significant non-performance of its commitments under the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.
Well, these European powers?
They claim that this move came after Iran was not able to respond to an European offer to extend the negotiation deadlines following weeks of stalled talks in Istanbul and elsewhere.
Well, I think also you can see that the European powers emphasized that the snapback was intended to pressure Iran back to the negotiating table, while also it tries to leave some room for diplomacy to potentially defer or reverse the sanctions.
But I think another very important reason is that Currently, I think the European powers are trying to strike a balance between the countries in the Middle East.
Therefore, we find that, while they are promoting the recognition of the Palestinian state On the one hand, they are also trying to increase pressure on Iran to maintain a balanced policy.
Now Tehran has argued that this snapback shouldn't have happened, pointing in part to America's unilateral withdrawal from the JCPOA back in 2018, during Donald Trump's first term in the office.
Does Tehran have a point here?
Well, I think to some extent, Iran does have a point because...
If we look at the history, then it shows that Tehran always contends that the United States withdrew from the deal unilaterally.
But at that time, actually, Tehran always sticked to the deal.
And also it's claimed that this invalidated the agreement's integrity.
And also Tehran has been keeping complaining that the European powers have fortified their participant status by failing to uphold the economic benefits promised under the JCPOA.
Also it complains that the European powers align too closely with the United States and also supports the IAEA censure resolutions.
And in addition, also Iran has argued that the snapback is procedurally flawed since the United States abandoned the deal a long time ago.
Therefore, one of the very important reasons why the current Iranian nuclear issue is very difficult to resolve is that it is still very difficult for Iran and the Western states to establish mutual trust.
At the UN General Assembly in New York, Iran has actually tried a last-ditch diplomatic effort to try to stop the reimposition of sanctions.
And there have also been some diplomatic efforts by China and Russia in this regard.
Why do you think the sanctions were eventually not stopped?
Well, right.
Actually, the geopolitics at the moment is quite complex.
We find that the sanctions preceded, despite diplomatic efforts, because the United Nations Security Council rejected a last-stage resolution.
And the Western nations, especially the United States, the United Kingdom, France and Germany.
They all opposed it and they argued that weeks of meetings yielded no results concrete agreement from Iran to curb its nuclear activities or restore the IAEA access.
Also, we can find that Iran's push in New York and the United Nations focused mainly on portraying Tehran as open to dialogue, but insisted on lifting the sanctions first.
So there are fundamental disagreements between Iran and these Western powers, because the Western powers, they demand for very viable compliance.
And I think it is very important to note that currently, Europe has shifted towards viewing Iran as a threat.
And this is not only just because of the Iranian nuclear issue, but also because of its close ties with Russia in the Russo-Ukrainian war.
So as a result this stores, the interim deals relate through France and also the European states become more aligned with the United States hardline position.
Iran further withdrew from this International Atomic Energy Agency monitoring after a war, a brief war with Israel in June this year, which we know also saw the United States strike nuclear sites within Iran.
Do you think Iran is going to respond to this reimposition of UN sanctions by abandoning the nuclear nonproliferation treaty?
And also some people are worried about a new round of fighting between Iran and Israel, as well as potentially, with the United States.
Is that a legitimate concern?
Well, as for the first question, I think this is possible, but not certain that Iran will abandon the nuclear non-proliferation treaty because, despite some discourse of deterrence, this could be more of a bargaining tactic than an immediate plan, as withdrawal would isolate Iran further.
Also, it might give rise to military strikes from the other side.
And also we have to keep in mind that this is not only just going to infuriate the Western powers, but also the regional powers such as Saudi Arabia.
And these regional powers will also become very much alarmed and a new regional arms race may begin.
And this is not what Iran wants to see at the moment.
And as for the second question about the war, I would say a new round of fighting might happen, because Iranian officials have already warned of retaliation against any aggression.
And they are saying they are prepared to defend their borders and rebuild deterrence.
And, more importantly, Israel.
You know, after its bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities in Jordan it didn't completely destroy the nuclear capabilities.
And given that Netanyahu is trying to prolong his political life by expanding the war, the possibility of him attacking Iran again in the future cannot be ruled out.
The final question.
Iran's currency has fallen to a new record low of 11 million some 11 million to 1 US dollars, sending food prices in Iran even higher.
So does Iran have the resources to weather the economic impact of this reimposition of UN sanctions?
And do you think the economic pressure is going to prompt Tehran to seek continued diplomacy?
Well, indeed.
Actually, at the moment, Iran has fallen into a very hard situation and it faces very severe challenges weathering the sanctions economic impact.
And sanctions will definitely freeze these assets.
It will halt arms deals and curb oil exports.
So this potentially might worsen the poverty and unrest that has already been facing Iran.
However, Iran has implemented a resistance economy for a long time.
Also, Iran is a large state with a lot of resources.
So I think sanctions will probably not easily compromise because of this, right?
It will not easily compromise.
So overall I would say economic strain may force concessions, but an escalation of tensions could even prolong the defiance.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Dr. Zhang Chuchu, Deputy Director of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies with Fudan University.
Coming up, China braces for holiday travel rush in a surge.
Nigerian authorities are eyeing for certification of China's C919 jet for local airline companies.
You are listening to World Today.
To listen to this episode again or to catch up on our previous episodes, download our podcast by searching World Today.
I'm Ding Han in Beijing.
Bye for now.
You're back with World Today, I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
The Ukrainian president says that a massive Russian drone and missile attack has killed 4 people and injured 40 others in Ukraine.
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that the assault involves nearly 500 combat drones and more than 40 missiles, including hypersonic missiles.
Meanwhile, the Russian Defense Ministry says that its air defense system has intercepted and destroyed more than 50 Ukrainian drones in multiple locations.
For more.
My colleague Zhao Ying spoke with Dr Kamal Makhilyaev, associate professor with the School of Global Studies University of Gothenburg.
These strikes came just after the UN General Assembly and Trump's remarks about Ukraine retaking all its territory.
So do you see this attack more as a geopolitical message from Moscow or as part of a concrete military strategy?
Well, that's a very interesting question, because you need to remember that there's almost like two separate wars going on in the war between Russia and Ukraine.
One is being fought out on the battlefields in the eastern Ukraine.
That's the one that has the military reasoning behind, strong military reasoning behind it.
That's the one that the parties are actually fighting as your classical war.
And then there is another one.
There is the one that is mostly consisting of these airstrikes from Russia on Ukraine, on the different parts beyond the battlefields in the eastern Ukraine, and the Ukraine reciprocating by also sending drones and sometimes even rockets into the Russian territory, albeit in much lesser quantities.
And so this second war that is being waged.
It is mostly a political messaging war, covered in the military reasoning.
It might well be that the sides still, you know, trying to justify the political messaging more by the military means, although neither side has actually profited militarily from that war.
The strikes.
Although they carry a lot of risks for the civilian populations on both sides, they actually do not advance the military goals on the ground in the eastern Ukraine for either side.
And it basically is boiling down to the political messaging and a lot of spite that you can see because of how long the conflict has been there and how much disdain the sides have for each other.
So yes, this strike was a political message from Moscow and it carried yes, with it a lot of pressure.
You know, a lot of spite that Moscow has for inability to advance as rapidly as it has towards Ukraine.
And of course, the reciprocation would be in the same line of messaging.
So Trump has moved from suggesting Ukraine must cede territory to now claiming it can reclaim everything.
How would you interpret this reversal?
And how is it likely being read in Kiev and Moscow?
I think that Trump messaging right now suggests that he is very disappointed with his inability to push Ukraine and Russia towards the negotiation table for substantial talks on the ceasefire.
He wasn't able to quickly secure this as a geopolitical win.
And the change in messaging is also is right now indicating that he is blaming Moscow side for it.
He's blaming Kremlin's actions, or rather inactions, in the negotiations to start talking real peace with Ukraine, in President Trump's, of course, own understanding of how the conflict is being played out.
And I think Kyiv is right now interpreting it as an opportunity to be able to secure more aid from the United States and then consequently, from Europe as well.
While Moscow is continuing the policy it has always been continuing.
Moscow knew that this moment is going to come eventually because of the steps that it was taking, basically playing for time, when it had an opportunity to be in the good graces of Trump, but they knew that this time was going to run out eventually.
And I think the Moscow was ready for that.
And the steps that we see now is in line with that thinking.
Okay, so could Russia be testing Western resolve at a moment when Trump is publicly suggesting allies to shut down Russian aircraft in their own airspace?
I don't think that Russia is on purpose testing the Western resolve at the moment, but it is showing that it's firm in its policies.
But it has been continuing for a very long time already with the war in Ukraine.
And it's not going to be stepping back anytime soon.
So I think it's more of a demonstration of firm resolve rather than escalation or testing of the Western resolve.
It's just saying that well, you do what you need to do, but we are doing what we think needs to be done within the context of the war that we're waging.
And you know, the Russian aircraft in the airspace might have been a purposeful move from Russia, but there are no evidence of that actually being the case.
And I don't think that the Western allies are also pushing that narrative too much, outside the media context, of course, because I don't think they have a concrete evidence to present that there haven't been any concrete evidence that Russia did it purposefully.
Although it might have been such a move, but it seems unlikely, and it seems like this was just one of these things that would, before the context of war, produce very little response from NATO.
But now in the context of war in Ukraine, this is taken as a possible provocation.
Okay.
But the attack prompted Poland to scramble jets and briefly close its airspace, drawing in Dutch and German forces with Patriot batteries.
What does this incident tell us about the risks of a direct NATO-Russia confrontation?
Well, first of all, it shows that this risk is very much real.
And if the sides will be reacting with more, so to say, with more rigor and more escalation, that's an incident might actually happen between the NATO and Russia on the borders of the alliance.
So that shows that the risk is there and the risk is higher than it has ever been.
But it's also also showing that the whole incidents with the drones and with the aircraft in the NATO airspace also shown that there is a need for the NATO to rethink its air defenses on the border.
So it's also being confirmed in the battlefields of Ukraine.
So if NATO were to harden this eastern flank even further, how might Moscow react?
And could that provoke a dangerous spiral?
Well, that also, you know, this is the question that needs some breaking down.
Because what do you mean by hardening the eastern flank?
Do you mean more forces?
But why would NATO do that?
It still has enough forces there to be able to serve both as a deterrent and also, as you know, protection for the borders.
But at the same time, the incidents exposed that the anti-drone, for example, air defense of NATO is very, very weak.
And it needs bolstering.
But this also wouldn't really harden the flank.
It would just make the air defense smarter and more poised to tackle the new threats that are coming from the new battlefields in modern wars.
On the other hand, Moscow's reaction.
Moscow doesn't have enough forces to commit to the escalation in terms of beefing up the numbers of forces on the NATO borders.
NATO borders with Russia are very long, and to beef up such borders with more forces would mean that Moscow would need to take some dedicated troops that are fighting in Ukraine towards the border, and I don't think Moscow has any resources to do that.
Well, Zelensky says Ukraine will strike back to force diplomacy.
What might such a Ukrainian military response look like in your opinion?
This is a very good question.
What they meant, i think we'll find out, or will not find out, in the coming months, but it might be something to do with ukraine starting to use more intermediate range missiles to also reciprocate the russian strikes on its territory with the rocket fire on the russian territory, Something that the Western allies of Ukraine have been trying to push Ukraine to be holding back on this.
And maybe Zelensky's claim is actually connected to that, that the reciprocal strikes are going to compel Moscow to change its course.
But just as the Moscow strikes have not been able to compel Ukraine to change course, only angered it and made it more resolved to its defense, I think if Ukraine is going to start doing the same thing, we are going to see this war that is more political than military, although it's carried out of military strikes, but it's not going to compel Moscow to do anything or change course, just going to make it angrier.
Dr Kamal Makili-Aliyev, Associate Professor with the School of Global Studies University of Gothenburg, talking with my colleague Zhao Ying.
Coming up, China braces for holiday travel surge.
You're listening to World Today.
We'll be back.
Welcome back.
You are listening to World Today.
I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
Chinese authorities are predicting 24 billion domestic trips during the National Day holiday that will begin on Wednesday.
The transport ministry says nearly 80% will be road trips.
Authorities predict that the National Railway Network will average over 18 million passenger trips per day.
The civil aviation sector is expecting a record number in terms of passenger trips.
In the meantime, China's immigration officials have also forecast an average of more than 2 million daily cross-border trips during the holiday period.
This year's Golden Week includes the National Day holiday, as well as the Mid-Autumn Festival, and it will last for eight days.
So what does the surge in terms of travel and spending reveal about the health of the Chinese economy?
My colleague Zhao Yang spoke with Dr Li Lun, assistant professor of economics with Peking University.
So, Professor Li Lun, thank you very much for joining us.
Golden Week is often seen as a snapshot of China's economy.
What do you expect for this year's Mid-Autumn Festival and National Day holiday travel and consumption?
Have you planned any holiday trips?
Yeah, so this year's Golden Week is an eight-day holiday because it combined mid-autumn festival with the national day.
So basically, it gives travelers more options.
Basically, a longer vacation or a longer trip is oftentimes more convenient for the consumers and travelers.
They can also choose to go different destinations or visit their parents, who are sometimes in other provinces.
So myself, I planned a trip to self-drive to the northeastern part of China to see the autumn leaves.
But I think it's also a good timing to see that.
And data from the travel operators show the strong demand for both domestic and international trips.
So in your opinion, what are the key drivers behind the surge in demand?
Yeah, so as I mentioned, this calendar year is somewhat different because the break is longer.
So a longer break means that there's more days for people to travel.
There's also fewer boundaries in terms of if the national day is only six days plus you have to work after the break to compensate for some of the missing holidays.
Then people are less willing to book travels, especially for overseas or foreign destinations.
And now we have an eight-day holiday, so people are more inclined to travel in the first place.
And second of all, we're seeing a more wide range of customized tours and destinations.
So people are more and more familiar with some of the smaller cities.
And so people, even for people who are afraid of the national holiday crowd, sometimes they can also find their uh desired destination to go.
And finally, i think there are many provinces and cities that are, you know, pushing consumption promotions or coupons and that basically, is providing an additional nudge from, you know, making people to to change from a maybe to a yes.
So i think overall uh, the plan, the the the longer you know holiday uh, and also the government policy together are some of the driving force behind this.
And when we talk about travel and consumption, we have to mention the Generation Z.
So what are Generation Z's growing influence?
And, in your opinion, what are the co-needs of younger generation of consumers that are evident in holiday consumption?
Yeah, so according to some data, so the people who are born after 2000 are taking up over 60 of the travel reservations in this National Day holiday.
So there are definitely you know, gradually becoming the majority of the of the traveler this year.
So I think for Gen Z a lot of the traveling habits are different because, first of all, they are very, you know, good users of social media, where they don't have the concern for, you know, not knowing somewhere or being afraid to go to somewhere because of information asymmetry, because they can get to learn about all of the stuff in the social media.
Also, they care much more about, you know, experiencing the local habits or the local lifestyle.
For example, one example we're seeing is the early morning market economy.
So a lot of people are traveling to the northeastern part just to experience the morning market, the early morning market, basically to taste the very, you know, delicious breakfast.
So they even book hotels near these morning markets, which is, you know, in previous sense, the morning markets are not travel.
You know places of interest.
So this reflects a, you know, a change in people's taste.
Also, I think a lot of Gen Z generation pay more attention to the cultural aspect of their traveling.
So they sometimes book hotels near the museums or art galleries and so on.
So this reflects a very different style of travel experience.
And with inter-province travel up.
A lot are Chinese travelers prioritizing experiences over the material goods.
And car rental bookings have also nearly doubled.
So does this reflect a growing preference for more flexible and independent travel?
Yeah, I think we're reflected by the increase in car rental bookings.
We're definitely seeing a more preference for independent trip because sometimes you know when you book through a trip, through the travel agencies, what they're providing is a most common trip for the majority of people.
But sometimes what you want to spend time on and what you want to spend more days visiting is different from other people.
So rent a car is a very convenient way to schedule your travel.
And interprovincial travel.
I think part of the reason why it's increasing is that people want to experience other provinces or other people's lifestyle.
So for people who haven't seen the snow, for example in the winter times, they sometimes visit the northeastern provinces to see that.
And for people who haven't tasted, for example, tea in the Fujian province or haven't seen the potteries or the tablewares in Jingdezhen, they can also travel there and experience basically, the lifestyle of the local destination.
And sometimes they can bring some of the local goods to wherever they live and incorporate some of that lifestyle in their day-to-day life.
So, in summary, I think these experiences it's not basically people are prioritizing experiences over material goods.
Sometimes, when you go to a different place, you can bring back some of the things you learned from that destination to your day-to-day everyday life.
And, as you earlier mentioned, cities like Chengdu, Guangzhou and Shenyang are issuing consumption vouchers.
So how effective are these local policies in stimulating the holiday spending? so we have yet to to observe how effective they are but uh for for example uh chengdu and guangdong had both rolled out a bunch of you know travel or accommodation coupons that people can use so i think overall these uh are very rarely you know the main reason why people to choose to to visit somewhere but maybe when they're booking hotels because of these coupons they can book a slightly more expensive or fancier hotel they can choose to go to a slightly more pricier restaurant and these kind of you know a slight lift or slight boost in their travel uh you know experience i think is very important for you know guaranteeing people's you know you know trap the the total utility or joy they derive from from the travel and i i do think there's a slight competition between the different provinces um in terms of attracting people and i think this is a very healthy way for you know the provinces to do so And outbound travel is rebounding with Thailand, Malaysia and Vietnam among the top destinations.
So why are these countries and what is the signal about Chinese consumers' confidence?
Yeah, so we're seeing that people are taking advantage of these eight day holiday to travel to mostly Southeast or, you know, including Japan, also the East Asia countries.
So I think the reason first of all, it's very near, but usually it's within a five hour flight radius.
And also, I think, because the foreign country.
They provide unique experiences, the exotic tourist attractions and also different food.
So I think they're very attractive overall to, especially when you bring your parents or your kids to see a different type of landscape or different type of culture.
And at the same time, inbound tourism is also rising.
So what opportunities does this bring for China's service industries?
Yeah, so I think for China's restaurant owners and for China's hotel employees, people need to get more and more use of accommodating foreigners.
And I'm not just talking about Shanghai or Beijing or the large cities, but also, you know, the smaller cities, because you know we're seeing not just the national holiday but over the first, first several months that you know, the inbound travel, in terms of its volume, in terms of its distribution over different cities, are all increasing.
So this, of course, benefits from the visa free policy for foreign foreigners to enter.
I do think that you know, for you know tourist attractions, for retail, for you know accommodation hotels, they all can benefit for this trend.
I do think there's going to be a lot of competition.
And, of course, if you can provide a more you know accommodating experience, you know, a more welcoming atmosphere for foreigners.
This is going to give you an edge in terms of competition.
Well, that was Dr Li Lun, Assistant Professor of Economics with Peking University, talking with my colleague Zhao Yang.
You are listening to World Today.
I'm Ding Hen in Beijing.
Nigeria's civil aviation regulator is considering certifying the C919 jet for use by domestic carriers.
Captain Chris Ona Njomo, who is the Director General of the Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority, says that his agency has begun examining this month-long certification process for the single-aisle jet.
The C919 is built by Chinese playmaker Comac.
Comac has actually held several discussions with Nigerian officials seeking a foothold in Africa.
So joining us now on the line is Dr. Zhang Fan from Beijing Normal University.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Hello.
So we know Nigeria represents the largest aviation market on the African continent.
How much business potential is there for C919?
Potential-wise, it's massive.
Right now the market size, the import and export of the aviation equipment, the public information I can find is something in the range of hundreds of millions of dollars per year, so it's not enormous.
However, Nigeria being one of the most populous countries, especially in West Africa, It's a hub country, meaning that its airline aspires to become like what the Ethiopian airline is to Eastern Africa.
It will not just serve the Nigerian market, but also.
The Western African region is one of the bright spots in terms of population growth.
So in the near to far future, we expect substantial growth in the market.
So taking a flight is actually known to be quite costly and expensive for many people in this country.
I mean, if CNI-19 could enter this country's aviation market, would that be helpful in terms of lowering the cost of flying for average Nigerians?
That's almost certainly so.
If you just look at the list price for the aircraft itself um, the estimate is something between 10 to uh to a quarter uh cheap.
10 to a quarter cheaper than the uh comparable sort of airbus and boeing models the airbus uh a320 neo and the um and boeing uh 737 max.
That's not enormous on the surface of it.
However, the most costly part of operating aircraft usually comes from maintenance.
So the long-term maintenance contract, including the training of the pilots, including the fact that China is perhaps offering sort of dry lease, which means the leasing company just put out the aircraft, not supplying the crew, the other support functions, which is usually the most expensive part, where the leasing companies make the extra money.
In that kind of arrangement.
Maybe the COMEC will sell the aircraft to a Chinese leasing company, Usually large banks and the leasing arm of banks and financial institutions.
And then they will lease on with favorable terms, with the knowledge transfer, with training, with all that included in a favorable package to Nigeria.
And that will really... surprise the longer running costs of the airlines.
And especially if they want to grow in the future into becoming this hub in Western Africa, they need to get this know-how, and China is more than willing to provide that know-how.
Hmm.
C919, we know is yet to gain certifications from Western regulators, which we know are sometimes seen as the benchmark.
So, in real practice, what kind of hurdles does Nigeria's regulator need to overcome in the absence of Western regulators' certification?
Right.
So there's a lot of a technical problem.
The issue is that you need to do a lot of technical testing to make sure you understand the performance, the safety performance of the aircraft themselves, which is why the American FAA and the European ESA they're the torchbearers, because they have the dual that they have the aircraft manufacturers in their respective jurisdictions, which means they actually well, it actually can become a problem.
For example, the american regulator relies on boeing to do too much work regulating yourself, and that causes a lot of problems, as we have seen recently.
Uh, but on the other, on the flip side of the coin, is that they they, they have the place to find this know-how and for a um for for, for the nigerian um sort of um regulator, they don't necessarily have that expertise within their country.
So they have to establish some sort of a.
I think without this certification from the US and Europeans, they have to rely on the Chinese regulators.
And they have to establish this trust, this information sharing mechanism, and all that for that certification, to rely on the Chinese technical testing facilities to provide the necessary work.
I take your point.
So earlier this year the United States temporarily halted exports of these CFM engines that are used on C919 amid trade tensions with China, and in turn that has affected C919's deliveries.
So how can Comac cope with this choking point if C919 wants to see a sustainable expansion of global footprint?
Right.
So that's not really a choking point.
China hides the engines.
If you look at the military transport aircraft, the Y-20B uses Chinese engines and they're basically the same thing.
You just need to increase the bypass ratio for the commercial version of it.
The fact that China uses a French-US engine is because it's easier to gain certification from the US and European regulators.
But having a problem with that as it is, it's kind of a moot point.
So china might as well just use chinese engines and and smooth over this.
Uh, this regulatory approval process, using nigeria as a test batch for how to deal with this, this collaboration develop the protocols as we say, so so that's probably how it would do, how it will happen in the future.
Okay, your points well taken, and thank you very much, by the way, for this very important piece of clarification.
Dr Zhang Fan, joining us from Beijing Normal University.
You're listening to World Today.
I'm Dinghan in Beijing.
That's all the time for this edition of the program.
Thank you so much for listening.
Bye for now.
