JAKARTA, INDONESIA — Indonesia will expand its existing defense partnerships and step up its handling of strategic issues impacting its sovereignty, including maritime security and the safety of sea passage and fisheries, its foreign minister said on Friday.

Sugiono, who uses only one name, said Indonesia would continue to advocate for the completion of a code of conduct between the Southeast Asian bloc ASEAN and China on the South China Sea and prioritize ASEAN’s centrality.

Indonesia considers itself not a party in disputes over the sea, a waterway crucial to global trade, but has recently been tested by forays by China’s coast guard into its exclusive economic zone.

Beijing claims sovereignty over almost the entire South China Sea, putting it at odds with Malaysia, Vietnam and the Philippines, with disputes frequent over the conduct in their EEZs of China’s massive fleet of coast guard. China insists it is operating lawfully in its territory.

“In the geostrategic sense, Indonesia is close to a source of regional conflict, the South China Sea. Indonesia’s position remains prioritizing conflict resolution that is peaceful,” Sugiono said, adding Indonesia would keep pushing for constructive dialogue on a code of conduct.

Regional commitments to draft a code were first made in 2002 but talks towards its creation only started in 2017 and progress has been limited, with years spent discussing the framework for negotiations and numerous agreements signed to expedite the process.

Thorny issues include whether the code will be legally binding, enforceable and based on international maritime law, under which a 2016 international arbitration panel ruled Beijing’s expansive territorial claims had no legal basis.

China does not recognize the ruling.

In a wide-ranging speech setting out Indonesia’s foreign policy that was attended by the diplomatic community, Sugiono also said Indonesia would prioritize completion of talks on free trade agreements and expand its international trade, including with non-traditional partners in Africa and the Pacific.

He said Indonesia’s joining of the BRICS grouping — which includes Russia, China, Brazil, India, Iran, Egypt and South Africa — was not a deviation from Indonesia’s international position, but an underlining of its free and active foreign policy.

He also said Indonesia would never abandon its support for the Palestinian cause, calling for a ceasefire and accountability for Israel over its role in the Gaza conflict.

Sugiono was appointed in October when new President Prabowo Subianto took office. 
…

your ad here

WASHINGTON — In Myanmar, a relatively new ethnic armed group known as the Arakan Army has recently taken control of 15 out of 17 townships in the war-torn country’s western Rakhine state. This includes the Myanmar military’s western regional command headquarters located in Ann Township, in central Rakhine state. This marks the second major regional command center to fall since the beginning of a surge in resistance victories by allied ethnic armed groups – the “Three Brotherhood Alliance” – known  as Operation 1027 in late 2023.

The significant territorial gains by the AA are reshaping power dynamics in Myanmar’s civil war, observers say. The ethnic army’s growing control over Rakhine state is also drawing attention to the plight of the country’s Muslim ethnic Rohingya minority.

In a recent phone interview with VOA’s Burmese service, AA spokesperson Khaing Thu Kha said the group continued to hold its ground.

“As of December 29, 2024, our AA has completely occupied all the military bases of the fascist military council in Gwa Township. We are pursuing and attacking retreating forces,” Khaing Thu Kha said.

In response, Myanmar’s military has launched heavy artillery strikes from air and sea but was unsuccessful in its attempts to retake Gwa, the spokesperson added. The junta did not respond to VOA on the issue.

The Arakan Army’s gains continued this week, as it seized a key oil and gas pipeline station and closed in on a major weapons factory of the Myanmar military.

The fall of Gwa follows the army’s seizing of Ann township earlier in December, when it captured the military’s western regional command headquarters after intense fighting, marking another major loss for Myanmar’s military.

In July, the Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army, another ethnic armed group, popularly known as the Kokang army — seized the military’s regional command headquarters in Lashio, in the northern part of Shan state.

“In the history of Myanmar’s military, losing two regional commands in such a short period is unprecedented,” former Myanmar army Major Naung Yoe told VOA. “These regional commands oversee vast operational areas and are critical to military control.”

Naung Yoe, who is now part of the anti-junta civil disobedience movement group People’s Goal, is based along the Thai-Myanmar border. He attributes the Arakan Army’s success to strategy and strong local support.

“The courage of the AA soldiers, their disciplined command structure, and the overwhelming support of the Rakhine people have played key roles in their victories,” he said.

The military has not responded in the media on recent fighting in Rakhine state.

Strategic battleground

Rakhine state, with its abundant natural resources and access to the Bay of Bengal, is strategically significant. It is home to major China-backed infrastructure projects and holds geopolitical importance as a gateway to Southeast Asia.

The state is predominantly inhabited by Rakhine Buddhists, with Rohingya Muslims making up the second-largest population. The Rohingya have faced systemic persecution, culminating in the 2017 military crackdown that forced over 700,000 to flee to Bangladesh. Myanmar’s military is now facing international legal proceedings on charges of genocide and other war crimes.

This latest round of fighting between the military and the Arakan Army, which began in late 2023 following Operation1027 has been fierce. Dozens of Rohingya civilians were killed during junta attacks, some with heavy artillery fired at AA troops based in Rohingya villages, according to local human rights organizations.

The Arakan Army, formed in 2009 by Rakhine youth leaders, is part of the Three Brotherhood Alliance that is fighting the junta alongside the Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army and the Ta’Ang National Liberation Army.

With an estimated 45,000 troops, the AA says it seeks autonomy for Rakhine state, aiming to “restore the sovereignty of the Arakan people.”

However, U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk has condemned abuses by both the military and the AA, citing forced recruitment, extrajudicial killings and indiscriminate attacks that violate international law. AA offensives have reportedly displaced tens of thousands of civilians, including many Rohingya.

On Aug. 5, dozens of Rohingya were killed near the Naf River, which divides Myanmar from Bangladesh, underscoring their plight as they remain trapped between escalating violence and closed borders with little safe refuge.

Rohingya calls for justice

In late December, 28 Rohingya organizations issued a joint statement calling on the AA, which now controls Maungdaw and Buthidaung townships in northern Rakhine, to “uphold and respect the rights of Rohingya and other ethnic and religious minorities” in the region bordering Bangladesh.

Cox’s Bazar in southeastern Bangladesh hosts over 1.2 million Rohingya refugees, most of whom fled Myanmar following the military crackdown in August 2017.

Meanwhile, approximately 500,000 Rohingya remain in Myanmar, living in areas now under AA control, including territories along the Bangladesh border.

“The AA has reached a position where it can control up to 14 cities,” Tun Khin, president of the Burmese Rohingya Organization U.K., or BROUK, told VOA Burmese by phone. BROUK is among the 28 organizations behind the joint statement.

“However, human rights violations against the Rohingya continue, especially in places like Buthidaung and Maungdaw,” Tun Khin said. “As a result, the Rohingya have not been able to return to their homes. It is critical to stop the daily abuses inflicted on the Rohingya by AA forces.”

After the AA captured Buthidaung and Maungdaw, nearly 60,000 Rohingya fled to Bangladesh, Tun Khin said.

“AA, much like the Burmese military, is driving the Rohingya from their homes, perpetuating a cycle of displacement,” he said.

The Rohingya and other Rakhine minorities must find a way to live peacefully together, he said.

“The Rohingya have supported the Burmese revolution and stood alongside revolutionary forces like the AA,” Tun Khin said, “yet, they have been forcibly driven from their homes during clashes between the AA and the Burmese army. This is unacceptable. The AA is committing similar crimes to those perpetrated by the Burmese military.”

A path toward dialogue?

For its part, the Arakan Army reiterated its commitment to dialogue late last month.

“We remain steadfast in our belief that current internal issues can and should be resolved through political means rather than military solutions,” the group said in a statement.

In his New Year’s speech, however, Myanmar’s military leader, Senior General Min Aung Hlaing, accused ethnic armed groups of pursuing selfish interests and inciting conflict while claiming to support democracy.

He also reiterated the junta’s commitment to holding elections, citing the completion of a national census and other administrative milestones, and pledged that elections would take place this year.

During the 50th anniversary of Rakhine State Day on Dec. 15, Min Aung Hlaing called on ethnic armed groups, including the Arakan Army, to “abandon the armed path and choose the right course.”

Myanmar’s military rulers have not directly responded to the AA’s offer for dialogue, according to Naung Yoe, the former Myanmar army major.

“The prospects for a resolution remain bleak. I still don’t see a dialogue emerging that could resolve the differences between the two sides,” he told VOA.

Junta leader Min Aung Hlaing recently reiterated his support for the 2008 constitution, framing it as essential for Myanmar’s future. That constitution allowed the formation of a partially civilian government but guaranteed the military’s continued role in politics. The military overthrew the elected government in a coup in 2021.

Ethnic leaders, however, reject any political framework that involves the military.

“With the junta clinging to the 2008 constitution and ethnic leaders envisioning a political future without military involvement, the chances of reconciliation are slim,” Naung Yoe said.

He also pointed to the Arakan Army’s intention to control all of Rakhine state as a potential stumbling block as well.

“If political reconciliation remains unattainable, the conflict will likely escalate further in early 2025,” he said. 
…

your ad here

WASHINGTON — Russia’s efforts to obtain China’s help in enhancing artificial intelligence is seen as a bid to challenge America’s lead in the field even as the outgoing Biden administration is expected to impose new export control measures to further curb Beijing’s access to AI chips.

As the new year began, Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the country’s state-owned Sberbank, to work with China in researching and developing AI technology, according to the Kremlin.

“The Russian president sees his country in global competition for AI with the United States and has positioned the state resources to try and compete with the U.S. in information and cyberspace – two areas where artificial intelligence is supposed to aid Russia in what they see as Western narratives and influence,” said Samuel Bendett, adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

Moscow views Beijing’s success in AI as an example to follow, and its “cooperation with China is viewed as a necessary step towards acquiring artificial intelligence-related skill sets, knowledge and technology,” Bendett told VOA in written comments.

The U.S. currently leads in AI innovation, followed by China, which is falling behind by wide margins, according to a November report by the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence. Russia ranks 31st out of 83 countries in AI implementation, innovation and investment, according to U.K.-based Tortoise Media’s Global AI Index.

Response to sanctions

Western sanctions imposed on Russia since its invasion of Ukraine in 2022 have limited the country’s AI development, and Moscow has turned to Beijing to offset the restriction, according to Bendett in his report “The Role of AI in Russia’s Confrontation with the West.”

Sberbank, which Putin instructed to collaborate with China, is under Western sanctions.

It is Russia’s largest bank and leads the country’s AI development efforts.

The outgoing Biden administration is expected to impose a new set of export control measures aimed at further limiting China’s ability to access chips that support AI technology. The new measures could come as early as Friday, according to Bloomberg.

Sberbank CEO German Gref said in 2023 that Russia cannot obtain graphics processing units, microchips needed to support AI development, according to Reuters.

But the bank’s first deputy CEO, Alexander Vedyakhin, said in December that despite Western sanctions, Russia can improve its AI ranking by 2030 through its own development.

Another key area where Russia has sought to further apply AI help from China is in the military.

“There already have been top level meetings between Russia and Chinese militaries in 2024,” and “ongoing dialogue” between the defense ministries of the two countries is likely so they can understand “how AI could aid in a large-scale conventional conflict, like the one unfolding in Ukraine,” Bendett said.

Russian and Chinese officials met in Beijing early last year to discuss military application of AI, especially in developing autonomous weapons, according to Russia’s Foreign Ministry.

AI-powered weapons

In December, Ukraine said Russia began using AI-powered strike drones with improved capabilities that can evade air defenses, identify key targets and operate offline.

James Lewis, director of the Strategic Technologies Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said Russia is likely to use AI technology on enhancing drones as well as in making weapons with improved target detection and attack speed.

The China-Russia AI partnership “creates new risk for the U.S.,” but military application of “AI won’t compensate for bad strategy” in the battlefield, he said.

Attending an AI conference in Moscow last month, Song Haitao, president of the Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Research Institute, said China plans to sign an agreement with Russia’s Sberbank to promote bilateral cooperation on AI development.

Speaking at the conference, Putin applauded China for “making great strides” in advancing AI technology and its application, including in building “smart cities” and conducting “modern governance.”

Sam Bresnick, research fellow at Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology, said although it is not entirely clear how Beijing might benefit from helping Moscow in developing AI, China might want some military technologies and wartime data from Russia in return.

“Russia is very good at making submarines, and there’s been a speculation in the past that China could benefit from acquiring that kind of technology. Another one is helicopter technology,” Bresnick said.

“The war in Ukraine has generated an astonishing amount of data,” Bresnick continued. “China would probably be interested in getting its hands on them because having more militarily relevant data from Russia would help China develop its own AI systems for military.”

Liu Pengyu, a spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, told VOA on Thursday that “in terms of the application of artificial intelligence, China actively advocates the principles of ‘people-oriented’ and ‘intelligent for good,’ ensuring that artificial intelligence is safe, reliable and controllable, better enabling global sustainable development, and enhancing the common well-being of all mankind.” 
…

your ad here

GENEVA — Australia violated the rights of asylum-seekers arbitrarily detained on the island of Nauru, a U.N. watchdog ruled Thursday, in a warning to other countries intent on outsourcing asylum processing.

The U.N. Human Rights Committee published decisions in two cases involving 25 refugees and asylum-seekers who endured years of arbitrary detention in the island nation.

“A state party cannot escape its human rights responsibility when outsourcing asylum processing to another state,” committee member Mahjoub El Haiba said in a statement.

Under a hard-line policy introduced more than a decade ago, Australia has sent thousands of migrants attempting to reach the country by boat to detention centers on Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island and the tiny Pacific nation of Nauru, which lies further to the northwest.

Victims in both cases filed complaints to the U.N. committee of 18 independent experts, charging that Australia had violated their rights under an international covenant, in particular regarding arbitrary detention.

Australia rejected the allegations, insisting that abuses that occurred in Nauru did not fall within its jurisdiction.

But the U.N. committee highlighted that Australia had arranged for the establishment of Nauru’s regional processing center and contributed to its operation and management.

El Haiba said Australia did have jurisdiction because it “had significant control and influence over the regional processing facility in Nauru.”

‘Not human rights-free zones’

A number of European countries have been examining the possibility of similar arrangements to outsource their migration policies.

Thursday’s decisions “send a clear message to all states: Where there is power or effective control, there is responsibility,” El Haiba said. “The outsourcing of operations does not absolve states of accountability. Offshore detention facilities are not human rights-free zones.”

The first case examined by the committee involved 24 unaccompanied minors from Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Myanmar.

They were intercepted at sea by Australia and transferred in 2014 to Nauru’s overcrowded Regional Processing Center.

They were held there “with insufficient water supply and sanitation, high temperatures and humidity, as well as inadequate health care,” Thursday’s statement said. “Almost all of these minors have suffered from deterioration of physical and mental well-being, including self-harm, depression, kidney problems, insomnia, headaches, memory problems and weight loss.”

Compensation

Even though all but one of the minors were granted refugee status around September 2014, they remained detained in Nauru, the committee said.

It said Australia had failed to justify why the minors could not have been transferred to centers on the mainland more suitable for vulnerable individuals.

The committee separately evaluated the case of an Iranian asylum seeker who arrived by boat on Christmas Island with several family members in August 2013 and was transferred seven months later to Nauru.

The woman was recognized as a refugee by Nauru authorities in 2017 but was not released.

In November 2018, she was transferred to Australia in November 2018 for medical reasons but remained detained in various facilities there, the committee said.

It determined that Australia had failed to show that the woman’s prolonged and indefinite detention was justified.

The committee called on Australia to compensate the victims and take steps to ensure similar violations do not recur.

The committee has no power to compel states to follow its rulings, but its decisions carry reputational weight.
…

your ad here

Beijing — China said Thursday that an investigation had found the European Union imposed unfair “trade and investment barriers” on Beijing, marking the latest salvo in long-running commercial tensions between the two economic powers. 

Officials announced the probe in July after Brussels began looking into whether Chinese government subsidies were undermining European competition. 

Beijing has consistently denied its industrial policies are unfair and has threatened to take action against the EU to protect Chinese companies’ legal rights and interests. 

The commerce ministry said Thursday that the implementation of the EU’s Foreign Subsidies Regulation (FSR) discriminated against Chinese firms and “constitutes trade and investment barriers.” 

However, it did not mention whether Beijing planned to take action in response. 

The two are major trade partners but are locked in a wide-ranging standoff, notably over Beijing’s support for its renewables and electric-vehicle sectors. 

EU actions against Chinese firms have come as the 27-nation bloc seeks to expand renewable energy use to meet its target of net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. 

But Brussels also wants to pivot away from what it views as an overreliance on Chinese technology at a time when many Western governments increasingly consider Beijing a potential national security threat. 

When announcing the probe, the ministry said its national chamber of commerce for importing and exporting machinery and electronics had filed a complaint over the FSR measures. 

The 20-page document detailing the ministry’s conclusions said their “selective enforcement” resulted in “Chinese products being treated more unfavorably during the process of export to the EU than products from third countries.” 

It added that the FSR had “vague” criteria for investigating foreign subsidies, placed a “severe burden” on the targeted companies and had opaque procedures that created “huge uncertainty.” 

EU measures such as surprise inspections “clearly exceeded the necessary limits,” while investigators were “subjective and arbitrary” on issues like market distortion, according to the ministry. 

Companies deemed not to have complied with probes also faced “severe penalties,” which placed “huge pressure” on Chinese firms, it said. 

The European Commission on Thursday defended the FSR, saying it was “fully compliant with all applicable EU and World Trade Organization rules.” 

“All companies, regardless of their seat or nationality, are subject to the rules,” a commission spokesperson said in a statement. 

“This is also the case when applying State aid or antitrust rules.”   

Projects curtailed 

The Chinese commerce ministry said FSR investigations had forced Chinese companies to abandon or curtail projects, causing losses of more than $2.05 billion. 

The measures had “damaged the competitiveness of Chinese enterprises and products in the EU market,” it said, adding that they also hindered the development of European national economies and undermined trade cooperation between Beijing and Brussels. 

The EU’s first probe under the FSR in February targeted a subsidiary of Chinese rail giant CRRC, but closed after the company withdrew from a tender in Bulgaria to supply electric trains. 

A second probe targets Chinese-owned solar panel manufacturers seeking to build and operate a photovoltaic park in Romania, partly financed by European funds. 

In October, Brussels imposed extra tariffs on Chinese-made electric cars after an anti-subsidy investigation under a different set of rules concluded Beijing’s state support was unfairly undercutting European automakers. 

Beijing in response announced provisional tariffs on brandy imported from the EU, and later imposed “temporary anti-dumping measures” on the liquor. 

Last month, China said it would extend the brandy investigation, citing the case’s “complexity.” 

Separately, a report by the European Union Chamber of Commerce in China warned that firms were being forced to drastically localize their operations to suit China’s regulations, driving up costs and reducing efficiency. 

Heightened trade tensions and Beijing’s “self-reliance policies” were causing many multinationals “to separate certain China-based functions, or even entire operations, from those in the rest of the world,” it said. 

It added that governance rules increasingly dominated by national security concerns had heightened uncertainties for local entities in engaging with European clients. 

Some customers are therefore choosing to “err on the side of caution and not take a risk by buying from a foreign service provider,” Chamber head Jens Eskelund said at a media event on Thursday.           
…

your ad here