If this is not the “negative story” of the Australian press, I do not know that China’s representatives are so hard abroad
If this is not the “negative report” of the Australian press, I do not know that China’s representatives are so hard abroad!
May 1st, international labor day.
But most Chinese don’t work on that day,
They are either resting at home or traveling through scenic spots.
Enjoy a comfortable vacation.
But in Perth, western Australia, this is a day of “not so comfortable”.
First look at the picture left
When the Sydney morning herald logout the topic of “nasty” exclusive news, don’t have to guess, the Australian media must have felt and found a disgusting “China”.
How to make China sick?
Let me tell you:
In other words, on May 1, an international conference called the golden berley process working group was held in Perth.
Long name, but please note that it is an international conference.
The meeting was opened in kimberley, South Africa, in May 2000. The meeting objective is to establish a set of certificate system, to prevent illegal rough diamonds by the rebels to buy weapon to overthrow the legitimate government, contain “conflict diamonds” into normal trade, maintain normal order in the diamond trade, promote world peace and stability, development and prosperity.
China is a founding member of the kimberley process and the host of 2014.
OK, so what happened at this year’s meeting?
This is what the Sydney morning herald says:
At the official welcoming ceremony for the meeting held by the Australian government, the chairman of the meeting, Robert e. Robert, a senior official at the foreign ministry of foreign trade and foreign affairs of Australia, said in a recent visit to the meeting. Jones was speaking, the mainland delegation members to use the phone on the seat, raised questions about the procedures of the meeting, and requires clear whether people around here are subject to the “official invitation”.
The paper described China’s actions as a “distraction” to the meeting and that the motive for “interference” was the presence of representatives from Taiwan.
The Australian media said Taiwan became an observer of the process in 2007, so it could attend. But Chinese representatives continued to “interfere” with the meeting, leading to the inability of Australian foreign minister bishop bishop to speak. The representatives of the two countries followed the “closed-door negotiations”, and Taiwan representatives were eventually invited out of the meeting. Bishop can speak normally. The conference process has also been restored.
Bishop spoke at the opening ceremony of the conference on Monday.
By the end of this statement, do you think that China stands for nothing?
Australia’s rhetoric is not over.
Australia, a spokesman for the department of foreign affairs and trade said, invited as guests, chairman of the Chinese Taipei delegation is attending the meeting “according to precedent,” this invitation with Australia’s adherence to the “one China” policy. China’s continued interference in the proceedings during the opening ceremony is regrettable.
A request not to tell his/her name in the Australian senior delegates told the Sydney morning herald, the move “disgusting, very unusual, very not appropriate, not to respect people…”
China’s surprise move was a disrespect for the Australian government, as Australia’s foreign minister attended the kimberley process.
Uh…… Is it not so easy to criticise China for not being able to retain its name?
Apparently, the “anonymous Chinese critic” will not be a man fighting.
The news sent back to Taiwan, where Taiwan’s foreign minister, hou qingshan, said Taiwan had the right to participate in the meeting, and would protest to the mainland through the commission. He added that China’s push for international pressure on Taiwan is growing, which will affect cross-strait relations and make people sick.
And so on, if you look at Australia and Taiwan, you know, is it the equivalent of a pull?
How do you hear the Chinese government?
At a regular press briefing today, geng shuang said:
Kimberley process began in 2003, when China and process understanding, Taiwan, China in the name of “Chinese Taipei hair drill trade entity” temporary execution process certification system, but not kimberley process formal members, nor the observer, should not join any group or committee conference process.
Before a joint session of the kimberley process working group, the meeting host Fang Chan has decided to invite Taiwan side in the name of the “guests”, chairman of the meeting, in violation of the relevant process rules. China has repeatedly lodged representations with the host before the meeting, but China’s legitimate concerns have not been respected. Most members of the process, as well as the subcommittee and the working group, also explicitly disagree with the organizers. But it was inexplicable and regrettable that the organizers were unimpressed and insisted.
It is reasonable for China to express concern over these issues and relevant arrangements at the process meeting.
And inside (ID: huanqiu – com) about this event, managing NiYongJie the deputy director of the Shanghai research institute of Taiwan, said that the incident is obviously the organizers, the mainland of reasonable, Taiwan’s participation in international shall not contravene the “one China” policy, cannot appear “two chinas” or “one China, one Taiwan”. Australia, on grounds of “past practices” at the beginning, invited to Taiwan to attend, was unaware of the between the two sides of the situation is different, can’t again to “practice” as the basis of judgment, the participation of Taiwan to mainland permission.
Ma ying-jeou NiYongJie memories of the past period of Taiwan to participate in some of the organizations and institutions, such as the international civil aviation organization (ICAO) and Interpol assembly, denied by tsai ing-wen “contenders,” in what is now under the serious situation of cross-strait relations, Taiwan also could not attend, so to speak, the democratic progressive party (DPP) space is smaller and smaller.
Did you understand the editor of the Sydney morning herald?