cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/317669

> Archived link > > On 21 June 2024, China issued alarming new guiding opinions under the 2005 Anti-Secession Law. > > The guidelines threaten to impose a maximum potential death penalty for a range of vaguely defined supporting ‘Taiwan independence’ activities. They allow Chinese courts to conduct trials in absentia and appear to apply to both Taiwanese nationals and foreigners alike, in an unacceptable escalation in Beijing’s assault on the freedom of expression of the people of Taiwan and the international community. > > Michael Caster, Asia Digital Program Manager at ARTICLE 19, commented: > >“In these new guidelines, Beijing is seeking to wield the maximum threat of in absentia death sentences to instill fear and gag independent expression on all things Taiwan. Make no mistake, this has nothing to do with preserving cross-straits peace, as Beijing would have it. This development serves to further bully the international community into isolating Taiwan. The only acceptable response is to redouble solidarity and accelerate coordination and cooperation with Taiwan.

cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/317669

> Archived link > > On 21 June 2024, China issued alarming new guiding opinions under the 2005 Anti-Secession Law. > > The guidelines threaten to impose a maximum potential death penalty for a range of vaguely defined supporting ‘Taiwan independence’ activities. They allow Chinese courts to conduct trials in absentia and appear to apply to both Taiwanese nationals and foreigners alike, in an unacceptable escalation in Beijing’s assault on the freedom of expression of the people of Taiwan and the international community. > > Michael Caster, Asia Digital Program Manager at ARTICLE 19, commented: > >“In these new guidelines, Beijing is seeking to wield the maximum threat of in absentia death sentences to instill fear and gag independent expression on all things Taiwan. Make no mistake, this has nothing to do with preserving cross-straits peace, as Beijing would have it. This development serves to further bully the international community into isolating Taiwan. The only acceptable response is to redouble solidarity and accelerate coordination and cooperation with Taiwan.

Archived link

On 21 June 2024, China issued alarming new guiding opinions under the 2005 Anti-Secession Law.

The guidelines threaten to impose a maximum potential death penalty for a range of vaguely defined supporting ‘Taiwan independence’ activities. They allow Chinese courts to conduct trials in absentia and appear to apply to both Taiwanese nationals and foreigners alike, in an unacceptable escalation in Beijing’s assault on the freedom of expression of the people of Taiwan and the international community.

Michael Caster, Asia Digital Program Manager at ARTICLE 19, commented: >“In these new guidelines, Beijing is seeking to wield the maximum threat of in absentia death sentences to instill fear and gag independent expression on all things Taiwan. Make no mistake, this has nothing to do with preserving cross-straits peace, as Beijing would have it. This development serves to further bully the international community into isolating Taiwan. The only acceptable response is to redouble solidarity and accelerate coordination and cooperation with Taiwan.

cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/317047

> in February 2024, the EU Parliament adopted the eIDAS regulation, creating the framework for a "European Digital Identity Wallet". This digital Wallet will enable citizens to identify themselves in a legally binding manner, both online and offline, sign documents, login into websites and share personal data about them with others. Recently, the European Commission published the Architectural Reference Framework (ARF) 1.4 for the technical implementation of the Wallet. > > The success of the EU Digital Identity Wallet depends on its ability to gain citizens' trust and establish a resilient infrastructure in our current data-driven economy. > > "However, after our analysis, we believe that this goal has been missed," says the digital rights group Epicenter Works. > > "We see severe shortcomings in the ARF that either contradict the regulation or ignore important elements of it. These issues, if left unaddressed, could significantly undermine user rights and privacy."

cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/317047

> in February 2024, the EU Parliament adopted the eIDAS regulation, creating the framework for a "European Digital Identity Wallet". This digital Wallet will enable citizens to identify themselves in a legally binding manner, both online and offline, sign documents, login into websites and share personal data about them with others. Recently, the European Commission published the Architectural Reference Framework (ARF) 1.4 for the technical implementation of the Wallet. > > The success of the EU Digital Identity Wallet depends on its ability to gain citizens' trust and establish a resilient infrastructure in our current data-driven economy. > > "However, after our analysis, we believe that this goal has been missed," says the digital rights group Epicenter Works. > > "We see severe shortcomings in the ARF that either contradict the regulation or ignore important elements of it. These issues, if left unaddressed, could significantly undermine user rights and privacy."

in February 2024, the EU Parliament adopted the eIDAS regulation, creating the framework for a "European Digital Identity Wallet". This digital Wallet will enable citizens to identify themselves in a legally binding manner, both online and offline, sign documents, login into websites and share personal data about them with others. Recently, the European Commission published the Architectural Reference Framework (ARF) 1.4 for the technical implementation of the Wallet.

The success of the EU Digital Identity Wallet depends on its ability to gain citizens' trust and establish a resilient infrastructure in our current data-driven economy.

"However, after our analysis, we believe that this goal has been missed," says the digital rights group Epicenter Works.

"We see severe shortcomings in the ARF that either contradict the regulation or ignore important elements of it. These issues, if left unaddressed, could significantly undermine user rights and privacy."

Archived link

WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange is free after a 14-year battle against extradition to the United States. In a final effort to secure his freedom, an anonymous Bitcoiner donated over 8 Bitcoin, worth around $500,000, to help Assange’s family pay off the debt incurred by his travel and settlement expenses. [...] The donation link was posted by Stella Assange on June 25, and within 10 hours, an anonymous Bitcoiner paid over 8 Bitcoin (BTC) to the fund, almost clearing the goal of $520,000. He has also received over 300,000 British pounds ($380,000) in fiat donations so far.

The single Bitcoin donation was the largest donation to the fund, more than all other donations in all currencies combined. As a result, Assange will arrive in Australia debt free.

Archived link

Addition for clarification: The "South China Morning Post"(SCMP) is a state-controlled Chinese media outlet. In this article, however, it criticizes the Chinese health care system and even cites ordinary citizens' posts which don't appear to be censored, a rare move in China. This is why the article is linked here. In general, however, one should be very careful using this source.

A hospital in China has stoked controversy by charging a patient for the use of a chair they were sitting on while receiving an intravenous infusion.

On mainland social media at the end of June, a person released a billing statement by the public-funded Ningxia Children’s Hospital, which showed that five yuan (70 US cents) had been charged for a seat, Zonglan Video reported.

It is not clear how old the patient was, or what they were being treated for, but the bill showed the medication contained antibiotics.

An official at the hospital in Yinchuan in Ningxia Hui autonomous region, northwestern China, said the fee was for two days’ use of a chair by the patient who was sitting on it while receiving an infusion. [...] The controversial chair fee has become the subject of heated discussions on mainland social media, after being viewed 5 million times on Douyin alone.

“Hospitals are so commercial. I feel speechless about this fee,” one online observer said.

“It’s the first time I’ve heard of this kind of cost in a hospital. Is there anything left that they do not charge fees for?” said another person.

“Are ordinary people now expected to bring their own chair to see doctors from now on,” a third said.

cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/309474

> Archived link

> Addition for clarification: The "South China Morning Post"(SCMP) is a state-controlled Chinese media outlet. Sometimes they appear to publish articles like this one that are, at least to some degree, critical of the CCP, although the article increasingly reiterates the CCP's stance as you read along. The post provides a rare glimpse into the Chinese propaganda machinery, however, which is why I posted it here. In general, however, one should be very careful using this source.

> - “Narrative construction and discourse building are essential if we are to effectively defend our rights and interests in the South China Sea – both in the present and in future,” Wu Shicun, founder of the National Institute for South China Sea Studies, told a seminar held in Hainan province last week. > > - Without naming any country, Wu said China faced “an increasingly arduous battle over public perception and opinion”, adding that “rival claimants” were “stepping up cooperation with extraterritorial forces in the study of historical and legal issues” concerning the South China Sea. > > - Beijing lays claim to much of the South China Sea, citing historic activities and records in support. > > - Its claims were rejected by the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague in 2016 in a case filed by the Philippines. > > - Beijing has dismissed the Hague ruling as “null and void” and continued to build up its infrastructure and troop presence in the South China Sea. But the Philippines and other claimants – which include Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei – along with the United States and its allies have repeatedly urged China to abide by international law. > > - Yi Xianliang, a former ambassador to Norway who previously served as deputy director of the foreign ministry’s boundary and ocean affairs department, also spoke at Tuesday’s seminar and dismissed the 2016 ruling as a “bad joke”. > > - But Yi warned “we have to ask why the ruling is flawed” and ask if it “will happen again and how we can prevent it from happening again”.

cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/309474

> Archived link

> Addition for clarification: The "South China Morning Post"(SCMP) is a state-controlled Chinese media outlet. Sometimes they appear to publish articles like this one that are, at least to some degree, critical of the CCP, although the article increasingly reiterates the CCP's stance as you read along. The post provides a rare glimpse into the Chinese propaganda machinery, however, which is why I posted it here. In general, however, one should be very careful using this source.

> - “Narrative construction and discourse building are essential if we are to effectively defend our rights and interests in the South China Sea – both in the present and in future,” Wu Shicun, founder of the National Institute for South China Sea Studies, told a seminar held in Hainan province last week. > > - Without naming any country, Wu said China faced “an increasingly arduous battle over public perception and opinion”, adding that “rival claimants” were “stepping up cooperation with extraterritorial forces in the study of historical and legal issues” concerning the South China Sea. > > - Beijing lays claim to much of the South China Sea, citing historic activities and records in support. > > - Its claims were rejected by the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague in 2016 in a case filed by the Philippines. > > - Beijing has dismissed the Hague ruling as “null and void” and continued to build up its infrastructure and troop presence in the South China Sea. But the Philippines and other claimants – which include Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei – along with the United States and its allies have repeatedly urged China to abide by international law. > > - Yi Xianliang, a former ambassador to Norway who previously served as deputy director of the foreign ministry’s boundary and ocean affairs department, also spoke at Tuesday’s seminar and dismissed the 2016 ruling as a “bad joke”. > > - But Yi warned “we have to ask why the ruling is flawed” and ask if it “will happen again and how we can prevent it from happening again”.

Archived link

Addition for clarification: The "South China Morning Post"(SCMP) is a state-controlled Chinese media outlet. Sometimes they appear to publish articles like this one that are, at least to some degree, critical of the CCP, although the article increasingly reiterates the CCP's stance as you read along. The post provides a rare glimpse into the Chinese propaganda machinery, however, which is why I posted it here. In general, however, one should be very careful using this source.

• “Narrative construction and discourse building are essential if we are to effectively defend our rights and interests in the South China Sea – both in the present and in future,” Wu Shicun, founder of the National Institute for South China Sea Studies, told a seminar held in Hainan province last week.

• Without naming any country, Wu said China faced “an increasingly arduous battle over public perception and opinion”, adding that “rival claimants” were “stepping up cooperation with extraterritorial forces in the study of historical and legal issues” concerning the South China Sea.

• Beijing lays claim to much of the South China Sea, citing historic activities and records in support.

• Its claims were rejected by the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague in 2016 in a case filed by the Philippines.

• Beijing has dismissed the Hague ruling as “null and void” and continued to build up its infrastructure and troop presence in the South China Sea. But the Philippines and other claimants – which include Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei – along with the United States and its allies have repeatedly urged China to abide by international law.

• Yi Xianliang, a former ambassador to Norway who previously served as deputy director of the foreign ministry’s boundary and ocean affairs department, also spoke at Tuesday’s seminar and dismissed the 2016 ruling as a “bad joke”.

• But Yi warned “we have to ask why the ruling is flawed” and ask if it “will happen again and how we can prevent it from happening again”.

cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/261388

> - China’s energy regulator said it will limit “low-end” solar panel manufacturing after industry leaders called for more government intervention earlier this month. The move is an acknowledgement by Beijing that solar panel overcapacity is a problem, one that has pushed Chinese solar firms into a price war and shriveled returns. > - The competition in China’s solar power industry is “indeed very fierce,” an official at the National Energy Administration (NEA) said at a press conference Thursday. > - A price war on solar panels in China has meant that big firms have rapidly lost profit while small firms risk bankruptcy. > - Historically, the industry has been propped up by city governments, which build solar panel factories to lease or sell to private firms. But while some local authorities have expressed willingness to continue to keep solar firms afloat, “that support may dry up as the provinces are themselves swimming in debt, largely stemming from the country’s property crisis, and solar has to compete for their support with other green tech sectors, like electric vehicles, that are also struggling with overcapacity. > - Chinese officials want homeowners to install solar panels to combat overcapacity, but China’s grid is still not able to accommodate fluctuating solar energy levels. > - One solution may be virtual power plants: smaller-scale grids that rely on local renewable energy infrastructure and incentivize homeowners to use that energy during peak times with cash payments. But beyond building a new grid meant to handle renewable energy, China also needs “improved coordination” from Beijing to enable solar-heavy provinces to trade energy with solar-weak provinces. > - China’s energy regulator is also pushing for more spot trading — where prices will fluctuate with supply and demand — rather than fixed rates, encouraging customers to use energy during low-demand periods.

• China’s energy regulator said it will limit “low-end” solar panel manufacturing after industry leaders called for more government intervention earlier this month. The move is an acknowledgement by Beijing that solar panel overcapacity is a problem, one that has pushed Chinese solar firms into a price war and shriveled returns.
• The competition in China’s solar power industry is “indeed very fierce,” an official at the National Energy Administration (NEA) said at a press conference Thursday.
• A price war on solar panels in China has meant that big firms have rapidly lost profit while small firms risk bankruptcy.
• Historically, the industry has been propped up by city governments, which build solar panel factories to lease or sell to private firms. But while some local authorities have expressed willingness to continue to keep solar firms afloat, “that support may dry up as the provinces are themselves swimming in debt, largely stemming from the country’s property crisis, and solar has to compete for their support with other green tech sectors, like electric vehicles, that are also struggling with overcapacity.
• Chinese officials want homeowners to install solar panels to combat overcapacity, but China’s grid is still not able to accommodate fluctuating solar energy levels.
• One solution may be virtual power plants: smaller-scale grids that rely on local renewable energy infrastructure and incentivize homeowners to use that energy during peak times with cash payments. But beyond building a new grid meant to handle renewable energy, China also needs “improved coordination” from Beijing to enable solar-heavy provinces to trade energy with solar-weak provinces.
• China’s energy regulator is also pushing for more spot trading — where prices will fluctuate with supply and demand — rather than fixed rates, encouraging customers to use energy during low-demand periods.

Archived link

• The war in Ukraine has altered the balance of interests between China and Russia. They have drawn closer together and further away from the West without reconciling their different world views, says a joint report by the Mercator Institute for China Studies, Chatham House, and the German Marshall Fund
• The new China-Russia alignment is characterized by a strong, flexible political bond but lacks a shared ideology or legal framework. It reflects mutual instrumentalization and is highly contingent on external factors.
• This alignment has evolved from a mere challenge into a complex security threat to Europe and its transatlantic partners.
• Although the United States and Europe see threats from Russia and China as separate and carrying different degrees of urgency, it is imperative to understand the nature and the extent of the threat they pose together.
• Russia’s war on Ukraine is a direct threat to European security. Beijing’s assistance to Russia turns China into a security threat to be contained rather than only a “partner, competitor and systemic rival”.
• China is providing Russia with an economic lifeline, helping Moscow to circumvent Western sanctions and expand its military-industrial complex with unrestricted exports of critical dual-use goods.
• China is supporting Russia also with hybrid operations and increased military cooperation, reducing Russia’s diplomatic isolation and promoting Russia’s narrative in the Global South. Attempts to drive a wedge between the two “limitless partners” are likely to be counterproductive. Instead, the key is to change Beijing’s calculus for supporting Moscow.

The policy recommendations for transatlantic partners provided here revolve around three pillars:

1. Revising Europe’s view of China to acknowledge the security threat it represents.
2. Recognising China’s potential role to play in ending the war in Ukraine, yet without weakening European security.
3. Clarifying red lines and imposing costs on China for its support for Russia’s war effort.

Archived

Here is a thread on it: https://infosec.exchange/@jtig/112689665815283809

• So far "there is no evidence to suggest that the product environment or customer data is affected," the company says on its website.
• TeamViewer's internal IT environment is completely independent from its product environment, the firm adds.

[Edit typo.]

cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/259710

> - The University Hospital Centre Zagreb (KBC Zagreb) is under cyberattack that started on Wednesday (June 26) night. All services are working, but the processing of patients is slower than usual, Milivoj Novak, Assistant Director at the hospital, has said. > > - The attacks have been claimed by the pro-Russian NoName057(16) hacker group and have resulted in a temporary unavailability of the institutions’ websites and online portals. The sites are back online now. > > - It is currently unknown whether the cyberattack against the hospital involved the deployment of ransomware, and whether it’s connected to yesterday’s DDoS attacks on the websites of several Croatian government and financial institutions: the Ministry of Finance, the Tax Administration, the Croatian National Bank (HNB), the Economic Bank of Zagreb (PBZ), and the Zagreb Stock Exchange (ZSE).

• The University Hospital Centre Zagreb (KBC Zagreb) is under cyberattack that started on Wednesday (June 26) night. All services are working, but the processing of patients is slower than usual, Milivoj Novak, Assistant Director at the hospital, has said.

• The attacks have been claimed by the pro-Russian NoName057(16) hacker group and have resulted in a temporary unavailability of the institutions’ websites and online portals. The sites are back online now.

• It is currently unknown whether the cyberattack against the hospital involved the deployment of ransomware, and whether it’s connected to yesterday’s DDoS attacks on the websites of several Croatian government and financial institutions: the Ministry of Finance, the Tax Administration, the Croatian National Bank (HNB), the Economic Bank of Zagreb (PBZ), and the Zagreb Stock Exchange (ZSE).

cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/259213

> cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/259212 > > > British authorities must reconsider whether to open an investigation into imports of cotton allegedly produced by slave labour in the Chinese region of Xinjiang, a London court ruled on Thursday, allowing an appeal by a Uyghur rights group. > > > > The World Uyghur Congress, an international organisation of exiled Uyghur groups, took legal action against Britain's National Crime Agency (NCA) after it declined to begin a criminal investigation. > > Rights groups and the U.S. government accuse China of widespread abuses of Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities in the western region of Xinjiang, from where the vast majority of Chinese-produced cotton emanates. > > > > Beijing vigorously denies any abuses and its embassy in Washington has previously described allegations of forced labour as "nothing but a lie concocted by the U.S. side in an attempt to wantonly suppress Chinese enterprises". > > > > "The Chinese government has made it very clear that the allegation of 'forced labour' in Xinjiang is nothing but an enormous lie propagated by anti-China elements to smear China," a spokesperson for the Chinese embassy in London said. > > In its legal action, the World Uyghur Congress argued that the NCA wrongly failed to investigate whether cotton from Xinjiang amounts to "criminal property". > > > > Last year, a judge at London's High Court ruled there was "clear and undisputed evidence of instances of cotton being manufactured ... by the use of detained and prison labour as well as by forced labour". > > But the legal challenge was dismissed on the grounds that the British authorities' approach to the law – which was that there has to be a clear link between alleged criminality and a specific product – was correct. > > > > The Court of Appeal overturned that decision, ruling that "the question of whether to carry out an investigation ... will be remitted to the NCA for reconsideration". > > > > Rahima Mahmut, UK Director of the World Uyghur Congress, described the ruling as "a monumental victory and a moral triumph". > > "This win represents a measure of justice for those Uyghurs and other Turkic people who have been tortured and subjected to slave labour," Mahmut said in a statement. > > > > A spokesperson for the NCA said: "We respectfully note the judgment of the Court of Appeal and are considering our next steps."

cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/259213

> cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/259212 > > > British authorities must reconsider whether to open an investigation into imports of cotton allegedly produced by slave labour in the Chinese region of Xinjiang, a London court ruled on Thursday, allowing an appeal by a Uyghur rights group. > > > > The World Uyghur Congress, an international organisation of exiled Uyghur groups, took legal action against Britain's National Crime Agency (NCA) after it declined to begin a criminal investigation. > > Rights groups and the U.S. government accuse China of widespread abuses of Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities in the western region of Xinjiang, from where the vast majority of Chinese-produced cotton emanates. > > > > Beijing vigorously denies any abuses and its embassy in Washington has previously described allegations of forced labour as "nothing but a lie concocted by the U.S. side in an attempt to wantonly suppress Chinese enterprises". > > > > "The Chinese government has made it very clear that the allegation of 'forced labour' in Xinjiang is nothing but an enormous lie propagated by anti-China elements to smear China," a spokesperson for the Chinese embassy in London said. > > In its legal action, the World Uyghur Congress argued that the NCA wrongly failed to investigate whether cotton from Xinjiang amounts to "criminal property". > > > > Last year, a judge at London's High Court ruled there was "clear and undisputed evidence of instances of cotton being manufactured ... by the use of detained and prison labour as well as by forced labour". > > But the legal challenge was dismissed on the grounds that the British authorities' approach to the law – which was that there has to be a clear link between alleged criminality and a specific product – was correct. > > > > The Court of Appeal overturned that decision, ruling that "the question of whether to carry out an investigation ... will be remitted to the NCA for reconsideration". > > > > Rahima Mahmut, UK Director of the World Uyghur Congress, described the ruling as "a monumental victory and a moral triumph". > > "This win represents a measure of justice for those Uyghurs and other Turkic people who have been tortured and subjected to slave labour," Mahmut said in a statement. > > > > A spokesperson for the NCA said: "We respectfully note the judgment of the Court of Appeal and are considering our next steps."

cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/259212

> British authorities must reconsider whether to open an investigation into imports of cotton allegedly produced by slave labour in the Chinese region of Xinjiang, a London court ruled on Thursday, allowing an appeal by a Uyghur rights group. > > The World Uyghur Congress, an international organisation of exiled Uyghur groups, took legal action against Britain's National Crime Agency (NCA) after it declined to begin a criminal investigation. > Rights groups and the U.S. government accuse China of widespread abuses of Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities in the western region of Xinjiang, from where the vast majority of Chinese-produced cotton emanates. > > Beijing vigorously denies any abuses and its embassy in Washington has previously described allegations of forced labour as "nothing but a lie concocted by the U.S. side in an attempt to wantonly suppress Chinese enterprises". > > "The Chinese government has made it very clear that the allegation of 'forced labour' in Xinjiang is nothing but an enormous lie propagated by anti-China elements to smear China," a spokesperson for the Chinese embassy in London said. > In its legal action, the World Uyghur Congress argued that the NCA wrongly failed to investigate whether cotton from Xinjiang amounts to "criminal property". > > Last year, a judge at London's High Court ruled there was "clear and undisputed evidence of instances of cotton being manufactured ... by the use of detained and prison labour as well as by forced labour". > But the legal challenge was dismissed on the grounds that the British authorities' approach to the law – which was that there has to be a clear link between alleged criminality and a specific product – was correct. > > The Court of Appeal overturned that decision, ruling that "the question of whether to carry out an investigation ... will be remitted to the NCA for reconsideration". > > Rahima Mahmut, UK Director of the World Uyghur Congress, described the ruling as "a monumental victory and a moral triumph". > "This win represents a measure of justice for those Uyghurs and other Turkic people who have been tortured and subjected to slave labour," Mahmut said in a statement. > > A spokesperson for the NCA said: "We respectfully note the judgment of the Court of Appeal and are considering our next steps."