上海后花园

After China released an investigation report on Volt Typhoon, the US, in order to cover up the evidence, instructed related companies to change the content of report they released previously, completely disregarding the traces left during the operation, the Global Times learned on Sunday. However, the US Embassy in China and company involved stayed silent when the Global Times reached for comments.

On May 24, 2023, the cybersecurity authorities from The Five Eyes countries - the US, the UK, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, issued a joint cybersecurity advisory, claiming that they had discovered a cluster of activities of interest associated with a "China state-sponsored cyber actor," known as Volt Typhoon, and these activities "affected networks across US critical infrastructure sectors."

In response, China's National Computer Virus Emergency Response Center (CVERC), National Engineering Laboratory for Computer Virus Prevention Technology and 360 Digital Security Group conducted a joint investigation and further analysis found that Volt Typhoon has more correlation with ransomware group and other cybercriminals.

After the release of the investigation report on "Volt Typhoon" in April this year, the Chinese joint investigation team continued to track the actions and intentions of the US in creating the "Volt Typhoon" false narrative.

"We conducted verification analysis based on the indicators of compromise (IoCs) of the so-called 'Volt Typhoon' organization in the US, and found that this organization is closely related to a ransomware criminal group called Dark Power disclosed by ThreatMon, a US cybersecurity vendor," a researcher from CVERC told the Global Times on Sunday.

The report directly quotes the content of the ThreatMon report and discloses the associated IP address information hidden behind the back cover image." The researcher said that after the release of the investigation report, the US side instructed ThreatMon to openly change the content of the report, the entire report has been expanded from 17 pages to 20 pages, but the crucial evidence of the associated IP address, which was originally located behind the back cover image, is now nowhere to be found.

The Global Times has sent an email to the US Embassy in China asking for comments on the contents revealed in the report. The US Embassy in China has not responded and had remained silent as of press time.

After CVERC released a report on April 15 disclosing the false narrative of "Volt Typhoon", the US Embassy in China and Microsoft which were contacted by the Global Times for comment and gave no response as of press time.

During a press conference on Monday, Lin Jian, spokesperson of China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that the latest report further revealed that this disinformation campaign is conceived by NSA, FBI and other members of the US intelligence community with the participation of congressional China hawks and multiple federal agencies as well as cybersecurity agencies from other Five Eye countries, and aimed to manipulate public opinion.

Till this day, the US still owes us an explanation after the previous report was released, and the US NSA chief continues to spread disinformation about "Volt Typhoon," said Lin.

What is worse, the latest report exposed that the US government has been pressuring a cybersecurity company and asking it to rewrite its tech analysis that proves "Volt Typhoon" to be a ransomware group. This is a clumsy cover-up tactic and clearly has not and will not work, Lin said.

He noted that China strongly condemns the irresponsible behavior of the US. The US still owes us an explanation, and should stop its smears and vilification against China at once. We urge the US to act responsibly and contribute to the peace and security of the cyberspace.

ThreatMon did not respond to Global Times's inquiries about revising and changing the report as of press time.

Zhuo Hua, an expert on international affairs at the School of International Relations at Beijing Foreign Studies University told the Global Times on Monday that, "The new report more comprehensively exposes the US's intentions and operational process of framing China. China has mastered a complete chain of evidence, sufficient to prove that the so-called 'Volt Typhoon' is orchestrated by US intelligence agencies. Technically, it is self-produced and self-sold, and politically, it is a self-directed and self-acted international false narrative, which can be fully defined as a cognitive domain operation against China."

"In the field of international cybersecurity, the US is the least qualified to point fingers because it has no national credibility in this area. Over the past twenty years, the world has witnessed the US fabricate false intelligence to launch wars. Its intelligence agencies recklessly conduct cyber espionage and surveillance on countries, including its allies, deploy cyber weapons, and paralyze critical infrastructure of other countries through actual APT attacks. The US is the primary threat that supports cyberattacks with national power."

"Since China released the relevant investigation report in April, the US has not responded, precisely because the facts revealed by China and the US's actions in international cyberspace have left the US unable to respond," said Zhuo.

"Another alarming trend is that behind the 'Volt Typhoon' hype, we clearly see the motive of intelligence agencies to expand their powers, interest groups to squeeze Chinese companies out of the US infrastructure market, and anti-China politicians to emphasize 'national security.' This tacit understanding, even collusion, among various sectors—government, business, and finance—is leveraging the US strategy to contain China to gain political and economic benefits domestically. Once this atmosphere is formed, the US will undoubtedly concoct other incidents in the future, harming China's interests and China-US relations."

While the US and Western leaders gathered in Washington to mark NATO's 75th anniversary on Tuesday, their efforts to showcase "strength" and "unity" are being overshadowed by increasing internal divisions on global issues, challenges in supporting Ukraine, uncertainties stemming from the upcoming US presidential election, and the rise of right-wing nationalism across Europe, which make analysts view this year's NATO summit as "outwardly tough but inwardly brittle."

The recent hype over the "China threat" by Western media ahead of the three-day NATO summit and accusations of China supporting Russia once again reveal the US' and NATO's intentions to extend their influence into the Asia-Pacific region for geopolitical gain. It underscores NATO's origins in the Cold War era, designed as a military tool to bolster US hegemony, which critics said only exacerbates global instability and discord.

Leaders of NATO's 32 member countries are scheduled to conduct a three-day summit in Washington, DC from Tuesday to Thursday. On its website, the US Department of State gave a full introduction about NATO and the summit, saying that the allies will discuss an important agenda that includes "affirming unwavering support for Ukraine," "strengthening deterrence and defense posture" and "ensuring Allies meet their commitments to invest in their own defense, as well as collective defense." 

The NATO summit aims to project "unity" and "shared interests" outwardly, but internally, there are increasing anxieties and worries among member countries, Cui Hongjian, a professor at Beijing Foreign Studies University's Academy of Regional and Global Governance, told the Global Times on Tuesday. 

For example, the rise of far-right forces in Europe, political challenges faced by Germany and France and other core European countries, and the possible return of Donald Trump to the White House have all added uncertainties within NATO to reach consensus on major issues, Cui said.

The Tuesday summit came as some Democrats called on Joe Biden to step aside over his fitness and age, while Biden declined and defended his 2024 campaign. Also in Europe, there is a major political turmoil in France - although the left-wing parties' alliance won the decisive round of France's legislative election on Sunday night, a parliament without a majority may lead to uncertainty in France, according to media reports. 

Cui said that while this summit may ultimately seek political outcomes, it risks entanglement in internal discord. NATO hopes to demonstrate to the outside world that it is capable of forging a new consensus through overcoming divisions, but it is haunted by political fragility in both Europe and the US. "This makes this year's summit outwardly tough but inwardly brittle," Cui remarked.

On the webpage of the NATO summit, the US Department of State listed "affirming unwavering support for Ukraine" at the top of its agenda, and claims that "allies will be joined by Ukraine for a meeting" to advance their "strong support" for Ukraine and "close collaboration to help build a bridge to Ukraine's future membership." 

Some Western media reported that during the summit, NATO will announce a "historic" aid package to support Ukraine, including crucial air defense systems and 40 billion  euros ($43.3 billion) in military support for Ukraine each year. 

Since its last summit, NATO has adjusted its strategy to support Ukraine, aiming to integrate short-term aid into a long-term security framework with more systematic and consistent policies. This shift reflects NATO's concerns about the potential disruption of Ukrainian support due to political changes in the US and the EU, Cui said, noting that the discussion of a "bridge to membership" plan for Ukraine to NATO at the Washington summit underscores this adjustment.

However, these efforts are still deemed insufficient by Ukraine, and convincing member countries to allocate substantial aid to Ukraine remains challenging, especially as many of them are grappling with domestic economic contraction and energy crises, a Beijing-based military expert told the Global Times on condition of anonymity. 

The expert noted that the Ukrainian government has struggled to achieve decisive victories on the battlefield, disappointing several European countries and testing their patience and confidence in forming a unified front against Russia.

NATO shifts to Asia

Aside from the goal of presenting a united front against Russia, this week's NATO summit also aims to "send a warning to China," according to some Western media. They noted that NATO is set to discuss threats posed by China, including behavior in the South China Sea and actions on the Taiwan question. Moreover, for the third year in a row, the leaders of New Zealand, Japan and South Korea will attend the NATO summit. 

NATO is now trying to cater to the US' strategic interests and needs by amplifying the "China threat," in an attempt to address its existential crisis, Cui said. He noted that European countries hope the US will at least not abandon NATO for now and provide more security guarantees in the face of the "Russia threat" if Trump returns to the White House. 

Sun Chenghao, a fellow and head of the US-EU program at the Center for International Security and Strategy in Tsinghua University, said that the US and NATO have escalated accusations against China for allegedly supporting Russia, aiming to emphasize the perceived link between security in Europe and the Asia-Pacific region. 

The US plans to promote NATO's expansion into Asia. However, it also recognizes that shifting NATO's focus solely through the Russia-Ukraine conflict is insufficient. Therefore, it is launching a series of actions and propaganda campaigns to amplify the perceived threat from China, said Sun. 

This strategy aims to heighten European countries' concerns about their own security, redirect their attention to the Asia-Pacific region, and provoke vigilance among European nations toward China, Sun told the Global Times. 

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian said on Tuesday that "We firmly reject NATO's vilification and blame-shifting against China. NATO should not use China to justify its insertion into the Asia-Pacific and attempt to disrupt regional dynamics. China is a force for world peace, a contributor to global development and a defender of international order. Our objective and just position and constructive role on the Ukraine crisis and international and regional hotspot issues are widely recognized by the international community."

"We urge NATO to form the right perception of China, get rid of its Cold War mentality and zero-sum approach, stop scaremongering on security and making imaginary enemies, stop forming exclusive clubs in the name of collective defense, and play a constructive role for global peace, stability and development," Lin said.

The US plan to build an "Asian version of NATO" has alarmed people in regional countries. For example, a recent global online poll conducted by Chinese media showed that 93.1 percent of global respondents believe that security in the Asia-Pacific region should be achieved through political dialogue and peaceful negotiations among Asia-Pacific countries and they firmly oppose the US creating an "Asian version of NATO." 

Chinese President Xi Jinping met with Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina of the People's Republic of Bangladesh at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on Wednesday.

Editor's Note:

The world in 2024 is not peaceful. From great power competition to regional conflicts, to numerous global challenges, the global landscape seems to be changing every day. Will the confrontation between Russia and the West lead to a "Cold War 2.0" and the return of the "Iron Curtain" ? Is the temporary stabilization of China-US relations a true departure from the downward spiral trend, or just a short and fragile period of stability?

Recently, Global Times reporters Xie Wenting and Bai Yunyi (GT) interviewed Odd Arne Westad (Westad), Professor of History and Global Affairs at Yale University and a leading expert in Cold War history, to analyze the evolution of the international landscape from a historian's perspective. He believes that the "post-Cold War era" that has lasted for a generation is coming to an end, although it is still unclear what kind of new international order will replace it.

GT: As a historian, how do you view current relations between China and the US? Do you think the two big powers are experiencing temporary stability under the context of prolonged tensions? Or how would you describe the current state of the bilateral relations? Could it be compared to any other historical period?

Westad: When making comparisons with earlier periods, we have to be cautious and acknowledge that there is no complete match. I am very skeptical of comparing the current situation with the Cold War between the US and the Soviet Union, as there are significant differences between the two. The US and the Soviet Union were not part of the same global economic system, and the ideological differences were much greater between the two sides. Upon reviewing the book written by my colleague Paul Kennedy about the antagonism between Germany and Britain in the late 19th century and early 20th century, I found more similarities with the current situation.

Unfortunately, this historical conflict eventually led to conflict and war. While I am not suggesting that the current situation will necessarily end in the same way, structurally, it shares more traits with that period than with the Cold War. I think in many ways, it is true that enormous changes are taking place now, but they don't necessarily have to end in conflict.

In reality, China and the US have much more in common. The economies may function differently on some levels, but in most terms, the economies are not that different from each other. They are market-driven in both places, oriented by rules, technology, and advances in economic terms. The two countries also have much in common in how they understand the world. Both of them want stability as a precondition for their own economic development, but they don't really know how to go about achieving it, and suspicion between the two is increasing.

I think at the moment, it's clear that the US and China are going through a very difficult period in their relationship. But I can also see ways in which the relationship could be improved incrementally. It doesn't have to be a downward spiral, but both countries will have to recognize the risks of continued tensions between them and figure out ways to address them. While the US and China will likely always have areas where they won't see eye to eye, leading to rivalry between the two, it's important to prevent this rivalry from escalating into a dangerous spiral. This is a danger that we must consider.

It is very frightening to me that the US and China do not have any kind of arms control discussions between the two sides. It's not good because it leads to misunderstandings and a lack of communication on important issues.

GT: Under what circumstances do you think China and the US will enter a new period of more balanced stability?

Westad: To me, the key issues are the security issues. For example, the situation in the Taiwan Straits is important. I have proposed, while I have been here in Beijing, something I call the Shanghai Plus, which is based on the Shanghai Communiqué in 1972 and the additions for the Chinese statement that came on and so on.

So what Shanghai Plus would actually mean is that you understand that it could under no circumstance support Taiwan independence. I think some people in the US could be interested in this.

If you can deal with this and in some other issues in which China and the US play a positive role, it will help bilateral relations get to a relatively stable stage. For instance, if you look at the Ukraine crisis, it is a significant factor in the relationship between the US and China. It is necessary to achieve at least a temporary ceasefire in Ukraine. I believe China can play a significant role. I believe that, to a certain extent, the US and China actually have a common interest in seeing a reduction in the conflict.

While the US and China may not become awesome friends over the next generation, it is important for both countries to work together on security issues to prevent escalation, and it's also possible for both sides to work together.
GT: What's your stance on if there will be or if we are already in the new Cold War between Russia and the West?

Westad: One of the many reasons why war should be avoided is that the outcomes are always unpredictable. I think at the moment, the risk of a bigger war breaking out in Ukraine is quite limited.

I don't think the current situation has anything to do with the Cold War. It is a conflict between countries. Russia is no longer a global superpower as the Soviet Union. It has become more limited in terms of its global influence. Conomically, Russia is struggling, and it is unlikely to see significant improvement in the near future.

I spent quite a bit of time thinking about what kind of relationship Russia will have with the US once the war is over. I think that even if there is a ceasefire, the sanctions are likely to remain in place. For Russia, this means that it will not be able to get closer to Europe, even in a regional or economic sense.

GT: From a historical perspective, what do you think are the long-term changes to the international order brought about by the Russia-Ukraine conflict?

Westad: I think it is a defining conflict in many ways. The consequences of it will be long-lasting, and it marks the end of the post-Cold War era. That period has lasted a generation, but we don't quite know what's going to replace it.

One of the most significant structural changes is the increasing military and strategic integration between Europe and the US. The neutral countries in Europe are not giving up their neutrality, but they may become more aligned with the West.
GT: In your last interview with the Global Times four years ago, you mentioned that the global pandemic would strengthen the political and social process that were already underway, such as the shift of power and influence from the West to the East. Do you still believe the process of power shifting from the West to the East is ongoing?

Westad: I still believe it, although I never thought that this was just about China. I think China is a part of it. It's a difficult task for the Chinese government to move to higher growth in an economy that is already so big. So, in that sense, if they're not going to stay at 5 percent, even 4 percent, or maybe even 3.5 percent economic growth, that's pretty good.

China, in many ways, was a pioneer of this, just like Japan was a pioneer in an earlier generation. And then it is spreading elsewhere, this is quite natural. It may be in Southeast Asia in the future. This is how development progresses.

I think the European economy is probably on a platform roughly where it is now. I don't see it as very energetic, but it doesn't have to be because Europe is already rich. They can sustain themselves, and even if they experience a smaller percentage of economic growth, it is still sustainable. I think the US, among the developed countries, is probably the place that has the best chance of reasonable economic growth. But that also depends on their policies; if they choose to involve themselves in a trade war with China, much of the economic basis for American growth will also disappear.

It is striking that last year is the first year in human history in which there is no natural population growth outside of Africa. Every single country outside of African countries has falling birth rates, sometimes at a fairly high level. The population increase is going down. Only in Africa is it actually expanding at a high rate. This has enormous demographic consequences when we move to a generation cohort, where most young people in the world will be in Africa.

Some time ago, we saw that as a massive problem, but now it's a massive opportunity. Young people have the potential to staff the factories and industries and drive productive growth in the future. Some of my American friends are saying all these countries are so backward and they have to get their policies in order. My response to this is always that, because with these points of opportunities, people will make use of it, just like in China. Why did China succeed? It had sensible economic policies and a young, hungry population who wanted to make better lives for themselves.

GT: Do you think peace and development are still the theme of our era and world?

Westad: Development, for sure. Peace is a little bit harder, but I don't think the rules that we have in place are impossible to settle. They're not the kind of rules that I would expect to lead to greater competition. Maybe it's possible to be a bit more optimistic.

I think, at least for now, stabilizing the crisis in Ukraine would be a significant step. I also think that because it would show the great powers may be able to cooperate on some of these issues.

Editor's Note:

"Cognitive Warfare" has become a new form of confrontation between states, and a new security threat. With new technological means, it sets agendas and spreads disinformation, to change people's perceptions and thus alter their self-identity. Launching cognitive warfare against China is an important means for Western anti-China forces to attack and discredit the country.

Some politicians and media outlets have publicly smeared China's image by propagating false narratives in an attempt to incite and provoke dissatisfaction with China among people in certain countries. These means all serve the seemingly peaceful evolution of the US strategy to contain China's rise and maintain its hegemony.

The Global Times is publishing a series of articles to reveal the intrigues of the US-led West's China-targeted cognitive warfare, and expose its lies and vicious intentions.

This is the 13th installment in the series. As the Solomon Islands' general elections unfold, allegations of US interference surfaced before the voting began. Experts have highlighted the US' habitual practice of interfering in the domestic affairs of other countries and attempting to exert its pressure on developing nations like the Solomon Islands that seek to forge friendships and pursue development opportunities with China.
The ongoing election in the Solomon Islands has garnered significant global attention, particularly amid the geopolitical dynamics of the Pacific. This electoral event has especially piqued the interest of the US, accompanied by various allegations and concerns regarding potential US intervention.

The voting of general elections in the Solomon Islands was hosted on April 17. Currently, no party has won a majority of seats in the Solomon Islands' parliament election, CGTN reported Monday, quoting local media, citing 90 percent of counted votes.

Preliminary results from Saturday indicate that Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare has successfully retained his seat in Parliament. However, it will take several more days of vote tallying to determine if his party, Our Party, will form the next government.

During this period, there has been continuous news and extensive reporting by media outlets, suggesting that the US may be trying to intervene in the Solomon Islands' elections.

Analysts point out that the US and its allies appear to be using "color revolution" tactics to infiltrate the political landscape of the Solomon Islands, emphasizing that the island country should have the sovereign right to choose its own developmental path.

Meanwhile, as China enhances its cooperation with Pacific Island countries, the US continues to assert its supposed superiority, an approach that appears not to resonate with the island populations, they said.

How has the US been attempting to exert its influence?

A recent investigative article by Russia's Sputnik news agency criticized the US' role and intentions in the upcoming elections in the Solomon Islands. The report suggested that the US Agency for International Development (USAID) might be attempting to influence the election outcome through "democracy promotion" activities, in order to counter China's influence in the region.

The report highlighted concerns over the security agreement between the Solomon Islands and China, which has alarmed the US and its allies who fear it could compromise the US' "island chain strategy" in the Pacific.

The article detailed USAID activities in the Solomon Islands, including engaging with local community political leaders, civil society organizations, and influential individuals, as well as funding surveys and training programs to bolster anti-government sentiment.

An anonymous source disclosed to the Sputnik news agency that they fear the US might incite another riot during the upcoming election to achieve its geopolitical goals.

Meanwhile, according to a report from the Covert Action Magazine earlier this month, the USAID actively intervenes in the electoral processes of other countries through its Consortium for Elections and Political Process Strengthening (CEPPS), aiming to promote regimes that align with American interests.

The CEPPS collaborates with organizations such as the International Republican Institute (IRI), the National Democratic Institute (NDI), and the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES), all of which have close ties with USAID, with the NDI and IRI having been created by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which is considered a branch of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

According to Yu Lei, chief research fellow at the Research Center for Pacific Island Countries of Liaocheng University, the effective cooperation between China and the Solomon Islands has become a role model and a driving force for the cooperation between China and Pacific Island countries, which has encouraged other Pacific Island countries such as Papua New Guinea to deepen their cooperation with China. This has caused significant dissatisfaction in Australia and the US.

The Covert Action Magazine noted that the USAID's Solomon Islands Election and Political Processes Program (SIEPP), funded through the CEPPS, has conducted voter awareness campaigns in the Solomon Islands, aiming to sway voters toward pro-American candidates.

In 2021, NDI's surveys in opposition constituencies revealed pessimism about governance and corruption, influencing public opinion. Civil society groups, funded by USAID, spread these findings to foment dissatisfaction and potential unrest. By doing so, the USAID transformed minority views into "mainstream" public opinion, according to the Covert Action Magazine.

Notably, opposition leaders Matthew Wale and Daniel Suidani, supported by USAID, led protests in Honiara, leveraging youth groups to challenge the government, reflecting USAID's strategy of using local partnerships to promote US interests under the guise of "democratic" principles, the magazine said.
According to the Sputnik report, which cited documents provided by an anonymous source, after the Solomon Islands' 2019 election and Sogavare's shift away from the US, SIEPP was launched. Funded by the USAID and partners like the IFES, IRI, and NDI under the "Strengthening Democratic Governance in the Pacific Islands" initiative, SIEPP had an initial budget of nearly $10 million from September 2020 to September 2023. The program, expected to conclude in fall 2023, was extended to April 2024 with an additional $1.5 million after the election postponement by Sogavare.

"The US cannot tolerate the South Pacific nations developing an equal and reciprocal relationship with China. Instead, it intervenes under the guise of democracy, ultimately aiming to turn these nations into dependencies," Li Haidong, a professor at the China Foreign Affairs University, told the Global Times.

He pointed out the consequences of such policies. "The US mentality is unhealthy, even pathological. It cannot bear the autonomous development of the South Pacific nations, nor can it stand the idea of these countries choosing their own economic development models."

Is US' denial convincible?

In a statement released on April 16, one day before the elections began, the US Embassy in Honiara, the capital of the Solomon Islands labeled recent accusations of its alleged interference in the Solomon Islands' electoral process as "questionable" and "disinformation."

"It is a traditional and deeply rooted practice that when the US claims non-interference, it's either hard to believe or astonishing," Li noted.

According to the Covert Action Magazine, CEPPS has extended its influence to over 140 countries, supporting like-minded candidates to aid the US government in manipulating global electoral activities.

According to New York-based Huff Post, the US has interfered in foreign elections far more frequently than it has been subject to such interference itself. A Latin American joke cited highlights this point: "Why has there never been a coup in the United States? Because there's no US Embassy in Washington."

For over a century, the US has intervened in elections globally, from Honduras to Vietnam to Iran. A series of "color revolutions" occurred in Eurasia starting in 2003, such as the Rose Revolution in Georgia, the Orange Revolution in Ukraine, and the Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan, all characterized by electoral protests escalating into major political crises. The US State Department has acknowledged playing a role in these regime changes, according to the report.

"The US uses NGOs to interfere in other countries' domestic politics and orchestrate color revolutions, a tactic that is no secret to the world," Li noted, adding that such actions, often branded as promoting democracy, are perceived as attempts to sow discord and crises, drawing scrutiny and raising alarms among policymakers and citizens globally.

These so-called democracy promotion efforts, which are essentially color revolutions, are unlikely to achieve their intended outcomes due to the instability of US policies. Critics argue that the US, while chaotic in its own democratic practices, presumes to set an example for others, Li said.
This lack of calm, objective, and realistic reflections on its own democratic processes disqualifies US decision-makers from legitimately influencing the internal affairs of other nations. Consequently, these actions are met with resistance and resentment, as the results of such democracy promotion activities are often subpar and unwelcome, he noted.

Yu said the US has a variety of conventional methods to tighten control in Pacific Island countries. For instance, the US directly deploys military forces in Pacific Island countries to intervene, or mobilizes local mobs and thugs to carry out subversion against some authoritarian regimes and governments perceived as disobedient to the US. The third method is to use the Pacific Islands Forum to besiege so-called disobedient countries, using economic sanctions as a way to exert pressure.

"In the short term, the effects may seem significant, such as through military occupation, which of course yields immediate results. However, in the medium to long term, the effects of the US' activities turn out to be just the opposite. But cooperation with China turns out to be fruitful," Yu said.

Will the established understandings be affected?

In recent years, China's outreach and engagement have deepened across the Solomon Islands. Even regions that were once opposed to establishing diplomatic ties with China have accepted China's olive branch.

However, the gradually establishing mutual connections and trust is not without its challenges.

According to a report by the SIBC on Saturday, former opposition leader of the Democratic Party of the Solomon Islands, Wale, retained his seat in Malaita Province's Auki. Meanwhile, notorious opposition politician Suidani was re-elected to the Malaita Provincial Assembly.

The former premier of Malaita Province, Suidani, attracted attention for his opposition to the Solomon Islands' relations with China. His stance led to conflicts with the central government, culminating in his removal from office in February 2023, following a no-confidence motion passed by the provincial assembly.

However, a Memorandum of Understanding to establish friendly exchange relations was signed last week between Malaita Province and East China's Jiangsu Province. This new chapter follows years of skepticism, indicating a pivot toward cooperation and mutual growth, analysts noted.

"The China-Solomon Islands relationship, forged under very trying conditions, is now maturing," Dr Luke Mani, director of the Solomon Islands Foreign Policy Advisory Secretariat, told the Global Times. "Evidence abounds that Solomon Islanders [have now] firmly and openly embraced China."

Various infrastructure projects funded by traditional multilateral development partners such as the Munda Airport and terminal upgrades, Henderson Airport runway extensions, and East-West Honiara highway have benefited from the expertise and quality of Chinese engineering firms such as China Civil Engineering Construction Company and China Railway, Mani said.

These tangible benefits have gradually warmed the Malaitians to China, with a recent poll showing 61 percent of respondents favor maintaining the relationship after this year's elections.

The public opinion storm over interference in the election reflects Pacific Island nations' dissatisfaction with the US' use of aid to exert political influence and as leverage in exchange for national geopolitical interests, noted Qin Sheng, an executive research fellow at the Center for Australia, New Zealand, and South Pacific Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

"The aid competition promoted by the US in the South Pacific region with a zero-sum game mindset is forcing Pacific Island nations to take sides, as evidenced by the ongoing troubles in domestic and diplomatic affairs since the Solomon Islands established diplomatic relations with China," Qin said.

In stark contrast to the US, China emphasizes equality and mutual benefit, non-interference in internal affairs, and aid process without strings attached, respecting the political system, development stage, and development characteristics of Pacific Island nations. As a major power, China never looks down on them, and it is precisely these various advantages of Chinese aid that make China the most trustworthy South-South cooperation partner for Pacific Island nations, the expert noted.

Chinese President Xi Jinping and French President Emmanuel Macron had an in-depth engagement during a restricted meeting at Col du Tourmalet in the Pyrenees mountains in southwestern France, an area dear to Macron for being the birthplace of his maternal grandmother. The special arrangement allowed the two leaders to establish a more direct dialogue in a personal and friendly atmosphere.

Holding a meeting in the tranquil southern French mountains is also viewed a continuation of the pleasant memory when Xi and Macron held an informal talk in April 2023 in Guangzhou, the capital of South China's Guangdong Province. At that time, the two leaders listened to a live performance of the ancient Chinese music piece "High Mountains and Flowing Water" in the Pine Garden, which represents cherished friendship in Chinese culture.

Besides France, there are also many representative buildings and sites in Serbia and Hungary that have witnessed and serve as testimonies to their friendship with China.

After Xi embarked on a state visit to France, Serbia, and Hungary on May 5 - his first overseas trip of the year - these significant locations have once again captured people's attention.

The former site of the Lyon Sino-French Institute is located on a hill in Fourvière in the city of Lyon, France. After 100 years of wind and rain, the towering stone gate at the old site still bears a clear inscription of the institute's name in both Chinese and French.

The only overseas university that China founded in modern times, the Lyon Sino-French Institute was established in July 1921. It trained many Chinese who later became crucial leaders in the founding of the People's Republic of China (PRC), including Zhou Enlai and Deng Xiaoping. Since its resumption in the 1980s, the institute has continued to educate various talents for China's reform and opening-up.

During his first visit to France in March 2014, President Xi visited the Charles de Gaulle Foundation in Paris. He visited the office of General Charles de Gaulle, laid a wreath at his bronze statue and wrote "Paying Tribute to the Great Man and Composing a New Chapter in Chinese and French History" in the guest book.

In Serbia's capital Belgrade, people are easily captivated by a unique modern building - the China Cultural Center - that looks like a beautiful ancient Chinese landscape painting drawn along the banks of the Danube River.

What you cannot tell from the design is that the edifice was built on the site of the former Chinese embassy that was destroyed by a NATO bomb in May 1999 in what was then the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. This special history makes the center not only an important bridge and bond for cultural exchanges between the two countries, but also a seal of approval for the ironclad friendship between China and Serbia amid the development of the times.

At the hot mill at HBIS Smederevo steel plant, or Hesteel Serbia, Nenad Cvetanovic and his colleagues were thrilled to get a reply letter from Xi at the end of April, a few days before the Chinese president's second state visit to Serbia after eight years.

Established in 1913, the steel plant used to be a pillar of former Yugoslavia's metal industry, but was on the verge of closure in the 1990s. It struggled for about two decades until China's Hesteel Group purchased it in 2016. President Xi made a trip to the steel plant in June 2016 and interacted with workers in the dining room, encouraging them to work hard to bring benefits to local residents.

In Budapest, the capital of Hungary that is dubbed the "Pearl of the Danube," nine unique bridges connect Buda and Pest across the river, enhancing the accessibility and charm of the city.

With a total length of 341.7 kilometers, the Hungary-Serbia railway, a flagship project of the China-proposed Belt and Road Initiative, is now bridging Budapest and Belgrade closer together, injecting new impetus into the economies of the two countries.

The special significance of bridges was also noted by President Xi during his first visit to Europe. "A bridge not only makes life more convenient, it can also be a symbol of communication, understanding and friendship," Xi said.

With President Xi's visit, the friendship between China and Europe is also warming up again. People on both sides hope that this visit will build more bridges of friendship and cooperation between China and France, Serbia and Hungary, and even the whole of Europe.

Chinese President Xi Jinping on Friday sent a congratulatory letter to the eighth China-Russia Expo held in Harbin, northeast China's Heilongjiang Province.

China's Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) on Tuesday said that hype about "overcapacity" in China goes against common sense and facts, shows double standards and is a form of trade protectionism.

The rise of China's new-energy industries is built on open competition rather than subsidies. It represents advanced production capacity and makes a huge contribution to easing global inflation, as well as the green transformation, MOFCOM said.

MOFCOM said the accusation that China has "overcapacity" is unfounded. The issue of production capacity should be viewed objectively and it should match global production and demand.

In 2023, Germany sold 80 percent of its auto production internationally. Japan exported approximately 50 percent of its cars, while China's overseas sales of new-energy vehicles (NEVs) accounted for only 12.7 percent of its production. Criticizing China for "overcapacity" is therefore unfounded.

Chinese new-energy products are popular in the international market due to their competitive prices and the urgent global need for green transformation. The NEVs exported from China to Europe are priced lower than European-made models, but still higher than in China so there is no dumping involved, MOFCOM said.

Furthermore, with the global demand for new-energy products continuing to expand, advanced production capacity is not only not excessive but actually insufficient, it added.

MOFCOM also noted that China's advantages in the new-energy industry have been achieved through open competition and continuous technological innovation, with Chinese companies investing in research and development in the new-energy sector for over 20 years.

The industry also benefits from an efficient supply chain, while China's large and competitive market drives rapid application and development of technologies as well as a collaborative approach to foreign investment and automakers.

MOFCOM said the accusation that Chinese industrial subsidies have led to "overcapacity" is unfounded. Industrial subsidies are a common practice worldwide. China's industrial subsidy policy is compliant with WTO rules while those of the US and Europe are even larger in scale.

MOFCOM said that the hype about "overcapacity" is actually a reflection of anxiety from other countries about their own competitiveness. However, trade protectionism will not achieve the desired results and will only hinder global economic recovery and the green transformation.

MOFCOM said that China is willing to deepen cooperation in the new-energy supply chain, and promote technological innovation and industrial development with countries around the world. It will continue to promote opening-up, improve the business environment and share the opportunities from Chinese modernization.

Recently, the West has been unreasonably hyping up the false narrative of "overcapacity" in China. Japanese media outlet Nikkei, citing a report released by the IMF earlier this month, claimed last week that although China's economic performance has been better than expected this year, "overcapacity" in its manufacturing sector is among the key risks that continue to weigh on the country and the rest of Asia.

Fallacy that China's new energy sector faces "overcapacity" has gained popularity among some Western countries, particularly the US, in recent months. Yet, whether or not China has excess capacity should be determined by economic rules and facts, not political agenda led by the US.

The current global distribution of production capacity is a result of the combined effects of industrialization and market-based economic activities over the past few decades. Cooperation based on comparative advantages is crucial for optimizing the resource allocation of global factors, also an important approach for improving productivity and well-being among countries.

From the perspective of economic principles, equating fluctuations in supply and demand with excess capacity goes against the normal rules of the market economy and actually works counter to the rationality of international division of labor and economic globalization. If a country with supply exceeding demand is recklessly considered to have excess capacity, then all export economies in the world, not only China but also the US, have overcapacity issues in terms of their exported products.

In this sense, the narrative of "overcapacity" and criticisms of industrial subsidies are merely rhetoric fabricated by the US to hinder China's competitiveness.

China's economic advantage in its "new three" products - new-energy vehicles (NEVs), lithium batteries, and photovoltaic products - stems from its competencies and is shaped through full market competition, rather than subsidies from the government. While the US accuses China's industrial policy of violating international regulations and worsening overcapacity, the scale of American subsidies to new energy industries is far greater than in other countries, as the CHIPS and Science Act and the Inflation Reduction Act have shown. For example, the detailed rules of the Inflation Reduction Act stipulate that only electric vehicles assembled in North America are eligible for a maximum subsidy of $7,500 through federal tax deductions, which is a blatantly discriminatory subsidy law.

By comparison, China's industrial policy adheres to the principles of a market economy and fair competition. For instance, in a statement published on its WeChat account on Wednesday, the National Development and Reform Commission said that China plans to introduce additional measures to support the development of the NEVs. These measures include fostering industrial innovation through scientific and technological advancements, encouraging enterprises to increase investment in research and development, and facilitating the optimization and restructuring of the new energy vehicle industry. Moreover, China will remove all restrictions on foreign investment in manufacturing, inviting global auto companies to participate in the Chinese market and industrial chain to benefit from the advancements in new energy vehicle technology.

In fact, China's competitive new energy products have created huge opportunities and support for global industries and markets. Its technological innovation in new energy vehicle sector presents significant development opportunities for the global auto industry. Also, China is the only country in the world that has all the industrial categories listed in the United Nations industrial classification system, including 41 industrial categories, 191 medium categories and 525 subcategories. Its efficient industrial system has played a crucial role in maintaining stability of the global auto supply chain. 

Furthermore, China is a major driving force behind the world's rapid expansion of renewable power generation capacity. China's installed capacity of renewable energy exceeded 1.45 billion kilowatts in 2023, accounting for more than 50 percent of the country's total installed power generation capacity, according to data released by the National Energy Administration. Power generated from renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power now accounts for more than 15 percent of China's total electricity consumption.

China has always been committed to promoting high-level opening-up and offering opportunities for market access to other countries, with the aim of achieving mutually beneficial results. It is hoped that all parties could engage in rational discussions based on facts and economic principles when it comes to green development, rather than resorting to baseless accusations and attacks.

In addition to the groundless hype about "overcapacity" regarding exports of China's new-energy products, some Westerners are turning their attention back to China's currency and its depreciation pressure, trying to combine these two things as an excuse for US protectionism to suppress China's exports.

The Wall Street Journal published an article on Saturday, attributing China's export boom to not only "bulging industrial capacity" but also the "lower exchange rate" of China's currency. This ridiculous logic reflects how some American elites have become increasingly hysterical and unscrupulous in their campaign to suppress Chinese enterprises and embrace trade protectionism.

The yuan exchange rate has long been a sensitive issue in China-US relations. Elites in Washington were once enthusiastic about persuading the US government to declare China "a currency manipulator." Currently, although there is no evidence to suggest that discussion of currency manipulation is emerging, media hype about the depreciation of the yuan hasn't stopped, reflecting the strong inertia of a narrow-minded and outdated mentality. 

The central parity rate of the yuan strengthened 69 pips to 7.0994 against the US dollar on Monday, according to the China Foreign Exchange Trade System. The yuan has depreciated since the beginning of this year, when the rate stood at 7.0770 on January 2, but a slight depreciation is normal and won't have much effect on the economy.

Many Asian currencies have been hit this year by the strength of the US dollar. The yen last week weakened to 160 against the US dollar, marking its lowest point since 1990. As multiple Asian currencies continue to depreciate against the US dollar, the yuan has maintained its resilience in the foreign exchange market.

The main reason for the depreciation of Asian currencies is the strength of the US dollar. Asia's central bankers are bracing for more turbulence as the receding prospect of US interest rate cuts in the near future sends shockwaves through regional currencies.

It's ironic that some American elites claim China's "weak currency" is turbocharging China's overseas sales at the expense of other exporting nations, but the fact is that it is the irresponsible US monetary policy that has resulted in Asian currencies' depreciation.

Amid economic uncertainty caused by sluggish global demand, an abnormal fall of a currency is one of the financial risks that will result in capital flight and erode social faith. Few analysts believe that Asian countries want to manipulate their currencies into a steep depreciation. 

A weak currency contributes to higher exports, but if some Americans believe the depreciation of Asian currencies damages the interests of the US economy, then it is not Asia's exports that should be blamed, but the irresponsible US monetary policy.

The yuan's depreciation is mild compared with other major currencies in Asia. The yuan is likely to face renewed depreciation pressure if the US Federal Reserve continues with its irresponsible monetary policy, but China is fully capable of stabilizing the market and keeping the yuan steady at a reasonable and balanced level. 

The resilience of China's currency is underpinned by the country's steady progress in economic development and expanded economic scale in the past several decades.

The US has been unreasonably hyping the false narrative of "overcapacity," and its real purpose is to attack the Chinese economy, especially its export sectors. Some observers believe the "overcapacity" rhetoric has replaced the "currency manipulation" hype as the latest excuse for US protectionism, but we probably face a more complex situation, as some American elites try to combine these two arguments to suppress China's exports.

It is easy to see through their tricks. We hope that the US can restrain the internal rise of trade protectionism and return to the track of free trade.