On Tuesday, the foreign ministers of the G7 nations vowed to increase sanctions on Russia and issued a scathing statement against Beijing after three days of talks in Japan.
The foreign ministers of the US, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Canada, and Japan said in a joint statement that they would “intensify” sanctions against Russia and threatened countries that looked to circumvent sanctions or provide Moscow with support.
“We remain committed to intensifying sanctions against Russia, coordinating and fully enforcing them, including through the Enforcement Coordination Mechanism, and countering Russia’s and third parties’ attempts to evade and undermine our sanctions measures. We reiterate our call on third parties to cease assistance to Russia’s war, or face severe costs,” the statement said.
Concerning China, the ministers said they recognize “the importance of engaging candidly with and expressing our concerns directly to China.” They acknowledged the need to “work together with China on global challenges” but went on to slam Beijing.
“We reiterate our call for China to act as a responsible member of the international community,” the ministers said. They slammed China for its actions in the South China Sea, Hong Kong, and over allegations of human rights abuses in Xinjiang and Tibet.
“We remind China of the need to uphold the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and abstain from threats, coercion, intimidation, or the use of force,” they said. The ministers also mentioned Taiwan, saying they “reaffirm the importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait.”
In response to the statement, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said, “The G7 Foreign Ministers’ Meeting grossly interfered in China’s internal affairs and maliciously smeared and discredited China.”
“The communiqué reflects the group’s arrogance, prejudice, and deliberate desire to block and contain China. We deplore and reject this and have made a strong démarche to the host Japan,” Wang added.
The ministers also condemned North Korea’s recent weapons tests, which have been provoked by the resumption of massive US-South Korea war games. The meeting comes about a month before a summit of G7 leaders will be held in Hiroshima, Japan, from May 19-21.
Is the G7 looking for problems???… The old paradigm isn’t working anymore. It is time for a new paradigm, more inclusive and less dictatorial than the present one.
G7 now have lower GDP than BRIKS. As BRIKS+ is in the works — the mantle of gobal economic leadership has been passed on.
Keeping in mind that SCO is already a second largest organization in the world, second inly to UN. With a long waiting list.
They know it but they can’t change their course of confrontation and self destruction. They are obsessed.
I’ll be interested to see whether the same people who admonish me that GDP doesn’t reflect special, magical, mystical realities which only they can divine from reading chicken entrails or something whenever I mention it will similarly admonish you for relying on concrete numbers instead of woo-woo.
Whatever the US government reports as GDP or CPI or the unemployment rate or any other macroeconomic measure is, I suspect, woo-woo, meant to justify government meddling in the economy. The only true inflation rate is the level of monetary expansion.
“The foreign ministers of the US, Britain, France, Germany, Italy,
Canada, and Japan said in a joint statement that they would “intensify”
sanctions against Russia and threatened countries that looked to
circumvent sanctions or provide Moscow with support.”
Is it any wonder that the Global South (Third World) is fleeing from America and the G7.
BRICS is seeing an avalanche of countries applying for membership.
Soon America will be like Fort Apache surrounded and standing alone with no friends.
US have no friends, only vassals and enemies. The terror act against Nord Stream demonstrated it very nice.
Surely we must have some friends Mikhailovich…. Let me think…. Israel?
Israel receives the financial and other kinds of help from US but Israel is not so keen to follow American crusade against Russia as members of NATO. Some American oligarchs are closely connected to Israel and that explains the special US-Israel relations. Though the leadership of Israel supports US, people of Israel not so enthusiastic about anti-Russian policy. Israel hasn’t joined anti-Russian sanctions. Russians visiting Israel still need no visa. Not everyone in Israel is pro-American. Far from that.
Don’t know about that. Israeli spy network and political influence in the U.S. is pretty intense.
I was being facetious, sorry.
Sarcasm?
G7 persists in its self destructive policy. Their leaders are truly obsessed with their bizarre and evil fantasies. They absolutely have no wish to stop and think analytically what they are doing.
G7 writes the rules for everyone else to follow, alas the world is following them poorly. Ya know, I could write a few rules for the G7 to follow, with indignation and punishments at the ready in case they don’t hop to it.
G7’s rhetoric of righteous indignation recalls the colonists’ outrage against Lords North & Grenville, in re Johnson responded, “How is it we hear the loudest yelps for ‘freedom’ from the drivers of negroes”? History certainly does repeat itself … ??
““We remind China of the need to uphold the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and abstain from threats, coercion, intimidation, or the use of force,” they said. The ministers also mentioned Taiwan, saying they “reaffirm the importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait.””
Just amazing … their whole statement is all threats, coercion, and attempted intimidation of China and third parties to conform to their desired outcomes re Russia etc. and they dare remind others of the UN charter? As for Taiwan and Hong Kong, is that not direct interference in China’s internal affairs?
Seeing as how Taiwan is not and never has been part of the People’s Republic of China, no, it’s not “direct interference in” the PRC’s “internal affairs.”
Its history is complicated.
That is your opinion. Under UN law, however, as well as most (all?) these seven nations own laws, there is only one China … of which Taiwan is a currently self-administered part but regardless part of the whole and none of our business.
Yes, there is only one China.
“Taiwan” is an independent island nation located 100 or so miles off the coast of “China,” and has never, at any time, been part of or ruled by the People’s Republic of China. It was, for some brief periods ending 128 years ago, ruled by previous regimes which ruled various iterations of “China.”
Might the regime currently ruling “Taiwan” decide, at some point, to engage in a political unification with “China” (possibly, but not necessarily, under the regime currently ruling “China”)? Sure.
Might the regime currently ruling “China” decide, at some point, to invade, conquer, occupy, and annex “Taiwan?” Sure.
It’s my opinion that the regime currently ruling “the United States” should stay out of the matter, trade freely with both nations, etc. But nobody’s under any obligation to smile and nod every time the Beijing regime demands that the world pretend it rules Taiwan. It never has, it doesn’t now, and the possibility that it may in the future is entirely speculative.
I don’t disagree with your statements here. However, the article above the line was about the G7 foreign ministers condemning China’s actions under UN law (noninterference in sovereign states) in territories they themselves have all stated ARE indeed China (Taiwan, but also Hong Kong and Jinjiang).
You may have a case that the PRC has never ruled Taiwan. But that’s immaterial if one bases legitimacy on UN recognition. Thus, the hypocrisy of the G7 cannot be overstated.
“they themselves have all stated ARE indeed China (Taiwan, but also Hong Kong and Jinjiang).”
I’m not sure about “all.”
The US has stated that it recognizes “one China.”
The US has not stated that it recognizes “China” as the rulers of “Taiwan.”
The U.S. recognizes one China and that Taiwan is part of China and it recognizes the PRC as the legitimate government of China, right?
“right?”
Feel free to point out where the US “recognizes” that middle claim.
Oh come on … the middle part is part of the first part: if there is one China with Taiwan part of it, then Taiwan is naturally part of one China.
Yes, if a A and B, then A and B.
But B is neither a fact, nor to the best of my knowledge is B asserted in US policy.
It’s also not asserted in UN policy (UNR 2578 doesn’t even mention Taiwan — it just transfers the UN credentials for “China” to the PRC from “the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek”).
Just, no … this is not logical, Tom.
The whole point of “one China” is that all of historic Chinese territories (which Taiwan certainly is) are under one ultimate jurisdiction. There are irregularities … like HK until 1999 or Taiwan presently, but ultimately, there will be one Chinese nation.
This is understood by (almost) all and this is why, instead of simply adding a mainland China delegation to the UN, they transferred the credentials for China (one whole China) to the more logical party.
“all of historic Chinese territories (which Taiwan certainly is in my imagination)”
Fixed, no charge.
Taiwan is geographically distinct from China. It’s been as “historically indigenous,” “historically Dutch” and “historically Japanese” as much or more than it’s been “historically Chinese.” The last time it was “historically Chinese” was 1895.
The United Nations transferred the credentials for “China” to the People’s Republic of China regime, from a previously competing regime that had (allegedly temporarily) fled China for Taiwan, while still claiming to be the “legitimate government” of China. The UN action said nothing whatsoever about the status of Taiwan itself.
That’s completely nonsensical. The US position is the same as it has always been: the position of the week. The US has no foreign policy – none.
My research shows that when Chiang Kai-shek fled to Taiwan in 1949, he claimed that the Republic of China was still the sole legitimate government of all of China, including the mainland. That claim seems to have been honored until 1971 when UN GA Resolution 2758 recognized the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as “the only legitimate representative of China to the United Nations” and removed “the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek” (referring to Republic of China (ROC)) from the United Nations. The US opposed the resolution, but it passed anyway with a two-thirds majority. Washington severed diplomatic relations with Taipei in 1979.
Name Taiwan’s representative to the UN.
What could that possibly have to do with anything?
“The foreign ministers of the US, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Canada, and Japan said in a joint statement that they would “intensify” sanctions against Russia and threatened countries that looked to circumvent sanctions or provide Moscow with support.”
And if the 6 lackeys don’t follow orders, they too will feel the wrath of intensified sanctions and threats.
Uncle Sam has a good stick for all his friends and he doesn’t hesitate to use it when necessary.
Y’all got a nice gas pipeline here … be a shame if something should “happen” to it … now I’m gonna make you an offer you can’t refuse.
“God Father-esque”?
I can hear the music in the background.
Sometimes it feels like we are Britain’s (and/or the EU’s) lackeys so our (and theirs) global corporations can safely operate and expand.
After all Ukraine has been a joint G7 effort for years with Ms. Nuland in charge.
Are they f*cking crazy???
What a great question?!
The only thing the west is exporting these days is hate, pure and simple.
LOL
BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) combined GDP has just overtaken the G7’s.
How does an lessor economic power make sanctions hurt?
Sure those Chinese ball bearings might not be as good as those the West produces nor is France selling optics (Russia’s tanks need them and the alternatives are cutting the distance accurate shelling can be done) but even the leaks share it isn’t enough to matter.
This smells more like those “stern letters” Washington issues all the time than anything real.