Johnson Choi Looking back and forward 蔡永強思前想後 Dec 3 2025
1974 to 1980, I studied hotel and restaurant management at the University of Hawaii, later pursuing an MBA degree. During that time, I held two jobs simultaneously: one as an Assistant Food & Beverage Manager at the Lobster House Restaurant in Hilton Hawaiian Village, and the other as an assistant manager and waiter at Maple Garden Restaurant. I was taking 21 credit hours per semester, averaging only four hours of sleep per day! At Hilton, the job offered reputation but little financial gain—a monthly salary of just one thousand dollars for 50 hours of work per week. Meanwhile, at Maple Garden, working four hours each night, I earned around eighty dollars in tips, totaling over two thousand dollars per month, all tax-free! Back then, a house cost only twenty-five thousand dollars, and I could have bought two or three—each of which is now worth two million dollars. Some of my classmates worked as waiters at the French restaurant Michelle, where they averaged 200 to 300 dollars in tips per night!
As a waiter, I detested the “tip pooling” system. Because I worked quickly, I could handle 5 to 8 tables at once, with a high turnover rate. When tips weren’t pooled, I often earned over a hundred dollars in a single night. In the 1970s, a hundred dollars was a significant amount of money! Whenever the boss was short-staffed, they would always call on me.
I have two major regrets in life: first, not using the money I earned to buy property; second, foolishly—extremely foolishly—choosing to stay in the United States!
In the 1970s, Hong Kong was more advanced than the United States, while mainland China lagged behind. Therefore, it was understandable for people from mainland China to aspire to come to the United States back then. But today, China’s development surpasses that of the United States tenfold, yet some are still willing to spend 500,000 to one million dollars to buy a U.S. passport! Your children will inevitably abandon their ancestral roots and forget their heritage—is it truly worth it?
Thirty years east of the river, thirty years west of the river. The next three hundred years will undoubtedly be an era dominated by the Chinese nation. As descendants of the Chinese people, we should take immense pride in this!
Highlight video of a former IMF Executive Director Paulo Nogueira Batista Jr. speech (with Chinese subtitles): Xi Jinping calling for globalization?! Becoming a “non-violent” elephant?! The New Development Bank challenging the IMF and World Bank?! 前國際貨幣基金組織執行董事保羅諾蓋拉巴蒂斯塔二世的演講重點視頻有中文字幕: 習近平倡議全球化?! 要做「非暴力」的大象?! 新開發銀行對抗IMF與世銀?!
This video translates and summarizes the key points from a speech by a former Executive Director of the International Monetary Fund. It covers the imbalances in the global financial system, the geopolitical competition between the US–Europe and China, and how the BRICS countries are challenging the existing international order.
The video also includes many other highlights: • China offering peace and cooperation but receiving hostility in return?! • Ukraine and Argentina moved to the “white list”? • BRICS providing financial aid with minimal conditions?! • The US and Europe destroying their own financial order?! The system promoted during the Trump era is being dismantled?! • BRICS creating an alternative system to challenge the West?! • The US dollar system becoming a source of global risk?! BRICS preparing to launch a new global reserve currency?! • The US economy being even more fragile than during the financial crisis?! The next crash already on its way?! • G20 cooperation collapsing?! Members divided with no consensus and an empty communiqué?! • BRICS leading the Global South?! Brazil–India cooperation proving more effective than China acting alone?!
Over the past 50 years, every time gold skyrocketed, disaster followed. No exceptions.
In the 1970s, gold surged 24x, then the Bretton Woods system collapsed and the world fell into stagflation. In 2008, gold jumped 4x, then Lehman Brothers crashed and the subprime crisis devastated the global economy. Now, gold is surging again.
This time, three major crises are repeating: fiscal crisis, dollar crisis, and inflation crisis.
But 2020s America has one massive difference from the 1970s – there’s no key to break out of this cycle.
In this video, I’ll use 50 years of data to show you: ✓ Why gold surges are always crisis signals ✓ Which historical patterns are repeating right now ✓ Why smart money is positioning in gold early ✓ What ordinary people should do to prepare
Gold’s surge isn’t just an investment opportunity – it’s a risk warning.
Japan’s political arena dropped a “small signal flare” yesterday… 日本政壇昨天丟出了一顆“小信號彈”…
According to Kyodo News on December 2, Yuko Obuchi, a heavyweight female lawmaker of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), made a special trip to the Chinese Embassy in Japan for a face-to-face meeting with Ambassador Wu Jianghao, during which she voluntarily expressed her wish to visit China. Given the current extremely tense state of China–Japan relations, this scene is highly noteworthy.
Many people may not be very familiar with the name “Yuko Obuchi,” but she is by no means an ordinary “decorative” politician. She is a genuine political powerhouse in Japan:
First, she comes from a political family. She is the daughter of former Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi and has been elected to the House of Representatives eight consecutive times. After many years cultivating her constituency, she has firm foundations and deep seniority. She is an “old face” in Japanese politics, not some newcomer.
Second, she currently serves as the LDP’s Director-General of the Organization and Campaign Headquarters. In simple terms, she is in charge of intra-party mobilization, grassroots organization, and the election front — a key figure in the party’s political machinery. The weight of this position is almost on par with the LDP’s most senior posts, such as Secretary-General, Policy Research Council Chair, General Council Chair, or Election Strategy Committee Chair. This is not a role an ordinary backbencher can compare to.
Third, Japanese media have long portrayed Yuko Obuchi as a “tough yet gentle” political strongwoman and one of the symbolic figures of women’s participation in Japanese politics. She has promoted multiple bills involving women’s rights and social welfare. Her image is steady and pragmatic, and combined with the halo of being a former prime minister’s daughter, she wields considerable influence both inside and outside the party.
Fourth—and this is the most important factor for China–Japan relations in this meeting—she serves as the Secretary-General of the Japan–China Parliamentary Friendship League. This means she doesn’t merely say Japan should value relations with China; she has long acted as a “communication window” in parliamentary diplomacy. And this time, she didn’t come alone—she brought several members of the League to visit Ambassador Wu Jianghao. This clearly carries the implication that she is “representing a segment of Japan’s political establishment.”
👉 From this perspective, Yuko Obuchi’s engagement with the Chinese side at this moment sends at least two signals:
(1) The LDP is not monolithic. Some within the party still hope to find a “bottom point” to stop further deterioration in the current tense situation.
(2) Japan’s ruling party realizes that if relations continue to worsen, it will harm Japan’s own diplomatic space, economic environment, and security outlook. Therefore, someone needs to step forward to “make contact, feel out the situation, and test the temperature.”
👉 However, China–Japan relations cannot be repaired by a single meeting or a smiling photo. Everyone knows the fuse that ignited the current tension—certain Japanese politicians, represented by Sanae Takaichi, have repeatedly made extremely wrong and provocative statements regarding major core interests such as Taiwan. These actions have severely damaged the already fragile political trust between China and Japan, pushing relations to the brink of near “rupture.”
In such circumstances, no matter how “friendly” or proactive Yuko Obuchi may be, it is impossible for her alone to reverse the overall situation. A more realistic interpretation is this: Japan understands very well where the problem lies, but for now is unwilling—or afraid—to directly adjust the hardline stance of the Takaichi faction. So they let a relatively moderate, influential politician approach China first, to probe China’s bottom line, gauge the public reaction, and create space for potential policy adjustments down the road.
👉 In fact, China’s position has already been stated with utmost clarity:
Those Japanese politicians must fundamentally correct their wrong words and actions, explicitly restate Japan’s solemn and clear stance on the Taiwan issue, and return to the correct track defined by the four political documents and the One-China principle. Only then can both sides have a realistic basis to talk about “repair” or “improvement.”
If Yuko Obuchi is truly sincere, her key role is not in “saying nice things for the media,” but in whether she can—after returning to Japan—convey China’s concerns, bottom lines, and conditions fully and accurately to Japan’s leadership, and push the Takaichi Cabinet to take concrete actions instead of continuing word games or diplomatic theatrics.
This visit is more like a “tentative knock on the door.”
Whether the door actually opens will not depend on how many pleasant words she says, but on whether the Japanese government is willing to make clear and responsible choices on the key issues that matter.
US “Sing Tao Chinese Radio” “Current Affairs Observation” by Yu Fei Video: Who is to Blame for the Hong Fu Court Century Fire Tragedy? Starting the Investigation from the Fire’s “Prequel”. Wednesday 12/03/2025 美國《星島中文電台》「時事觀察」余非視頻: 宏福苑世紀大火慘劇誰之過？由火災「前傳」開始查找. 星期三 12/03/2025
Dong Zhang Xi Wang | Tai Po Hong Fu Court Five-Alarm Fire | Past “Dong Zhang” Report on “330 Million” Sky-High Maintenance Costs Becomes Focus Again | Hong Fu Court, Five-Alarm Fire, Major Maintenance 東張西望｜大埔宏福苑五級火 《東張》過往報導「3.3億」天價大維修再成焦點｜宏福苑, 五級火, 大維修
US “Sing Tao Chinese Radio” “Current Affairs Observation” by Yu Fei Video: Who is to Blame for the Hong Fu Court Century Fire Tragedy? Starting the Investigation from the Fire’s “Prequel”. Wednesday 12/01/2025
Dong Zhang Xi Wang | Tai Po Hong Fu Court Five-Alarm Fire | Past “Dong Zhang” Report on “330 Million” Sky-High Maintenance Costs Becomes Focus Again | Hong Fu Court, Five-Alarm Fire, Major Maintenance
This episode discusses the Hong Kong Hong Fu Court century fire, which has now become international news. The tragedy led to public condolences from leaders of multiple countries and even the Pope. Before this program airs, I believe everyone has already heard or read a lot of information about the fire, but I still want to share my perspective. I will use reports from reliable media as much as possible, not online rumors. Important links will be attached. Everything is subject to updates based on later information. In short, the entire society urgently needs an open and transparent investigation process to understand the true details, so as not to misjudge the cause of the disaster, focus on the wrong issues, or make incorrect criticisms. The public cares about this matter simply to know the truth.
Since the fire started around 2 AM on November 26th, I have been following the situation around the clock. The focus of this episode is not on the situation at the fire scene during the rescue, but rather starts from the “prequel” of the incident, connecting it to today’s outcome.
My understanding of Hong Fu Court dates back a year. After intense controversy in 2023, in January 2024, the then Owners’ Incorporation passed a maintenance project plan with a total cost as high as HK$330 million. The cost was to be shared by 1,984 households across 8 blocks, each needing to bear HK$160,000 to 180,000. During the process of passing the plan, some residents told the media that there were many strange operations involved. I will talk more about this later, as it involves a then-sitting District Councilor surnamed Wong. In fact, most residents did not agree with the sky-high maintenance plan. They simply lost to another party with strong operational power. It is worth noting that the residents never stopped speaking out and fighting for their rights. How they fought might not be effectively conveyed in writing or verbally. However, on the second day after the five-alarm fire, November 27, 2025, TVB’s “Dong Zhang Xi Wang” re-uploaded an episode filmed in June 2024 about the Hong Fu Court incident, which is now available for review on YouTube. This video is very valuable, and a link will be provided. In mid-2024, six months after the sky-high maintenance plan was passed, the project started in June, and payment was due in June. But when were payments collected, and how? The then Chairman of the Owners’ Incorporation, Mr. Tang, did not consult the residents. On June 3, 2024, residents suddenly received payment notices, requiring them to pay six installments in full within seven and a half months. The project was expected to take about 24 months, meaning residents had to pay the full amount before the project was even halfway completed. The payment notice also stated that residents who paid late would “bear all responsibilities or costs incurred by the Incorporation due to late payment or non-payment of the maintenance cost share.”
This payment schedule made many homeowners in the estate feel it was very difficult. Knowing there was an Incorporation meeting in mid-June, they planned to attend to express their demands; they also reported the issue to “Dong Zhang Xi Wang.” It is because “Dong Zhang Xi Wang” filmed the situation that day and re-uploaded it that we have the chance to see what happened firsthand. The residents had too many questions. The most direct one was why they had to pay in full before the work was completed—what if the contractor abandoned the project or disappeared? Furthermore, how would the interest on the funds in the independent account for payments be used, calculated, and managed? They knew none of the details. Even stranger, they were only notified by the contractor before construction started that the mosaic tiles used in the original quote were no longer produced and had to be replaced with “wa zai shi” (a type of tile). According to the Deed of Mutual Covenant, the exterior wall finish could not be changed without a vote at an owners’ meeting. However, without convening an owners’ meeting, the switch to “wa zai shi” was approved, and work began with a ceremony on June 16th, starting to erect scaffolding. Homeowners were worried that material differences would affect the subsidy amount approved by the Urban Renewal Authority. In short, they had many questions. “Dong Zhang Xi Wang” filmed the scene that night when the Owners’ Incorporation ignored the owners’ request to hold a meeting. It was also shocking that the Incorporation could disregard the owners’ wish to attend as observers and simply close the door to hold their meeting. Under “Dong Zhang’s” lens, the scene of residents knocking on doors and windows with umbrellas, demanding entry, connected to today’s outcome, is deeply depressing.
Other details won’t be enumerated. I just want to emphasize—starting from the selection of the maintenance plan in 2023, residents came forward to fight whenever they found problems. However, with the successful maneuvering by the then-District Councilor surnamed Wong, who was also an advisor to the Incorporation (mentioned earlier and to be discussed more later), the plan was smoothly passed. According to interviewed residents, Councilor Wong, taking advantage of visiting households to canvass opinions, held proxy votes from many elderly residents, leading to the passage of the sky-high maintenance plan in January 2024. In the following half year, residents also stood up whenever they found problems, which is why “Dong Zhang Xi Wang” followed up. After appearing on “Dong Zhang,” the Owners’ Incorporation made changes to the payment arrangement, delaying the first payment from June to July 31st; the deadline was also extended from six months to ten and a half months. Later, some residents initiated a petition according to the “Building Management Ordinance.” The ordinance stipulates that as long as more than 5% of owners sign the petition, the Chairman of the Owners’ Incorporation must announce the convening of a special owners’ meeting within 14 days of receiving the request and hold the meeting within 45 days. The petition letter was delivered to the Owners’ Incorporation on July 5, 2024, but there was no response afterwards. On July 23rd, some owners discussed possibly filing a case with the Lands Tribunal. The Incorporation then threatened them, saying those who file cases would have to bear legal costs and their personal information would be made public. In short, after a round of struggle and contention, one can imagine how hard it was for salaried homeowners who have to work. Finally, in September 2024, two months later, Chairman Tang was forced to convene a special owners’ meeting. At the meeting, Chairman Tang, who had been in office for over 10 years, was removed by a large majority, and a new set of Incorporation representatives was elected. There were many twists and turns that day, which won’t be detailed here. Unfortunately, because the contract was already signed in January 2024 and work had already begun for two months, the new Incorporation could only re-examine the existing terms and supervise the progress and quality. A founder of the Anti-Bid-Rigging Alliance intervened in the incident to provide advice to residents. He said the new Owners’ Incorporation did guard the gate and even dismissed an underperforming subcontractor due to seriously handling residents’ complaints. I traced back to a year ago to supplement the above information, aiming to point out that under the problematic Owners’ Incorporation Ordinance, where it’s not easy to prevent the Incorporation from manipulation or bid-rigging, these residents had already done their utmost. The problems with Hong Kong’s Owners’ Incorporation Ordinance won’t be diverged into now; maybe discussed later if there’s time during the live stream.
Now for the second observation. After the new Owners’ Incorporation took over, the residents’ fate was in the hands of the new Incorporation and, more importantly, the government departments responsible for professional inspections. The new Owners’ Incorporation did work, but clearly, professionalism relies on government supervision. And when encountering construction problems, it turned out residents had complained to relevant departments and even reported to the police. Looking back from today’s outcome, during the process, they had nowhere to turn for help; no person, no department offered strong assistance.
After the fire, Secretary for Labour and Welfare Chris Sun said the last inspection of the Hong Fu Court maintenance project was on November 20th, a week before the fire. Written reminders regarding fire prevention had been issued, requiring enhanced measures, mainly because complaints were received about workers smoking. Sun stated that since the project started in July 2024, the Labour Department had conducted 16 inspections, focusing on occupational safety and health; it had also issued 6 improvement notices and made 3 prosecutions, mainly related to work at height. He also said that in October last year, at the start of the project, they reviewed the scaffolding net test reports provided by the Housing Bureau, which showed flame-retardant nets were used. He further stated that during the inspection in November 2024, registered inspection personnel and the contractor were on-site sampling and testing the scaffolding net material with fire, and no combustion-supporting situation was found at that time. However, in the face of these impressive procedural numbers, someone brought up an incident between September and October 2024. It turned out that a resident had emailed multiple departments inquiring about the fire prevention of the surrounding nets. On October 5, 2024, he posted the Labour Department’s written reply on the Facebook group “Hong Fu Court Residents Exchange Group.”
The resident posting署名 “Chung Man Lau” attached the Labour Department’s reply. The reply stated that they “have been following up on the work safety of the site” and that the scaffolding nets serve to limit the range of falling objects, protecting people from being hit by falling materials, tools, and debris; it also said the Department indicated “under the current safety regulations enforced by the Labour Department applicable to construction sites, there are no provisions covering the flame-retardant standards of scaffolding nets or any materials,” and that “this maintenance project does not require hot work, use of open flames, or flammable materials on the bamboo scaffolding, etc., and the site also has suitable fire-fighting facilities. Therefore, the risk of fire in the scaffolding nets is relatively low.” But after today’s major incident, the Labour Department had a different story for the media. It stated that the current “Code of Practice for Safety of Bamboo Scaffolds” stipulates that protective nets on scaffolding must possess flame-retardant characteristics and meet the requirements of recognized standards. Although the “Bamboo Scaffold Code” is not legislation, it has special legal status; non-compliance with the code can be used as an element of conviction in criminal proceedings. However, all that is in the past now, with no way back. In September-October 2024, the relevant government departments missed the opportunity to take responsibility for preventing the tragedy.
Recounting the above situation is to let everyone know once again that after discovering irregularities, Hong Fu Court residents complained, spoke out, and reported to various government departments; even, as mentioned at the beginning, they reported to the police. Unfortunately, they still could not escape today’s outcome. As for Secretary for Security Tang Ping-keung previously affirming at a press conference, without an independent investigation report, that the surrounding nets were qualified, the source of that data awaits questioning. Because those of us who watched the live broadcast that night, along with many citizens, couldn’t see how those nets that turned to ashes were flame-retardant. Currently, many photos show that most of the bamboo scaffolding remains largely intact, but the surrounding nets on the other seven blocks, except the one not on fire, were 80-90% burned to ashes. Whether the nets were only qualified on paper, or qualified ones were mixed with a large amount of unqualified ones, all awaits further investigation. We must be patient. Returning to the inspections, the nets’ true nature is revealed only after burning, but for professional Fire Services and Labour Departments, as well as relevant inspection personnel, the fact that the windows of the entire building were covered with foam board was visible to the naked eye. Why didn’t the relevant professional inspectors spot the fire hazard and warn that it was flammable?
Program time is limited. This episode aims to point out that rewinding the century fire reveals that it reached today’s stage through layers of laws not being followed, or someone’s dereliction of duty, or even unreasonable regulations. This major disaster exposes numerous systemic flaws. Hong Fu Court is a fire, but Hong Kong’s “water disasters and flooding” have also caused great suffering to many. I’m not referring to floods, but “upstairs water leakage.” It turns out that even after reporting to the Joint Office for Water Seepage, reporting to the police, reporting everything, there’s still a high chance it won’t help. Making solving the family disaster of upstairs water leakage a new show that attracts ratings for “Dong Zhang Xi Wang.”
How many departments in Hong Kong responsible for supervision actually have no one seriously doing the supervisory work? How many departments are established but may be filled with incompetent individuals? The various water seepage cases frequently featured on “Dong Zhang Xi Wang” are scattered, individual cases; even if the quantity is large and the harm deep, they are inconspicuous. Therefore, the government departments’ inability to deal with water leakage issues goes unnoticed. The Hong Fu Court tragedy, besides the high number of casualties, the scene was too shocking—seven high-rise buildings burning simultaneously is an extremely unusual sight. Hence, the incident broke out of Hong Kong, attracting international attention. Having reached this point, the resulting public attention creates舆论 pressure, leading the public to dig deeper into the underlying causes of the disaster. And the government’s governance shortcomings in many aspects are pushed to the forefront and examined due to the fire tragedy.
In the current economic downturn, government jobs offer high and stable salaries; and Legislative Council members have already expanded from 60 to 90! I sincerely hope that under such favorable conditions, Hong Kong’s internal governance capability can deliver an outstanding report card.
The last observation is that at the moment of producing this program, some media report that the Legislative Council换届 election is very likely to proceed as scheduled. Regarding the Hong Fu Court tragedy, according to current information, the dual identity of District Councilor Wong as both a councilor and an advisor to the Owners’ Incorporation is suspected to be one of the factors that might have facilitated the sky-high maintenance contract. The residents’ accounts await Councilor Wong’s more detailed explanation to set the record straight. Setting aside Councilor Wong the person and the matter, let’s not talk about her. However, from the rumors about her, it’s hard not to think about the relationship between politics and commercial interests. In a Hong Kong without the opposition, the future of politics, and the new ecosystem with so many more councilors, what kind of situation will develop in Hong Kong? It deserves attention! The Hong Fu Court tragedy has pulled out many threads worth following up on, relating to overall governance.
Before ending the program, a summary: Discussing the Hong Fu Court tragedy, I also covered the “prequel” of the century fire. Knowing the general prequel gives us better ability to judge how to view the entire incident. The biggest feeling is that these residents kept crying out for help regarding their danger! They are not a group of ignorant people. In short, it’s due to systemic, governmental governance… such deficiencies that these可怜, once-resisting lambs were still slaughtered. Among those who died very innocently, the latest news includes at least 10 Indonesian and Filipino domestic helpers and 5 maintenance workers. It’s reported one of them was a foreman who died after returning to the fire scene to call other workers to evacuate. The entire fire is an exceptionally沉重 tragedy and should not be vaguely glossed over. Therefore, I decided to, while mourning, also investigate the truth of the disaster and will continue to follow closely. I look forward to a high-level independent investigation commission that will allow more information to be公开 announced to the public.
Many buildings in Hong Kong have similar structures and situations, and having been inhabited for decades, they require maintenance one by one. To thoroughly investigate the root causes and shortcomings of this tragedy is to reduce the chance of similar incidents happening in the future to zero.
Former Singapore UN Ambassador Kishore Mahbubani video: Beyond Communism: The ‘MPH’ Formula That Actually Runs China 前新加坡聯合國大使馬凱煥影片有中文字幕: 超越共產主義：中國實際運行的「MPH」公式
🇨🇳 Beyond Communism: The ‘MPH’ Formula That Actually Runs China
For decades, the West has viewed China through a Cold War lens — as a “Communist” state destined to fail like the Soviet Union.
But Kishore Mahbubani reveals a startling truth: Modern China is not driven by Marx or Lenin. It is driven by a civilizational formula rooted in Confucian tradition and modern competence — the MPH Formula: Meritocracy. Pragmatism. Honesty.
Through this lens, China’s rise stops being a mystery — it becomes a case study in effective governance.
In this talk, you’ll learn:
🎓 Why “Meritocracy” — not ideology — determines who leads China
⚙️ How “Pragmatism” made China the world’s clean-energy and infrastructure superpower
🧭 Why “Honesty” in performance — not elections — sustains political legitimacy
💼 How China’s system quietly outperforms gridlocked Western democracies
🌏 Why the real contest is not “Democracy vs. Autocracy,” but Competence vs. Dysfunction
Mahbubani’s message is clear: If the West wants to compete with China, it must rediscover the virtues that once made it great — results, merit, and pragmatic honesty. Because the real revolution in Beijing is not Communism. It’s competence.
American logistic expert reports from China video: The China rare earths problem isn’t as bad as we think. It’s much worse: a look at gallium 美國物流尊家在中國報導視訊有中文字幕: 中國稀土問題並非如我們所想的那麼簡單- 其嚴峻程度遠超預期：以鎵為例透視現狀
It’s now understood that China has deep and durable monopolies on nearly all the Rare Earth metals and critical minerals.
But each of those minerals poses unique challenges to Western countries who hope to build supply chains for them.
Gallium is instructive. It is a crucial component for the most advanced electronics used in defense, and in civilian sectors.
But gallium is produced as a byproduct of aluminum smelting, from bauxite. Only while smelting hundreds of millions of tons of bauxite ores to extract aluminum, can engineers extract a few hundred tons of gallium.
Most smelters in Western countries have closed, and bauxite mining and aluminum smelting today are dominated by China, Russia, and India.
Initiatives to “re-shore” gallium production in the United States suffer from two defects. Western smelters never bothered to extract gallium in the first place. And in order to produce trace amounts of gallium, the bauxite and aluminum smelting industries need to be rebuilt.
Former Taipei County Magistrate Chou Hsi-wei’s video with English subtitles: China’s forbearance is not weakness! Sanae Kaohsiung crosses the red line, fully exposing Japan’s militaristic ambitions? Chou Hsi-wei showcases historical materials from the War of Resistance against Japan: Beijing has long been preparing for a “final reckoning,” Taiwan can no longer stand on the front lines for Japan! 前台北縣長周錫瑋視頻有英文字幕; 中國忍辱不是軟弱！高市早苗踩爆紅線，日本軍國野心全面曝光？周錫瑋秀出抗戰史料：北京早已準備「總清算」，台灣不能再替日本站前線! https://rumble.com/v72ifw6-sanae-kaohsiung-crosses-the-red-line-fully-exposing-japans-militaristic-amb.html https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZP8Ux1cC2/
Video: Japan Just Hit a Wall! Japan want to undo the after WWII world order set up by US, USSR, France, Britain & China! China asked is that what the UN Security Council Members want to do? 日本撞上鐵板! 日本想要推翻二戰後由美國、蘇聯、法國、英國和中國所建立的世界秩序！中國質問，這難道也是聯合國安理會成員國想要做的事嗎?
After 10 Days of Threats Over Taiwan, China Got US, UK, France to Back Them Up 對台灣連嗆10天後，中國竟讓美、英、法全站到自己這邊
Japanese official Sanae Takaichi just said “Taiwan’s crisis is Japan’s crisis” – but 10 days later, Japan went completely silent!
What happened? China didn’t play by the usual rules this time. They reframed the Taiwan issue as a WWII legacy problem and internationalized Japan’s militarism concerns. The result? The US, UK, France, and Russia – all five permanent UN Security Council members – publicly backed China’s position!
Here’s why this diplomatic counterattack is brilliant: ✅ China tied Taiwan to post-WWII international order, making Japan unable to refute ✅ All P5 nations made statements within 10 days, creating massive pressure ✅ Japan went from aggressive provocation to complete silence in under two weeks
In this video, I’ll break down: Why did Japan suddenly dare to provoke China? What diplomatic strategy did China use to get all P5 nations on board? Why is defining Taiwan as a WWII issue so powerful? What does this mean for East Asian geopolitics?
If you’re interested in international politics, China-Japan relations, or the Taiwan issue, this video is a must-watch!
China Once Again #Writes to Guterres, Sternly #Refutes Japan! 🇨🇳 On December 1, China’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Fu Cong, once again wrote to UN Secretary-General António Guterres, sternly refuting the unreasonable arguments contained in the letter sent to the Secretary-General by Japan’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Yamanaka Kazuyuki, on November 24, and clarifying the position of the Chinese government. The full text of the letter is as follows: 中方再次#致函 古特雷斯，严正#批驳 日方！🇨🇳 12月1日，中国常驻联合国代表#傅聪 再次致函联合国秘书长#古特雷斯，针对日本常驻联合国代表#山崎和之 11月24日给古特雷斯秘书长致函中有关无理狡辩言论予以#严正批驳，并阐明中国政府立场。致函全文如下:
Your Excellency,
I recently wrote to you to express the Chinese government’s grave concerns over the provocative remarks made by Japanese Prime Minister Takaichi Sanae regarding Taiwan. The Chinese side has noted that the Japanese Permanent Representative, in his letter to you on November 24, resorted to unreasonable arguments, evaded key issues, and made groundless accusations against China, even turning the tables on the victim. China firmly opposes this. Under the instructions of my government, I would like to further clarify our position as follows:
The #direct cause of the serious differences between China and Japan at present is the provocative remarks made by Japanese Prime Minister Takaichi Sanae during a parliamentary debate on November 7, in which she wrongly claimed that “a Taiwan contingency could constitute a survival-threatening situation for Japan,” implying Japan’s possible military intervention in the Taiwan issue. Such erroneous remarks openly challenge the outcomes of World War II and the post-war international order, and seriously violate the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. It is entirely justifiable and necessary for China to write to you to clarify its solemn position. In fact, many people of justice in the international community and within Japan, including former Japanese prime ministers, have also expressed clear criticism of Takaichi’s remarks.
Including the letter from the Japanese representative, Japan has claimed to adhere to a “#consistent position.” Recently, China has publicly questioned Japan on multiple occasions: What exactly is the so-called “consistent position”? Japan has consistently evaded the question and has yet to provide a #direct response to China. Can Japan clearly and accurately explain to the international community what its “consistent position” on the Taiwan issue is?
International legal documents such as the Cairo Declaration, the Potsdam Proclamation, and the Japanese Instrument of Surrender have long affirmed China’s sovereignty over Taiwan, stipulated that Japan must return Taiwan and other Chinese territories it had stolen, and established the principles for post-war disposition of Japan, all of which constitute an important part of the post-war international order. The 1972 China-Japan Joint Statement clearly states: “The Government of Japan recognizes the Government of the People’s Republic of China as the sole legal government of China” and “The Government of the People’s Republic of China reiterates that Taiwan is an inalienable part of the territory of the People’s Republic of China. The Government of Japan fully understands and respects this position of the Government of China and adheres to the position of Article 8 of the Potsdam Proclamation.” Subsequently, the Japanese government explicitly pledged in a series of treaties and statements between China and Japan to uphold the above position. How can Takaichi Sanae’s erroneous remarks, which #betray the commitments made by the Japanese government so far, be trusted by the international community?
In his letter, the Japanese representative stated that Japan adheres to a #passive defense strategy of exclusively defense-oriented policy and claimed that Takaichi Sanae’s remarks were based on this position. Taiwan is China’s territory, yet Takaichi Sanae linked Japan’s “survival-threatening situation” to “a Taiwan contingency,” implying the use of force against China. This clearly goes beyond Japan’s so-called “exclusively defense-oriented” and “passive defense” scope. Japan’s argument is self-contradictory and is an attempt to #deceive the international community.
The UN Charter stipulates that all members shall refrain from the threat or use of force in their international relations and shall respect the territorial integrity and political independence of any state. Takaichi Sanae’s erroneous remarks violate the purposes, principles, and relevant provisions of the UN Charter. How can Japan claim to “always respect and abide by international law, including the UN Charter”? The international community should recognize the serious dangers posed by Takaichi Sanae’s erroneous remarks and remain highly vigilant against Japan’s #ambition to subvert the post-war international order.
In his letter, the Japanese representative also insinuated criticism of other countries’ national defense development. I would like to draw Your Excellency’s attention to the following facts: Since Japan’s defeat in World War II, right-wing forces in Japan have never ceased their efforts to whitewash Japan’s history of aggression. Over the years, Japan has continuously and significantly adjusted its security policies, with its defense budget increasing for “thirteen consecutive years.” Japan has revised the long-standing “Three Principles on Arms Exports” and begun exporting lethal weapons. Japan is also scheming to revise the “Three Non-Nuclear Principles” to pave the way for introducing nuclear weapons. Clearly, Japan has long broken through the confines of “exclusively defense-oriented policy” and is rearming itself. It is Japan itself that is engaged in “military expansion,” “unilaterally changing the status quo despite opposition from neighboring countries,” and “adopting coercive measures.” Historically, using the so-called “survival-threatening situation” as a pretext for military expansion and launching foreign aggression under the name of “self-defense” was the #usual tactic of Japanese militarism. In light of Takaichi Sanae’s dangerous remarks, the international community must be #highly vigilant against Japan’s #ambition to expand its military and revive militarism, and work together to safeguard world peace.
In his letter, the Japanese representative expressed the need to enhance mutual understanding and cooperation. However, the biggest challenge now is that Takaichi Sanae’s erroneous words and actions have #severely damaged mutual trust between China and Japan and undermined the political foundation of China-Japan relations. If Japan sincerely wishes to develop stable China-Japan relations, it should clearly adhere to the #One-China principle, abide by the spirit of the four China-Japan political documents and the political commitments made, immediately retract the erroneous remarks, and genuinely translate its commitments to China into concrete actions. Otherwise, Japan will bear #all consequences arising therefrom.
This letter will be circulated as an official document of the UN General Assembly to all member states.
Business Blog 