Friends of Socialist China, Author at Friends of Socialist China

Xi meets Trump – two visions collide

Chinese President Xi Jinping paid a state visit to the United States of America from September 23 to 25 at the invitation of President Donald J. Trump. It was his first state visit to the country since September 2015, during the Barack Obama administration, and follows President Trump’s state visit to China in May this year.

On the eve of the visit, the Morning Star published an editorial, arguing that this visit “could scarcely come at a more critical moment”, with:

Two already-disastrous wars threatening to spin out of control, in Ukraine and in the Gulf
Alarm mounting at the dangers posed by artificial intelligence
Growing levels of debt threatening to deepen problems in the global capitalist economy
The menace of climate change developing apace

All of these crises, the paper argues, “are rooted in the workings of imperialism today, in the dynamics for its ceaseless drive for capital accumulation on a global scale, its search for the greatest possible profit through international competition and coercion.”

Furthermore: “In Trump this failing system has an appropriate, if highly dangerous, lead representative. His actions, animated both by a bullying ‘America First’ aggression and a drive for personal and financial self-aggrandisement, have made every aspect of the threats facing the world worse.

“Yet for all his bluster and military adventures, Trump approaches his summit with Xi as the weaker party in some respects.”

Among the reasons for this are that: “In contrast to Trump, Beijing continues to uphold international law and the authority of the United Nations — thin defences against the depredations of imperialism but a base to build on rather than an edifice to be torn down…

“Xi also leads a cohesive society developing apace along almost every indicator of human well-being. Trump’s US by contrast is choking on its own divisions, including rampant racism, the removal of all restraints on private and corporate greed and the negation of the rights notionally provided for under the constitution.”

From this, the paper concludes: “Because of this it is, alas, unlikely that the meeting will lead to any great breakthroughs on major issues… Ultimately, the meeting between Xi and Trump is a meeting of a plausible future for the international order and a dystopian present. Xi and the Communist Party of China he leads bear much of the hopes of the world in the present crisis.”

China and Russia veto bid to pressure Iran

An attempt by the United States, supported by Britain and France, to further misuse the United Nations to put pressure on Iran suffered a setback on September 17 when China and Russia vetoed a proposed extension to the mandate of the UN Security Council’s Panel of Experts on Iran. Pakistan and Somalia abstained on the vote.

The New York Times reported: “Fu Cong, China’s UN ambassador, urged Council members to avoid ‘double standards, political manipulation, pressure and confrontation’. It added that he described the US decisions to pull out of a 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran and to wage war against the country this year were ‘at the root of the current crisis’.”

The New York Times added: “The latest confrontation at the UN came the day after a high-level meeting between the foreign ministers of China and Iran in Beijing, at a time when Mr. Trump appears to be running out of options on Iran.”

Iran’s Press TV reported that the country’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf said that the “unipolar order” has ended after China and Russia rejected the political abuse of the UN Security Council by the United States and its allies.

In a post on X, Qalibaf added: “China and Russia’s vetoes rejected the political abuse of the Security Council and reaffirmed the rule of law. We must defend multilateralism; unilateralism serves no one’s interests.”

Iran’s UN mission said China and Russia have “once again stood firmly in defence of the UN Charter, international law, and the integrity of the Council” and prevented “yet another cynical attempt by the United States and its allies to abuse the Security Council for their political purposes”. Iran expressed its deep appreciation to them for their “consistent and principled positions and decisive actions today”. The mission also commended Somalia and Pakistan for their “valuable positions and abstentions”.

This is a book above all for the new generation mobilised by Gaza

The following is the full text of the remarks prepared by Keith Bennett for the 20 September online launch of China’s Foreign Policy and the Making of a Multipolar World: Changes Unseen in a Century, which he edited along with Carlos Martinez. (His speech as delivered was abbreviated due to time constraints.)

Taking up the concept of changes unseen in a century, advanced by Xi Jinping and incorporated into the book’s title, Keith notes that: “One key manifestation of this in our part of the world can be summed up in three words: Gaza changes everything.”

He adds that: “It is above all this new generation coming to anti-imperialist politics that we hope our book can reach.”

The book is available from socialistbooks.com. The discount code CHINA35 gives 35 percent off all titles from the publishers Praxis Press until the end of the year.

In his testimonial for the book that we’ve been launching online today, George Galloway, as most if not all of you will know currently a parliamentary candidate for the constituency recently held by the prime minister of the United Kingdom, writes:

“Only the light-hearted care naught for where China goes next. The future of China will shape yours.”

One might disagree with George on many things, but on this at least reasonable people should surely not differ.

Yet, as China, to paraphrase Xi Jinping, steadily advances to the centre of the world stage, in our part of the world there is still a dearth of serious scholarship and a serious lack of understanding of what is actually happening, how the country and its leadership actually thinks and acts, and how that is changing the face not only of China but of the world as a whole.

There is not a shortage of copy per se. If you pick up a comic like the Telegraph, the Mail or the Murdoch Times, you can, on a daily basis, read entertaining fiction, suggesting for example that China is bugging tractors in order to harvest the kind of prosaic information readily available on a government website. Slightly more sophisticated versions of the same are offered by the chronically anachronistic voice of classical liberalism, The Economist, and even the venerable pink paper, the Financial Times.

There are a few, but still far too few, books offering excellent Marxist analysis of China, including from Carlos Martinez, Jenny Clegg, and the late and always much missed Jude Woodward. And from John Ross, Ken Hammond and Roland Boer. There are also the rightly popular work of Martin Jacques and the phenomenal scholarship of Peter Nolan.

Yet if you go into a branch of Waterstones, for example, with the possible exception of Martin Jacques’ key work, thanks in large part to its brilliantly provocative title, you’re highly unlikely to find any of these authors.

What you’re likely to find is the scribblings of the renegade Jung Chang, who serves up a diet of political pornography thinly disguised as biography; of the charlatan Gordon Chang, who informed us in 2001 that China was certain to collapse by 2011, yet is still, presumably as a kind of therapy, periodically paraded in public as some kind of China expert; or of Frank Dikötter, whose dubious scholarship would have us believe that the greatest revolution in human history is little more than one great, century-long criminal conspiracy.

What this all reflects is that the battle on the ideological front, and the battle for public opinion, are key parts of the cold war against socialism and human progress; and are key fronts in the class struggle.

Chairman Mao observed that to make a revolution it is always necessary first of all to create public opinion. And the same goes for counter-revolution.

It was precisely in order to take up that battle for public opinion, as a key front in the class struggle, the struggle for peace and against war, the struggle for socialism and against barbarism, that, in May 2021, Carlos, Danny Haiphong and myself, took the initiative to establish Friends of Socialist China. And why Carlos and myself embarked on this book project.

As they have demonstrated again in their contributions today, the authors represent some of the finest activist scholars working in the China field today. We are indebted to them for giving so generously of their time and their wisdom.

I use the designation activist scholars advisedly. This is exactly what we are aiming for. As Stalin well put it in his celebrated work, Foundations of Leninism:

“Of course, theory becomes purposeless if it is not connected with revolutionary practice, just as practice gropes in the dark if its path is not illumined by revolutionary theory. But theory can become a tremendous force in the working-class movement if it is built up in indissoluble connection with revolutionary practice.”

Review: China’s Foreign Policy and the Making of a Multipolar World

We are very pleased to publish the detailed review below by Dr Francisco Dominguez of the recently published ‘China’s Foreign Policy and the Making of a Multipolar World: Changes unseen in a century’, edited by Keith Bennett and Carlos Martinez. Francisco is one of the foremost anti-imperialist scholars and activists in Britain. Originally a political refugee from Pinochet’s Chile, he was the head of the Research Group on Latin America at Middlesex University and is the National Secretary of the Venezuela Solidarity Campaign and an executive committee member of the Cuba Solidarity Campaign.

Francisco goes through the book chapter by chapter and concludes that it is “a book that is a must read”.

It was launched online on 20 September and is available from socialistbooks.com. The discount code CHINA35 gives 35 percent off all titles from the publishers Praxis Press until the end of the year.

Three features define the contours that this book seeks to scrutinise in its examination of China’s foreign policy. The first is the proposition that “the world is presently witnessing changes unseen in a century”, whose pace and scale have intensified dramatically. The second concerns the transformation of China’s foreign policy, hitherto moulded by the principle of “hide our capacities and bide our time” and the practice of “being good at maintaining a low profile”, but now “replaced by a more assertive and proactive strategy” aimed at promoting the interests of the Global South, advancing peace and common security, and pursuing a more just world order. The third is an exploration of the historical roots and theoretical foundations of China’s foreign policy. This is quite an undertaking for a group of nine intellectual cadres, each addressing specific dimensions of China’s foreign policy, which has itself become a crucial factor in the ongoing “changes unseen in a century”.

The images on the book’s cover provide an intriguing foretaste of its content. The first depicts the 1955 Bandung Conference, at which the then Third World—represented by 29 participating countries, and still largely confined to aspirational declarations—expressed its desire for a “more just world system”, free from colonial oppression and founded upon respect for the national sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries. The conference also featured Zhou Enlai’s proposal, on behalf of the recently founded People’s Republic of China, of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence.

Japan is further down the road of remilitarisation than at any point since 1945

18 September marked the 95th anniversary of the September 18th Incident, the staged explosion in Northeast China that Japanese forces used as the pretext for the invasion and occupation of Manchuria – and the opening act of the Second World War in Asia. China Daily marked the anniversary by speaking to commentators and peace campaigners in China and Europe, among them our co-editor Carlos Martinez.

Carlos told the paper that the anniversary finds Japan further down the road of remilitarisation than at any point since 1945, pointing to a record military budget, deepening military integration with the United States, and Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s provocative statements on Taiwan. The danger, he argued, is that Japan is being turned into a forward military platform in Washington’s strategic competition with Beijing – a country that already hosts around 50,000 US military personnel and occupies the central position in the US alliance system in East Asia.

He described the nuclear question as particularly serious, citing the warning from Tomoko Tamura, chair of the Japanese Communist Party, that the introduction of US nuclear weapons would make Japan a frontline base in a possible nuclear conflict. “In the only country ever subjected to atomic attack, that is the measure of how far the US alliance has hollowed out Japan’s postwar pacifism. The peoples of East Asia have every interest in refusing it.”

The other contributors make a related point: that remembering this history is not a matter of stoking hatred but of understanding how aggression escalates when the international community fails to respond – as the League of Nations failed to respond in 1931 – and that a broad rightward shift in Japanese society is drowning out the ordinary Japanese people who want peace.

China at the UN: peace, development, and fairness

The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) is holding its 81st annual general debate in New York, September 22–28.

Referring to this, the Chinese newspaper Global Times published an editorial commentary on 20 September, which starkly contrasted the two very different world views that will contend at this global gathering:

“What should the world expect to hear? Gaza’s children weeping, small island states crying for help, the Global South demanding development and fairness.”

Referring to the heavy restrictions placed on the Iranian delegation attending the meeting and the outright denial of visas to delegates from Palestine, it notes:

“Iran is right: Attendance is a legal right, not a favour. By extension, peace is a right, development is a right, and so is not being left behind in the AI era. This is the fair word China will speak. If delegates can enter the UN hall only at the host’s discretion, confined by travel limits and a compressed delegation [as in the case of Iran], then international law and the Agreement regarding the Headquarters of the UN are already hollowed out… Harder still: Between the two states at war, Israel is admitted while Palestinian representatives are shut out for taking its war with Israel to international courts. Yet in Gaza’s ruins, families still search for remains, and the blood of women and children remains wet.”

China, it continues, demands an immediate cease-fire, humanitarian access, an end to annexation and a two-state solution. “No cease-fire, no development. No justice, no lasting ceasefire.”

Turning to the issue of climate change, it argues that developed nations must fulfill their climate finance promises. “China is planting trees, installing solar power panels and promoting electric vehicles at scale, sharing technology with its Southern partners because, in the face of the climate crisis, we are all in the same boat.”

Likewise, “China advocates ‘AI for good and for all’, promoting it as a shared resource through open-source initiatives and capacity building, so that African doctors, Southeast Asian teachers and Latin American farmers can all benefit. China seeks no AI hegemony; it simply hopes no child misses out on the future because of where they were born.”

China, it concludes, is ready to stand with all countries that cherish peace and pursue development.

Launching “China’s Foreign Policy and the Making of a Multipolar World”

On 20 September, Friends of Socialist China and the International Manifesto Group, together with Praxis Press, Manifesto Press and the Critical Theory Workshop, held an online launch for the newly-released China’s Foreign Policy and the Making of a Multipolar World: Changes Unseen in a Century. Edited by Keith Bennett and Carlos Martinez, the book brings together nine essays on the history, theory and practice of China’s foreign relations. Chaired by Carlos, the launch heard from contributors Andrew Murray, Danny Haiphong, Mick Dunford, Jenny Clegg, Torkil Lauesen, Ken Hammond and Keith.

The full video of the event is embedded below, and each contribution is also available as a separate video, linked in the text that follows.

A case study in Iran

Carlos opened the launch by explaining why the book was put together. The US-Israeli war on Iran, he argued, is not only an attack on a country Washington and Tel Aviv happen to dislike, but part of a desperate campaign to arrest the whole process of multipolarity. It has failed: Iran’s sovereignty is intact and its strategic relationship with both China and Russia has deepened.

China’s conduct in the war, Carlos suggested, provides a case study for the book’s key arguments. Beijing condemned the aggression from the outset, continued buying the bulk of Iran’s oil in defiance of US sanctions, vetoed Security Council resolutions designed to legitimise the war, and worked persistently with regional countries – most notably Pakistan – towards a ceasefire and negotiated solution. That combination of material solidarity and an unwavering insistence on peace and the UN Charter is what the book sets out to explain: a foreign policy that is “neither the menacing expansionism imagined by the China hawks, nor the timid inadequacy lamented by parts of the Western left”.

Not a Cold War re-run

Andrew Murray, political correspondent of the Morning Star, argued that China’s rise cannot be understood without its corollary, the decay of the United States. After all, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the financial crash of 2008, had little to do with China. Only now, with US decline and China’s growing weight combined, has the contradiction between imperialism and a Global South in which China plays a leading part clearly become the main contradiction in world politics.

This is not a simple re-run of the Cold War. The Soviet Union faced a far more powerful array of forces, and the mass national liberation and labour movements of that era do not exist in the same form today. Washington has moved from hoping for the incremental restoration of capitalism in China towards military and strategic encirclement, of which AUKUS is but one symptom.

On the charge that China is imperialist, Andrew commended Carlos’s polemic with Greg Godels and offered the historian Victor Kiernan’s definition of imperialism as “coercion exerted abroad, by one means or another, to extort profits above what simple commercial exchange can procure”. That coercive element, he said, is “something which is entirely absent from China’s conduct of international affairs and business”.

China says no to star wars

On 15 September the BBC reported that the United States had confirmed it deployed a space weapon in Earth’s orbit, the first time it has acknowledged such offensive capabilities. The article went on to note that China had responded by warning against an “arms race” in space. A foreign ministry spokesperson in Beijing said: “We urge the US side to stop expanding its military capabilities and preparing for war in outer space.”

On 17 September, the Xinhua News Agency published a commentary, “No new ‘Star Wars’ in space”. It said that “the Moon should not become a new battlefield. Preventing the militarisation of space must remain a basic principle as humanity ventures beyond Earth.”

The 1967 Outer Space Treaty was established precisely to prevent outer space from becoming another arena of confrontation, it noted, adding:

“There is little to be gained by extending the logic of arms rivalry into an environment that humanity is only beginning to explore. More weapons and more military preparations in space would not make the space environment more secure… China has consistently called for the peaceful use of outer space and opposed its weaponisation, militarisation and an arms race. Its recent donation to the United Nations of a lunar soil sample collected by the Chang’e-6 mission from the far side of the Moon offers a tangible example of what space exploration can serve: scientific discovery, multilateral cooperation and the common interests of humanity.”

China and Brazil should lead the Global South toward collective self-reliance

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, who is also a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee and Director of the Foreign Affairs Office of the CPC Central Committee, met with Chief Advisor to the President of Brazil for Foreign Policy, Celso Amorim, in Beijing, on September 16.

Wang Yi conveyed President Xi Jinping’s warm greetings to President Lula, stating that under the strategic guidance of the two heads of state, China-Brazil relations have in recent years achieved leapfrog development from comprehensive strategic partners to communities with a shared future. The global, strategic, and long-term nature of their relationship has become more prominent, and it has become a model of unity and cooperation among major powers in the Global South. Both sides, he added, should strengthen strategic cooperation on major international and regional issues, continue to stand on the side of international fairness and justice, jointly hold high the torch of multilateralism, and lead the Global South toward collective self-reliance.

Amorim conveyed President Lula’s sincere greetings to President Xi Jinping, stating that both China and Brazil are major countries in the Global South and can genuinely contribute to world peace and stability. In the current international situation of turmoil and instability, Brazil-China relations transcend the bilateral scope and carry increasing significance. Both sides should strengthen communication and cooperation on multilateral platforms such as BRICS and jointly contribute to promoting world peace and development.

Iranian Foreign Minister: Tehran is fully prepared to deepen strategic coordination with Beijing

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi visited Beijing on September 16 and held talks with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi.

The website of the Chinese Foreign Ministry reports that Wang Yi stated that the current situation in the Middle East remains turbulent, seriously affecting international peace and development. As a permanent member of the UN Security Council, China is willing to play a constructive role in resolving international disputes. China and Iran are comprehensive strategic partners, and China is also willing to strengthen dialogue and cooperation with Iran to safeguard Iran’s legitimate rights and interests. The continuation of the US-Iran war does not serve the common interests of the parties involved or the international community. We encourage Iran and the United States to remain rational and restrained, to return to the Memorandum of Understanding agreed in Islamabad as soon as possible, restructure negotiation mechanisms based on the consensus reached so far and conduct substantive consultations on issues of mutual concern. We support Iran’s dialogue with Gulf countries, respect for each other’s territorial sovereignty and national security, and safeguarding regional common interests in a constructive manner.

Wang further pointed out that the current situation once again proves that the existing security framework in the Middle East is not yet complete and needs reform and strengthening. During his visit to Egypt, President Xi Jinping put forward four proposals to support regional countries in upholding a common, comprehensive, cooperative, and sustainable security concept and building a new security architecture for the Middle East. We welcome beneficial exploration by regional countries on this topic. On Middle East issues, as a responsible major power, China will continue to contribute to peace and stability, to promoting peace talks, and to fairness and justice.

Araghchi briefed Wang Yi on the latest situation in the Middle East and the Gulf region and Iran’s next steps, stating that Iran does not want the conflict to continue and hopes to return to diplomatic resolution channels while firmly safeguarding its own interests. Iran believes the US-Iran Memorandum of Understanding remains valid, Iran has reached a plan with Oman to open the Strait of Hormuz, and the US should fulfil all its commitments. Iran is also willing to engage in dialogue and consultation with regional countries, establish and develop good-neighbourly and friendly relations, and promote the early restoration of peace and tranquillity in the region. Iran welcomes and supports President Xi Jinping’s four propositions for maintaining peace and stability in the Middle East and the four initiatives for promoting regional common security. It is willing to strengthen cooperation with China within this framework and looks forward to China playing a greater role in regional peace and stability.

The Tehran Times reported that Araghchi expressed strong support for President Xi Jinping’s landmark proposals on safeguarding peace in the Middle East, declaring that Tehran is fully prepared to deepen strategic coordination with Beijing to build a sustainable regional security framework.

The English language Iranian daily reported that: “Amid China’s consistent contributions to regional and global peace and stability, Araghchi’s call for a greater Beijing-led role further underscores the diplomatic significance of his visit.

“This is the second time that the Iranian foreign minister has paid an official visit to China since the US and Israel launched their war on Iran in late February. Araghchi last visited China in May, shortly before a trip by President Donald Trump to the country. Araghchi’s Wednesday visit comes ahead of the upcoming trip by President Xi to the US, where he will meet Trump.

“China is a trusted partner not only for Iran but also for other countries in the Middle East, in addition to maintaining open communication channels with Washington.

“When viewed alongside China’s principled stance during the Iran-US war, its emphasis on prioritising dialogue over confrontation, the two four-point initiatives put forward by President Xi, and his latest call for a ‘due role’ in resolving the conflict through BRICS, the significance of Araghchi’s trip becomes even clearer.”

The Tehran Times concluded: “By offering visionary peace initiatives and standing firmly against unilateralism and hegemony, Beijing provides a vital pillar of support for independent nations confronting external aggression. This diplomatic momentum underscores China’s constructive leadership and its contribution to advancing lasting security, development, and peace in the region.”

For its part, the Palestine Chronicle noted that Araghchi had stressed Iran’s strategic partnership with China and said that decisions being taken amid current regional developments would have “enormous repercussions.” It added:

“Against this backdrop, Tehran and Beijing have intensified diplomatic coordination, with Iran presenting China as an important strategic partner in shaping the political response to the war and its wider economic consequences.

“Araghchi said the choices being made during the current period would extend beyond the immediate crisis, affecting the future balance of power and political arrangements across the region.”

Sanders, Bannon and an AI ban aimed at China

The following important article by Gary Wilson brings a much-needed class analysis to bear on the debate over AI safety, artificial general intelligence and recursive self-improvement – an issue that has until now been conducted almost entirely in the abstract language of “humanity versus the machines”.

Gary’s starting point is a one-day Pro-Human Assembly held in Washington on 15 September, at which Senator Bernie Sanders shared a platform with Steve Bannon, and at which Sanders and Congressman Greg Casar promoted their proposed Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act. The question posed from that stage was how to keep artificial intelligence under human control. But, as Wilson observes, there is no “human control” in general: every one of the leading AI systems is owned by somebody, financed by somebody and put to work by somebody.

Artificial superintelligence does not exist. What does exist is Palantir’s Maven Smart System, running on a Pentagon contract worth nearly $1.3 billion and used to identify and prioritise targets in the war on Iran; Palantir’s ELITE, which assigns confidence scores to addresses where ICE may find the people it is hunting; and the algorithmic systems already used across warehousing, construction, transport, healthcare and gig work to set the pace of work, evaluate performance and determine pay. None of these is the target of the proposed ban.

The article argues that the core target of the current debate is China. Gary traces the convergence between Sanders’ call for export controls and international agreement, Bannon’s demand that Chinese nationals be removed from US laboratories, and Anthropic chief executive Dario Amodei’s proposal for an industry slowdown that must on no account go far enough to let Chinese companies catch up – noting the obvious contradiction that the US companies built their models by appropriating the accumulated labour of millions of people without permission or payment, and now want the US government to stop Chinese companies doing to them what they did to everyone else.

The machines already have human owners.

The most advanced chips are owned. The data centers are owned. The models are owned. The military networks are owned and controlled by the government. The products of millions of people’s labor have been gathered into privately owned systems whose owners determine who may use them and for what purpose.

Now those same corporations and the U.S. government are arguing over how fast those systems should develop, how tightly they should be regulated and how to keep China from acquiring the same capabilities.

The machines that ought to worry us already have names, budgets and contracts.

Maven sorts targets.

ELITE sorts addresses.

They are under the control of the U.S. monopolies and the U.S. government. The ban proposed in Washington would leave both running. Its target is China.

How BRICS is reshaping the Global South’s place in the world

The following article by Sithembiso Bhengu, director of the Chris Hani Institute, a South Africa-based think tank, examines what the growth of BRICS means for Africa.

Three of the ten full members of BRICS are African states – South Africa, Egypt and Ethiopia – meaning that the continent is well represented in a bloc that accounts for nearly half the world’s population. As Bhengu puts it, this is a rare thing in the postwar order: an institution in which African states are “not merely petitioners at the margins of decisions made elsewhere, but co-architects of the rules themselves”.

The contrast he draws is with the Bretton Woods institutions, which brought austerity, liberalisation, privatisation and structural adjustment to Africa, locking much of the continent into debt dependency long after formal independence had been won. BRICS and its New Development Bank offer development finance without conditionality, bolstering rather than compromising African countries’ sovereignty, and giving African finance ministries a genuine second option for the first time in a generation.

The figures bear this out. Belt and Road investment in Africa reached $39 billion in the first half of 2025 alone – around five times the level of a year earlier, and making the continent the single largest destination for that capital anywhere in the world. Kenya’s Standard Gauge Railway, Djibouti’s ports, Ethiopia’s infrastructure build-out and Nigeria’s special economic zones are all part of a Global South modernising on its own terms, along corridors, in Bhengu’s phrase, that it did not have to ask permission to construct.

The trajectory of BRICS cooperation is clear and consequential. As BRICS continues to evolve as a platform for Global South cooperation, and as the African Union presses, through BRICS and the G20 alike, for reform of the United Nations Security Council, the direction of travel is becoming clearer: African states are moving from being subjects of global governance to becoming shapers of it.

Tings Chak: Fifty years after Mao – a legacy for changing the current of history

The following article by Tings Chak, Asia co-coordinator of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research and an editor of Wenhua Zongheng: A Journal of Contemporary Chinese Thought, marks fifty years since the death of Mao Zedong by asking why young Chinese people are returning to him.

She begins with a television drama made for the 130th anniversary of Mao’s birth, which set out to show not a bronze statue but “a young man their own age trying to figure things out” – and with the fact that Mao’s Selected Works have repeatedly topped the borrowing list at Tsinghua University library. What draws these readers, she argues, is not nostalgia but political method: how to identify the contradictions within a situation, distinguish its surface appearance from its underlying movement, and locate individual experience within wider social forces.

Tings traces that method from “no investigation, no right to speak” through the Communist Party’s 2023 investigation and research campaign to the targeted poverty alleviation drive, in which 800,000 cadres were dispatched to 128,000 villages. She then turns to On Protracted War, written when defeat at Japan’s hands seemed to many the only sober conclusion, and to its relevance for a global left that moves too easily between the conviction that US imperialism is immovable and the declaration that an anti-imperialist multipolarity has already arrived.

Tings developed several of these themes in her contribution to our recent webinar marking the 50th anniversary, organised jointly with the International Manifesto Group, a report of which can be read here. The full text of our co-editor Keith Bennett’s closing remarks to the same webinar is available here.

BBC: retract your false report on China and the Himalayan floods

The US peace organisation CODEPINK, as part of its China Is Not Our Enemy campaign, has launched a petition calling on the BBC to retract its false report claiming that China was censoring footage of the catastrophic floods that struck Nepal and the Tibetan Plateau in late August.

As we noted at the time, the sequence of events was a simple one: “the Chinese state published the clip; the BBC ran the clip; the BBC then published a story about how the Chinese state is suppressing the clip.” The video used in the BBC’s own report had been released by the Chinese port authorities at Gyirong, and footage of the disaster was circulating widely on Chinese platforms.

CODEPINK’s petition notes that the real story is the climate crisis in the fastest-warming mountain range on earth, and that serious journalism would be examining the role of the fossil fuel industry and of global militarism rather than manufacturing another anti-China scare.

We encourage our readers to add their names. The full text of the petition, which can be signed on the CODEPINK website, is reproduced below.

Sign our petition to the BBC demanding they correct the record and stop using Himalayan flood tragedy to spread misinformation about China. We need media accountability!

Dear BBC Editors,

We are writing to demand that the BBC correct and retract the false report claiming that China is “censoring” footage of the recent catastrophic floods affecting Nepal and the Tibetan Plateau.

This disaster has caused immense human suffering. Hundreds of people have reportedly been killed, thousands remain missing, and communities across the Himalayan region are facing devastating destruction. Instead of documenting the human consequences of the accelerating climate crisis, the BBC instead chose to turn this tragedy into another anti-China story.

The claim that footage of the disaster was being broadly “censored” deserves serious scrutiny. The floods have been widely reported across Chinese media, while footage and discussion of the disaster have circulated extensively on Chinese social media platforms. Chinese citizens have publicly shared images, information, grief, and solidarity as communities confront this terrible tragedy.

Can China save the world?

In the following review of China’s Foreign Policy and the Making of a Multipolar World, Dirk Nimmegeers describes the collection as an “intriguing, enjoyable read, aimed at a diverse readership”. The review gives an overview of each of the ten chapters – from the historical and theoretical framing provided by the editors, through contributions by Ken Hammond, Andrew Murray, Jenny Clegg, Danny Haiphong, Cheng Enfu, Torkil Lauesen and Michael Dunford, to Carlos Martinez’s closing chapter on the Four Global Initiatives.

This review first appeared, in Dutch, on Chinasquare.be, and has been machine translated.

Note: there will be an online book launch for the book – hosted by Friends of Socialist China together with the International Manifesto Group, Praxis Press, Manifesto Press and the Critical Theory Workshop – on Sunday 20 September at 4pm Britain (5pm Western Europe, 11am US Eastern), at which seven of the book’s contributors will speak.

At present, ‘the world is undergoing changes the likes of which have not been seen for a century’. This is a well-known statement by the Chinese leader Xi Jinping. According to Keith Bennett and Carlos Martinez, it is becoming clearer every day that Xi is right. They point, to name but a few signs, to the course of the war against Iran, or the rise of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. Furthermore, the editors of Friends of Socialist China note that China has adapted its foreign policy to this reality, shifting from a low profile approach to a more assertive and proactive strategy. When they asked seven other eminent specialists for their analysis of China’s foreign policy, the editors therefore decided to give the collection a subtitle that echoes Xi’s vision. China’s Foreign Policy and the Making of a Multipolar World: Changes unseen in a century was published by Praxis Press at the end of August.

The book contains analyses of what China represents in geopolitical terms today. The authors are well-established and experienced academics and journalists. They provide answers to questions on this subject, which is of the utmost importance for the future of the world – questions that preoccupy many readers, particularly those on the progressive and left-wing spectrum. What is the historical background to Chinese foreign policy, and how will it evolve? On what principles and theories is it based? How does practice relate to propaganda? Is China a new imperialist power? Is its international policy ‘good enough’ for a country that calls itself socialist? And what does China’s rise mean for the Global South, for the prospects of peace and for the long-term struggle to establish a more just world order?

When socialist countries went to war: Keith Bennett in conversation with Radhika Desai

In the late 1970s, wars involving three self-declared socialist countries, China, Vietnam and Cambodia were gleefully reported in the Western press along with lurid allegations of ‘killing fields’ in Cambodia. Many considered that this had sounded the death knell of socialist internationalism.

In this episode of her Geopolitical Economy Hour, Radhika Desai is joined by our co-editor Keith Bennett, who is also co-editor of a new book on China’s foreign policy, to help disinter facts that lie buried under decades of misinterpretation and misunderstanding of these complex events. The purpose was twofold: to help understand these conflicts in a broadly historical materialist manner, one that makes socialist sense, and on that basis to dig deeper into the complex interrelationship between class and nation in the advance towards socialism. Some of the questions discussed are: Why did Vietnam attack Cambodia and China attack Vietnam? What drove these countries, which had stood shoulder to shoulder against US aggression, apart? Who were the ‘Khmer Rouge’ and what motivated them? Where did it all go wrong?

Parliamentary diplomacy boosts Angola-China friendship

Adão de Almeida, Speaker of Angola’s National Assembly, paid an official visit to China from September 9-17.

According to Angola’s Angop news agency, the agenda included sharing experiences on China’s legislative process, as well as identifying best practices that could be adapted to the Angolan context. The delegation also visited infrastructure related to science, technology and innovation, sectors regarded as strategic to Angola’s economic and social development.

Manuel Dembo, First Secretary of the Bureau of the National Assembly, noted that the visit is of significant strategic importance, as it is the first official visit by a Speaker of Angola’s National Assembly to the People’s Republic of China. The parliamentarian also highlighted the role played by China in Angola’s post-war reconstruction process, advocating stronger strategic cooperation between the two countries through parliamentary diplomacy.

Angop also reported that the two sides signed a Memorandum of Understanding aimed at strengthening interparliamentary cooperation and promoting political dialogue and mutual understanding as well as closer ties between the two peoples.

Under the instrument, the parties undertake, among other aspects, to deepen parliamentary ties and promote institutional exchanges, contributing to the strengthening of cooperation relations between the Republic of Angola and the People’s Republic of China.

The MoU was signed following September 11 talks between Almeida and his Chinese counterpart Zhao Leji, chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPC). Zhao said China stands ready to work with Angola, under the guidance of the important consensus reached by the two heads of state, to carry forward traditional friendship, strengthen solidarity and cooperation, advance the implementation of the outcomes of the Beijing Summit of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC), and promote the steady growth of China-Angola relations. Further, China appreciates Angola’s long-standing commitment to the one-China principle and will continue to firmly support Angola in safeguarding its national sovereignty, security and development interests.

Almeida said that while pursuing its own development, China supports the common development of its partners around the world. The National Assembly of Angola stands ready to strengthen exchanges with China’s NPC and give full play to the role of the legislature in providing legal guarantees for the implementation of the cooperation agreements between the two countries.

The Angolan visitor also met with Wang Huning, chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), on the same day.

Noting that Angola appreciates China’s support for its economic and social development, Almeida said Angola stands ready to deepen cooperation in energy, economy and trade, and transportation, strengthen international coordination, and promote fair and equitable global governance.

The following day, Almeida gave a keynote lecture at the China University of Petroleum, in which he highlighted the role of Angola’s parliament in creating the legislative conditions required for the development of the national oil industry, with particular emphasis on the approval of tax incentives aimed at attracting investment.

Almeida stated that, despite ongoing efforts to diversify the economy, oil continues to occupy a significant position, which is why the state has sought to create conditions to maintain adequate levels of production and attract new investment.

According to the Parliament Speaker, Angola once achieved production of approximately two million barrels of oil per day. However, this level has declined in recent years and currently stands at just over one million barrels per day. He added that this situation requires new investment, particularly in scientific research, exploration and the discovery of new oil fields, as well as in attracting capital for the development of petroleum resources.

Almeida also expressed satisfaction that the China University of Petroleum hosts Angolan students engaged in education and scientific research in the field of petroleum exploration. He considered that the training of these professionals could contribute to the development and growth of Angola’s oil industry and stressed the need for continuous, in-depth and dedicated study.

“We are confident that they will help ensure that Angola’s oil industry continues to grow and prosper,” he said.

In his address, the parliamentary leader also advocated the need for Angola to evolve from a state primarily engaged in oil production into a country with greater domestic capacity to process and refine its own resources.

Trump and Xi: two views on international relations

With a second summit this year between Chinese President Xi Jinping and US President Donald Trump expected to take place in Washington DC before the end of September, the US newspaper People’s World recently carried an article by veteran activist David Cavendish setting out the two leaders’ divergent views on international relations.

He notes that we have recently “seen how the leadership of the United States government, bogged down in a war that it cannot win, is spewing threats and insults against countries, both ‘friend’ and ‘foe’.”

He notes a number of statements by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, for example on X: “Today, in that same spirit, we are launching an economic onslaught against Iran’s financial connections around the globe. Our objective is to sever every economic lifeline that sustains this tyrannical regime.”

“At the same time”, he adds, “the president announced on his social media site that he will continue to use the military option, with attacks on targets in southern Iran. ‘If the failed Nation of Iran retaliates for this very justified attack, they will be hit again at a much harder and higher level, but it will not be the biggest attack of them all, that is waiting in the wings and, when it is over, there will be very little left of the Islamic Republic of Iran!’

“The president’s language, to say the least, is stark and speaks in a tone rarely heard in international affairs. One can make all types of analyses as to what motivates Trump, but one thing is clear: He is an extreme example of US imperialistic policies followed since the Spanish-American War.” (1898)

Noting China’s refusal to acquiesce in Trump’s campaign, he writes, “that was not just because of some minor technicality, but because the basis of Chinese foreign economic policy is, in most respects, the complete opposite of that of the United States.”

In this regard he draws attention to an editorial in Global Times, which states: “If the US cannot even rally its own allies, it certainly cannot expect to boss China around. China has consistently opposed unilateral bullying and long-arm jurisdiction—not because China is Iran’s largest trading partner and maintains long-standing friendly relations with Iran, but because once this US logic is accepted, international trade would no longer be normal exchanges between nations. Instead, it would devolve into an absurd situation where the US unilaterally sets the rules and the flow of all goods must be approved by the US.”

Noting how President Xi Jinping had recently stated, at the summit meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), held in the Kyrgyz capital Bishkek, that all countries need to build “an equal and orderly multipolar world,” one that “should ensure equal rights, equal opportunities and equal rules for all countries, regardless of their size, strength and wealth,” he concludes:

“That is the stark choice facing the people of our planet. On the one hand, we have the neo-barbarism of the Trump administration. On the other, a new set of international relations based on equality, fairness, and peace. The choice is clear.”

BRICS Summit reaches consensus and affirms support for Palestine and Cuba

The 18th Summit of the BRICS cooperation mechanism, meeting in the Indian capital, New Delhi, over September 12-13 adopted a joint declaration at the conclusion of its first session held in the afternoon of September 12.

The detailed 140-point declaration addresses a huge range of issues. Considering the sharp differences presently existing among some BRICS member countries, most notably Iran and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), the unanimous adoption by all the full members of BRICS may be said to represent not least a considerable achievement on the part of Indian diplomacy, with, according to numerous media reports, its diplomats working intensively to secure consensus and agreement among all parties in the days leading up to the summit.

The Xinhua News Agency reports that the declaration, which is entitled, “Building for Resilience, Innovation, Cooperation and Sustainability”, reflects a commitment to inclusive global governance and strengthening multilateralism, calling for international and regional peace and security, and underscoring sustainable and inclusive global economic growth as well as strengthening cultural and people-to-people cooperation.

Acknowledging the historical lineage of this key agency of Global South cooperation, the declaration notes: “We recall the 1955 Asian-African Conference in Bandung, Indonesia that proclaimed general principles, including equality, independence, non-intervention, and mutual benefit. We stress that the Bandung Spirit serves as a reference in the pursuit of a fairer, more inclusive, and representative multilateral system.”

Considering not least the positions and actions in the recent period of India and the United Arab Emirates, one positive and welcome development is the relatively principled stand taken by the declaration on the Palestinian and related issues. It states:

“We take note of the adoption of UNSC Resolution 2803. We call for the implementation of the relevant UNGA and UNSC Resolutions and urge all parties to ensure the maintenance of ceasefire and full and unhindered humanitarian access in the Gaza Strip. In this context, we express deep concern on the continued violence in Gaza despite the ceasefire agreement of October 2025. We call for halting any policies aimed at forced displacement of Palestinians from Gaza Strip and express concern regarding arrangements that may prejudice the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and legitimise or prolong occupation.

“We reaffirm that a just and lasting solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can only be achieved by peaceful means and depends on the fulfilment of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, including the rights to self-determination and return. We affirm the need for adequate representation of Palestine in all relevant international organisations, including multilateral financial institutions, and access to their resources. We reaffirm our support for the State of Palestine’s full membership in the UN in the context of the unwavering commitment to the two-state solution, in accordance with international law, including relevant UN Security Council and General Assembly resolutions, and the Arab Peace Initiative, that includes the establishment of a sovereign, independent and viable State of Palestine within the internationally recognised 1967 borders, which included the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, with East Jerusalem as its capital, in order to achieve the vision of two States living side by side, in peace and security.

“We express our firm opposition to the forced displacement, temporary or permanent, under any pretext, of any of the Palestinian population from the Occupied Palestinian Territory, as well as any geographic or demographic changes to the territory of the Gaza Strip. We reiterate that international law and international judicial bodies demand the end of the illegal occupation and the immediate cessation of all practices that undermine legal norms and obstruct a just and lasting peace.

“We reiterate our grave concern about the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including the humanitarian situation in Gaza. We call for adherence to international law, in particular to international humanitarian law and international human rights law, and condemn all their violations, including the use of starvation as a method of warfare, attacks targeting civilians and civilian objects, including healthcare facilities and other civilian infrastructure, as well as the unlawful obstruction of humanitarian access. We also condemn attempts to politicise or militarise humanitarian assistance. We reassert our steadfast support for UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) and stress the need to fully respect the mandate, bestowed on it by the UNGA, for the provision of basic services to Palestine refugees in its five fields of operations. We call on all relevant parties to respect their obligations under international law and act with utmost restraint and to avoid escalatory actions and provocative declarations. We note, in this regard, the provisional measures of the International Court of Justice in the legal proceedings instituted by South Africa against Israel, which, inter alia, reaffirmed Israel’s legal obligation to ensure the provision of humanitarian aid in Gaza.

“We reject any unilateral measures that seek to alter the legal and historical status of occupied Jerusalem. We urge full respect for the sanctity of all religious sites and holy places in the city and for the rights of all to access and to observe their religious rites without hinderance.

“We welcome the ceasefire in Lebanon and call on all parties to strictly adhere to its terms and to fully implement UNSC Resolution 1701. We condemn the continued violations of the ceasefire and of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Lebanon. We call on Israel to respect the terms agreed with the Lebanese government and to withdraw its occupying forces from all of the Lebanese territories, in which they remain.

“We highlight the vital role played by United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) and agree it is imperative to ensure the safety, security, and freedom of movement of all UN personnel and equipment, as well as to respect the integrity of UN premises. We condemn all attacks against UNIFIL installations and personnel and emphasise that such attacks are a violation of international law and UN Security Council Resolution 1701 (2006). We also extend our deepest condolences for the loss of four Indonesian as well as other peacekeepers serving under UNIFIL and express solidarity with all Troop Contributing Countries affected. We express our condemnation of the incidents that led to these fatalities and reiterate that the safety and security of UN peacekeepers are non-negotiable. We underscore the importance of respecting the role and mandate of UNIFIL in supporting the Government of Lebanon and in creating space for a political solution. In this regard, we call for those responsible for these attacks to be held accountable and further call on all parties to guarantee the safety and freedom of movement of UNIFIL personnel and assets, as well as the inviolability of UN premises.”

The declaration also declares its support for Cuba, stating: “Underlining the character of Latin America and the Caribbean as a zone of peace, built on mutual respect, peaceful settlement of disputes and non-intervention, we express deep concern on the situation relating to Cuba due to the tightening of unilateral blockade measures against the country, their adverse effects on the Cuban economy, energy supplies and the worrying humanitarian impact on the Cuban people. In this regard, we reiterate the necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial measures against Cuba in accordance with UNGA Resolution A/RES/80/4.”

It concludes by extending full support to China for its BRICS Chairship in 2027 and the holding of the XIX BRICS Summit in China.

Kim Jong Un: we will always join hands with the Chinese comrades

Leader of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) Kim Jong Un sent a reply letter on September 12 to his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping in response to his letter sent on the occasion of the 78th founding anniversary of the DPRK on September 9.

Kim Jong Un wrote: “Your warm congratulations and best wishes serve as great strength and encouragement to all the members of the Workers’ Party of Korea and the DPRK people who are making all-out efforts to usher in a new era of comprehensive national rejuvenation, regarding socialism as their faith.

“We will always join hands with the Chinese comrades in the course of firmly defending and advancing the common cause of socialism and better cultivating, strengthening and developing the traditional DPRK-China relations of friendship and cooperation in conformity with the requirements of the new era and the aspirations and wishes of the peoples of the two countries.”

On September 8, the DPRK embassy in Beijing hosted a reception to mark their national day. It was attended by Peng Qinghua, vice-chairperson of the Standing Committee of the Chinese National People’s Congress (NPC), along with representatives of numerous Chinese departments and organisations.

In his speech Ambassador Ri Ryong Nam said that the 78 year-long history of the DPRK is the proud course of victory in which it has dynamically advanced for building a powerful socialist country despite all trials and difficulties under the outstanding leadership of President Kim Il Sung, Chairman Kim Jong Il and respected Comrade Kim Jong Un.

He said that the Workers’ Party of Korea and the DPRK government would as ever invariably and firmly support the Chinese people in their struggle for defending the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics in the new era and the country’s national sovereignty, security, development and interests under the leadership of the Communist Party of China with Comrade General Secretary Xi Jinping as its core.

Peng Qinghua extended warm congratulations on behalf of the Chinese party, government and people to the Korean party, government and people, saying that after the founding of the DPRK the Korean people embarked on the road of independent development and have dynamically advanced the socialist cause and changed the appearance of the state by waging a ceaseless struggle for 78 years.

No matter how the international situation may change, the Chinese party and government remains unchanged in its firm stand of attaching great importance to the China-DPRK friendship and also in its steadfast determination to firmly support the socialist cause of the DPRK led by General Secretary Kim Jong Un, defend the common interests of the two countries and preserve the excellent strategic environment, he stressed.

Meanwhile the General Association of Koreans in China (GAKC) and other organisations of the Korean community held celebrations on September 8 and 9 to mark their national day. They included placing flower baskets at the statue of President Kim Il Sung at Yuwen Middle School in Jilin and study tours of anti-Japanese revolutionary battle sites, where Chinese and Korean comrades fought shoulder-to-shoulder, in the three northeastern provinces of China. Kim Il Sung, the founder of the DPRK, studied at the Yuwen Middle School in his teenage years and his time there formed an important part of his early revolutionary activities. The school is also associated with a number of key figures in the Chinese revolution, including Guo Moro, Chu Tunan, and Shang Yue, who taught there, and Peng Huanwu and Ma Zongjin, who studied there.