A Ugandan transforms plastics into an eco-friendly vessel

A man in Luzira, Uganda has found a unique way to recycle plastics by making a large vessel made entirely out of plastic waste and ecofriendly materials. -

By Afolake Oyinloye

Flowering plants rise as if magically from Lake Victoria onto a wooden boat, giving it a leafy ambiance that enchants many visitors.

A man in Luzira, Uganda has found a unique way to recycle plastics by making a large vessel made entirely out of plastic waste and ecofriendly materials.

James Kateeba hopes his creation, called Floating Island, will encourage recycling and end littering in Lake Victoria.

“The vessel is anchored using cords attached to the mainland. It's sitting on a minimum of 10 tonnes of plastic bottles. It could hold up to about 100 to 120 people in comfort.”

Former tour guide James Kateeba started building the boat in 2017 to answer first the question of what to do with tonnes of plastic waste ending up in the lake when it rains heavily.

“Bottles get into Lake Victoria from runoff water, like when it rains. Most times actually it is runoff water that is not properly managed from the mainland they end up in the lake and at times people just throw them carelessly as they go to their day by day work.”

Next, he realized that the boat also could be an example of a sustainable business on the shores of Uganda's Lake Victoria — a floating restaurant and bar that could be unmoored to drift for pleasure.

Many who come to relax here on the lake shore in the suburb of Luzira, in the Ugandan capital of Kampala, have no idea of the boat’s roots, but Kateeba insists it’s first and foremost “a conservation effort,” one man’s effort to play his part in protecting a great lake from degradation.

The initial attraction becomes more compelling when tourists to Uganda learn that the greenery emerges from an innovative recycling project which uses thousands of dirt-encrusted plastic bottles to anchor the boat.

Jaro Matusiewicz, a businessman visiting from Greece says he had “never seen a place like this,” praising its “accommodative” atmosphere as he dug into fish and chips on a maiden visit.

“He has a big Island actually but I never heard of anything like this in Africa, especially using the bottles which are collected from Lake Victoria, which is now a big plus because you are not only cleaning the environment but also providing something very unique.,” says Matusiewicz.

Africa's Lake Victoria, the world’s second-largest freshwater lake which spans three countries, is plagued by pollution including runoff waste, sand mining and a decline in water levels in part due to climate change.

Layers of plastic waste float near some beaches during the rainy season, a visible sign of pollution that’s a worry for fishing communities heavily dependent on the lake.

Kateeba started by asking fishermen from nearby landing sites to collect plastic bottles for a small fee.

More than 10 tonnes of bottles were brought to him within six months.

Batches were tied up in fishing nets and packed with dirt, creating the solid bases anchoring the boat but which also are fertile grounds for climbing plants here and there.

Kateeba’s boat has become a huge attraction for people who visit the island from various parts of the country.

Joseph Bongomin, a regular at the floating island, says it is refreshing to have something different where the community members can come and enjoy.

"We had formerly a beach but due to water activities it got busted so we started travelling to other areas where we could get some recreation. But when this brother of ours came and opened this floating island, that’s when we started getting the news we started coming in," explains Bongomin.

"Later it started bringing in more impact and we felt our area, a development of this nature that had come, we need to be part of it," he says.

Kateeba’s effort of conservation is also paying off as the roots from the fig trees and shrubs provide a breeding ground for fish.

“We get fishermen catching catfish, catching lung fish and tilapia under this. We created space under this vessel which is good for the fish population in this area,” says Kateeba.

A familiar project

A similarly minded project was launched in 2018 from the beaches of the Kenyan coast, that one involving the building of a small boat, known as the Flipflopi, entirely from plastic waste collected from sandy shores and towns.

In 2021 the Flipflopi went on a voyage of Lake Victoria in order “to raise awareness of the pollution plaguing the region’s most critical freshwater ecosystem,” according to the United Nations Environment Program.

Peace broker or weapons dealer? China’s latest balancing act in the war in Ukraine

A peace plan, reports of potential weapons sales, and an ‘eternal friendship’ with Russia make for a confusing picture.

Russia's president, Vladimir Putin, left, and President Xi Jinping of China pose for a photograph during their meeting in Beijing on Feb. 4.
ALEXEI DRUZHININ/Sputnik/AFP via Getty Images


Lili Pike, China Reporter, and Tom Nagorski, Global Editor
February 27, 2023

From the day Russia invaded Ukraine, the geopolitics of the war have mattered almost as much as events on the battlefield. And for all the focus on the U.S. and its NATO allies and their robust support for the Ukrainian resistance, China’s role has loomed large. And it’s not always clear where exactly President Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party stand when it comes to the war.

Recent developments have heightened the attention on Beijing. On Sunday, the Biden administration issued the latest of several public warnings against China providing military aid to Russia — in the wake of reports that such aid was in the offing. National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said weapons sent to Moscow would be used to harm civilians in Ukraine, and that China would face “real costs” if it went ahead with arms shipments to Russia. “China should want no part of that,” Sullivan said on ABCs “This Week.”

On Friday, the anniversary of the Russian invasion, China issued a 12-point position paper on the war (or the “Ukraine crisis,” as China prefers to call it) that laid out conditions for a negotiated solution. The document was seen as heavily biased toward Russia; it suggested a ceasefire that would freeze Russian gains in place and offered no condemnation of the invasion itself. The document got at best lukewarm reactions in Western capitals, and outright dismissals in others. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy responded by saying he would be happy to meet with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping — adding, “China historically respects our territorial integrity, and it should therefore do everything for Russia to leave the territory of Ukraine.”

Over the weekend, Beijing announced it would host Belarus’ President Aleksandr Lukashenko, a close Kremlin ally, for a state visit. That drew a suggestion via Twitter from a top aide to Zelenskyy that China choose its allies more carefully. “You don’t bet on an aggressor who broke international law and will lose the war,” Mykhailo Podolyak wrote. “This is shortsighted.”

For its part, China said Monday that the U.S. was “hypocritical” to warn Beijing about sending weapons to Russia. “While the United States has intensified its efforts to send weapons to one of the conflicting parties, resulting in endless wars and no end in sight for peace, it has frequently spread false information about China’s supply of weapons to Russia,” said Mao Ning, the spokeswoman for China’s foreign ministry.

Taken together, the recent developments highlight China’s complex and often opaque approach to the war. Just three weeks before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin and China’s leader Xi Jinping met and declared a “no limits” friendship and were sharply critical of NATO and the U.S. Ever since the war began, China has sought to balance the partnership with Russia against a concern that it not rupture completely its relationship with the West.

To date, the balance has tilted toward Moscow; China has refused to criticize Putin, kept up a busy wartime commerce with Russia, amplified Russian falsehoods about Ukraine and placed blame for the war at the feet of the NATO alliance. Now China is in effect nominating itself as a neutral broker in a possible resolution to the conflict.

As the war enters its second year, Grid spoke with two experts on Sino-Russian relations — Cheng Chen, a Professor of Political Science at University at Albany, State University of New York, and Marcin Kaczmarski, a lecturer in security studies at the University of Glasgow. They weighed in on the latest signals from China and what they might portend.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Grid: Has China’s position on the war shifted in any significant way over the last year?

Cheng Chen: From the beginning, China has emphasized that its position remains neutral and will not take sides. This rhetoric has not changed. At the same time, China has significantly toned down its enthusiasm when talking about its relationship with Russia. Although China refused to condemn Russian aggression, it made it clear that it had no prior knowledge of Putin’s plan of invasion and paid lip service to the importance of sovereignty.

This “neutral” stance, however, does not prevent China from playing a major and indispensable role in propping up Russia’s embattled economy, which contributes directly to Russia’s war efforts. It also does not prevent China from carrying out joint military exercises and joint military patrols, or holding high-level meetings and even summits with Russia, which thwarts the West’s efforts to make Russia an international pariah. In this sense, China has provided Russia with a vital lifeline in this time of crisis.

Marcin Kaczmarski: Firstly, I think China’s position on the war has evolved with the war, because my understanding was that China, just as Russia and many countries around the world, expected that it would be a very quick war, with a decisive victory for Russia.

Once it turned out that Ukraine was successfully resisting, and the West had united quite unexpectedly behind Ukraine, the Chinese feeling about the war started changing. On the one hand, China is trapped in this attempt to position itself as a neutral party — and this is what I would say Beijing attempts to do vis-à-vis the external world. But on the other hand, Beijing struggles to avoid any association with the West against Russia.

This position, which China presents as neutrality, in the West is read as support for Russia. This is why the Chinese narratives, the official discourses, are repeating Russian points, blaming the U.S., blaming NATO for the war, and so on. In this sense, I would say China’s trying to walk this line since it turned out that the war was going to last longer than we expected, than Russia expected.

G: Just how significant has China’s trade with Russia been in keeping Russia afloat economically?

MK: There are two main points here. Firstly, China is not alone in this capitalizing on Russia’s difficulties, in finding other customers. If we look at India or Turkey, these two states have also rushed to buy Russian oil, for instance. Second point is that in the case of China, my argument would be that it is still Chinese companies that are capitalizing on Russian difficulties and capitalizing on the fact that Russia has to sell oil, for instance, on discounted prices, rather than a strategic decision of the Chinese state to throw its economic weight behind Russia.

One instance is a project, the Trans-Mongolian Gas Pipeline, which Russia has lobbied quite strongly for, and which will be a clear signal that China is offering an alternative market to the European gas market. But so far, Mongolia says “yes,” Russia is willing to proceed with the project, but China still does not agree to a contract. I see it as the absence of China’s strategic support.

G: What do you make of the reports that China is considering providing Russia with weapons? Do you think that’s going to happen? Why or why not?

CC: Currently, there is no evidence that China has provided lethal aid to Russia. In the short term, it is highly unlikely that China will directly provide lethal weapons to Russia, because that would undermine any pretense of China’s neutrality and deprive Xi’s peace plan of any credibility. It would also subject China to severe Western sanctions at a time when China really wants to focus on economic growth after ending its zero-covid policy.

Nevertheless, there are numerous other ways in which China could boost Russia’s military capability, including supplying various nonlethal aid and dual-use materials and components, many of which have origins that are hard to trace. These options are much less costly, and therefore likely to remain China’s preference. All this, of course, does not mean there aren’t internal discussions of other options, as reported by The Wall Street Journal. The U.S.’s revelation of this intelligence, I think, might be for the purpose of deterring Beijing from actually pursuing that path, and implicitly discrediting Xi’s “neutral” peace plan.

MK: First, the Chinese leadership would not like to see Russia lose this war, because this would mean that the West is reinforced, that the whole narrative of the West’s decline, which is so widespread in Chinese official discourse, that this narrative is not exactly correct.

But at the same time, we have also seen the Chinese as unwilling to openly support Russia in circumventing or bypassing sanctions. While I wouldn’t exclude that there are some weapons deliveries to Russia, I think, from Beijing’s perspective, it is still too costly. Perhaps not that costly in relations with the U.S., because I would think the Chinese elite sees the conflict with the U.S. as rather a permanent feature of China’s position in the world. But it would be much more problematic when it comes to Europe, because in my understanding, China still hopes to either drive a wedge or keep Europe at a certain distance from the U.S., especially when it comes to a potential joint trans-Atlantic policy toward China.

As I said, I wouldn’t exclude such arms supplies; but I would say that their potential costs outweigh benefits for China at this stage.

G: Did anything stand out you in China’s new position paper on the war?

CC: I did notice the thinly veiled criticisms of the U.S.’s “double standards” regarding sovereignty and NATO expansion. The document doesn’t contain specifics about a potential peace process and is therefore open to potential interpretations. Notably, it does not explicitly call for any Russian military withdrawal from occupied territories.

In the coming months, it is likely that China will come up with more specific plans to broker peace. The first point in the current document [”Respecting the Sovereignty of All Countries”] is apparently an attempt to reassure Ukraine and the West that China does not support Russia’s territorial annexations. The points which follow, however, point to a pause to NATO’s future expansion and lifting sanctions against Russia. These points hardly dispel the West’s impression of China’s bias toward Russia and will be difficult for Ukraine to accept under present circumstances. How to convince Ukraine of Beijing’s sincerity and true neutrality will remain a challenge.

MK: In this position paper, there’s no clear stance that [the war] might end if Russia decided to just withdraw. I would see it as part of, on the one hand, China’s own efforts to present itself as this neutral party. Secondly, it is probably also a signal sent to Europe, because there are some policymakers and elites in Europe that encouraged China to do something about Russia, and to use this leverage that they have with Russia in order to influence Moscow.

But I think China’s trying to square the circle. On the one hand, it wants to appeal to Europe and pull Europe a bit away from the U.S. But at the same time, it doesn’t want to criticize Russia in any way. This is why I think it leads to this very vague and general paper where China doesn’t take an explicit position, but rather tries to hide behind general formulations which on their own may be correct and rightful, but when you apply them, they don’t work.

China might have been more explicit about the need for Russia to do certain things. Or, in practical terms, China’s leader might finally talk to President Zelenskyy. The Chinese leadership has avoided any bilateral talks, any phone calls with Zelenskyy, which also shows those difficulties — how China has maneuvered in between trying not to be associated with Russia, but at the same time, not wanting to suggest the outside world that their ties with Russia are somehow fragile because of this war.

G: Following up on the first point in the document, which calls for respecting the sovereignty of all countries, how do you interpret that in this context?

MK: This is very problematic because this sentence can be read in a number of ways. The first reading could just be that China means that Russia should respect Ukraine’s sovereignty. But then, the Russian policymakers might say that what China says is actually supporting the [2014] annexation of Crimea. China hasn’t ever formally recognized the annexation — but at the same time, China has never called for Crimea to return to Ukraine.

I think this is one of the problems of this position paper: Each side can read it as they want, or as it is convenient for their aims in this war.

G: Looking ahead at what role China wants to play in the peace process, do you think it will move toward more concrete asks of Russia or bilateral talks with Ukraine? And do you think Ukraine and the West would be open to China’s involvement?

CC: One year into the conflict, neither side has been able to deliver a crushing blow on the battlefield. Consequently, neither side has strong incentives to engage in negotiations to end the conflict. As Russia’s most powerful partner, China definitely has leverage. China chose this moment to step in because it wants to counter the U.S.’s accusation that China took the side of the aggressor — Russia — and establish its image as a major global mediator.

Other than the two sides of the conflict, China has two target audiences. One is Europe, which has been rightly concerned about China’s role in supporting Russia and contemplating “decoupling” from China amid growing U.S.-China tension. Knowing that most European countries are averse to a protracted conflict, China hopes to be seen as playing a proactive role in ending the conflict while reassuring Europe that continuing engagement with China will not undermine European interests. The other major target audience is the Global South, which so far has not taken a side. China has endeavored to be seen as a leader of the Global South. Proposing a peace plan, which is dismissed by the West, will make China appear to be the more reasonable and pro-peace party as opposed to the U.S.’s “adding fuel to the fire.” In sum, Xi’s peace plan is fundamentally driven by China’s own interests.

In this sense, the fact that China is coming up with a peace plan now is more significant than the substance of the plan itself, which is unlikely to make either side happy. As the current status quo on the battlefield favors Russia [because Russia is still occupying large chunks of Ukrainian territory], a call to “freeze” the conflict as it is, even if in a demilitarized fashion, is still biased toward Russia. China’s point, however, is not for Ukraine and the West to accept this proposal, but to embellish its “neutral” and “pro-peace” image in order to appeal to Europe and the Global South.

MK: Any changes in China’s position will relate to potential changes on the ground. If Ukraine manages to regain some of its territories, if it demonstrates on the battlefield that it is capable of inflicting damage on the Russian forces, and if there is a success of the Ukrainian counteroffensive, then I would expect China to be more flexible and perhaps to decide that, in its own interest, it’s better to help with the end of the conflict by distancing at least a bit from Russia or by pushing Russia to accept certain conditions if and when negotiations start. But I think that it really depends on what happens on the battlefield. At this stage, the calculus in Beijing is still that Russia is able to win this war.

G: Xi might visit Russia in April or May. Do you have any thoughts on why then, and what the aim of the visit would be?

MK: If we are talking about April and May, it is most plausibly a sign that the Chinese side didn’t want the visit to take place in February, around the anniversary of the war.

Secondly, it is China’s turn. Apart from the period of the pandemic, when both leaders didn’t travel, they saw each other every year. Even before Putin’s return to the presidency. So in this sense, Xi Jinping’s not going to Moscow would have been read in the West very clearly as a signal of tensions in the relationship, and even if tensions are there, both sides would work hard to sweep them under the carpet.

So I think in this sense, Xi doesn’t have a choice. He needs to go to Moscow to demonstrate the relations are still very good and normal despite the war. But the fact that he’s not rushing there may be a sign that they are once again trying to strike this balance between cordial relations with Russia and attempts to be neutral.

Thanks to Dave Tepps for copy editing this article.

• 
  Lili Pike

  China Reporter

  Lili Pike is a China reporter at Grid focused on climate change, technology and U.S.-China relations.

  lili_pike
• 
  Tom Nagorski

  Global Editor

  Tom Nagorski is the global editor at Grid, where he oversees our coverage of global security, U.S.-China relations, migration trends, global economics and U.S. foreign policy.

  TomNagorski

TOPICS

CHINAXI JINPINGVLADIMIR PUTINRUSSIA

A China-sponsored peace plan is worth a try

Many Asian countries who have managed countless disputes are likely to support such an attempt

A billboard showing Chinese President Xi Jinping with a slogan which reads "Remain true to our original aspiration and keep our mission firmly in mind", in Beijing, on February 28. AFP

Do leaders around the world want the war in Ukraine to end? Or do they want nothing less than President Vladimir Putin to be pushed from office during some sort of “colour revolution” in Russia? Answers to those questions were signalled by the responses to the 12-point peace plan laid out by China last Friday.

Nato Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg immediately dismissed it out of hand, saying: “It is not a peace plan. China doesn’t have much credibility because they have not been able to condemn the illegal invasion of Ukraine.” On the same day, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken told the UN Security Council: “No member of this council should call for peace while supporting Russia’s war on Ukraine and on the UN Charter.” No surprise there, really (although Beijing would surely dispute supporting either the war on Ukraine or one on the UN Charter). After all, US President Joe Biden said nearly a year ago that Mr Putin “cannot remain in power”, and last April, US Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin declared: “We want to see Russia weakened to the degree that it can’t do the kinds of things that it has done in invading Ukraine.” For them, the goalposts moved early on from securing an end to the war, to crushing Russia.

But Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy – whom the most bellicose western leaders have consistently said should be the final arbiter of what is acceptable to his country or not – did not reject the proposal. Quite the opposite. He said he would like to meet Chinese President Xi Jinping to discuss it. “Let’s work with China on this point,” he added. “Why not?” French President Emanuel Macron went a little further. "The fact that China is engaging in peace efforts is a good thing," he said on Saturday, and revealed that he planned to visit Beijing in early April to seek Mr Xi’s help in ending the war

.

France's President Emmanuel Macron (R) and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky walk on the tarmac of Velizy-Villacoublay airbase as they prepare to board a flight together, en route to Brussels for a summit at EU parliament, on February 9. Pool/ AFP

Mr Macron is absolutely right to do so, just as he has been one of the wisest of voices in simultaneously condemning the invasion while warning “we must not humiliate Russia, so that the day the fighting stops, we can build a way out through diplomatic channels”. Whatever people think about the government in Moscow, that has to be correct in terms of Russia itself in the long term.

I applaud Macron for not giving up without even trying

I believe that Mr Macron is also correct in thinking that any chance of peace has to be grasped. And this could be a chance. The likes of Nato’s Mr Stoltenberg evidently take China’s proposal to be a cynical ploy; but then they assume the country always acts in bad faith in any case. Not only should that assumption be challenged, but the naysayers are forgetting that China doesn’t want this prolonged war which, amongst other things, risks its own economic future and is in clear contravention of the first point in its peace plan. That states: “The sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all countries must be effectively upheld.”

There is no doubting that in the current circumstances, it may be exceptionally hard to reach an outcome that both sides can accept. But I applaud Mr Macron for not giving up without even trying.

What is the best that could come out of any discussions that could end the war swiftly? It would probably have to be some form of fudge that allowed both parties to save at least some face, and would require supremely dextrous diplomacy to overcome the reality that parts of Ukraine have now officially been declared to be part of Russia. How could the two presidents fashion an agreement that didn’t make one of them appear to be humbled and vanquished?

Being neither a Metternich nor a Kissinger, I don’t have the answer. But I do believe that some kind of non-maximalist, pragmatic solution might find plenty of support from the many Asian countries who have managed countless disputes that are never definitively settled but which have, most of the time, not led to armed conflict. China, South Korea, Japan and Russia all have disagreements over islands in the seas off East Asia, as do Thailand and Cambodia over ownership of a temple complex, and central Asian states over parts of the Fergana Valley. In fact, there are way too many disputes to list them all. The point is that, on the whole, the avoidance of war has been prized over resolutions that wholly satisfy one party and leave the other feeling cheated.

MORE FROM SHOLTO BYRNES

Nato should keep out of the Asia-Pacific's security issues

Much of the Global South might back a compromise, too – and their opinion is important, for it is not for western countries to decide that the only way this war stops is with a new Russian revolution that could lead to a disastrous civil war.

Also at the UN on Friday, the UAE’s ambassador Lana Nusseibeh said that she was “under no illusions” that peace efforts, including by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, would be easy. “Too much blood has been spilt, too much damage has been done,” she said. I myself have been moved by the heart-rending and superbly detailed reports from Ukraine by the academic and journalist David Patrikarakos. How can one be ambiguous in taking sides?

But a quick victory, by either Ukraine or Russia, appears extremely unlikely. Mr Macron seems to be the only western leader who understands that however unsatisfactory a Chinese-brokered fudge or compromise might be after everything Russia has done, it would still be better than hundreds of thousands more deaths. Good for him, I say, for not giving up on hope.

Published: March 01, 2023

.
Sholto Byrnes is an East Asian affairs columnist for The National

NATIONALIST JINGOISM

US losing ideological war against China in developing countries, says senior congressman

New congressional foreign affairs committee hears Beijing's scope will 'test American diplomacy like few issues have seen'

Michael McCaul says he believes the US could be at war with China by 2025. AP

Ellie Sennett
Washington
Feb 28, 2023

The new chairman of Washington's House Foreign Affairs Committee has used his first hearing to warn of China's expanding global influence.

Republican Michael McCaul on Tuesday told the committee the US was embroiled in an "ideological battle" with the government in Beijing.

“We are living through one of the most dangerous periods in American foreign policy in a generation [in] a struggle for the global balance of power … we are also falling behind on the ideological battle,” Mr McCaul told the committee on Tuesday.

Among the 6.3 billion people who live outside the world's “liberal democracies”, 70 per cent feel positively towards China and 66 per cent towards Russia, a 2021 poll by the Centre for the Future of Democracy of the University of Cambridge showed.

READ MORE

Blinken criticises China at UN after Beijing unveils Ukraine peace plan

Daniel Kritenbrink, assistant secretary at the State Department's Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, said Beijing represents Washington's “most consequential geopolitical challenge” as its only competitor with the intent and increased know-how to “reshape the international order".

“The scale and scope of the challenge posed by [China] as it becomes more repressive at home and more aggressive abroad will test American diplomacy like few issues we have seen,” he said.

The committee criticised Beijing's “coercive” expanding of foreign investment, including its historic Belt and Road Initiative.

MR. CIA

Scott Nathan, chief executive of the US International Development Finance Corporation, told the committee that Beijing “burdens countries with unsustainable debt".

Mr Nathan proposed that Washington increase its efforts at private-sector investment in countries where Beijing operates, and agreed with some members' argument that countries are becoming disenchanted over China's navigation of the vast investment project.

“They often bring their own workers rather than create local jobs and show little respect for community environmental labour standards,” he said. "When the workers go home to projects left behind, [they] are often inappropriate for local conditions and are poor quality."

To date, 147 countries — accounting for two thirds of the world’s population and 40 per cent of global gross domestic product — have signed on to Belt and Road projects or indicated an interest in doing so, according to the Washington-based Council on Foreign Relations.

Mr McCaul, who has hinted that he believes the US could be at war with China by 2025, called for the hearing in the aftermath of the spy balloon scandal and on the heels of a bilateral meeting between China's President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Suspected Chinese spy balloon shot down - in pictures








The committee chairman warned that that meeting would “strengthen their unholy alliance”, and condemned recent reports that Beijing is to send lethal weapons to Moscow as its war on Ukraine grinds into its second year.

China last week called for a ceasefire between Kyiv and Moscow, presenting a 12-point proposal to end the fighting.

Beijing insists it remains neutral on the conflict despite having refused to criticise the invasion of Ukraine or even refer to it as such.

Mr McCaul recently returned from a trip to Ukraine, where he led a congressional delegation to mark the war's sombre anniversary.

Tuesday's hearing, for which most seats available for observers were filled, demonstrated bipartisan concern for Chinese Communist Party influence and its possible assistance to Moscow, but a partisan divide over President Joe Biden's record on combating it.

Republicans called for a strengthening of export controls and criticised the administration over Department of Commerce approvals of tech sales with links to designated companies.

Democratic ranking member on the committee Gregory Meeks said the point highlighted by Republicans were “misleading and politicised without adequate context” and Democrats were set to later provide their own “explanatory document".

He said the Biden administration “deserves credit” for combating Beijing through the strengthening of Washington's political alliances.

“Our alliances and partnerships are our superpower and something Beijing cannot replicate,” Mr Meeks said. "Instead of taking unilateral steps that will be less effective and alienate us from our allies and partners, we must focus on working collectively to isolate Beijing."

CRIMINAL CAPITALI$M

'Greedy' fund managers sentenced over $8m Libyan wealth fund fraud

London-based fraudsters lived lavish lifestyle while conducting 'calculated and opportunistic' fraud

Three bankers have been sentenced at Southwark Crown Court in London for a complex fraud against Libya. Stephen Lock for The National

Nicky Harley
London
Feb 21, 2023

Three city fund managers have been jailed for a total of almost 12 years after conducting a "calculated and opportunistic" fraud resulting in $8.45 million losses to the Libyan Sovereign Wealth Fund.

A seven-year investigation by the UK's National Crime Agency discovered the complex fraud being conducted by fund managers Frederic Marino, Yoshika Ohmura and Aurelien Bessot.

Over a number of years, the men worked together to defraud a hedge fund and sovereign wealth fund that belonged to the Libyan people.

In 2009, French nationals Marino and Bessot set up an investment company, FM Capital Partners, based in Knightsbridge, London, which was responsible for investing the funds of a sovereign wealth fund established by the Libyan government.

READ MORE

Libyan wealth fund wins right to seek return of £10.5m investment in failed hotel scheme

Instead of optimising the investments, Marino and Bessot, with the help of Ohmura, placed investments so as to maximise their own rewards, to the detriment of the fund.

Prosecutor Andrew West, of the Crown Prosecution Service, described the men as "greedy and selfish".

“These three fraudsters were calculating and opportunistic in committing offences that left the people of Libya out of pocket by approximately $8.45 million for purely selfish and greedy purposes to fund their lavish lifestyles," he said.

“They showed a complete disregard for the important position they held to make investments work for their clients who were looking to diversify away from solely oil revenue.

“We would like to thank the hard work and dedication of the NCA in their diligent and determined investigation. The CPS is committed to working with criminal justice partners to combat large-scale financial fraud."

Marino, 56, was found guilty of fraud by abuse of position of trust and sentenced to seven years and six months, Ohmura, 47, was convicted of fraud by abuse of position of trust and sentenced to three years and six months, Bessot, 47, pleaded guilty to the same charge and was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment, suspended for two years.

The Libyan Investment Authority was established in 2006 by the Libyan government to manage the Libyan Sovereign Wealth Fund in order to protect and develop the value of Libya’s oil revenue reserves and to diversify the sources of national income away from oil.

The defendants were tasked with making investments on behalf of its Libya Africa Investment Portfolio.

However, an NCA investigation found that these investments were structured through Swiss investment banker Ohmura, generating finder fees that were under declared and laundered through a series of shell companies set up in the Seychelles and the Cayman Islands by the defendants.

Between 2009 and 2014, the three men caused LAIP to lose $8.45 million.

Concerns were originally raised in 2014, after the Libyan revolution, when the Libyan Board members of FMCP instigated a full investigation into the management and investment of their funds.

An independent auditor conducted a thorough investigation, including the seizure and analysis of around five million company records, and produced a 350-page report.

While being formally interviewed by the auditors, Marino walked out of the meeting and fled to Norway.

The NCA then began its investigation, involving numerous jurisdictions for witnesses and evidence, in particular Libya, Switzerland, the UAE, Monaco and Guernsey.

Marina and Ohmura were found guilty of conspiracy to commit fraud by abuse of position at Southwark Crown Court in December.

Bessot pleaded guilty to one count of fraud by abuse of position of trust before the start of the trial.

“This has been an extremely complex investigation with multi-jurisdictional challenges," Richard Harrison, Branch Commander of the NCA, said.

"These sentences send a clear message to anyone in the financial sector about the consequences of abusing their position.

"The NCA is committed to tackling fraud and those who abuse the UK’s financial centre to facilitate their crimes.”

World's ultra-wealthy lost a combined $10 trillion in 2022

Super-rich Europeans recorded the biggest drop after losing an average 17% of their net worth, Knight Frank report finds

Global economic uncertainty has dragged down the net worth of the world's wealthiest people, according to Knight Frank. 

Photo: Unsplash

Felicity Glover
Mar 01, 2023

The world’s ultra-wealthy people shed a combined $10 trillion, or 10 per cent, from their net worth in 2022, driven by the triple “shock” of global economic uncertainty, the energy crisis and the war in Ukraine, a report by property consultancy Knight Frank has said.

The super-rich in Europe were at the centre of the crisis, with ultra-high-net-worth individuals (UHNWIs) losing an average of 17 per cent from their fortunes, Knight Frank said in The Wealth Report 2023 on Wednesday.

Knight Frank defines UHNWIs as people who possess a net worth of $30 million or more, including primary residences and second homes not held as investments.

“Last year, the Ukraine crisis fuelled the European energy crunch and supercharged already surging inflation,” Liam Bailey, Knight Frank’s global head of research, said in the report.

“As a result, 2022 saw one of the sharpest upwards movements in global interest rates in history, leading to economic conditions which Collins English Dictionary neatly dubbed the ‘permacrisis’.”

Global economic uncertainty — compounded by the Russia-Ukraine war, high inflation and rising interest rates — has stoked volatility in global financial markets, which fell into bear territory in 2022 after a 13-year bull run.

READ MORE
Elon Musk reclaims title as world's richest person
Who ended 2022 as the richest person in the world?
Celebrity Net Worth: Who ended 2022 as the world's richest entertainer?

Central banks around the world have been increasing interest rates to rein in inflation.

The US Federal Reserve has increased its benchmark rates eight times since March 2022 to bring inflation down from 40-year highs to a target range of 2 per cent.

In January, the International Monetary Fund raised its estimate for global economic growth in 2023 by 0.2 percentage points from its October forecast.

Growth is now estimated at 2.9 per cent for the year, following a 3.4 per cent expansion in 2022.

Although 40 per cent of UHNWIs saw their wealth increase in 2022, the overwhelming trend was negative for the world’s super-rich, driven by a change in residential and commercial property values, fixed income, investments of passion and other assets, Knight Frank said.

“The fall in wealth is unsurprising, given the dramatic pivot in monetary policy that culminated in the worst performance for the traditional blended portfolio since the 1930s,” it said.

While Europe had the largest decline in wealth in 2022, the Australasia region recorded an 11 per cent drop and the Americas 10 per cent. In comparison, Africa experienced the smallest decline with 5 per cent, followed by Asia and the Middle East at 7 per cent.

However, 69 per cent of wealthy investors surveyed by Knight Frank expect to grow their portfolios this year, with confidence driven by asset repricing, perceived value opportunities and an expected economic rebound.

About 33 per cent of respondents said their main goal in 2023 was capital appreciation and 25 per cent are focused on wealth preservation.

High-net-worth individuals (HNWIs) — defined as someone with a net worth of $1 million or more, including their primary residence — in the Asia-Pacific region are more optimistic about growth, while wealth preservation is the top goal in Europe and the US as interest rates take their toll on the economy.

“Expect increases in investment allocations, with almost a third of investors looking at property investments to provide an inflation hedge and diversification,” Knight Frank said.

“A cautious approach will see 29 per cent of investors reduce debt volumes.”

Meanwhile, an “ironic legacy” of the pandemic has been a surge in the desire for mobility, with 13 per cent of UHNWIs saying they plan to acquire a second passport or citizenship.

The boom in so-called digital nomads is only just starting — promising disruption to outbound countries, destination markets, tax systems, residential rental demand and office requirements

Knight Frank

Singapore and Dubai are also expected to grow rapidly as wealth centres, the report found.

In a separate survey by Henley & Partners last September, Dubai was ranked the 23rd-most popular city in the world for ultra-wealthy residents.

The city’s population of HNWIs rose to 67,900, up from 54,000 in June last year, while the number of billionaires increased from one to 13 in 2022 and that of multimillionaires jumped to 3,170 from 2,480, Henley & Partners, which tracks private wealth and investment migration trends worldwide, said.

In recent years, the UAE, the Arab world’s second-largest economy, has undertaken several economic, legal and social reforms to strengthen its business environment, increase foreign direct investment, attract skilled workers with new visas and provide incentives to companies to set up or expand their operations.

In 2019, amendments were introduced to the 10-year golden residency initiative to simplify the eligibility criteria and expand the categories of beneficiaries.

The UAE also introduced a one-year digital nomad visa in March 2021 that allows people to live in the Emirates while continuing to work for employers in their home countries.

“The boom in so-called digital nomads is only just starting — promising disruption to outbound countries, destination markets, tax systems, residential rental demand and office requirements,” Knight Frank said.

‘Seismic change’ needed to attract space-race investors to Britain

Spacecraft manufacturer highlights prohibitive costs of launch missions and calls for removal of red tape

Virgin Orbit's failed launch bid in January. But the real deterrent is complicated CAA processes, says a leading aerospace firm. PA

Marwa Hassan
Mar 01, 2023

It is unwise to invest in the quest to launch spaceships from British soil until licensing delay issues are resolved, officials were told on Wednesday.

Space Forge, an aerospace manufacturing company, explained to the UK Science and Technology Committee that stringent regulatory processes are making the time and cost of launching missions prohibitive.

Virgin Orbit's failed attempt to blast satellites into orbit from Cornwall in January was blamed on a dislodged fuel filter, resulting in some rocket components and payload falling into the Atlantic.

READ MORE
From Cornwall to the cosmos: Britain's spaceport future is unveiled

UK's first ever space launch: What can Cornwall project achieve?

The failure itself was not necessarily a deterrent to companies wanting to launch spacecraft from the UK, but rather the deterrent was the Civil Aviation Authority’s (CAA) processes, Space Forge claimed.

Patrick McCall, a non-executive director at Space Forge, said: “The CAA is taking a different approach to risk — and a bit to process and timing as well”.


“But I think unless there is, without wanting to be too dramatic, a seismic change in that approach, the UK is not going to be competitive from a launch perspective.”

Joshua Western, Space Forge chief executive, said excessive red tape was hindering progress, suggesting a lack of engagement with UK authorities.

He compared this to Portugal, where official correspondence from the government or the regulator took place on more or less a weekly basis.

Mr Western told the committee: “Quite frankly, it costs us more to license our satellite for launch than it did to launch it.”

Mr McCall added: “I think the conclusion I’ve reached is it’s not a good use of money, because our regulatory framework is not competitive.”

A committee heard regulatory process in the UK were a significant obstacle to space launches. PA

Greg Clark, chairman of the committee, said it was disastrous that an attempt to demonstrate UK capabilities had turned “toxic for private, privately funded launch”.

The MPs heard there were potentially too many organisations and processes involved in achieving regulatory approval, causing delays.

Spaceport Cornwall was awarded an operating licence in November, allowing it to host the UK's first space launch. Still, licences for Virgin Orbit remained outstanding until later in the year due to technical and regulatory issues.

Sir Stephen Hillier, chairman of the CAA, said: “We recognise what they say but the Civil Aviation Authority took on this role in July 2021.

“In that period we’ve had 18 board meetings … at a dozen of those, space and our progress in space was a substantive matter for discussion and debate, including an extraordinary board meeting in advance of the Virgin Orbital launch.”

He added that a key goal for the CAA was to enact the legislation.
Since taking on the regulatory role in July 2021, the CAA have granted 285 space licences, including to Spaceport Cornwall and Virgin Orbit. Reuters

Tim Johnson, director for space regulation at the CAA, said: “Helping develop a safe and thriving UK space industry is a key part of our work as the space regulator.

“Since taking on the regulatory role in July 2021, we have granted 285 space licences, including to Spaceport Cornwall and Virgin Orbit, and there are a further 38 applications in the pipeline from aspiring spaceport, launch and satellite operators.”

The evidence presented to the committee highlights the regulatory process in the UK as a significant obstacle to space launches. Until these issues are resolved, the UK's attempts to become competitive in this area may continue to fail.

The need for a central gateway to manage the process effectively is crucial to avoid unnecessary delays and high costs for companies seeking to launch from UK soil. While progress has been made, it will take time to ensure that safety is not compromised while streamlining the process to make it more efficient.

Life-size robot elephant enters service at Indian temple

Gift from animal rights activists presented by head priest following a prayer

Taniya Dutta
Feb 27, 2023

Worshippers at a temple in the Indian state of Kerala have welcomed a life-size robotic elephant presented by animal rights group Peta.

Indian temples, particularly in Kerala and other southern states, often keep elephants for religious purposes, using them in festival processions.

Animal rights activists, however, have long demanded an end to this tradition, saying it amounts to cruelty, particularly when the elephants are surrounded by noisy crowds and exploding firecrackers.

At first glance, Irinjadappilly Raman — the new mechanical elephant that arrived at the temple on Sunday — looks surprisingly lifelike, with expressive eyes and a moving trunk and tail.

But it is actually made of iron and rubber, and mounted on wheels so that it can be moved easily.









People pose with the robotic elephant in Kerala

A ceremony was conducted at the Irinjadappilly Sree Krishna Temple near Thrissur, where the new elephant was welcomed by the head priest following a prayer.

“We are extremely happy and grateful to receive this mechanical elephant which will help us to conduct our rituals and festivals in a cruelty-free way, and we hope that other temples will also think about replacing live elephants for rituals,” head priest Rajkumar Namboothiri said.

There are more than 2,600 captive elephants in the country, according to the Ministry of Environment and Forests' Project Elephant journal.

Of these, about 1,821 are privately owned and used for tourism, entertainment and religious purposes.

These elephants often live in abysmal conditions: They are chained, get little exercise, are fed improper diets and kept in noisy surroundings.

“Many have extremely painful foot ailments and leg wounds from being chained to concrete for hours on end, and most do not get adequate food, water or veterinary care, let alone any semblance of a natural life,” Peta said.

READ MORE

Elephant kills woman in India and returns to trample body on pyre

Although the commercial trade of elephants is banned in India, a loophole in wildlife protection laws means that the elephants continue to be kept in captivity: The Wildlife Protection Act of 1972 makes an exception for elephants that are “gifted” or “inherited”, a clause exploited by elephant owners for illegal trading.

“The frustration of captivity leads elephants to develop and display abnormal behaviour,” said Peta.

“At their wit’s end, frustrated elephants often snap and try to break free, running amok and so harming humans, other animals and property.”

Captive elephants killed 526 people in Kerala in a 15-year period, Peta said, citing figures compiled by the Heritage Animal Task Force.

Thechikkattukavu Ramachandran, an elephant that has been in captivity for about 40 years and is one of the most often used on Kerala’s festival circuit, has reportedly killed 10 people as well as three elephants.

Updated: February 27, 2023

CRIMINAL CAPITALI$M

Japan Accuses Ad Giant Dentsu of Rigging Bids for Tokyo Olympics

Prosecutors said the company and five others had conspired to evade the public bidding process for test events, part of a widening investigation into corruption surrounding the Games.

The National Stadium in Tokyo. Dentsu played a critical role in coordinating the 2020 Tokyo Olympics, an event from which it stood to profit enormously.

Credit...Hiroko Masuike/The New York Times

By Ben Dooley and Hisako Ueno
Feb. 28, 2023

Japanese advertising giant Dentsu was one of the driving forces behind the 2020 Tokyo Olympics, helping bring in a record-shattering $3.6 billion in sponsorships and coordinating everything down to the smallest details.

On Tuesday, Japan’s prosecutors accused the company of breaking the law in the process, claiming it, and five others, conspired to evade the public bidding process leading up to the Games.

The accusations are part of a widening investigation into corruption surrounding the 2020 Olympics, which were delayed until 2021 because of the pandemic.

Japanese prosecutors have cast a wide net, charging executives from some of Japan’s top companies with bribery as they vied for high-profile sponsorship deals and sought contracts for, among other things, manufacturing Olympic uniforms and publishing printed materials for the Games.

The most recent charges relate to bid rigging, with prosecutors asserting that employees of Dentsu and other companies — including Japan’s second-largest advertising firm, Hakuhodo — violated the country’s antimonopoly law by circumventing the public bidding process for test events ahead of the Games. The events were essentially dress rehearsals designed to help organizers assess their readiness for hosting the main event.

More on JapanA Video-Gaming School: Japan’s first e-sports high school thought it would turn out pro gamers. Instead, it attracted an unexpected demographic: absentee students.
Economic Growth: After more than two years under some of the world’s tightest border controls, tourist spots in Japan are packed. That has been good for business.
A Controversial Statement: By suggesting mass suicide of older adults to deal with Japan’s rapidly aging society, Yusuke Narita, a Yale professor, has pushed the country’s hottest button.
Yakuza on the Field: As Japan’s iconic gangster group faces a changed world and a waning appeal, a softball team is helping former members build a new life.

Rather than engage in open competition for contracts, the companies colluded to select a single firm to bid, the prosecutors said in a charging statement. In doing so, they “substantially limited competition,” prosecutors added.

Tokyo headquarters of Dentsu, which said it had established a committee to investigate the company’s conduct.

Credit...Kimimasa Mayama/EPA, via Shutterstock

Earlier on Tuesday, Japan’s Fair Trade Commission filed a complaint against the companies and seven individuals, including Yasuo Mori, a former executive on the Olympic organizing committee. Earlier this month, prosecutors arrested Mr. Mori and three of the people charged Tuesday.

Dentsu is widely considered one of Japan’s most influential firms, working closely with the country’s most powerful companies as well as its ruling political party. It is also a powerful figure in the world of international sports promotion, playing a critical role in putting together the Tokyo Olympic Games, an event from which it stood to profit enormously.

In a statement on its website Tuesday, Dentsu said that it “takes this situation seriously and offers its sincere apologies to its business partners, shareholders and all other relevant parties for any inconvenience or concern this may cause.” It said it had established a committee to investigate the company’s conduct and asked some senior executives to return part of their compensation.

Even before the Tokyo Olympics began, concerns about wrongdoing had surfaced. In 2016, French authorities said they had uncovered millions of dollars of payments made by Tokyo’s Olympic organizing committee to a Singaporean firm in an effort to secure the winning bid to host the Games. The scandal led the head of the national Olympic committee, Tsunekazu Takeda, to resign. Mr. Takeda has denied any wrongdoing.

In the years since, additional corruption allegations have tainted the reputations of some of Japan’s most prominent companies.

In August, prosecutors arrested top executives from the publishing giant Kadokawa and the business clothing retailer Aoki Holdings on bribery charges. A former Dentsu executive, Haruyuki Takahashi, who served on the executive board of the committee charged with organizing the Tokyo Games, was also arrested. He has denied the charges against him.

In December, Aoki Holdings’ founder, Hironori Aoki, pleaded guilty to giving around $205,000 to Mr. Takahashi. In a court appearance this month, the ex-president of the Japanese marketing company ADK admitted to paying Mr. Takahashi over $100,000 as his company sought marketing opportunities linked to the Games.

In response to reporters’ questions about Tuesday’s charges, Japan’s top government spokesman, Hirokazu Matsuno, said they showed “contempt for the value of sports.”

  -   -  -

Ben Dooley reports on Japan’s business and economy, with a special interest in social issues and the intersections between business and politics. @benjamindooley

Hisako Ueno has been reporting on Japanese politics, business, gender, labor and culture for The Times since 2012. She previously worked for the Tokyo bureau of The Los Angeles Times from 1999 to 2009. @hudidi1

A version of this article appears in print on March 1, 2023, Section B, Page 5 of the New York edition with the headline: Japan Says 6 Companies Rigged Bids For Olympics.