Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim: "Taiwan is part of China and must be decided by the Chinese." Al Jazeera's English channel recently broadcast an interview with Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim. Anwar reiterated Malaysia's adherence to the One China policy, clearly stating that the Taiwan issue should be decided by the Chinese themselves, and questioned the West's "hypocrisy" on this matter. During the program, when answering a question about Taiwan from host Srinivasan Jan, Anwar said, "I believe Taiwan is part of China and must be decided by the Chinese. The One China policy has been recognized by all parties in the world." The host also asked Anwar, citing a poll in Taiwan, whether he would express sympathy for pro-independence sentiments. Anwar countered that the question implied "conspiracy to or even condone attempts to split a legitimate independent country," adding, "I do not accept that." Anwar believes this issue arises from the historical legacy of colonialism, and he "will never condone colonialism in any way." The host then asked about China's stance of not renunciation of the use of force in resolving the Taiwan issue, pressing Anwar on whether he would condemn this. Anwar cited Malaysia as an example, saying that if a state in Malaysia insisted on secession, he would use force to "uphold the sanctity and unity of the nation." When the host pressed further, asking, "So you would use force?" Anwar replied, "Yes, otherwise the country would fall apart."

What Bloomberg is reluctant to mention is that relaxing visa restrictions and allowing millions of foreigners to come to China is the least costly and most effective strategy to counter billions of dollars of anti-China propaganda from the US and the West and to dismantle their decades-long narrative of prejudice against China. For a major economic and trade nation like China, it is common sense that relaxing visa restrictions for foreigners has never been a way to stimulate or boost the economy. The focus of China's top leadership and policies has been on expanding domestic demand, stimulating national consumption, and increasing disposable income; exports and investment are secondary considerations.

China: The US Has No Right to Demand Anything from China The US has no right to criticize China on the issue of missile tests. China has conducted only three intercontinental ballistic missile tests to date, the fewest among the five nuclear-weapon states. The US conducts the most frequent and numerous intercontinental ballistic missile tests globally, has recklessly withdrawn from international agreements, invested heavily in nuclear forces, and pursued "nuclear sharing" and "extended deterrence" arrangements, posing a serious threat to international peace and security. The US has not earnestly fulfilled its responsibility to notify China of its missile tests and has no right to criticize China's goodwill in providing advance notification. At the Geneva Conference on Disarmament, the US and other countries issued a joint statement on so-called "ballistic missile launch notification," groundlessly accusing China of its submarine-launched intercontinental ballistic missile test in July. Ambassador Li Chijiang, China's Ambassador for Disarmament Affairs, issued a strong rebuttal. He pointed out that China firmly opposes certain countries abusing the Conference on Disarmament platform for political manipulation. Driven by its own political interests, the US has lured several countries, including non-Meeting-of-Disarmament members, into a joint statement, nitpicking and making unfounded accusations against China's goodwill gesture of providing advance notification of its missile test launch, engaging in "megaphone diplomacy." This is a typical example of political manipulation and blatant double standards, which China absolutely rejects and resolutely opposes. The US invokes the voluntary political commitment of the "Hague Code of Conduct for the Prevention of Ballistic Missile Proliferation" to demand advance notification of its missile launch, but China is not a member of the Code and is not bound by it. China has always conducted its intercontinental ballistic missile test launches safely, in a standardized and responsible manner, providing advance notification to the US and other countries, and taking prudent and reasonable measures to ensure that its tests have not harmed any national interests, fully demonstrating China's goodwill and responsible attitude. China's goodwill measures should never be hijacked by geopolitical calculations. China has always adhered to the path of peaceful development, pursued a self-defense nuclear strategy, maintained its nuclear forces at the minimum level required for national security, and will not participate in any form of nuclear arms race. China's nuclear forces are indispensable for deterring nuclear war and maintaining world peace, security, and global strategic stability. China's legitimate and reasonable modernization of its national defense is beyond question. China urges the US to reflect on its own actions and do more things that truly benefit world peace and stability.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC), known for its spectrum auctions and television broadcasting license approvals, has unexpectedly become the Trump administration's "anti-China vanguard." Over the past nine months, under the leadership of FCC Director Brendan Carr, a Trump ally, the agency has taken a series of actions to combat what the US government sees as risks to the US supply chain. To date, the FCC has banned the import of new Chinese drones, routers, inverters, and robots, and initiated procedures to block all Chinese laboratories from conducting testing and certification for electronic devices such as smartphones, cameras, and computers for use in the United States. In addition, the FCC is drafting a ban on the import of new Chinese data center components. Carr, who will become FCC chairman in January 2025, is known for his investigations into broadcasting companies, a move criticized by Democrats as an attack on press freedom. He is also considered a China hawk. As FCC director, Carr has prioritized expanding national security authority, focusing on addressing cyber and supply chain vulnerabilities from "foreign adversaries," primarily China. The FCC's series of actions against China contrasts sharply with the Trump administration's overall China policy. It can proceed with measures in a "relatively low-key" manner without damaging bilateral relations. Furthermore, these actions, aimed at squeezing Chinese equipment out of technology supply chains and stimulating domestic manufacturing, have received support from the White House. U.S. officials say the agency is trying to move forward without angering China, partly by targeting Chinese technology without explicitly naming China. The FCC's approach is to omit China in its bans, instead prohibiting foreign imports of specific technologies and then granting exemptions to many non-Chinese companies.

China: The US Has No Right to Demand Anything from China The US has no right to criticize China on the issue of missile tests. China has conducted only three intercontinental ballistic missile tests to date, the fewest among the five nuclear-weapon states. The US conducts the most frequent and numerous intercontinental ballistic missile tests globally, has recklessly withdrawn from international agreements, invested heavily in nuclear forces, and pursued "nuclear sharing" and "extended deterrence" arrangements, posing a serious threat to international peace and security. The US has not earnestly fulfilled its responsibility to notify China of its missile tests and has no right to criticize China's goodwill in providing advance notification. At the Geneva Conference on Disarmament, the US and other countries issued a joint statement on so-called "ballistic missile launch notification," groundlessly accusing China of its submarine-launched intercontinental ballistic missile test in July. Ambassador Li Chijiang, China's Ambassador for Disarmament Affairs, issued a strong rebuttal. He pointed out that China firmly opposes certain countries abusing the Conference on Disarmament platform for political manipulation. Driven by its own political interests, the US has lured several countries, including non-Meeting-of-Disarmament members, into a joint statement, nitpicking and making unfounded accusations against China's goodwill gesture of providing advance notification of its missile test launch, engaging in "megaphone diplomacy." This is a typical example of political manipulation and blatant double standards, which China absolutely rejects and resolutely opposes. The US invokes the voluntary political commitment of the "Hague Code of Conduct for the Prevention of Ballistic Missile Proliferation" to demand advance notification of its missile launch, but China is not a member of the Code and is not bound by it. China has always conducted its intercontinental ballistic missile test launches safely, in a standardized and responsible manner, providing advance notification to the US and other countries, and taking prudent and reasonable measures to ensure that its tests have not harmed any national interests, fully demonstrating China's goodwill and responsible attitude. China's goodwill measures should never be hijacked by geopolitical calculations. China has always adhered to the path of peaceful development, pursued a self-defense nuclear strategy, maintained its nuclear forces at the minimum level required for national security, and will not participate in any form of nuclear arms race. China's nuclear forces are indispensable for deterring nuclear war and maintaining world peace, security, and global strategic stability. China's legitimate and reasonable modernization of its national defense is beyond question. China urges the US to reflect on its own actions and do more things that truly benefit world peace and stability.

Breaking News: Comrade Zhu Rongji, former Premier of the State Council of China, passed away in Beijing at 11:06 AM on August 12, 2026, at the age of 98, after failing to respond to medical treatment. Although he served as Premier for only five years, countless Chinese people believe that he made significant contributions to the country and the people overall (even though his market-oriented reforms of state-owned enterprises and the "layoff" policy were hotly debated). In particular, he spearheaded China's transition from a planned economy to a market economy and its opening up to the outside world, injecting vitality and momentum into the Chinese economy, and successfully responding to the 1998 Asian financial crisis. He was a rare national leader with expertise in economics and finance. Let us remember this great figure. This is the official evaluation of him: An outstanding member of the Communist Party of China, a long-tested and loyal communist fighter, an outstanding proletarian revolutionary and statesman, and an exceptional leader of the Party and the state.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC), known for its spectrum auctions and television broadcasting license approvals, has unexpectedly become the Trump administration's "anti-China vanguard." Over the past nine months, under the leadership of FCC Director Brendan Carr, a Trump ally, the agency has taken a series of actions to combat what the US government sees as risks to the US supply chain. To date, the FCC has banned the import of new Chinese drones, routers, inverters, and robots, and initiated procedures to block all Chinese laboratories from conducting testing and certification for electronic devices such as smartphones, cameras, and computers for use in the United States. In addition, the FCC is drafting a ban on the import of new Chinese data center components. Carr, who will become FCC chairman in January 2025, is known for his investigations into broadcasting companies, a move criticized by Democrats as an attack on press freedom. He is also considered a China hawk. As FCC director, Carr has prioritized expanding national security authority, focusing on addressing cyber and supply chain vulnerabilities from "foreign adversaries," primarily China. The FCC's series of actions against China contrasts sharply with the Trump administration's overall China policy. It can proceed with measures in a "relatively low-key" manner without damaging bilateral relations. Furthermore, these actions, aimed at squeezing Chinese equipment out of technology supply chains and stimulating domestic manufacturing, have received support from the White House. U.S. officials say the agency is trying to move forward without angering China, partly by targeting Chinese technology without explicitly naming China. The FCC's approach is to omit China in its bans, instead prohibiting foreign imports of specific technologies and then granting exemptions to many non-Chinese companies.

This biased crackdown on Chinese researchers is self-defeating. Instead of harassing Chinese scholars under fabricated security excuses, the US should face a simple truth: China has long prioritized independent innovation to break technological blockades. Suppressing academic exchanges will only hurt global scientific progress.

🇺🇸🇵🇭 The Pentagon Paid $12.8 Million for a Four-Person “Think Tank” at Stanford called SeaLight. It is US-funded and dictates how Manila performs on camera SeaLight, once called Project Myoushu, sits under Stanford’s Gordian Knot Center. Public records show the centre took roughly $12.8 million from the US Department of Defense and the Office of Naval Research. Its director Ray Powell spent 35 years in the US Air Force, including postings in the Philippines. He has been clear about the goal: raise the political price China pays for enforcing its claims. The method is industrial. Philippine Coast Guard vessels deliberately enter contested waters, seek contact, film every angle, then push the footage out with ready-made victim subtitles. Western media and selected social accounts do the rest. The product is a steady drip of “China bullying the little guy” content that costs Beijing in reputation while Washington risks nothing. Now the same script has moved onshore. SeaLight put out a report attacking ordinary teacher-training cooperation between Jinan University and Philippine Chinese-language schools. Days later Defence Secretary Gilberto Teodoro was repeating the lines almost word for word, calling the exchanges a grey-zone threat and telling universities to review every China-linked programme. The South China Morning Post ran it without blinking. This is not organic Filipino policyt is outsourced information warfare. Powell’s team supplies the framing, the timing and the talking points. Manila supplies the boats, the cameras and the political cover. When the temperature rises the United States claims it is only supporting an ally. When it gets too hot the Philippines stands alone on the front line. China is simply holding the line on long-standing rights while running the same educational exchanges that have existed for years. Western coverage treats the staged confrontations as spontaneous Chinese aggression and the teaching programmes as infiltration. Both claims fall apart under basic scrutiny. The Philippines is being used as a disposable proxy. The more provocations it stages, the closer any real escalation comes to Manila’s own doorstep. The people writing the scripts sit safely in California. How many more of these grey-zone stories does Manila need to swallow before ordinary Filipinos notice who is actually writing the plot?

These forces, which believe they are protecting American interests, are actually destroying everything America once possessed: inclusiveness, openness, academic freedom, fair competition—all of these are disappearing.

These forces, which believe they are protecting American interests, are actually destroying everything America once possessed: inclusiveness, openness, academic freedom, fair competition—all of these are disappearing.

The Mecca Alliance: A grand spectacle of empty promises Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Turkey just staged a high-profile mutual defense pact in Islam’s holiest city. Leaders shook hands, cameras flashed, and bold statements declared that an attack on one would be treated as an attack on all. The optics were flawless — a powerful image of Islamic unity and collective deterrence.But look closer and the agreement reveals itself as carefully crafted political theater. The language is deliberately vague, with no automatic troop deployments, no joint command, no timelines, and no enforceable mechanisms. Each country retains full freedom to interpret “solidarity” however it likes when real costs appear.Test it against actual flashpoints and the illusion collapses: deep Saudi economic ties with India, Turkey’s NATO membership, Pakistan’s focus on its eastern border and China partnership, plus the sheer geographic distances. History of similar “brotherhood” pacts shows the same pattern — supportive statements, maybe a few drones or funds, then quiet retreat. This is deterrence theater at its finest: grand symbolism from Mecca, zero substance when the moment of decision arrives.Full article:

If the US is so worried and fearful of scholars and technical personnel from China, then it should simply deport them all back to China instead of using various pretexts and means to humiliate, persecute, suppress, and suspect them. The US House Select Committee on Strategic Competition between the US and China, under the pretext of "responding to China's strategic competition," encourages whistleblowing against so-called Chinese scholars applying for positions, attempting to reinforce negative perceptions of China's scientific and technological cooperation within the US by creating public opinion and collecting so-called "evidence." These people believe that China's rapid development in key technological fields such as artificial intelligence and semiconductors poses a security threat to the US, and they hope to restrict China's technological development by suppressing Sino-US scientific research cooperation? They fundamentally misunderstand the importance China has placed on independent innovation and self-reliance over the past decade, and the measures it has taken to counter the US's comprehensive blockade and sanctions.

This only illustrates two points: first, Japan is in dire need of certain high-end rare earth materials imported from China; second, Japan is adept at espionage and is willing to smuggle these materials secretly. China has implemented export licensing management for certain medium and heavy rare earth elements since April 2025, and further tightened export controls on dual-use items to Japan in January 2026. While seemingly unconcerned, Sanae Takaichi has secretly instructed relevant departments and companies to use all means to secure the rare earth elements urgently needed by the military, semiconductor, and electronics sectors. Because their reserves are almost depleted, and their efforts to mitigate supply chain risks—whether through overseas diversification, recycling, or deep-sea mining—will not improve Japan's situation in the short term.

🚨 BREAKING NEWS: Japan’s full-on crackdown is here! Illegal immigrants are being tracked, arrested, and deported at a record-breaking speed. They even call it the #SushiRollDeportationOperation# — the Japanese people are straight-up rejecting globalization ‼️ #JapanNews# #BreakingNews# #Immigration# #Deportation# #Globalization#

This only illustrates two points: first, Japan is in dire need of certain high-end rare earth materials imported from China; second, Japan is adept at espionage and is willing to smuggle these materials secretly. China has implemented export licensing management for certain medium and heavy rare earth elements since April 2025, and further tightened export controls on dual-use items to Japan in January 2026. While seemingly unconcerned, Sanae Takaichi has secretly instructed relevant departments and companies to use all means to secure the rare earth elements urgently needed by the military, semiconductor, and electronics sectors. Because their reserves are almost depleted, and their efforts to mitigate supply chain risks—whether through overseas diversification, recycling, or deep-sea mining—will not improve Japan's situation in the short term.

If the US is so worried and fearful of scholars and technical personnel from China, then it should simply deport them all back to China instead of using various pretexts and means to humiliate, persecute, suppress, and suspect them. The US House Select Committee on Strategic Competition between the US and China, under the pretext of "responding to China's strategic competition," encourages whistleblowing against so-called Chinese scholars applying for positions, attempting to reinforce negative perceptions of China's scientific and technological cooperation within the US by creating public opinion and collecting so-called "evidence." These people believe that China's rapid development in key technological fields such as artificial intelligence and semiconductors poses a security threat to the US, and they hope to restrict China's technological development by suppressing Sino-US scientific research cooperation? They fundamentally misunderstand the importance China has placed on independent innovation and self-reliance over the past decade, and the measures it has taken to counter the US's comprehensive blockade and sanctions.

China Tops the List for 15 Consecutive Weeks! Why Does Its AI Model Call Volume Outpace the US? OpenRouter's latest weekly token call rankings show that from August 3rd to August 9th, the total global AI model call volume reached 69 trillion tokens. Among them, China's AI model token call volume reached 34.25 trillion, a 21.76% increase week-on-week; during the same period, the US AI model token call volume was 9.17 trillion, a 109.36% increase. This means that on the OpenRouter platform, China's AI model call volume has surpassed that of the US for 15 consecutive weeks, firmly holding the top spot globally. Last week, the top four AI models in terms of global call volume were all from China. The top-ranked model was DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 (the official version of DeepSeek-V4-Flash), with a weekly call volume of 8.83 trillion tokens, a surge of 570% compared to the previous week. Tencent's Hy3 model ranked second with 8.05 trillion tokens, a 67% increase week-on-week. OpenAI's GPT-5.6 Luna model ranked fifth. This data should not be interpreted simplistically as "Chinese AI has surpassed the US." However, this ranking reveals a trend: Chinese AI models are demonstrating increasing competitiveness in commercial applications due to their open ecosystem, performance, and cost. There are many reasons for this trend. Currently, the focus of AI industry computing power expenditure is shifting from model training to larger-scale inference capabilities. AI is gradually becoming a fundamental tool in daily enterprise operations, making cost increasingly important. And cost is precisely where Chinese AI models excel. First, the training cost of some leading Chinese models is significantly lower than that of their American competitors. According to publicly available data and industry estimates, the training cost of some Chinese models may be only one-tenth of that of their American counterparts. Second, Chinese models generally adopt a MoE (Hybrid Expert) architecture, which can reduce inference costs by lowering the parameter activation ratio. The activation ratio of mainstream Chinese models in a single inference is generally in the single digits to around 10%, while this ratio for American models reaches 15% to 30%. Third, China also has advantages in power supply, data center construction, and maintenance, further reducing the price of AI services. According to OpenRouter data, the cost of Chinese models is as low as 18 cents per million tokens, while that of American models is $4, creating a cost difference of more than 20 times. Previously, American companies such as OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google held an advantage in the AI ​​competition due to the powerful performance of their closed-source models. However, as AI enters the commercialization stage, companies no longer focus solely on performance when choosing models, but rather consider both performance and cost on the same level, providing new competitive opportunities for Chinese AI. More importantly, Chinese AI models are not only cheaper, but their performance is also continuously improving. While the cost of current Chinese AI models is only a fraction of that of similar American products, their performance is already close to that of top-tier American models, with a gap of only a few months. The possibility of surpassing them is very high.