Saturday 21st of June 2025
Home » Blogs » Gus Leonisky's blog

news corp’s china obsession....

Introducing our new columnist Fred Zhang, who brings you his take on the way the Australian media reports and/or mis- and under- reports on China.

Last week, we saw yet another masterclass in how News Corp reduces complex geopolitical realities into blunt instruments of fear.

 

Fred Zhang

News Corp’s China obsession: why beating the drum is easier than thinking

 

First, The Australian’s Greg Brown pressed Prime Minister Anthony Albanese at the National Press Club to declare China a national security threat – offering voters a binary where there should be nuance.

Then, on Sky News, Australian Strategic Policy Institute analyst Malcolm Davis warned that northern Australia’s infrastructure is “essentially undefended,” calling for an immediate and dramatic surge in defence spending – 3.5% of GDP within two years.

These are not isolated incidents.

They’re the latest instalments in a long-running campaign by News Corp’s ecosystem to frame China as an imminent military aggressor, and Australia as dangerously naïve if it doesn’t rush headlong into a new Cold War footing.

But here’s the problem: this narrative isn’t just alarmist. It’s dangerously reductive.

To many Australians, China is a complicated partner: the largest trading partner, a regional superpower, a competitor, and yes, at times, a strategic challenge. But to News Corp, it’s none of those things. It’s a bogeyman. A monolith. A threat.

In this worldview, any refusal to describe China as an immediate military danger is framed as weakness. Diplomacy becomes appeasement. Nuance becomes naivety. You’re either “realistic” (i.e. hawkish), or you’re selling the country out.

It’s why Greg Brown pushed Albanese so hard for a soundbite – not to extract insight, but to force a declaration. “Is China a military threat to Australia?” he asked, twice, clearly unsatisfied by the prime minister’s sober insistence on maturity and diplomacy. Because “PM calls for regional peace” doesn’t make for a dramatic headline. “PM refuses to call out China threat” does.

On Sky News, the message was blunter.

Davis, a senior ASPI analyst and a regular media commentator, warned that key military and energy infrastructure in northern Australia is “essentially undefended".

With alarming certainty, he predicted China would invade Taiwan within a decade, and that such a move would almost inevitably draw Australia into high-intensity warfare.

To Sky’s audience, this wasn’t analysis – it was prophecy.

The solution looks simple: triple defence spending, mobilise for a protracted war, prepare for the worst.

What’s left unsaid in all this is more important than what’s said.

Where is the public debate about opportunity cost? About the risk of escalation? About the fact that China has not once signalled direct military aggression toward Australia?

Where is the discussion about diplomacy, multilateralism, or economic interdependence as part of national resilience?

Missing – because none of those make for urgent, ticker-worthy TV.

This fear-driven framing reached peak absurdity when News Corp published a headline suggesting Chinese warships were “targeting our cities” during live-fire drills off Australia’s coast – despite the exercises taking place in international waters, far from any real threat.

Richard Marles, our Defence Minister, explicitly stated the government had closely monitored the task group and understood its intent.

Yet his refusal to publicly confirm operational details — standard practice to protect intelligence methods — was spun as ominous.

There was no evidence China was rehearsing strikes on Australian cities, but the mere act of posing the question allowed the article to imply otherwise.

It’s strategic ambiguity weaponised as clickbait. The real danger isn’t the flotilla – it’s how coverage like this deliberately inflames public fear, equates presence with aggression, and manipulates “no comment” into a warning signal.

Instead of informing Australians, this coverage distorts regional dynamics into a drumbeat for war.

The real concern here is how these narratives feed each other.

News Corp pushes the “China threat” line through multiple channels — Sky, The Australian, Herald Sun — and amplifies voices like ASPI’s, a think-tank partially funded by foreign defence contractors and aligned with Washington’s hawkish strategic thinking.

In turn, these narratives create political pressure.

Ministers are urged to “get serious,” to spend more, to speak tougher. If they don’t, they risk being labelled as soft – never mind that quiet diplomacy and strategic ambiguity are often more effective tools than megaphone militarism.

This echo chamber rewards fear, not thoughtfulness.

None of this is to suggest that Australia shouldn’t take its defence seriously.

We should. We live in an uncertain region, but security isn’t just about missiles and bases – it’s about making wise choices, resisting panic, and maintaining control over our own strategic narrative.

By casting diplomacy as cowardice and pushing war-readiness as patriotic common sense, News Corp is doing the public a disservice. It is narrowing the debate, silencing reasonable voices, and dragging Australia into a worldview that mistakes clarity for crudeness.

There’s a reason leader like Albanese and Marles avoid falling into this trap.

They know what’s at stake. Perhaps it’s time more journalists remembered that too.

https://johnmenadue.com/post/2025/06/news-corps-china-obsession-why-beating-the-drum-is-easier-than-thinking/

 

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

 

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

plans for cooperation....

 

China and the CELAC countries are intensifying their cooperation – even if this displeases the US government

by Gisela Liebe

 

For the fourth time since 2015, the Forum of CELAC states with the People’s Republic of China took place in Beijing on 13 May. Around 20 foreign ministers from Latin America and the Caribbean participated under the chairmanship of Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi. The presence of the presidents of Brazil and Chile, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Gabriel Boric, was particularly significant. Colombian President Gustavo Petro participated as the current president of CELAC, but also actively represented his own country’s interests.
  In his opening speech, Chinese President Xi Jinping outlined far-reaching plans for future cooperation. Numerous joint programs are being established or expanded. In addition to the exchange of experience between officials and joint research projects, the “People’s Programs” area for the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean also aims to create 3,500 scholarships, 10,000 training opportunities in China, and 300 training positions for specialists in poverty alleviation. China is providing a loan of approximately 8.19 billion Euros for the development of the individual countries. This includes projects in infrastructure, agriculture and nutrition, energy and mining, as well as emerging areas such as clean energy, the digital economy, and AI. Economic cooperation is to be further strengthened. China plans to import more high-quality products from Latin America and increase its investments there.
  President Xi Jinping explicitly praised the proclamation of Latin America and the Caribbean as a zone of peace. In 2014, the 33 countries declared themselves a nuclear-weapon-free zone.
  Economic relations between Latin America and China have developed enormously over the past 10 years. China has initiated a total of 268 infrastructure programs and created one million jobs. Colombian President Gustavo Petro announced his intention to join China’s “Belt and Road” Initiative, which already includes two-thirds of Latin American and Caribbean countries. The United States and Colombia were also close military allies before Petro was elected president. The Chinese ambassador to Colombia emphasised to the media that China does not want to “replace” the United States as Colombia’s most important trading partner. However, the trend is moving in that direction: From 2014 to 2024, China’s share of Colombian imports rose from 18.4 per cent to 24.9 per cent.

 

China and Brazil – strategic partners

China has been Brazil’s most important trading partner since 2009, during Lula’s second term in office. Bilateral trade volume reached around 190 billion USD in 2024, twice the volume with the USA, Brazil’s second most important trading partner. Brazil even has a trade surplus with China, while its trade balance with the USA is negative. Lula, who travelled directly to Beijing after participating in the celebrations marking the end of World War II in Moscow, emphasised that China and Brazil are strategic partners and players that cannot be ignored on global issues. This is not just about economic cooperation. Since former Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff took over as head of the New Development Bank of the BRICS, based in Shanghai, in 2023, the relationship between the two countries has grown even closer. Rousseff now acts as a kind of ambassador for Brazil in Shanghai. Lula has met with Xi Jinping more often than any other statesman, with whom he has already met three times. In contrast, Lula has not yet met US President Trump in person since taking office, to which Lula was not even invited. Trump maintains close ties with former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who will soon appear in court for his attempted coup in Brazil.

 

The deep-sea port of Chancay connects South America with China

China’s most significant infrastructure project in Latin America is probably the deep-sea port of Chancay, which is scheduled to open in 2024 and is located 80 km north of Lima on the Pacific coast. Approximately 3.5 billion US dollars were invested in the construction of this gigantic port facility, which is fully operated by the Chinese state-owned shipping company Cosco. Even the largest container ships, with up to 24,000 containers, can dock and depart almost fully automatically. The port significantly reduces travel times to China: from up to 40 days, including detours via various ports, to just 23 days. A direct route to Shanghai is planned. Brazil is also very interested in using the port. Further road and railway projects to other South American countries are being planned. The significance of this port for trade between China and Latin America will probably only become apparent in a few years. Currently, around 5 per cent of global maritime freight volume passes through the Panama Canal. It will likely become less important due to the direct Pacific connection.

 

The US wants to regain control of the Panama Canal

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s first foreign trip to the Central American countries was not without reason. The Monroe Doctrine is just as valid for President Trump as it was for his predecessors. The Panama Canal, which was handed over to the state of Panama by President Jimmy Carter in 1999 after 100 years of US rule, should under no circumstances be controlled by China. José Raúl Mulino, President of Panama, finally agreed, presumably not entirely of his own free will, to grant the US preferential terms for transit through the canal, and he also declared his willingness to terminate Panama’s membership in China’s “Belt and Road” Initiative. Rubio scored a second success in El Salvador and Guatemala. El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukulele, who has ruled his country under a state of emergency for three years and has arrested around 86,000 people during that time, offered to house foreigners deported by the US in his maximum-security prisons in return for payment. Initially, 250 Venezuelans suspected in the US of belonging to a criminal gang were deported to El Salvador, some without any evidence. This US deportation policy is vehemently condemned throughout Latin America. •

https://www.zeit-fragen.ch/en/archives/2025/nr-13-10-juni-2025/china-und-die-celac-staaten-vertiefen-ihre-zusammenarbeit-auch-wenn-dies-der-us-regierung-missfaellt

 

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

 

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.