A US State Department report that accuses the Chinese government of expanding disinformation efforts is “in itself disinformation,” Beijing’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs claimed Saturday.

The ministry shot back after the State Department issued a striking report this week in which it accused the Chinese government of expanding efforts to control information and to disseminate propaganda and disinformation that promotes “digital authoritarianism” in China and around the world.

The US report, issued by the Global Engagement Center on Thursday, alleged that China spends billions of dollars a year on foreign information manipulation and warned that Chinese leader Xi Jinping had “significantly expanded” efforts to “shape the global information environment.”

It also underlined US concerns about China as a main military competitor and key rival in the battle over ideas and global disinformation.

  • @goldenlocks
    link
    English
    -331 year ago

    They are correct though whether you want to accept that or not. Zelensky has rejected peace talks because he is deranged and thinks he can take back Crimea. This user just put that in a weird way saying it’s illegal.

    Although he has made opposition parties illegal, and reporting against the war illegal as well. He has arrested a US citizen named Gonzalo Lira for his reporting

    • Spzi
      link
      fedilink
      English
      141 year ago

      This user just put that in a weird way saying it’s illegal.

      Exactly, legal/illegal is a well defined term. The president of Ukraine rejecting something does not make it “ILLEGAL”.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      10
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Zelensky has rejected peace talks because he is deranged and thinks he can take back Crimea.

      Zelensky had been talking a lot with Russia while Crimea was occupied, while they already occupied parts of Luhansk and Donetsk (by proxy). Even after the 2022 there were talks, you might remember the pictures of delegations sitting around a table in Belarus.

      If you had read the article in question (or in fact OP’s comment) you would’ve seen that it said:

      Zelensky’s decree released Tuesday declares that holding negotiations with Russian President Vladimir Putin has become impossible after his decision to annex four regions of Ukraine.

      Now, I will grant that yes of course that was a political move. He was known to be a Russia-friendly president, elected (among other things) because people thought Poroshenko was too heavy-handed. Such a declaration simply makes clear to the Ukrainian people that he’s drawing a line in the sand, that his patience with Russia has ended.

      And can you fucking blame him Russia just annexed four regions. How much talking do you think, say, Vietnam would do if China annexed four of their provinces or whatever they’re called.

      • @goldenlocks
        link
        English
        -131 year ago

        Ukraine has rejected those demands and won’t hold talks with Russia until Moscow’s troops pull back from all occupied territories. - link

        Throughout the conflict this has been his demand to return Crimea for peace talks. This was never a realistic option.

        If you had read the article in question

        Yes I know his current stance, but he has always called for the return of Crimea.

        And can you fucking blame him Russia just annexed four regions.

        I understand how terrible this situation is for Ukraine as a whole, and I want it to end. The demands Zelensky has made from the beginning has only made certain that the war would continue. What we need is a ceasefire and neither side is making reasonable demands.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          So… when I break into your home and eat your cookies, what are you going to do? Tell yourself that you should accept a ceasefire and let me have the couch?

          I’m sick and tired of this vulgar pacifism that does nothing but embolden aggressors. No: You should punch me in the face and boot me the fuck out. If you don’t I’ll leave to do the exact same thing to your neighbour once the cookies are gone, and the flour and sugar is gone – because yes I’m first going to make you to make more, doormat.

          • @goldenlocks
            link
            English
            -181 year ago

            Ask NATO, they’re the aggressors that provoked this conflict. They expanded around Russia and heightened tensions by putting nuclear missiles in Turkey to provoke the Cuban missile crisis, so you know Russians don’t want nuclear missiles in Ukraine. Same as we wouldn’t want Russian missiles in Mexico.

            • @RedAggroBest
              link
              English
              101 year ago

              That’s the worst take yet.

              Claiming NATO actions at the height of the cold war were aggression towards the modern Russian state is ridiculous.

              nuclear missiles in Turkey to provoke the Cuban missile crisis

              Except that was before disarmament? Which the US and USSR (and now Russia and many others) signed on to. Trying to say that 50yo actions taken at the height of the cold war justify Russia’s modern actions is outright horseshit.

              • @goldenlocks
                link
                English
                -12
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Trying to say that 50yo actions taken at the height of the cold war justify Russia’s modern actions is outright horseshit.

                Not what I said. I’m saying Russians remember feeling threatened by the combined force of NATO and Ukraine trying to join provoked the invasion.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              9
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Why did all those states want to join NATO? Might it have something to do with the continued occupation of Moldova, the invasion of Georgia, and their experience they had while being Russian vassals, being subjects to deportations and worse? Ever talked to an Estonian?

              Wanna talk about nukes in Kaliningrad and Belarus? Wanna talk about the Budapest memorandum? Wanna talk about China’s nuclear guarantees to Ukraine and wonder why Russia is only making nuclear threats against NATO, but not Ukraine?

            • Spzi
              link
              fedilink
              English
              51 year ago

              Ask NATO, they’re the aggressors that provoked this conflict. They expanded around Russia

              The difference between NATO expansion and Russia’s expansion:

              NATO expands by having democracies decide to join. Note for this to happen, the countries in question must want to join. If you insist, you can blame NATO for accepting these applications.

              Russia expands by rolling in with tanks, killing people and committing war crimes. Exactly the reason why all those countries want to join NATO, to have some protection from that bully.

              But sure, the defensive alliance is the actual aggressor, not the country starting invasions. /s

              • @goldenlocks
                link
                English
                -11 year ago

                Russia voted to join and was rejected dummy.

                • Spzi
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  Yes, “all practical civilian and military cooperation between NATO and Russia” was suspended by NATO on 1 April 2014, in response to Russia annexing Crimea, which also broke the Budapest Memorandum.

                  No country has the right to join an alliance with other countries. You can ask, they can reject.

                  Try to include arguments instead of personal attacks, if you can.

                  • @goldenlocks
                    link
                    English
                    -21 year ago

                    This was over 20 years ago when Putin became president of Russia. Also the Soviets applied in 1954 as well.

            • @bbuez
              link
              English
              01 year ago

              I love me some mental gymnastics just as much as everyone else, but for a minute lets agree for some reason Putin has a reason to be worried about “NATO expansionism”… didnt he e already have the upper hand circa 2014 and Crimea? Was he feeling just as threatened? Somehow even after mobilizing, Europe was still energy dependant, the US was about as friendly with Russia in a long time during the trump presidency, I’ve had the impression that much remained neutral before the full scale invasion aside from trade quarrels, nobody was talking about arming Ukraine in some sort of cold war era missile crisis. Which I would certainly hope the change from 3 day "special operation " into this fucking shitshow should tell you all you need: it is about the land. And if you’re wanting the former Soviet Union coming back to its glory through force, just say it.

              • @goldenlocks
                link
                English
                -21 year ago

                You’re very ignorant of the situation.

                • @bbuez
                  link
                  English
                  01 year ago

                  Thanks