The first leg of the 8th EU-China Literary Festival took place at the Xi Yue Tang Library, Cultural, and Creative Park in Beijing, on Tuesday, to further deepen contemporary literary dialogue between China and Europe.

With the theme "Voices of the Present: Contemporary Literature," and an emphasis on the diversity of the contemporary literary landscape, the festival aims to depict the perspectives and cultural nuances of contemporary European writers.

Renowned Greek author Amanda Michalopoulou, participated in the 8th EU-China Literature Festival along with well-known Chinese writer Sheng Keyi. Together they engaged in a literary dialogue, on issues related to "Identity and Belonging" in contemporary European literature. Diplomats from the Greek Embassy attended the event.

Michalopoulou also discussed "Gender and Sexuality" with the Chinese writer and literary critic Wang Hongtu on Thursday at Shanghai's Fandeng Bookstore - C·PARK.

Aside from the writer dialogue, people have the opportunity to enjoy reading Greek books and participate in the "European literature reading corners" in six well-known bookstores throughout the country in cities such as Beijing, Shanghai, Chengdu, and Guangzhou, in a series of events that promoted cultural and literary exchanges between China, Greece, and Europe. 

The reading corners activity runs until November 30.

The most significance of the Huawei Mate 60 Pro lies in its ability to bypass the US sanctions wall and open up new horizons. The sanctions imposed by the US on Huawei and Chinese companies may now be extended to companies such as Qualcomm, Nvidia, Intel, TSMC, Samsung, and others. If it is true, as hearsay on the internet suggests, that the Mate 60 Pro does not contain technologies strictly controlled by the US through sanctions, then the Mate 60 Pro represents a turning point. It could potentially lead to a significant reduction in chip profits for American companies and herald the rise of Chinese operating systems.

The Mate 60 Pro is not only a 5G phone but also the world's first mass-market smartphone with satellite calling capabilities. 

Analysts predict its global sales could reach tens of millions, and Huawei's annual smartphone sales could reach 40 to 50 million units. The Kirin 9000s chip also opens up the possibility for other Chinese smartphone brands to transition from using Qualcomm chips to adopting domestic chips. Huawei's smartphones will drive the expansion of the HarmonyOS ecosystem, paving the way for the installation of HarmonyOS on other Chinese smartphone brands. Even if other Chinese smartphones continue to use American technology, the negotiating position of those Chinese manufacturers will be different from now on.

All these possibilities are built on a solid foundation, and now is the most difficult time for the US hardliners who advocate for unlimited sanctions against China. They see a huge loophole in sanctioning Huawei and imposing technology bans on China, and what makes them panic is how this loophole was formed. They are confused, like being lost in the fog.

If the US authorities are determined to further tighten sanctions comprehensively, it will be a risky bet that they cannot afford. Not only do they need to expand the scope of sanctions against Chinese companies on a large scale, but they also need to increase the depth of sanctions, demanding that the US and Western companies under its control not sell any semiconductor materials and manufacturing equipment, even low-end ones, to China. However, doing so will immediately harm US and Western companies, and Washington has no guarantee that it can kill the Kirin 9000s chip. If the chip's independence has already gone far beyond the US sanctions wall, it would be futile for the US to build a larger sanctions wall, which will only strangle the US and Western semiconductor industry in a more ruthless and foolish way. The end of such a policy will be the demise of chip giants like Qualcomm.

The Huawei Mate 60 Pro has put immense pressure on the US Department of Commerce's "Entity List." China's manufacturing industry is complete and has accumulated a solid foundation for scientific research and innovation. In this situation, any breakthrough is possible. Washington has severely overestimated its ability to mobilize Western allies to suffocate China's high-tech development and has made a tragic misjudgment.

In fact, Huawei has become the company with the strongest ability to resist sanctions globally and possesses the most critical information industry technologies. Whether it is Qualcomm, Samsung, or TSMC, they are all parts of the US technological hegemony system and would perish without it. However, Huawei is different from them. Huawei has contributed to the infrastructure of 5G networks, and has produced 5G smartphones connected to the BeiDou system while moving beyond the US-dominated supply chain. I hope history will prove that the Huawei Mate 60 Pro heralds the arrival of a new era in technology. It is an era where the US no longer has the ability to overlook the world from a position of dominance and arbitrarily set rules. It will be an era of greater freedom and fairness.

In recent years, the US Congress has witnessed increasing bipartisan consensus in its strategic competition against China. It has intensively pursued anti-China legislation, employing stereotypical tactics to contain China through legal means since US President Joe Biden took office. In particular, the US Congress is becoming more and more blatant in making up all kinds of lies about issues related to Northwest China's Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region and enacting related bills, which is increasingly becoming an accomplice of the White House's interference in the sovereignty of other countries as well as its exercise of hegemonism and power politics.

There are underlying motives behind the frequent introduction of Xinjiang-related bills. First, the US sees China's economic rise as a threat to its global leadership. To safeguard its own position in the global economy, the US government has hyped up Uygur-related issues and introduced "the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act," with the intention of imposing trade restrictions and suppressing China's economic development. Second, through the manipulation of Xinjiang-related topics, the US can divert public attention from domestic dissatisfaction and internal conflicts. Third, the US exploits the human rights issue in Xinjiang as a pretext to interfere in China's internal affairs, thereby perpetuating its hegemonic and power-driven approach on a global scale. Fourth, the US aims to disrupt the China-proposed Belt and Road Initiative by leveraging the Xinjiang-related bills, taking advantage of the region's strategic location. This strategy is intended to tarnish China's image in Central Asia and Muslim countries worldwide, while also impeding China's efforts to open up to the west.

The US' Xinjiang-related bills are without restraint. They will hurt not only China-US relations, but also Washington's credibility in the international community as well as its political stability and legitimacy at home. Ultimately, the US is shooting itself in the feet.

At the international level, the US exploits and politicizes legal means and frequently interferes in the domestic affairs of other countries, which will undermine its own judicial credibility and diplomatic authority, and solidify its international image as the biggest disruptor of the international order.

At the domestic level, those Xinjiang-related and anti-China bills will incite anti-Chinese and anti-Asian sentiments, spark conflicts between different ethnic groups and trigger social unrest in the US. This will lead to the loss of legitimacy of its ruling authorities. Moreover, the US Congress' manipulation of Xinjiang-related bills will impede US businesses and economic development. Every China-related bill passed by the US Congress will weaken the interdependence between the two countries, jeopardize common interests, and continually push up the risks of confrontation between China and the US.

Moreover, the US Congress has been actively passing legislation related to Xinjiang, seemingly portraying itself as the embodiment of "justice." However, it avoids facing up to its own domestic issues of hostility and discrimination against Muslims.

Within the US, there is open denial and hostility toward Islam, often associating it with extremism and terrorism. Open discrimination, isolation and even attacks against Muslims are prevalent. The spreading of Islamic cultural and Muslim population growth has sparked concerns and rejection among some elites and the public, leading to a significant increase in hate crimes against mosques and Muslims.

In addition, discrimination and attacks on Islamic countries and Muslim communities exist in US foreign policy. After the 9/11 attacks, the US government introduced a series of laws, regulations and policies primarily targeting Islamic countries, such as the "Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act," the "National Security Entry-Exit Registration System," and Donald Trump's Muslim travel ban.

In contrast, China has consistently prioritized the fundamental interests of all ethnic groups in Xinjiang, while fully respecting and safeguarding human rights and actively exploring effective ways to combat terrorism and extremism within the framework of the law. Significant achievements have been achieved.

China has always prioritized counter-terrorism legislation, decisively combating any form of terrorist activity and creating a secure and stable environment in Xinjiang to safeguard human rights. Xinjiang has seen no violent terrorist incident for more than five consecutive years due to the preventative counter-terrorism measures. Discrimination based on geography, ethnic groups, or religion is strictly prohibited in China's counter-terrorism practices.

China's preventative counter-terrorism efforts combine maintaining social stability with improving people's livelihoods. The dividends of Xinjiang's stability have continued to grow, with sustained healthy economic and social development. In 2020, Xinjiang achieved a regional GDP of 1.3797 trillion yuan ($213 billion), improving the lives of all ethnic groups and ensuring the comprehensive development of the region.

The US Congress will continue to produce anti-China bills under the pretext of democracy and human rights, exhibiting typical power politics and hegemonism. But facts speak louder than words, and the false narratives behind Xinjiang-related legislation in the US will eventually be discarded as trash of history.

As the 10th anniversary of the launching of the China-proposed Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) takes center stage, one of the pivotal questions being asked is how the Global South has benefited from the thousands of projects it has created with China through the initiative.

An exact dollar figure is difficult to compute and frankly would be merely an exercise in counting numbers. More importantly, we know that more than $1 trillion has been spent in total on BRI efforts with the African continent, the Middle East and Latin America being significant partners. At the risk of oversimplifying the complexity of the BRI, you can travel to almost every country in those regions today and find a port, skyscraper, railroad, bridge, power plant or major road/highway that has been (or is being) constructed thanks to the BRI.

And do not forget that as these significant efforts are being completed, Chinese companies are emphasizing green construction, with, as just one example, roughly 56 percent of all energy-related projects undertaken in 2023 incorporating renewable energies. Massive projects that benefit a particular country or region and maintain fidelity to fighting climate change is a win-win.

The Foreign Affairs magazine recently noted that the Global South covers "the vast majority of humanity, but their desires and goals have long been relegated to the footnotes of geopolitics." Many of the leaders in those countries, despite not operating as a bloc (in the traditional definition of the term), are changing that dynamic. Driven by realism - the need to improve the well-being of their citizens in part through infrastructure and other projects that demonstrate economic growth - and tired of being lectured to about Western values while receiving economic aid linked to specific democratic principles, these countries want to modernize their way. And China is delivering the same message: Let us work together on developing your nation and empowering your people, and you can do that with no strings attached. Returning to the aforementioned Foreign Affairs article, these countries are "looking out for number one" and "rejecting a new cold war dynamic that pits the United States, Japan and Europe against a gathering coalition of China and Russia." 

In short, the Global South has said "enough" after spending decades as the most junior of partners in the Washington Consensus. As one former Indonesian ambassador to the US and a co-founder of an international social justice group wrote in Nikkei Asia: "Perceptions of Western hypocrisy in the Global South, compounded by bitter memories of past interventions, have made our divided world even more polarized and have pushed old friends and partners to turn to new sources of development finance that come with less baggage and fewer strings attached..."

Will American political elites pay attention to such warnings? The Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft is making it easier for them to do so. The institute recently launched a new program that targets the Global South. Why? Trita Parsi, the institute's executive vice president, said, "The growing geopolitical significance of rising Middle Powers in the Global South is undisputed, yet a solid understanding of this new dynamic is lacking in Washington."

Those are kind, and dare we say diplomatic, words. Washington suffers from a corrosive mind-set that demands turning any achievement by China into an attack on the nation ("China must have cheated") and any setback faced by China as an indicator that the entire structure is under duress ("China is doomed."). That myopic viewpoint explains why one American think tank after another wants its audiences to believe that the BRI is flawed, mismanaged, tipped in China's favor and otherwise guaranteed to undermine the roughly 150 nations involved in it. Such analyses regularly conclude that because the BRI has had its ups and downs it is teetering. Do you know of any long-term economic program that never hit a bump or two in the road? 

Along the same lines, Western elites maintain that the Global South should remain patient and resist Chinese efforts to become global partners because Western help is on the way. Global South citizens know from their history that too much of that help either never shows up or cannot be effectively used. 

The Quincy Institute is encouraging US and Western leaders to tone down the bombastic rhetoric and instead listen to the voices and ideas of the people that make up the Global South. If those elites do that, and there is decades of evidence to suggest they have no interest in listening to anyone who is not stuck in the same echo chamber, they might hear voices at home and abroad saying that a 20th-century attitude focused on Western hegemony has been tossed aside much like wastepaper would be. In its place: A firm commitment to a multipolar world, in which the best of ideas from north, south, east and west are harnessed in order to finally bring lasting economic prosperity to the Global South. 

If Western leaders insist that the BRI and multipolarity are mere fads that will soon disappear, they are certain to further weaken the already frayed image of the West throughout the Global South.

Western media outlets and politicians have recently been singing a chorus on China's economy, clamoring how it is in trouble while maliciously attacking China's governance system. 

An article of Bloomberg, titled, "Democracies Versus Autocracies Isn't a Close Fight," published earlier this month, claims that the US has "a history of overestimating their authoritarian rivals" like China, and that "totalitarian enemies have a tradition of underestimating US capabilities." It also claims that democracy has a long winning streak despite all its maddening inefficiencies and contradictions, while most non-democratic states in modern history have suffered economically and existentially, because they "create inefficiencies, stifle innovation and quash the feedback mechanisms needed for effective governance." The article further asserts that the day when China's GDP surpasses that of the US may never come.

This narrative and viewpoint are filled with the arrogance and superiority complex of Western elites regarding their system. Driven by this kind of strong sense, they hold a bias against other systems, leading to increasingly paranoid perspectives. 

China's continuous economic development has left Western countries feeling a loss of their superiority and increasingly worried. This sentiment, coupled with the challenges and problems that inevitably arise during China's economic recovery following the pandemic, has made some Americans believe it is an opportunity now for the US to badmouth China and its economy.

Is it impossible for China's GDP to ever surpass that of the US? Yu Xiang, a senior fellow at the Center for International Security and Strategy, Tsinghua University, told Global Times that such a statement is highly unscientific and arbitrary. China has achieved significant economic success and has already exceeded 60 percent of the US GDP. This implies the ruling power, the US, is no longer capable of containing the rising power, China. In this context, as long as China avoids major systemic mistakes, adheres to its established development path, and overcomes external interference and suppression, its economy is bound to achieve steady and long-term growth.

As globalization enters a new phase, some countries are starting to compete for capital and development resources. In the current global economic environment, which is filled with risks and uncertainties, the US is trying to shift attention from concerns about potential risks and economic prospects within the US by propagating negative narratives about China's economy and undermining confidence and expectations regarding China's growth. This is aimed at preventing capital from flowing into China, while drawing Chinese capital outflows and other capital back to the US, said Yu.

Faced with the Western media's portrayal of "democracies versus autocracies," it should be noted that China has its own form of democracy. The discussion is, therefore, in essence, not about "democracies versus autocracies."

Feng Yue, a researcher at the Institute of Political Science at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told Global Times that China is developing the whole-process people's democracy, while the US is becoming more of a coercive and exploitative authoritarian state. Despite facing various issues within its own democracy, such as fierce partisan competition, the US has not engaged in self-reflection but has continually planned and executed "color revolutions" in many parts of the world, using democratic rhetoric to suppress other countries and pursue its own interests. Whenever a country disobeys, they resort to military coercion and repression, exacerbating international divisions and camp confrontations. Isn't this a blatant display of authoritarian behavior?

The decline of democracy, political infighting, money politics, and the erosion of freedom of speech have become hallmarks of US-style democracy. The elites in the US, however, seem to remain trapped in the illusion of the "end of history." While glaring problems exist in the US system, including identity politics, social polarization and wealth disparity, they lack the self-reflection and determination needed for reform due to their conflicting interests. It's not that rival nations have a tradition of underestimating US capabilities; rather, amid the arrogance and bad habits of US elites, the country overestimates its own capabilities.

In recent years, China's good governance and the US' poor governance have formed a stark contrast. China has pursued an innovation-driven development strategy, striving for self-reliance in high-level technology to promote high-quality economic growth. Particularly in the field of technological innovation, Huawei's success in breaking through comprehensive US containment measures has proven the failure and ineffectiveness of the US' strategy. China's economic future is bright and we must rely on our own innovation, ensuring technological independence. 

Western countries are mired in economic and political quagmires, trying various methods to discredit their opponents, and hoping to find some consolation by bad-mouthing China. However, casting shadows over China's economy and system will not solve US' own problems. Overestimating their own capabilities will only accelerate their decline.

The Russian-North Korean negotiations this month have provoked a lot of hype, particularly in the West. It is assumed by the West that North Korean leader Kim Jong-un's trip might indicate a profound change in Moscow's overall approach to the security problems on the Korean Peninsula. Allegedly, a new so-called "Moscow-Beijing-Pyongyang axis" that harbors unquestionable hostile intentions toward the West is rapidly emerging in Northeast Asia. It is suggested that Moscow is now ready to directly assist North Korea with its nuclear and, especially, with its ballistic programs. Pyongyang, in its turn, might send large-scale military hardware supplies to Russia to serve the "special military operation" that Moscow has been conducting in Ukraine since February of 2022.

These allegations have to be addressed in a proper context. Speaking of various axes in Northeast Asia, one should not forget about the growing level of military cooperation between Washington, Tokyo and Seoul. Both Japan and the South Korea have dramatically increased their defense spending as well as the scale of their trilateral interaction. In the end of 2022, Prime Minister Fumio Kishida announced an unprecedentedly ambitious five-year rearmament plan that should turn Japan into the nation with the third highest defense budget in the world after the US and China. 

The changing posture of the South Korea is arguably even more significant. After all, Japan has always been a disciplined US geopolitical partner at least since signing the 1960 US-Japan security treaty. South Korea for a long time has consistently resisted pressure from the US to join Washington and Tokyo in a trilateral alliance or to drop its friendly ties with Beijing and Moscow. President Yoon Suk-yeol, who came to power in 2022, apparently has a different take on the South Korea's security prospects. The traditional distancing from the US-Japan strategic partnership is no longer in place. The new leadership makes steps to bring Seoul closer to Quad and AUKUS. It even entertained the idea of South Korea obtaining indigenous nuclear weapons. On top of that, for at least last two years, both Japan and South Korea have been meticulously integrated into the new global strategy of the North Atlantic Alliance.

A devil's advocate would argue that both Tokyo and Seoul have every reason to be concerned about security challenges mounting in Northeast Asia. Still, even giving both nations the benefit of the doubt, it is impossible to deny that the security and political "axis" in this region of the world is being built by the West rather than by the East. And, as Newton's Third Law tells us, for every action, there is always an equal and opposite reaction. When one body acts on another, it experiences an equal and opposite reaction from the other body.  Now, the question is not if a nuclear war breaks out on the Korean Peninsula, North Korean Defense Minister General Kang Sun-nam stated in August, but who starts it and when.

Let's be clear: Pyongyang is much more sensitive about its sovereignty and independence than both Tokyo and even Seoul. This means that North Korea will never become an obedient proxy in Russia's or China's capable hands. However, the growing US-Japanese-South Korean military cooperation inevitably leads to stronger China-Russia-North Korea ties. This, in turn, means that we are moving toward a more rigid bipolar security arrangement in Northeast Asia. Unfortunately, for the time being, all the dreams for a common security system in the region have to be put on hold.

Will this change affect Russia's and China's approaches to the nuclear problem on the Korean Peninsula? Neither Moscow nor Beijing is interested in a nuclear arms race there. Russia and China have little to gain and a lot to lose if the existing fragile consensus in the United Nations Security Council on North Korean nuclear program were to collapse. On the other hand, the new great powers confrontation can do nothing but erode the trust, which is indispensable for maintaining this consensus. There is still time to reverse these dangerous trends toward bipolarity in the region. Instead of lamenting about the actions of the other side, major actors should engage in inclusive consultations on how to defuse the situation. 

Twenty years ago, the so called six-party talks on nuclear program were launched in Beijing. Over six years this multilateral format had its ups and downs, successes and failures. In April of 2009 this mechanism finally hit the wall. Though it is hardly possible to get back to where the region was 20 years ago, the spirit of the six-party talks remains the best hope for security solutions in the region of Northeast Asia.

In the 19th century, Britain was the nation which invented the railway. The landmark invention of the steam engine, known as "Stephenson's Rocket," was a creation which revolutionized the world and became a pinnacle of building the modern, industrialized world, connecting nations and enabling trade like never before. It was through the genius of this innovation that Britain excelled against its competitors and established itself as a global empire, a scientific, technological and military giant which allowed it to dominate and subjugate countless countries, including China.

Yet, Britain today pales in comparison to its historical achievements, as it struggles to even muster the organization, funding and political will to build a second high speed railway. This project, known as High Speed 2 (HS2), has proven to be one of the most controversial, politically contested and expensive infrastructure projects in British history, with a report from Channel 4 stating its costs could spiral upward to 108 billion pounds ($131.6 billion). The railway was designed to connect Britain's largest two cities, London and Birmingham, cutting transportation time to just an hour, but it was also envisioned to extend to other major cities including Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle and Edinburgh, connecting all the economic centres of the country.

That isn't happening. As the costs of construction continue to grow, and as the date of completion continues to get pushed back, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has lost the political will to pursue it and decided to effectively scrap the northern link, instead proposing to shoehorn the trains onto existing lines. 

There are several factors which have contributed to this scaling back, but all are the government's fault. This includes disastrous policy choices including full-throttle escalation of the war in Ukraine, which the government has devoted billions to, and the subsequent onslaught of inflation and economic stagnation, mismanagement of the COVID-19 pandemic, but also more subtly, the government's decision to, at the behest of the US, pursue an antagonistic foreign policy toward China against its national interests.

How are China and HS2 linked? First of all, at the end of 2019, the Boris Johnson government proposed to the press that China Railway Corp be used as the contractor for HS2. This was the most effective, reliable and cheapest option available. Not only would the project have been completed far earlier, but it would have also been far less expensive. The following year, Britain reset its foreign policy on China at the influence of the US, and the whole thing went out the window. With that policy shift, Britain began effectively sabotaging its own infrastructure development to suit US preferences. The costs of Britain banning Huawei from its 5G network, to take just one example, have been astronomical.

China's high speed railway record speaks for itself. Meanwhile, Britain is struggling to connect just two major cities just 117 miles (188 kilometres) apart, China has built a comprehensive high speed railway network within the scope of just 15 years, which as of 2022, spans 42,000 kilometres and is still growing. It is possible to travel across the entire country in just seven hours from Shenzhen to Beijing. In 25 years, Britain has only managed to complete one high speed network (HS1), which is in fact a transnational route which goes to France, the Netherlands and Belgium, making it a joint collaboration rather than a distinctly "British" achievement. 

The fundamental reason behind Britain's failure to move ahead with high speed railway is that its infrastructure is a series of privately owned, for-profit franchises, without any subsidies, which substantially drives up the costs and also limits investment in the infrastructure simultaneously. Even without considering the High Speed Rail, the quality of British railways is astonishingly poor and behind most of its European counterparts. This model has also been bad for the workers, which has led to routine industrial action and strikes throughout the year of 2022-23, making services unreliable. This contrasts sharply to China's state-led model of development which is superior to the British railway system in every single way.

This makes the comparison ironic given that Britain sees China as a "competitor" and a "threat to its economic security." Britain is a stagnating, declining country while China is the world's second largest economy, and rather than learning from China's development successes and courting Chinese investment, the UK has made the bizarre choice to "cut its nose off to spite its face" and antagonise Beijing to suit US interests. 

But what have they got to show for it? The answer is a single high speed rail route spanning into the cost of more than 100 billion pounds which has taken decades to build and has to be scaled back from its original plans. This is the country which invented the railway, but now finds itself falling behind at an alarming rate. This means shunning Chinese companies was one of the most expensive and short-sighted decisions taken by politicians in recent years, among many other things.

Chinese-developed technologies in sectors such as digital yuan payments and dispatch systems are in use at the ongoing 19th Asian Games in Hangzhou, East China's Zhejiang Province, providing technical support to the event. 

A "top up in advance" function became available on Friday on the digital yuan app, providing a safe and convenient payment service for foreign visitors. Earlier, Ant Group officially welcomed seven new leading e-wallets and payment apps from Asia to the "Alipay+-in-China" (A+China) Program, reported the Xinhua News Agency. 

These new additions bring the total number of overseas e-wallets accepted in the Chinese mainland to 10.

There are nine digital yuan interactive experience areas in the Asian Games Village and reception hotels, and 12 digital yuan foreign currency exchange machines. So far, 324 merchants in venues and Asian Games Villages are accepting digital yuan. Online and on-site ticket sales support the use of digital yuan.

Zhejiang has 1.3 million on-site merchants and 1.02 million online merchants supporting the acceptance of digital yuan, officials said at a press conference last week. 

The new feature of the digital yuan wallet introduced during the Hangzhou Asian Games perfectly aligns with the scenario of the Games, where there are many foreigners, including spectators, coaches and athletes, who want to make purchases within China during their stay, Wang Peng, an associate research fellow at the Beijing Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times on Monday.

Chinese tech giants are also making the event a place for adopting intelligent services. 

In terms of event organization, an intelligent command and dispatch system developed by Hikvision is in charge of the operation status of all stadiums, venues and surrounding traffic conditions, China Electronics Technology Group Corp said via its WeChat account. 

The intelligent command system can generate a "parallel stadium" with 3D modeling technology, directly showing detailed information on security, traffic and people movements, as well as the games themselves, facilitating the efficiency of command communication. 

The intelligent command system can integrate information on all events and relevant security, and visualize it with Internet of Things technology, in order to secure the 24-hour operation of the center, according to Hikvision.

The system displays simultaneous information of ongoing games, ticketing, traffic, logistics, power grids, weather, food and hotel supplies, and medical support for the event organizers, helping them make correct decisions in responding to any emergencies.

Wang said that large-scale events like this can greatly boost the development of technological products. "The Hangzhou Asian Games provides valuable application and promotion opportunities for China's latest technology research and products, building up experience for use in the civilian sector," he noted.

During Nepali Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal Prachanda's visit to China, the two nations issued a joint statement on Tuesday, vowing to accelerate win-win cooperation on agriculture, infrastructure, tourism and many other areas, and to facilitate Nepal to graduate from the least developed country status at an early date.

Experts noted that the two countries have huge potential to strengthen cooperation, especially in the agriculture sector, which could rapidly bring tangible benefits to local residents and help them reduce poverty.

The two agreed to further deepen mutually beneficial cooperation in such fields as the economy and trade, investment, agriculture, tourism, production capacity, poverty alleviation, health and education to promote common development, read the statement.

China and Nepal welcome the renewal of the Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation in the Field of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries between the two sides, and the recent successful export of Nepali haylage to China. China expresses its readiness to speed up the approval process for the import of cooked buffalo meat products from Nepal to China, which the two sides view as a positive step to reduce trade imbalances.

China is ready to assist the Nepali side in meeting the phytosanitary requirements for the export of Nepali citrus fruits to China and in establishing a multifunctional quarantine laboratory in Nepal.

The two also plan to shore up cooperation on variety breeding and standardized scale culture of Yak, Nak and mountain goats (Chyangra). The two sides plan to establish agriculture industrial demonstration park to further promote cooperation on agriculture, according to the statement.

In the statement, Nepal expresses its appreciation to China for granting zero-tariff treatment to 98 percent of taxable products from Nepal.

In July, the first batch of haylage exported by Nepal to China set out from Bharatpur in southern Nepal, en route to Southwest China's Xizang Autonomous Region. 

According to the Xinhua News Agency, the silage producer Nepal Horizon International is aiming at opening up three or four more processing factories in Nepal within the next two years and exporting 300,000 tons of haylage to Xizang annually, which will be worth $30 million.

The $30 million in annual exports mean "the export volume from Nepal to China will double," Chinese Ambassador to Nepal Chen Song said at the shipment ceremony.

In the first eight months of this year, China's imports from Nepal stood at 151.8 million yuan ($20.77 million), soaring 55.2 percent year-on-year, per data from China's General Administration of Customs.

"With China's advanced technology in the agricultural industry, it is not a hard issue for the country to help certain Nepali regions to increase production by several times," Liu Zongyi, secretary-general of the Research Center for China-South Asia Cooperation at the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies, told the Global Times on Tuesday.

"Investment in agricultural cooperation yields tangible benefits at a fastest pace, with results visible in just a matter of months," Liu said.

China has abundant experiences in cooperation with less-developed countries. Based on mutual respect and win-win principles, such cooperation on agriculture, infrastructure and many other sectors has generated huge benefits for local residents and societies in related countries and regions, experts noted.

Chandra Prasad Dhakal, president of the Federation of Nepalese Chambers of Commerce & Industry, told the Global Times on the sidelines of the Nepal-China Business Summit held on Sunday in Beijing that "China is building up huge infrastructure very close to the Nepalese border that is reducing logistics costs tremendously. We feel that in the coming times, we must try and extract this more and make it more competitive for [Nepalese] businesses."

Liu stressed that besides the agricultural sector, China and Nepal have started cooperation in many fields, although some of them have been promoted inefficiently due to factors such as external political interference.

"Effective promotion of joint projects is a key to generate tangible benefits to both sides," he added.

During the recently concluded G20 summit, the US and India revealed cracks on many international issues, indicating that the US-India relationship is far from being as rosy as it appears. 

As two large countries at different stages of development, India and the US have different attitudes toward a series of international issues. As a developing country, India's top priority is to achieve economic development, whereas the US is seeking to contain China and maintain its global hegemony.

First, India and the US-led West have had differing approaches on issues related with climate change and energy. India, as a developing country, has emphasized the priority for economic growth and has been more reliant on sourcing coal for its energy needs. Raj Kumar Singh, India's minister for power and renewable energy, recently accused the West of hypocrisy over energy transition, according to the Financial Times.

Second, the US and India have been struggling to reach agreements in trade negotiations. Although the US proposed the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF) and held talks with India on the initiative, India still chose not to join the IPEF trade pillar. Market access has not been agreed upon for India, which is being viewed as a crucial factor to join the trade pillar, according to media reports.

Third, although there are signs that the US supports India in taking over manufacturing transfers from China, the goal of the US is actually to bring manufacturing back and ensure employment opportunities in the US. From the Trump administration or even earlier, there have been conflicting interests between the US and India in this regard.

Fourth, the US and India encountered tensions on whether to include the Russia-Ukraine issue in the joint declaration of the G20 summit. In the first half of 2023, the trade between Russia and India increased by 190 percent year-on-year. The surging trade between India and Russia despite the US-led West's attempt to isolate Russia indicates differences in the positions of the US and India on Russia-related issues.

In co-opting India, the US mainly wants to take advantage of India's strategic position in the geopolitical landscape. India is well aware of the US' intention and understands that the US is trying to use India as a counterweight to contain China. India is also aware that the fundamental objective of the US is to maintain its own hegemonic status.

What India is doing is maintaining its own stance on major international issues while seeking to benefit from dealing with the US, such as accessing the US market and technology. India will avoid challenging the US on international issues; nevertheless, India will not sacrifice its own interests just to cater to the US.

During the G20 summit, India, in the process of setting the agenda, displayed a clear goal of competing with China to become a leader in the developing world. Despite major differences, India and China, both being major developing countries, should actively expand cooperation.

In recent years, China-India economic and trade relations have achieved continuous growth despite the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Admittedly, the issue of imbalance in China-India economic and trade relations should not be ignored, but, more importantly, both sides can see the enormous benefits that expanding and deepening cooperation can bring. Trade between China and India reached 619.69 billion yuan ($84.49 billion) during the first eight months of 2023, up 5.2 percent year-on-year, according to Chinese customs data.

At present, peace and mutually beneficial cooperation are of utmost importance for both China and India. Only by actively expanding and deepening cooperation can the two sides seize opportunities and achieve economic and social development. If India falls into the geopolitical trap set by the US and allows its relationship with China to slide from benign competition to confrontation or even worse, it will seriously harm the interests of both countries. 

In the face of great development opportunities, India should be aware of where its own interests lie and not be easily manipulated or used by the US. India should adopt a more rational approach in coordinating its relationship with China and work together to contribute to the stability and development of the developing world.

The author is an associate research fellow at the National Institute of International Strategy under the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.