US on China

diplomatic ties with China and paved the way for its opening up to the world with a historic visit in 1972. “If the free world doesn’t change Communist China — [it] will surely change us,” Pompeo added, attacking what is one of the most significant Republican foreign policy achievements in the last five decades. “The free world must triumph over this new tyranny,” he said.

It was Nixon’s visit to China in 1972, the first by an American president since the Communists took power in 1949, that upended a Cold War paradigm and paved the way for the normalisation of relations in 1979. The thaw was precipitated by a deterioration in China’s ties with the Soviet Union. Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping visited the US in 1979 after the establishment of diplomatic ties, smiling in photos as he tried on a cowboy hat in Texas. The Houston consulate that is being shut this week opened later the same year -- it was China’s first in the United States.

Thursday’s speech was the fourth in a formatted series by senior members of the Trump administration framing the deteriorating relations with China, which has also been marked by a slew of punitive measures such as, most recently, the closure of the Chinese consulate in Houston. On Friday, China ordered the US to close its consulate in the western city of Chengdu, ratcheting up the diplomatic conflict and prompting the White House to caution Beijing against engaging in “tit-for-tat retaliation”.

“The current situation in Chinese-us relations is not what China desires to see. The United States is responsible for all this,” said foreign ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin. “We once again urge the United States to immediately retract its wrong decision and create necessary conditions for bringing the bilateral relationship back on track.”

China’s state-run broadcaster also quoted Wang as attacking Pompeo’s remarks: “Pompeo’s statement was filled with cold war mentality. It’s a combination of political lies by US politicians recently. We resolutely oppose this.” Also on Friday, the US State Department sent out a notice warning Americans in China of a “heightened risk of arbitrary detention”. “The kind of engagement we have been pursuing has not brought the kind of change in China that President Nixon hoped to induce,” Pompeo said at the lecture, adding: “President Nixon once said he feared he had created a ‘Frankenstein’ by opening the world to the Chinese Communist Party. And here we are.”

He said there was now a need for “a new grouping of likeminded nations -- a new alliance of democracies” to change the way they deal with China. He did not specify which these nations were. “We cannot treat this incarnation of China as a normal country,” Pompeo said, adding the United States cannot do it alone because the Chinese have spread far too wide and deep into the world, unlike the Soviet Union, which had remained closed.

When asked if he was urging nations to pick between the US and China, in line with a choice the US presented to the world in the 1940s between itself and the USSR, Pompeo said the choice for them was between “freedom and tyranny”.

“If we bend the knee now, our children’s children may be at the mercy of the CCP (the Chinese Communist Party), whose actions are the primary challenge to the free world,” he had said in his speech, as he was laying out the threat the world faced form China. “General Secretary Xi Jinping isn’t destined to tyrannize inside and outside of China forever, unless we allow it,” he said. The secretary of state also argued for involving the Chinese people in changing the regime.

“We must also engage and empower the Chinese people...a dynamic, freedom-loving people who are completely distinct from the Chinese Communist Party.” he said. He has been meeting Chinese dissidents and victims and survivors of Chinese oppression in Xinjiang and Hong Kong, and some of them were present in the audience at the invitation-only event. Scott Kennedy of Washington’s Center for Strategic and International Studies said cooperation with other democracies on China would be easier said than done, given the Trump administration’s record of dealing with allies.“how do you form a united front against China when the U.S. is bullying its allies, trashing multilateral institutions and pushing an economic decoupling (from China) that no one else supports?” he said. day, but there was no word from him. Gehlot said if the demand for convening a session was not met, MLAS will “not be responsible” if people gherao the governor’s house.

The Congress party also accused Mishra of acting on the behest of the Union government. “Governors are supposed to uphold the Constitution and the laws, but governors in this country are acting at the behest of the Union government,” Congress leader Kapil Sibal told a virtual press conference.

The Congress’s dharna came to an end later at night. Mishra assured that he will call an assembly session even as he wanted certain clarifications from the government, party functionaries said.

Governor Mishra, meanwhile, sent a six-point questionnaire asking the government to respond as to why the assembly session was being called. “There is no one above constitutional decorum. There should not be any kind of pressure politics...,” he said.

He added that he will follow constitutional norms to convene a session, denied there was any pressure on him from the BJP, and wondered why Gehlot was in a hurry to prove his majority on the floor of the House when no one had made such a demand.

According to the law laid down by the Supreme Court, the governor notifies the holding of a session on the recommendation of the council of ministers.

“...the law is clear that a governor is bound by aid and advice of his cabinet, as long as it has not lost its majority on the floor of the house. In a parliamentary system, there cannot be a constitutional authority that prevents a house from being called,” senior counsel Sanjay Hegde told HT.

Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan said: “If the Council of Ministers has the confidence of the House, there is no question that the Governor is bound by their advice in convening the legislature.”

Gulab Chand Kataria, the leader of the Opposition in the state assembly, said: “The chief minister is saying that the public will come and gherao Raj Bhavan. I would request the Centre that it deploy the CRPF [Central Reserve Police Force] in Rajasthan to maintain law and order. It should not trust the Rajasthan police.”

Gehlot has the support of 101 members (though this does not include speaker CP Joshi). Pilot has 18 other Congress MLAS and three independents in his camp, taking his tally to 22. The BJP and its ally Rashtriya Loktrantrik Party have 75 seats. Bhanwarlal Meghwal, one Congress MLA said to be close to Pilot, is indisposed.if Pilot’s tally is added to that of the opposition alliance, it takes their number up to 97. A three-member swing from the Gehlot camp to the Pilot camp or to the BJP could lead to the government falling in the event of a floor test.

The Congress accuses the BJP of instigating the political crisis in Rajasthan and attempting to topple the state government. The opposition party denies the claim and says the crisis was triggered by an internal feud in the Congress.

Earlier in the day, the Rajasthan high court’s order to maintain status quo on disqualification notices issued by the state assembly speaker to 19 rebel Congress MLAS came as a breather for Pilot.

“We are of the considered view that the present writ petition is maintainable. The writ petition is admitted. After completion of filing of pleadings of the parties and the intervenors, counsel for the parties shall be at liberty to file an application for early hearing of the writ petition. Till then, the ‘status quo’ as exists today viz-aviz impugned notices dated July 14 shall be maintained,” the order by the division bench of chief justice Indrajit Mahanty and justice Prakash Gupta said.

The Congress chief whip, Mahesh Joshi, filed a complaint before the speaker on July 14, seeking action against Pilot and the other dissidents under paragraph 2 (1) (a) of the 10th Schedule of the Constitution.

The provision disqualifies MLAS if they “voluntarily” give up the membership of the party which they represent in the House.

The rebels said Pilot never indicated any intention to leave the Congress party. In their petition filed on July 15, Pilot and other 18 MLAS submitted that were merely exercising their right to criticise party leadership and the functioning of the chief minister.

The Pilot camp also challenged the validity of paragraph 2(1) (a) of the 10th Schedule, contending that the provision was very wide since even expression of opinion or views against party leadership are construed as defection.

Meanwhile, the assembly speaker moved the Supreme Court and filed a special leave petition on Wednesday, challenging the July 21 order of high court directing speaker to defer disqualification proceedings. The top court said it will look into the crucial question of whether the high court can interfere in proceedings initiated by the speaker even before a decision on disqualification has been taken.

Normally, when a matter is admitted, it takes a very long time before it comes up for hearing in due course, Supreme Court advocate Sriram Parakkat said. “But the high court in its order has given liberty to the parties to file an application for early hearing after filing all pleadings. So the court can take up the matter without much delay if such an application is filed and the court finds it fit to hold an early hearing,” he said.