英文媒体关于中国的报道汇总 2023-10-15
October 16, 2023 24 min 4922 words
根据您提供的新闻报道,我总结了以下主要内容- 1. 普京访问中国,与习近平会面,加深两国“无限”合作伙伴关系。 2. 中国修建的丝绸之路经过南亚多个国家,对这些国家经济发展有帮助,但也给这些国家带来了大量债务。 3. 英国科学家设计捕捉箱,试图控制迅速增长的中国美捞螯蟹数量。 以下是我对这些报道的评论- 1. 普京访问中国加深双边合作并不令人惊讶,两国领导人多次宣称中俄伙伴关系“毫无限制”,这次访问在当前的国际环境下更显示出两国战略合作关系牢固。但是报道使用了带有偏见的词语如“竞争对手”描述中国和俄罗斯。 2. 中国修建基础设施确实给一些南亚国家带来实际效益,同时也给这些国家带来一定的债务压力。但是报道只强调中国造成这些国家债务问题,而没有提到这些国家自身的经济管理问题以及多边开发银行的角色,这反映出一定的偏见。 3. 中国美捞螯蟹作为外来入侵物种对英国本地生态系统的确造成一定影响,英国科学家试图控制其数量也在情理之中。但是报道语气偏激,将其描述为“吃掉我们的房子”,反映出对中国的负面刻板印象。 总体来说,这些报道对中国采取了严苛的标准,在事实报道的同时带有明显的偏见和对中国的负面描述。作为新闻工作者,我们应该坚持客观公正的报道原则,而不仅仅是引用带有色彩的语句来吸引眼球。中国与世界的互动是复杂的,需要全面平衡的描述。
- China’s ties with America are warming, a bit | China
- [World] China's Belt and Road Initiative: Kenya and a railway to nowhere
- Xi Jinping bumps up the share prices of firms he visits | China
- Borrell says EU takes China seriously, expects same in return
- American and Chinese scientists are decoupling, too | Science & technology
- A corner of Italy that is forever China | Europe
China’s ties with America are warming, a bit | China
https://www.economist.com/china/2023/10/12/chinas-ties-with-america-are-warming-a-bitIn New York politics, plain speaking is an asset. Fearless public candour is less useful when climbing to the top ranks of the Chinese Communist Party. Despite this daunting culture gap, Chuck Schumer—the acerbic, Brooklyn-born majority leader of America’s Senate and co-chairman of the first congressional delegation to China since before the pandemic—held businesslike meetings with Xi Jinping and other party bosses on October 9th and 10th.
The encounters began with less-than-promising displays of party doublespeak. Earlier this year, Mr Xi accused America and allies of trying to contain and suppress his country on all fronts. Yet when the supreme leader welcomed the six senators to the Great Hall of the People, he dismissed bilateral tensions as mere “wind and rain”. Deploring the very notion of a great-power contest, Mr Xi declared that “competition and confrontation are not in line with the trend of the times.” For his part, the foreign minister, Wang Yi, suggested that ignorance explains Americans’ growing wariness of China. With luck, Mr Wang averred, the senators’ visit would give them a more “accurate” understanding of his country.
Mr Schumer was having none of it. It is “natural” that the world’s two greatest powers are competitors in trade, technology, diplomacy and more, he told his hosts, adding: “We welcome this competition. We do not seek conflict.” In his meeting with the foreign minister, the senator said he was “very disappointed” by China’s initial response to terror attacks by Hamas, which “showed no sympathy” for Israelis murdered in their hundreds. Mr Schumer was correct. As with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, China’s diplomats claimed to be neutral after Hamas attacked Israel. They called on both sides to lay down their arms. China’s official media have played down mass killings and hostage-taking of civilians by Hamas, emphasised Israeli air strikes on Gaza and presented America as a warmonger fuelling the conflict for selfish ends. Mr Schumer asked for a clear condemnation of Hamas. Several senators asked China to use its influence and urge Iran to avoid escalating the war. For good measure Mr Schumer complained about unfair Chinese trade practices and China-based chemical factories that feed the deadly trade in fentanyl. He urged China not to support “Russia’s immoral war against Ukraine”.
His hosts were pragmatic, not cross, in response. The commerce minister, Wang Wentao, said that China does not seek to avoid competition, as long as it is based on world trade rules. During the Americans’ visit, the foreign ministry somewhat toughened its line on Hamas, condemning acts that harm civilians.
It is not a love of Brooklyn-style bluntness that explains China’s reaction. Party chiefs respect power, whether economic or political. China needs foreign investment and know-how, and wants to head off tighter, American-led controls on exports of semiconductors and other technologies. Leaders in Beijing notice that, at a time when members of Congress agree on very little, politicians in Washington can come together to pass tough-on-China bills and industrial subsidies for American firms. Congress demands stronger armed forces to counter the People’s Liberation Army.
Party leaders understand diplomatic clout, too. They have watched, appalled, as America harnesses fears of China to broker a rapprochement between Japan and South Korea, and to deepen defence ties with regional countries from Australia and India to the Philippines. Diplomats report that China has heard from many governments that it should lower tensions and talk to America—and that countries have sent the same message to President Joe Biden’s team. Mr Xi all but confirmed this in public, telling Mr Schumer’s delegation that the international community expects their two countries to co-operate on such global tasks as fighting climate change and securing a post-pandemic economic recovery. American officials sound confident that Mr Xi will attend an Asia-Pacific leaders’ summit next month in San Francisco, and hold a side meeting with Mr Biden. For the past three months China has eased off from dangerous mid-air and maritime encounters with surveillance aircraft and warships from America and allies, such as Australia and Canada, says an American defence official.
The party respects a united front
This modest lowering of tensions cannot be separated from the tough-on-China mood that unites America’s politicians. That bipartisan consensus is real, Chaguan heard on a recent trip to Washington. Both parties agree that China is “the pacing challenge of this century”, says Senator Chris Coons, a Democrat with close ties to Mr Biden. Still, divisions lurk. Not every member worries about the views of foreign allies and non-aligned countries. Most Republicans are far less fussed about competing with China for top jobs and influence at the UN, laments Mr Coons. Even as China expands its diplomatic footprint, the Senate has failed to confirm American ambassadors to vital countries.
Republicans complain that Mr Biden’s focus on climate change and what they call his “war on fossil fuels” will leave Americans dependent on Chinese-made electric cars. Isolationism, on the hard right and far left, is a growing force. Mike Gallagher, the Republican chairman of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, is a Reagan-admiring internationalist. Like Mr Coons, he sees a link between America’s global credibility and the health of its democratic institutions at home. But even Mr Gallagher worries that the American public’s support for war over Taiwan might “evaporate” if the costs are too high. That makes him eager to see America pre-position enough arms on Taiwan and deterrent force in Asia to make taking the island impossible. Others worry that causing China to lose all hope would trigger a war.
In short, American politicians agree that they are in a great power contest with China, but not how to compete. Policymaking on China has not succumbed to partisan dysfunction or to Trumpish, America First nationalism. Candidly, though, it could. ■
Read more from Chaguan, our columnist on China:
China wants to be the leader of the global south (Sep 21st)
Xi Jinping builds a 21st-century police state (Sep 14th)
The Belt and Road, as seen from China (Sep 7th)
Also: How the Chaguan column got its name
[World] China's Belt and Road Initiative: Kenya and a railway to nowhere
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-67101736?at_medium=RSS&at_campaign=KARANGAThe first section of Kenya's Chinese-built railway was opened with much fanfare in 2017 - but two years later work on the tracks stopped in the middle of the country and the master plan of linking it to other landlocked countries in East Africa seems to have derailed.
This means the project is not bringing as much money as was hoped at this stage, while Kenya is left servicing loans totalling around $4.7bn (£3.9bn), mainly borrowed from Chinese banks.
Yet it is hard to believe that Kenya's Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) is not a success when passengers disgorge from a packed train of around 12 carriages at the Syokimau railway terminus in the capital, Nairobi - the last service of the day.
They have travelled non-stop from the port city of Mombasa, 470km (290 miles) away on the Indian Ocean.
"It's great," 53-year-old commuter Pauline Echesa told me. The four-and-a-half hour journey gives her the bonus of watching wildlife along the way as the railway cuts through national parks, she says.
A 30-year-old commuter found the experience a little more exhausting, saying the seats were not that comfortable but the journey saved her money compared to other ways travelling up from the coast.
There is no doubt the passenger side of the business is doing well and is fully booked, but it cannot pay back the loans on its own - and it was never meant to do so.
This burden falls to the cargo side of the business - bringing inland the containers that arrive at Mombasa port. It was intended that they would reach Uganda, Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
The problem is that they can go only go as far as the Kenyan town of Naivasha - 120km from Nairobi but still far from the Ugandan border - on the SGR. Most of the freight trains then return to Mombasa empty, a huge loss of potential income.
"It will be more productive for us to continue with the project," Kenya's Transport Cabinet Secretary Kipchumba Murkomen told the BBC. "But the financing part is actually our challenge."
He says the government would be exploring options for funding the construction of the remaining portion of the railway during the upcoming Belt and Road Summit in China.
Launched in 2013, China's massive Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has stretched across the globe and noticeably changed the landscape of infrastructure across Africa.
But its future is a matter of debate now as China continues to scale down funding and African countries face the reality of growing debt that in some cases threatens to destabilise their economies.
American think-tank the Council on Foreign Relations argues that some BRI investments have involved opaque bidding processes and required use of Chinese firms leading to inflated costs which have in some cases resulted in the cancelation of projects and a political backlash.
Internal issues that have affected the Chinese economy have also led to hugely diminished funding, says Nigeria's former Deputy Central Bank Governor, Kingsley Moghalu.
"The funding levels in the past couple of years have not been more than $2bn across the continent," he says - down, he estimates, from between $10bn and $20bn a decade ago.
Kenya's SGR is one of those to have suffered.
But Mr Murkomen says Kenya is open to options: "We have private sector players in China who have said they are willing to put their own resources as long as we can have a conversation about how they'll recoup their finances."
One could be a grace period to allow the country to first service the loans taken to finance the sections of the railway that are complete, he explains.
An admission that the government is seeking more funding may not sit well with many in the country who already reeling from tax hikes introduced by President William Ruto since he came into office a year ago.
Kenyans are concerned that debt repayments are exerting significant pressure on the country's economy. Government figures from the end of June 2022 showed that China was Kenya's third biggest external creditor - accounting for 19.4% of the country's debt.
"Right now, the debt profile of the country is quite heavy," says Kenyan economist Ken Gichinga, explaining that next June is when Kenya must repay a $2bn Eurobond.
"And there is also a feeling that not all that money went to building the railway," says Mr Gichinga.
The opacity in the deals countries like Kenya have signed with China is a matter of concern to their own citizens as well as critics abroad.
The Council on Foreign Relations assessment notes that loan terms are rarely made public and "because China refused to join the Paris Club of major official creditors", Chinese banks are under no pressure to cap lending rates or share information.
This, it concludes, means the risks for both the US and recipient countries "considerably outweighed its benefits".
For Kenya's railway to reap the benefits that were envisioned at its inception, it needs to go transnational.
"Uganda really needs to also be onboard," argues Mr Gichinga.
But that ambition looks shaky.
The original East Africa Transport Master Plan, proposed by the East Africa Community around two decades ago, wanted two routes into landlocked countries from the coast - one coming from Kenya, known as the northern corridor, and another from Tanzania, dubbed the central corridor. It then had connections to South Sudan and DR Congo.
However Uganda may decide to push its business towards Tanzania. Its railway project has cost way less to build and offers higher speeds as the line is electrified.
Former Tanzanian President John Magufuli tore up the deal that had been signed by his predecessor with China to build the railway and chose to get funding instead from Turkey and Portugal to finance the first leg of the project.
Tanzania also appears on track to connect to Rwanda, Burundi and DR Congo - with China coming onboard in latter sections.
Mr Moghalu argues that, like Tanzania, countries on the continent "should be drivers of their own destiny".
"African countries need a mental repositioning and not feel like an abused spouse that they should be grateful to China because their former spouse, the West, did not treat them well."
Western countries have recently been trying to counter BRI, including US President Joe Biden's Build Back Better World Initiative, launched in 2021 in collaboration with G7 economies. But there is general acknowledgement that China still can offer more in terms of long-term development.
For the Nairobi-Mombasa commuters, such investments for the country's future are definitely worthwhile.
"Let us sacrifice to pay the debt and get more for such projects," Ms Echesa told the BBC.
The Kenyan government will be hoping it can convince China, and its banks, that the SGR railway will be profitable if it gets to the border and beyond.
More on China-Africa relations:
Related Topics
Xi Jinping bumps up the share prices of firms he visits | China
https://www.economist.com/china/2023/10/12/xi-jinping-bumps-up-the-share-prices-of-firms-he-visitsIn imperial times, to gather unfiltered information and tap into the public mood, emperors slipped into civilian clothing and travelled around incognito. China’s Communist rulers are fond of inspection tours, too. But unlike the emperors’ hugger-mugger trips, modern equivalents are highly publicised affairs, intended to show that the visitors are caring and down-to-earth. State media often show China’s current leader, Xi Jinping, visiting schools, offices and factories, surrounded by onlookers beaming with adoration.
It might be expected that Mr Xi’s inspections of firms would generate such a positive buzz that their business would benefit. But a paper by researchers in Japan, led by Ito Asei of the University of Tokyo, paints a more complex picture of the Xi effect. It is based on a study of leaders’ visits to companies listed on the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock exchanges during the rule of Mr Xi and his predecessor, Hu Jintao, who was the party’s chief from 2002 to 2012.
The researchers measured profits on investments in shares of the visited firms and compared them with returns that would have been expected had a visit not occurred (“cumulative abnormal returns”, in stockmarket jargon). They focused on a 15-day period around each inspection. Between 2012 and 2022 Mr Xi visited 53 listed firms while his prime minister, Li Keqiang (who stepped down this year after holding the job for a decade), toured 43 of them.
The impact was clear. For Mr Xi, abnormal returns peaked on average at nearly 6% above the expected amount. For Mr Li, they were about 3.5% above. Both figures were much higher than the researchers calculated for Mr Hu (2.2%) and his prime minister, Wen Jiabao (1.3%). In Mr Xi’s second five-year term as the party’s leader, which began in 2017, the effect was even greater, reaching nearly 7%. Curiously, the influence of a visit by Mr Xi is often seen before the trip itself, suggesting that rumours of his plans may spread before he sets off.
Mr Ito and his co-authors found that leaders were more likely to call on larger firms that are already doing well. Some speculators may reckon that the visits could portend government action that would give these companies an extra boost. But the researchers found that state firms, which are always politically favoured, do not reap any additional benefits from leaders’ visits. It is non-state-owned companies, which rank lower in the party’s esteem, that revel more in the afterglow: they find it easier to get bank loans and experience a spike in sales.
The leader effect on company value is not confined to China. In a study published in 2020, researchers led by Jeffrey Brown of the University of Illinois found that when bosses of American companies met White House officials, their firms’ share prices also increased. But the abnormal returns, at about 0.4% on average, paled in comparison with those noticed in China.
The outsize impact of a Xi visit could be explained partly by his politics. Under his leadership the Chinese government has put much greater effort into directing investment towards what it considers to be strategically important industries. Mr Xi is a champion of this dirigiste approach. So when investors get wind that he will visit a firm, they may be all the more inclined to see the trip as a sign that he has picked a winner. Mr Xi would abhor the term state capitalism, but China’s speculators feed on its abundant manifestations. ■
Subscribers can sign up to Drum Tower, our new weekly newsletter, to understand what the world makes of China—and what China makes of the world.
Borrell says EU takes China seriously, expects same in return
https://reuters.com/article/china-europe-borrell/borrell-says-eu-takes-china-seriously-expects-same-in-return-idUSKBN31E01RThe European Union's top diplomat Josep Borrell said on Saturday his message to Chinese officials on a Beijing visit had been that Brussels takes China seriously and expects the same in return on geopolitical issues and trade.
"Cooperation is very much important," Borrell told a press conference ending a three-day visit that had twice been postponed.
"Europe takes China very, very seriously," he said. "We also expect to be considered not through the lens of our relationship with others, but in ourselves."
The 27-member bloc has long complained it does not receive adequate attention from Beijing, particularly compared to the United States, and that China does not sufficiently recognise the EU's agency in geopolitical affairs.
"Since the war in Ukraine, Europe has become a geopolitical power," Borrell said. "We want to talk to China with this approach."
He said he discussed with Chinese officials the crisis in Israel and Gaza, and announced that his chief of staff, Enrique Mora, would be visiting Beijing next week to continue to engage Chinese officials on geopolitical issues.
On Friday, Borrell met Foreign Minister Wang Yi, who described the talks as "comprehensive, candid and friendly".
The two discussed EU-China trade tensions and a broad range of hot-button issues, including the Israel-Hamas conflict and China using its influence on Russia to stop its war in Ukraine.
"We are facing a critical moment in Gaza and we cannot say that the problem in Gaza will be solved by the two-state solution because the world has been failing miserably," Borrell said on Saturday.
"But what we discussed with my Chinese counterpart is that it is the only solution that can be implemented," he added.
The EU's record $426 billion trade deficit last year with the world's second-largest economy has become a major sticking point in the relationship.
Last week Brussels launched an investigation into whether to impose tariffs on Chinese electric vehicle (EV) imports it says benefit from state subsidies.
"We have a lot of geopolitical issues to consider, but certainly this was discussed, and I told my Chinese counterpart that to launch an investigation is just to launch an investigation," Borrell said.
During talks in Beijing last month, China's economy tsar, He Lifeng, asked EU Trade Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis to "exercise restraint in the use of trade remedy measures".
The EU plans to open an anti-subsidy investigation into Chinese steelmakers this month, the Financial Times has reported.
Beijing has also objected to EU plans for a "carbon border adjustment mechanism" that will set tariffs of 20% to 35% on goods with a high carbon price, such as steel and iron ore.
The EU and China plan a summit by the end of the year, with Borrell's visit and those of a number of other top EU officials in recent months having paved the way.
American and Chinese scientists are decoupling, too | Science & technology
https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2023/10/11/american-and-chinese-scientists-are-decoupling-tooTHERE ARE lots of ways to measure China’s rise. It is the world’s second-biggest economy, its biggest manufacturer and its biggest creditor. In 2021 it passed another milestone. That year, for the first time, Chinese scientists published more papers than their counterparts in America or the European Union (see chart 1). It is not just the quantity that is improving. The Nature Index, run by the publishers of the journal of the same name, tracks contributions to the world’s best-regarded health and natural-sciences journals. Chinese researchers rank first in the natural sciences, and second overall.
Cause for celebration, no doubt, in Beijing. In Washington, though, the news may have been less welcome. America increasingly dismayed by China’s rise—and especially its growing scientific and technological prowess. Under Donald Trump, the previous Republican president, and Joe Biden, the current Democratic one, it has imposed tariffs, rules and subsidies designed to hobble China’s high-tech firms while boosting its own. China has retaliated, moving against some big American tech companies. Twenty years ago, politicians endorsed globalisation and free trade. Now “decoupling”, national security and “friend-shoring” are the hot topics.
Conscious uncoupling
Academia is not immune. New rules and chilly politics in both countries are making it harder for researchers to collaborate. In August America agreed on a temporary, six-month extension for a landmark scientific co-operation agreement signed in 1979. Several American politicians want the deal scrapped entirely, claiming in an open letter that, by collaborating with Chinese researchers, America was “fuelling its own destruction.”
The strains can be seen in the figures. In 2020 the number of papers jointly written by American and Chinese researchers fell for the first time. It fell again the following year, the most recent for which data are available, though it is still rising for some other countries, such as Britain. The number of visas America awards to Chinese students and academics is down as well, to around a third of its peak in 2015 (see chart 2). Scientifically as well as politically, the countries are drawing apart.
The Science and Technology Agreement, as the 1979 pact is called, was the first bilateral treaty signed between America and China after they re-established diplomatic relations. Several landmark studies have come under its umbrella. A long-running project following 285,000 Chinese women, begun in 1983, helped demonstrate that folic acid could prevent spina bifida, a rare birth defect. These days folic acid is added to flour, bread, cereal and other staple foods; pregnant women are encouraged to take more. Co-operation in influenza research helps anticipate which strains of flu are likely to be dominant each year, improving vaccines.
Even superpower rivals can agree that medical research is a good thing. But China’s advances in other areas of science, such as computing, materials science and AI, have made American policymakers uneasy. Critics argue that science in China has benefited from American academic transparency and know-how—but that China has not always returned the favour. Doubters also point to China’s policy of “civil-military fusion”, in which the fruits of civilian research are scrutinised for any useful military applications.
China retorts that America’s worries about national security have led to the unfair targeting of Chinese researchers at American universities. One frequent target of complaint is the Department of Justice’s “China Initiative”, which ran between 2018 and 2022 and was designed to investigate alleged instances of Chinese technological espionage. But cases seem to have been thin on the ground. The initiative investigated at least 150 academics of Chinese origin, but managed to secure only a handful of convictions. Some were for less offences such as grant fraud.
Some of the investigations have become very public fiascos, as with the case of Gang Chen, a well regarded mechanical engineer of Chinese origin who is now at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dr Chen was arrested in 2021. He spent a year on academic leave before all the charges against him were dropped. Other researchers have been sacked by their universities and found themselves on no-fly lists. Academics say the initiative led to an atmosphere of suspicion and mistrust.
China, meanwhile, has national-security concerns of its own, which can likewise impede co-operation. Rules introduced in recent years all but prohibit the export of many different kinds of data. Officials have banned the collection of genomic data by non-Chinese entities, for instance. Foreign social-science researchers are rarely given access to economic and social surveys without a friend in the government. The rules are vague, leaving even researchers keen to work with colleagues overseas unsure what they are allowed to share.
A cooling of ties will make life harder for both sides. Chinese academics will find it harder to get experience in American universities, which still dominate the world rankings in almost every subject. And because China is now a scientific power in its own right, with cutting-edge researchers in several fields, American science will suffer, too.
The benefits of collaboration are “significant,” and benefit American institutions slightly more than Chinese ones, says Jonathan Adams, who tracks academic information at Clarivate, a data provider. A study published in 2020 by Jenny Lee and John Haupt at the University of Arizona, found that, when papers co-written with Chinese scientists were excluded, the number of American publications in science and engineering fell slightly between 2014 and 2018.
Give me your brainy masses
America’s scientific pre-eminence has been built at least partly on its ability to attract the world’s best. Before the pandemic around 16% of graduate students in science, technology, engineering and mathematics at American universities were Chinese. The grad students of today often become the professors of tomorrow. Like Dr Chen, many Chinese students choose to stay in America after completing their degrees. That is something America’s leaders should be keen to encourage. ■
Curious about the world? To enjoy our mind-expanding science coverage, sign up to Simply Science, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter.
A corner of Italy that is forever China | Europe
https://www.economist.com/europe/2023/10/12/a-corner-of-italy-that-is-forever-chinaItaly may, like other Western countries, be hard at work “de-risking” its links to China; Giorgia Meloni’s government is considering leaving the Belt and Road Initiative that promotes Chinese trade and investment by next year. But in the hilltop university city of Macerata in the Marche region, relations with China are as enthusiastically friendly as ever. And that is because of a Jesuit priest who lived more than 400 years ago.
Matteo Ricci, born in 1552, is Macerata’s most notable son. A missionary and scholar, he was the first European invited to enter the Forbidden City in Beijing. Father Ricci co-wrote the earliest translations into Latin of the Confucian classics and left an enduring bond between China and his birthplace.
Though formally a city with its own cathedral and bishop, Macerata is a very small one, with barely 40,000 inhabitants. Yet its local authority keeps close relations with that of Shanghai, which has 26m. Macerata’s Confucius Institute, which promotes Chinese culture, is ranked by the Chinese authorities as on a par with that of Rome. And up to 300 Chinese students can be found studying at Macerata’s academy of fine arts.
“At Chinese New Year, the entire city becomes a Chinese town for the day,” says the Confucius Institute’s co-director, Giorgio Trentin. It is perhaps the only provincial Italian city where a visitor could find a group of locals practising tai chi in a side-street.
Macerata is also a key point of linkage between the Roman Catholic church and its members in China, split between an underground movement and the government-sanctioned Catholic Patriotic Association (CPA). Missionaries from Macerata followed in Father Ricci’s footsteps for centuries.
Today the diocese produces Chinese translations of theological works, and many of the graduates of its seminary subsequently go to China to study or work in non-ecclesiastical roles while maintaining contact with the country’s scattered Catholics. “I currently have a priest in Beijing and two more in Inner Mongolia,” says the bishop, Nazzareno Marconi. His diocese also sponsors Chinese who come to study for the priesthood in Italy. But ask him whether they belong to the CPA or the underground church and he smiles and gives a polite “No comment”.■