0x815

Japan and Canada on Tuesday, June 18, joined the Philippines’ treaty-ally the United States and strategic partner Australia in expressing support for Manila following the latest – and worst, thus far – incident between Chinese and Filipino personnel and vessels in the West Philippine Sea.

“Japan reiterates serious concern over repeated actions which obstruct freedom of navigation and increase regional tensions including recent dangerous actions that resulted in damage to the Filipino vessel and injuries to Filipinos onboard,” the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) said in a statement late June 18.

On June 17, a Philippine military mission to bring supplies for and rotate troops assigned to the BRP Sierra Madre in Ayungin Shoal was disrupted by Chinese maritime personnel.

The Philippines’ National Security Council (NSC) said China used “dangerous maneuvers, including ramming and towing” in disrupting the mission. The Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), a day after the incident, confirmed that a soldier was “severely injured” because of China’s “intentional ramming.”

Japan and Canada are the latest countries to issue statements in support of the Philippines after the June 17 incident in Ayungin Shoal. The US State Department and Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade also earlier released statements from Washington and Canberra, respectively.

In its statement, Japan said that issues in the South China Sea are “directly related to the peace and stability of the region and is a legitimate concern of the international community.”

“Japan opposes any unilateral attempts to change the status quo by force as well as any actions that increase tensions in the South China Sea,” said the MOFA.

Japan also reiterated its concern over “unlawful maritime claims and steadfastly opposes the dangerous and coercive use of Coast Guard and maritime militia vessels in the South China Sea.” A similar statement was made following the historic trilateral meeting between United States President Joe Biden, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, and Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. in April 2024.

Tokyo said it “appreciates” Manila “for having consistently complied with the [2016] Arbitral Tribunal’s award,” and for its “commitment to the peaceful settlement of disputes in the South China Sea.”

Japan and the Philippines enjoy close economic, political, diplomatic, and security ties. Japan has helped the modernize the Philippine Coast Guard, among the units in the frontlines of the Philippines’ push to defend its sovereign rights and claims in the West Philippine Sea.

The two countries are also in the process of concluding a Reciprocal Access Agreement, a deal that would set terms for visits and deployment of troops to each others’ territories.

Canada also scored China for its “dangerous and destabilizing actions” against Philippine vessels during the June 17 resupply mission.

“The PRC’s use of water cannons, dangerous maneuvers and ramming of Philippine vessels is inconsistent with the PRC’s obligations under international law, including the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea [UNCLOS],” said Global Affairs Canada in a statement on its website.

“Canada opposes escalatory and coercive actions, including the unilateral declaration of authority over disputed features. Disputes must be resolved through dialogue rather than through force or coercion,” added the North American nation.

“We call upon the PRC to comply with its obligations, including implementation of the 2016 UNCLOS arbitral tribunal ruling, which is binding on the parties.”

Ayungin Shoal is among a flashpoint in tensions between China and the Philippines. The June 17 incident is the first confrontation between the two since China unilaterally imposed a new “regulation” for its coast guard that allows it to detain for up to 60 days persons they deem as “trespassers” in waters they consider theirs.

Canada is among a growing list of countries that have been eager to further improve ties – particularly covering defense and security – with the Philippines. It recently gave Philippine maritime agencies access to its dark vessel detection system.

Ottawa is also keen on forging a visiting forces-like agreement with Manila, following the signing of a defense cooperation memorandum in January 2024.

Japan and Canada on Tuesday, June 18, joined the Philippines’ treaty-ally the United States and strategic partner Australia in expressing support for Manila following the latest – and worst, thus far – incident between Chinese and Filipino personnel and vessels in the West Philippine Sea.

“Japan reiterates serious concern over repeated actions which obstruct freedom of navigation and increase regional tensions including recent dangerous actions that resulted in damage to the Filipino vessel and injuries to Filipinos onboard,” the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) said in a statement late June 18.

On June 17, a Philippine military mission to bring supplies for and rotate troops assigned to the BRP Sierra Madre in Ayungin Shoal was disrupted by Chinese maritime personnel.

The Philippines’ National Security Council (NSC) said China used “dangerous maneuvers, including ramming and towing” in disrupting the mission. The Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), a day after the incident, confirmed that a soldier was “severely injured” because of China’s “intentional ramming.”

Japan and Canada are the latest countries to issue statements in support of the Philippines after the June 17 incident in Ayungin Shoal. The US State Department and Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade also earlier released statements from Washington and Canberra, respectively.

In its statement, Japan said that issues in the South China Sea are “directly related to the peace and stability of the region and is a legitimate concern of the international community.”

“Japan opposes any unilateral attempts to change the status quo by force as well as any actions that increase tensions in the South China Sea,” said the MOFA.

Japan also reiterated its concern over “unlawful maritime claims and steadfastly opposes the dangerous and coercive use of Coast Guard and maritime militia vessels in the South China Sea.” A similar statement was made following the historic trilateral meeting between United States President Joe Biden, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, and Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. in April 2024.

Tokyo said it “appreciates” Manila “for having consistently complied with the [2016] Arbitral Tribunal’s award,” and for its “commitment to the peaceful settlement of disputes in the South China Sea.”

Japan and the Philippines enjoy close economic, political, diplomatic, and security ties. Japan has helped the modernize the Philippine Coast Guard, among the units in the frontlines of the Philippines’ push to defend its sovereign rights and claims in the West Philippine Sea.

The two countries are also in the process of concluding a Reciprocal Access Agreement, a deal that would set terms for visits and deployment of troops to each others’ territories.

Canada also scored China for its “dangerous and destabilizing actions” against Philippine vessels during the June 17 resupply mission.

“The PRC’s use of water cannons, dangerous maneuvers and ramming of Philippine vessels is inconsistent with the PRC’s obligations under international law, including the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea [UNCLOS],” said Global Affairs Canada in a statement on its website.

“Canada opposes escalatory and coercive actions, including the unilateral declaration of authority over disputed features. Disputes must be resolved through dialogue rather than through force or coercion,” added the North American nation.

“We call upon the PRC to comply with its obligations, including implementation of the 2016 UNCLOS arbitral tribunal ruling, which is binding on the parties.”

Ayungin Shoal is among a flashpoint in tensions between China and the Philippines. The June 17 incident is the first confrontation between the two since China unilaterally imposed a new “regulation” for its coast guard that allows it to detain for up to 60 days persons they deem as “trespassers” in waters they consider theirs.

Canada is among a growing list of countries that have been eager to further improve ties – particularly covering defense and security – with the Philippines. It recently gave Philippine maritime agencies access to its dark vessel detection system.

Ottawa is also keen on forging a visiting forces-like agreement with Manila, following the signing of a defense cooperation memorandum in January 2024.

Japan and Canada on Tuesday, June 18, joined the Philippines’ treaty-ally the United States and strategic partner Australia in expressing support for Manila following the latest – and worst, thus far – incident between Chinese and Filipino personnel and vessels in the West Philippine Sea.

“Japan reiterates serious concern over repeated actions which obstruct freedom of navigation and increase regional tensions including recent dangerous actions that resulted in damage to the Filipino vessel and injuries to Filipinos onboard,” the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) said in a statement late June 18.

On June 17, a Philippine military mission to bring supplies for and rotate troops assigned to the BRP Sierra Madre in Ayungin Shoal was disrupted by Chinese maritime personnel.

The Philippines’ National Security Council (NSC) said China used “dangerous maneuvers, including ramming and towing” in disrupting the mission. The Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), a day after the incident, confirmed that a soldier was “severely injured” because of China’s “intentional ramming.”

Japan and Canada are the latest countries to issue statements in support of the Philippines after the June 17 incident in Ayungin Shoal. The US State Department and Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade also earlier released statements from Washington and Canberra, respectively.

In its statement, Japan said that issues in the South China Sea are “directly related to the peace and stability of the region and is a legitimate concern of the international community.”

“Japan opposes any unilateral attempts to change the status quo by force as well as any actions that increase tensions in the South China Sea,” said the MOFA.

Japan also reiterated its concern over “unlawful maritime claims and steadfastly opposes the dangerous and coercive use of Coast Guard and maritime militia vessels in the South China Sea.” A similar statement was made following the historic trilateral meeting between United States President Joe Biden, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, and Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. in April 2024.

Tokyo said it “appreciates” Manila “for having consistently complied with the [2016] Arbitral Tribunal’s award,” and for its “commitment to the peaceful settlement of disputes in the South China Sea.”

Japan and the Philippines enjoy close economic, political, diplomatic, and security ties. Japan has helped the modernize the Philippine Coast Guard, among the units in the frontlines of the Philippines’ push to defend its sovereign rights and claims in the West Philippine Sea.

The two countries are also in the process of concluding a Reciprocal Access Agreement, a deal that would set terms for visits and deployment of troops to each others’ territories.

Canada also scored China for its “dangerous and destabilizing actions” against Philippine vessels during the June 17 resupply mission.

“The PRC’s use of water cannons, dangerous maneuvers and ramming of Philippine vessels is inconsistent with the PRC’s obligations under international law, including the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea [UNCLOS],” said Global Affairs Canada in a statement on its website.

“Canada opposes escalatory and coercive actions, including the unilateral declaration of authority over disputed features. Disputes must be resolved through dialogue rather than through force or coercion,” added the North American nation.

“We call upon the PRC to comply with its obligations, including implementation of the 2016 UNCLOS arbitral tribunal ruling, which is binding on the parties.”

Ayungin Shoal is among a flashpoint in tensions between China and the Philippines. The June 17 incident is the first confrontation between the two since China unilaterally imposed a new “regulation” for its coast guard that allows it to detain for up to 60 days persons they deem as “trespassers” in waters they consider theirs.

Canada is among a growing list of countries that have been eager to further improve ties – particularly covering defense and security – with the Philippines. It recently gave Philippine maritime agencies access to its dark vessel detection system.

Ottawa is also keen on forging a visiting forces-like agreement with Manila, following the signing of a defense cooperation memorandum in January 2024.

Local governments in China have asked several companies to pay tax bills dating back as far as the 1990s, underscoring their need for funding given the uneven economic recovery and persistent housing slump.

A number of listed firms have said in exchange filings in recent months that they’ve gotten government demands to pay tens of millions in back taxes and warned investors this could impact their earnings.

V V Food & Beverage Co. said last week that a liquor-making unit was told to pay some 85 million yuan ($11.7 million) on income it “failed to disclose” for about 15 years starting in 1994. ChinaLin Securities Co., Ningbo Bohui Petrochemical Technology Co., Zangge Mining Co. and PKU HealthCare Corp. have issued similar statements.

China’s local governments are facing unprecedented pressure to expand revenues because economic growth is slowing and the contracting real estate market has sent income from land sales plunging. Their already elevated debt stockpile is limiting their ability to leverage up further, forcing the central government to borrow more and give them the funds.

The tax recovery is “likely due to the fiscal distress of local governments,” said Xing Zhaopeng, an analyst at Australia & New Zealand Banking Group. “I think they need some money to pay by quarter end” because regional authorities usually pay contractors of government projects then, he added.

Local governments booked less than 5.8 trillion yuan in revenues under the general public budget and the government-fund account, which include taxes and land sales income, in the first four months of the year. That figure was less than the more than 5.9 trillion yuan in the same period last year, according to data from the Finance Ministry.

Their spending also fell to just under 10 trillion yuan from 10.4 trillion yuan a year earlier.

- In response to the EU's tariffs on EV, China announced an anti-dumping probe on pork imports from the European Union. But at less than $2 billion last year, pork accounts for a tiny sliver of the trade between the EU and China, which topped $280 billion in 2023.

- So why is China going after a sector that, economically, matters so little? Politics.

- Beijing is deploying a playbook it has used in previous trade skirmishes with Europe, the US and Australia. By targeting agriculture, the soft (pork) belly of Europe, China tries to keep the conflict contained and leverages the outsized influence of Europe’s farming lobby.

- Beijing obviously hopes that EU nations would now pressure Brussels into softening the EV tariffs before they’re officially imposed July 4. However, EU nations should avoid playing into China’s hands.--

Growing up in Spain, where the farming sector is a powerhouse, the wars I lived through were named for food: the “strawberry war” with the French in 1989, the “tuna war” with the British in 1990, and the “turbot war” with the Canadians in 1995. Still, nothing prepared me for what’s shaping up to be the “ham war” with China.

On Monday, Beijing announced an anti-dumping probe on pork imports from the European Union, a first step toward tariffs. The probe came less than a week after Brussels announced it would impose duties on Chinese-made electric vehicles as high as 50%, saying they benefited from “unfair subsidisation.”

Spain is, by far, the largest pork exporter into China, whose taste for the nation’s succulent (and expensive) Iberico ham has become increasingly fashionable. The Netherlands, Denmark, France, Belgium and Germany are also significant exporters.

But at less than $2 billion last year, pork accounts for a tiny sliver of the trade between the EU and China, which topped $280 billion in 2023. So why is China going after a sector that, economically, matters so little? Politics.

Beijing is deploying a playbook it has used in previous trade skirmishes with Europe, the US and Australia. By targeting agriculture, the soft (pork) belly of Europe, China achieves two objectives: It keeps the conflict contained and leverages the outsized influence of Europe’s farming lobby.

Beijing obviously hopes that EU nations would now pressure Brussels into softening the EV tariffs before they’re officially imposed July 4. Germany was already unhappy with the duties, fearing for its own car sales in China; Spain and France, which appeared undecided, could join Berlin against Brussels.

However, EU nations can avoid playing into China’s hands. Take Spain, where pork can make headlines in news bulletins and the quality of meat is a source of national pride. Last year, Spain exported €12.2 billion in meat, including not only pork, but also beef and poultry, to every nation in the world. But during the same period, its exports of automobiles, motorbikes and car components reached nearly €54 billion. It’s clear what sector matters the most economically.

Then, consider that Spain has no rival in China when it comes to high-end pork, but Spain and China are competing in the very same segment in the car industry: small, cheap cars for the growing ranks of the world’s working and middle classes. Spain has so far focused on gasoline- and diesel-powered cars, while the Chinese are leading on electric ones. Without tariff protection, it’s unlikely that Spain would be able to switch from gasoline into electric cars, and without that switch, its car industry would slowly die.

China has used the local farmers of its trade antagonist for its own benefit before: It pressured Australia by targeting its farm exports, including barley, beef, wine and lobsters, and it tried to force the hand of the US by restricting the soybean trade. The farming lobby is particularly strong in Brussels. After all, autoworkers don’t take their cars to the center of Brussels as farmers do with their tractors when they need to protest government policy.

China also knows that its imports of European pork, particularly of low-value-added meat, is going to decline as its pig herd grows again to meet local demand, which the Europeans also know and are braced for.

European nations should play their cards carefully. China has opened a window for negotiation. Its probe into European pork exports is likely to last six months, potentially a year, leaving plenty of time for talks. In that vein, its response to Brussels isn’t the start of a trade war, but rather the beginning of prewar talks. Both sides can find a solution.

Ultimately, Europe shouldn’t trade off its multibillion-euro car industry to content its politically active farmers. Agricultural exports are important, but they are more valuable for sentimental reasons than for economic impact. Put your mind in the euro value alone, however, and cars win – by a long mile. That should be the focus in Brussels, and in Madrid, Paris, Amsterdam and Copenhagen.

Australians overwhelmingly support a crackdown on Chinese investors buying real estate amid growing concerns over housing affordability, a new survey has found.

Eighty-three per cent of Australians believe the government “should restrict the amount of investment in residential real estate that is permitted from Chinese investors”, according to the poll published last week by the University of Technology Sydney’s Australia-China Relations Institute.

That was the highest number in the four years the UTS:ACRI survey has been running.

"Chinese investment in Australian residential real estate continues to generate concern,” the authors wrote in the report, The Australia-China relationship: What do Australians think?.

The poll asked a representative sample of 2015 Australian adults a range of questions on issues ranging from national security — including foreign interference and the conflict over Taiwan — to tourism, trade and investment.

Only 28 per cent of respondents agreed that “Chinese investment in Australian residential real estate brings a lot of benefits for Australians” such as housing construction, new dwellings and jobs.

“Agreement with this statement has incrementally decreased over the last four years,” the report said.

A “clear majority” of 80 per cent of Australians agreed with the statement that “foreign buyers from China drive up Australian housing prices”, a seven-point increase from 73 per cent in 2023, and almost back to the 82 per cent high recorded in 2021.

Just under three quarters, or 74 per cent, said Chinese investors “have negatively affected the rental market for residential real estate in Australia”, also a four-year high and a six-point increase from 68 per cent in 2023.

More broadly, just under three quarters of respondents said Australia was “too economically reliant on China”, while just over half said foreign investment from China was “more detrimental than beneficial”.

David Ho, co-founder and group managing director of Asian property portal Juwai IQI, said the findings showed Australians were “stressed by the tight property market and believe foreign buyers are part of the problem”.

“They want foreign buyers to be restricted, regulated, and taxed, and that’s fine — because foreign buyers already in fact are heavily taxed, regulated, and restricted,” he said.

“The real solutions are much harder — limiting population growth, cutting zoning restrictions, building more transit networks to enable housing in new areas, and slashing construction costs.”

Mr Ho said foreign buyers from all countries contributed more than an estimated $200 million in stamp duties just in the first nine months of last year in NSW and Victoria.

“The federal government long ago restricted foreign buyers to only new property, meaning something off the plan or just built,” he said.

"State governments have imposed additional stamp duties and land taxes on foreign buyers that cost each person hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars per buyer. If you’re competing against a buyer at an auction, they’re almost certainly not a foreign buyer.”

Mr Ho added several studies including a parliamentary inquiry had looked at foreign buying “very closely” and found it “leads to a net gain in housing supply and [doesn’t] push up home prices, except in just a very few suburbs in each of the capital cities”.

“These off-the-plan foreign buyers are crucial for developers to get early sales because, without those sales, they can’t start construction,” he said.

“That’s why foreign buyers are restricted to new development properties. Because each foreign buyer facilitates the construction of four new dwellings by enabling the developer to go ahead with their project. If you remove foreign buyers from off-the-plan sales, it will probably mean prices and rents go up.”

Faced with similar concerns, the Canadian government last year announced a two-year ban on foreigners buying residential property, sparking calls for Australia to follow suit.

The role of Chinese investors in the Australian property market has long been a point of contention — foreigners without Australian citizenship or permanent residency can only purchase new homes, under the theory it that helps boost housing construction, but may purchase established dwellings subject to approval by the Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB).

The FIRB’s latest quarterly figures showed, despite a significant drop, the Chinese remain by far the largest foreign buyers of Australian homes, with $700 million worth of investment proposals approved between July 1 and September 30, 2023.

The 523 residential dwellings approved — at an average value of $1.34 million — was down from 826 dwellings worth a combined $1.1 billion in the prior three months.

In the full 2022-23 financial year, Chinese investors purchased 2601 homes worth $3.4 billion, up from $2.4 billion comprising 2317 homes in 2021-22.

The FIRB’s figures for the October to December quarter are expected to be published soon. Industry sources have suggested the numbers are several weeks overdue, as they would typically have been released in early June.

China-focused real estate agents told The Australian last month that many mum-and-dad investors who purchased one or two-bedroom off-the-plan apartments were now desperate to offload their properties and bring the money back home to rescue struggling businesses.

The implosion of China’s real estate bubble, which has sparked a wider economic crisis and a frantic rescue mission by Beijing to use public financing to buy up unsold properties, had already seen billions of dollars worth of Australian apartment projects by giants like Greenland, Wanda, Country Garden and Poly abandoned in recent years.

Rising interest rates and tougher rules on foreign investors who buy Australian properties and leave them empty, announced by the federal government in December, have contributed to the rise in distressed Chinese sellers.

Plus Agency managing director Peter Li told The Australian that prior to Covid his Sydney-based agency kept “buying, buying, buying” for Chinese clients.

“We still service a lot of our Chinese clients,” he said.

“Now we help them with selling, selling, selling.”

But the same domestic economic woes causing pain for the middle-class have had the opposite effect at the top end of the market, as ultra-wealthy Chinese accelerating relocation plans rush to park their money in multimillion-dollar trophy homes in Australia’s most exclusive suburbs like Melbourne’s Toorak.

“They are coming in busloads,” Morrell and Koren director David Morrell told news.com.au in November.

The frustrated local advocate said 100 per cent of sales in the prior six months had been to Chinese buyers, some of whom were paying cash to secure luxury properties and pricing locals out of the market.

“We are seeing jumps of $2-3 million dollars on properties,” he said.

“We have a marketplace that is disproportionately being sold to Chinese buyers, relative to the rest of the population.”

He used the example of a recent property that was on the market for $9.2 million.

“There were five Chinese parties biding and it sold for $12 million,” he said.

“They have paid a $3 million dollar premium. It wasn’t just one of them there are now four wounded underbidders. What’s happening in Toorak is only a look at what is happening under the blankets, across the country.”

His comments came after Toorak buyer’s agent Alex Bragilevsky told The Australian Financial Review wealthy Chinese buyers were taking private jets to Melbourne to purchase mansions on the spot.

“I’ve facilitated $135 million of real estate deals [in Toorak] in the past six months,” he said. “All these buyers were Chinese.”

But Jeremy Fox, director of RT Edgar at Toorak, disagreed that it was necessarily a bad thing.

Ultimately, it flows onto the rest of the market, and has protected the housing market from a downturn,” he said.

“It is good for the real estate market when the top end is strong because the money flows down to all price ranges in Melbourne.”

Leith van Onselen, co-founder of MacroBusiness and chief economist at MB Fund and MB Super, said there had “certainly been many anecdotal reports of increased activity by Chinese buyers in Australian real estate” but “how this translates to FIRB numbers remains to be seen”.

Meanwhile, fresh figures show foreign demand for new properties also remains strong.

NAB’s quarterly Residential Property Survey found the market share of foreign buyers in new Australian housing markets fell slightly in the three months to March to 10 per cent, down from a six-and-a-half-year high of 11 per cent in the last three months of 2023.

This remained above the long-term survey average of 9.1 per cent.

“Despite the slip, there has still been a near five-fold rise in foreign buyer market share in new Australian home markets since hitting a low of just over 2 per cent during the Covid pandemic in mid-2021,” NAB said.

Mr van Onselen said the federal government should step in and ban temporary residents from purchasing established Australian homes.

“Implementing a ban on temporary residents would revert the rules back to what existed prior to the global financial crisis,” he said.

“That is, before the Rudd government carelessly opened up the established housing market to temporary residents in 2009. Australia must also implement the tranche two global anti-money laundering rules pertaining to real estate gatekeepers, including real estate agents, lawyers, and accountants.

"Australia has delayed the implementation of these global AML rules for around 15 years, which has made Australian housing a magnet for dirty foreign money and helped to inflate housing prices.”

It came as Prime Minister Anthony Albanese hosted China’s second-in-command, Premier Li Qiang, in Canberra on Monday for the annual leaders meeting, where he declared that the two countries will “co-operate where we can and disagree where we must”.

In a statement issued after arriving in Australia, Premier Li said China-Australia relations were “back on track” after a series of “twists and turns, generating tangible benefits to the people of both countries”.

“History has proven that seeking common ground while shelving differences and mutually beneficial co-operation are the valuable experience in growing China-Australia relations and must be upheld and carried forward,” he said.

In Shanghai muss das "Roxie" schließen - und die LGBTQ-Community der Stadt verliert einen ihrer letzten sicheren Treffpunkte. Die Bar stand offenbar schon länger unter Druck.

In einer offiziellen Mitteilung der Bar in der chinesischen Messenger App Wechat hieß es, dass sie aufgrund von "Umständen außerhalb ihrer Macht" schließen musste. Mit der Schließung vertraute Personen sagten, dass die Bar von den chinesischen Behörden als "zu feministisch" erachtet wurde und dass sie schon länger unter Druck stand.

Seit der Machtübernahme von Staats- und Parteichef Xi Jinping vor mehr als zehn Jahren geht China verstärkt sowohl gegen feministischen als auch LGBTQ-Aktivismus vor. So wurden in den vergangenen Jahren vermehrt Gruppen an Unis geschlossen und Pride-Veranstaltungen eingestellt.

Frauen ohne Kinderwunsch sind nicht erwünscht

Die Staats- und Parteiführung propagiert das traditionelle Familienbild von Mann und Frau. Die Regierung will, dass die Frauen mehr Kinder bekommen und fördert Initiativen, um die Geburtenrate zu steigern. Feministische, unabhängige junge Frauen, ohne Wunsch zu heiraten und Kinder zu bekommen, sind von der Regierung nicht erwünscht. Gerade deshalb war das "Roxie" für viele lesbische und feministische Frauen ein Ort der Begegnung - egal welcher Herkunft.

• Professoren an der RWTH Aachen generieren "Drittmittel" von Firmen, die ihnen selbst gehören und eigens zum Zweck der Geldbeschaffung gegründet wurden. An der RWTH haben mi.destens 21 Professoren solche GmbHs gegründet.
• Vereinfacht gesagt geht es bei dem Konzept darum, eine Firma zwischen potenziellen Geldgebern aus der Industrie auf der einen Seite und der RWTH auf der anderen Seite zu installieren. Ubd je mehr Drittmittel fließen, desto höher sind auch die Mittel aus der öffentlichen Hand für die Uni.
• Die konkreten, einzelnen Verträge zwischen den Geldgebern dieser sogenannten 'Professoren-GmbHs' wird ebenso wenig von der Universität überprüft wie die Identität der Geldgeber. Der tatsächliche Geldfluss an die Firmen der Professorinnen und Professoren bleibt so im Dunkeln.
• Laut Insidern könnten Professorinnen und Professoren durch die fehlende Kontrolle mit ihren GmbHs weitaus mehr Geld einnehmen als letztlich an die Uni fließe. Die Uni habe so auch keinen Überblick darüber, ob möglicherweise sicherheitsrelevantes Wissen ins Ausland abfließt.
• Ein Land, das viele besonders finanzstarke Geldgeber für solche Drittmittel-Aufträge beheimatet, ist China. Die Professoren-GmbHs machen gute Geschäfte mit chinesischen Firmen. Und für Forschungsprojekte fließen Millionensummen aus dem Überwachungsstaat. Die Kritik daran: Es darf angenommen werden, dass niemand Geld an eine Universität und deren Professoren schiebt, ohne eine Gegenleistung zu erwarten.
• Mindestens 19 der 100 Professorinnen und Professoren anden Fakumtäten Maschinenwesen und Elektrotechnik haben mit Forschenden chinesischer Militäreinrichtungen oder militößärnaher Einrichtingen kooperiert.
• Die Hocgschule in Aachen kooperiert u.a. mit dem China Scholarship Council (CSC), eine Institution, die ihren Stipendiaten brutale Knebelverträge aufzwingt, die sie zur bedingungslosen Treue vor der Kommunistischen Partei verpflichten, sowie mit dem chinesischen Harbin Institute of Technology (HIT), von chinesischen Staatsmedien als zentral für „Innovation in der Verteidigungstechnologie und Modernisierung von Waffen und Rüstungsgütern“ beschrieben.
• In mindestens 3 Fällen kooperierte eine der Professoren-GmbHs laut veröffentlichten Arbeiten in den vergangenen zwei Jahren mit Forschenden der chinesischen National University for Defence Technology (NUDT). Die NUDT untersteht direkt der Zentralen Militärkommission, dem höchsten militärischen Führungsorgan Chinas.
• Bei einer Forschungsarbeit von 2023 etwa ging es darum, Radartechnologie für unbemannten Luftfahrzeugen – Drohnen – zu verbessern (PDF). Ein „Dual-Use“ ist durch den Nutzen für das chinesische Militär offensichtlich, immerhin experimentiert die NUDT seit Jahren an Drohnenschwärmen, die für die Felderkennung eingesetzt werden sollen.
• Die enge Beziehung nach China macht sich für einige auch im Lebenslauf bemerkbar. Die Karriere von Markus Oeser etwa zeigt einen bemerkenswerten Sprung: Der Professor für Bauingenieurwesen war jahrelang an der RWTH beschäftigt, bevor er 2021 Präsident der Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen wurde, auf Vorschlag des damaligen Verkehrsministers Andreas Scheuer. An der RWTH hält Oeser weiterhin Vorlesungen.
• Oeser hat in mindestens 86 Fällen mit der HIT kooperiert – er dürfte damit der Spitzenreiter in Sachen Kooperationen mit chinesischen militärnahen Einrichtungen sein. An der HIT hatte er seit 2015 auch eine Gastprofessur inne.
• Während Nebentätigkeiten der Leherenden in Aachen grundsätzlich erlaubt seien, bedürfen sie einer Genehmigung. Der für die RWTH Aachen zuständige Landesrechnungshof Nordrhein-Westfalen hat "keine Erkenntnisse" darüber, wie viele Professorinnen und Professoren der RWTH Aachen eigene Firmen leiten und ob Einkünfte aus diesen Firmen bekannt seien.
• Christopher Bohlens, der für den Verein Transparency International Deutschland die Arbeitsgruppe Wissenschaft leitet und als Sachverständiger im Wissenschaftsrat tätig ist, kritisiert die Praktiken an der RWTH scharf. Er sieht „ein tiefes strukturelles Problem der Universität und ihrer Verbindungen zur Industrie und zu ausländischen Geldgebern offen“.
• Dass Gelder aus China fließen, wirft laut Bohlens Fragen zur Unabhängigkeit der Forschung und der möglichen Einflussnahme durch ausländische Regierungen auf. „Besonders alarmierend ist, dass Gelder auch für Projekte mit militärischem Bezug geflossen sind, was sicherheitspolitische Implikationen haben könnte“, sagt Bohlens.
• „Die Fälle müssen auch unter dem Gesichtspunkt der illegitimen Einflussnahme durch China und anderer autoritärer Staaten betrachtet werden, die mithilfe von viel Geld und teils strategisch eingesetzter Korruption in ganz unterschiedlichen Sektoren ihre Interessen durchsetzen. Hier spielt auch der Wissenschaftsbereich eine wichtige Rolle", sagt Bohlens.
• Diese Probleme betreffen nicht nur die RWTH in Aachen: Sie können überall dort auftreten, wo Universitäten enge Verbindungen zur Industrie und ausländischen Geldgebern pflegen, ohne hinreichend für Transparenz zu sorgen. Sie bedrohen das Fundament einer Institution, die auf Wissen und auf Integrität gebaut sein sollte.

For more than 30 years, José DeCoux woke each morning to a deafening noise. In his home in Ecuador's Los Cedros forest, monkeys squeal, squirrels scuffle, and 400 species of bird flit and squawk. A mist hangs in the trees, and ferns and mosses in countless shades of green cover every rock and tree trunk.

DeCoux moved to the Los Cedros reserve in northern Ecuador from the US in the 1980s. He was "sort of heeding the call to save the rainforest, or something", he told BBC Future Planet with a smile in April.

With the help of friends and non-profits including Friends of the Earth Sweden and the Rainforest Information Center of Australia, DeCoux bought land in Los Cedros forest, and a conservation and eco-tourism project was born. DeCoux managed the reserve until his death in May, four years after being diagnosed with cancer.

Despite extensive deforestation in the surrounding region, Los Cedros' 11,681 acres (4,800 ha) buzz and thrum with life. Its biodiversity is astonishing: more than 130 scientific papers have been published on the vast number of species that call Los Cedros home – from fungi and orchids to snails, jaguars and bears. Most of the reserve is a cloud forest where the air is heavy with moisture from drenching rain and permanent condensation, which fosters blankets of lichen and strange orchids. Many species can't be found anywhere else, such as the tiny orange Los Cedros rainfrog.

Life continues to thrive in Los Cedros, but its survival wasn't always certain – and it is largely thanks to a powerful, and increasingly influential, global legal movement that the forest is still standing.

In 2008, Ecuador became the first country to change its constitution to state that nature has the same rights as people. The change was led by Ecuador's Indigenous movement, and marked one of the first major steps in what has become known as the 'rights of nature' movement – a movement centred on a legal framework that recognises the inherent right of the natural world to the same protections as people and corporations.

The rights of nature movement "is a move to transform natural entities from objects to subjects, in courts and in front of the law", says Jacqueline Gallant from New York University's School of Law's Earth Rights Advocacy Clinic. "But in a much broader sense, it's been a movement to reanimate and recentre nature as a subject of intrinsic worth," Gallant explains. This is in contrast, she says, to the Western view of nature as "an inanimate backdrop against which the drama of human activity unfolds".

"The rights of nature movement reanimates and recentres nature as a subject of intrinsic worth" – Jacqueline Gallant

To date, initiatives to recognise the rights of nature have been pursued in 44 countries, from Bolivia to Brazil and Uganda to the US. Some cases have defended a single animal, while other legal decisions have recognised the rights of rivers, mountains, and all of Mother Earth. Still, legal practice in this area is relatively new, with few clear precedents for what nature rights look like in action.

DeCoux initially took his case to court in 2019, when a mining company began explorations in the area. DeCoux argued that allowing mining in the forest would violate the rights of nature, and defended Los Cedros forest's right to exist, survive and regenerate. The case was thrown out of the lower courts – the judge "just didn't like it", DeCoux said – but was later selected by the Constitutional Court as a case that would provide a real world of example of the rights of nature. Finally, in 2021, DeCoux won. The judge ruled that mining would harm the biodiversity of the forest, and therefore violate the constitutional rights of nature. "The litigation was successful beyond our wildest dreams," DeCoux said.

The case was an opportunity for judges to look at the rights of nature beyond the theoretical framework of Ecuador's Constitution. It would help determine what these rights look like in action, and set a precedent for future cases, DeCoux believed.

Gallant explains this distinction. The US Constitution includes the right to free speech, for example, and centuries of case law now explain how this right plays out in the real world, she says. "Constitutions lay out the law in a level of generality that doesn't always provide a roadmap about how it plays out in practice," she says. "So that's why the ruling on Los Cedros is really important, because it helps explain what the rights of nature provisions in the Constitution actually mean in practice."

The ruling on Los Cedros was all the more powerful for specifying that it did not only apply to protected areas, but – as with any constitutional right – to the entire territory of the country. The judges were also clear that the area deserves protection in its own right, not just because it provides resources, like clean water, to humans.

Their verdict has turned the rights of nature from a constitutional idea into a practical reality. As Gallant says, "there are people around the world looking at it and seeing how a court has articulated what the rights of nature means in practice, and they say, 'Great, let's try and do this in this jurisdiction'. And that's how the global movement advances".

In Los Cedros, the verdict was resoundingly good news for the animals, plants and fungi that live there. Mining has not happened, and the forest has therefore not suffered. The mining companies had to remove their machinery immediately, and the court put a blanket ban on all future mining and all other extractive activities in Los Cedros. "The companies packed their bags and left less than 10 days after the decision came down from the Constitutional Court," DeCoux told the BBC when we spoke to him.

But the outcome of nature rights cases isn't always so clear, or positive – even when a court rules in nature's favour. The River Ganga in India, for example, was recognised as a legal person in 2017, but by 2023 pollution has continued to the extent that most of its water remains undrinkable.

"Some courts hand down the rulings and then forget about them, they never go back to them again," says César Rodríguez-Garavito, professor of clinical law and director of the More-Than-Human Rights (Moth) Project at NYU School of Law – an initiative that brings together law, science and the arts to advance rights for humans, non-humans and the broader web of life.

To quantify the impact of the court's decision on Los Cedros, Rodríguez-Garavito has spent time in the area, speaking to scientists and other key actors, and observing the outcomes two years on from the ruling. He has looked at the precise ways in which the ruling has been acted on, and the practical impact of that on the forest. His research concludes that Los Cedros has remained a sanctuary for biodiversity – and that this would very likely not have been possible without the ruling. "Definitely, both in and of itself, and compared to other rights of nature rulings, the picture is positive," he says.

However, Rodríguez-Garavito's findings also highlight that the forest remains vulnerable. The Ecuadorian government has passed the burden of protection to other state and private actors, who have limited resources to monitor and protect the land. And mining permitted in nearby areas could have "spillover effects" on Los Cedros, and boost illegal hunting, logging and mining on the reserve’s borders.

In his interview with the BBC, De Coux was adamant there was still work to do. "The game is not over yet," he said. "The forces of the extractive industries are still actively working against us.

"But I'm certainly very happy with the position we're in today because we've got a way forward."

Rodríguez-Garavito says that his research provides a template for tracking and measuring the impact of future legal decisions on the rights of nature. "We wanted to propose a methodology for future similar reports," he says. "We're trying to create some accountability."

The work of the rights of nature movement is powerful, but it cannot operate alone – and nor should it, Gallant says. Moth's work is interdisciplinary, bringing together science, culture and the arts – because, she says, "the judiciary alone can't do everything that's needed to promote a paradigm where the more than human world is valued more centrally and where we structure our politics and our culture to reflect that more".

Gallant points out that, importantly, the rights of nature movement is a vehicle for Indigenous principles and priorities to have sway, and that these ideas are leading the rest of the world.

"These [philosophical ideas] are not new inventions, they are things that Indigenous peoples around the world have been saying for time immemorial," Gallant says. "Movements and organisations in the Global South have been on the frontlines of advancing these concepts politically, legally, socially. It's a really good example of the Global North learning something really important from the Global South."

For more than 30 years, José DeCoux woke each morning to a deafening noise. In his home in Ecuador's Los Cedros forest, monkeys squeal, squirrels scuffle, and 400 species of bird flit and squawk. A mist hangs in the trees, and ferns and mosses in countless shades of green cover every rock and tree trunk.

DeCoux moved to the Los Cedros reserve in northern Ecuador from the US in the 1980s. He was "sort of heeding the call to save the rainforest, or something", he told BBC Future Planet with a smile in April.

With the help of friends and non-profits including Friends of the Earth Sweden and the Rainforest Information Center of Australia, DeCoux bought land in Los Cedros forest, and a conservation and eco-tourism project was born. DeCoux managed the reserve until his death in May, four years after being diagnosed with cancer.

Despite extensive deforestation in the surrounding region, Los Cedros' 11,681 acres (4,800 ha) buzz and thrum with life. Its biodiversity is astonishing: more than 130 scientific papers have been published on the vast number of species that call Los Cedros home – from fungi and orchids to snails, jaguars and bears. Most of the reserve is a cloud forest where the air is heavy with moisture from drenching rain and permanent condensation, which fosters blankets of lichen and strange orchids. Many species can't be found anywhere else, such as the tiny orange Los Cedros rainfrog.

Life continues to thrive in Los Cedros, but its survival wasn't always certain – and it is largely thanks to a powerful, and increasingly influential, global legal movement that the forest is still standing.

In 2008, Ecuador became the first country to change its constitution to state that nature has the same rights as people. The change was led by Ecuador's Indigenous movement, and marked one of the first major steps in what has become known as the 'rights of nature' movement – a movement centred on a legal framework that recognises the inherent right of the natural world to the same protections as people and corporations.

The rights of nature movement "is a move to transform natural entities from objects to subjects, in courts and in front of the law", says Jacqueline Gallant from New York University's School of Law's Earth Rights Advocacy Clinic. "But in a much broader sense, it's been a movement to reanimate and recentre nature as a subject of intrinsic worth," Gallant explains. This is in contrast, she says, to the Western view of nature as "an inanimate backdrop against which the drama of human activity unfolds".

"The rights of nature movement reanimates and recentres nature as a subject of intrinsic worth" – Jacqueline Gallant

To date, initiatives to recognise the rights of nature have been pursued in 44 countries, from Bolivia to Brazil and Uganda to the US. Some cases have defended a single animal, while other legal decisions have recognised the rights of rivers, mountains, and all of Mother Earth. Still, legal practice in this area is relatively new, with few clear precedents for what nature rights look like in action.

DeCoux initially took his case to court in 2019, when a mining company began explorations in the area. DeCoux argued that allowing mining in the forest would violate the rights of nature, and defended Los Cedros forest's right to exist, survive and regenerate. The case was thrown out of the lower courts – the judge "just didn't like it", DeCoux said – but was later selected by the Constitutional Court as a case that would provide a real world of example of the rights of nature. Finally, in 2021, DeCoux won. The judge ruled that mining would harm the biodiversity of the forest, and therefore violate the constitutional rights of nature. "The litigation was successful beyond our wildest dreams," DeCoux said.

The case was an opportunity for judges to look at the rights of nature beyond the theoretical framework of Ecuador's Constitution. It would help determine what these rights look like in action, and set a precedent for future cases, DeCoux believed.

Gallant explains this distinction. The US Constitution includes the right to free speech, for example, and centuries of case law now explain how this right plays out in the real world, she says. "Constitutions lay out the law in a level of generality that doesn't always provide a roadmap about how it plays out in practice," she says. "So that's why the ruling on Los Cedros is really important, because it helps explain what the rights of nature provisions in the Constitution actually mean in practice."

The ruling on Los Cedros was all the more powerful for specifying that it did not only apply to protected areas, but – as with any constitutional right – to the entire territory of the country. The judges were also clear that the area deserves protection in its own right, not just because it provides resources, like clean water, to humans.

Their verdict has turned the rights of nature from a constitutional idea into a practical reality. As Gallant says, "there are people around the world looking at it and seeing how a court has articulated what the rights of nature means in practice, and they say, 'Great, let's try and do this in this jurisdiction'. And that's how the global movement advances".

In Los Cedros, the verdict was resoundingly good news for the animals, plants and fungi that live there. Mining has not happened, and the forest has therefore not suffered. The mining companies had to remove their machinery immediately, and the court put a blanket ban on all future mining and all other extractive activities in Los Cedros. "The companies packed their bags and left less than 10 days after the decision came down from the Constitutional Court," DeCoux told the BBC when we spoke to him.

But the outcome of nature rights cases isn't always so clear, or positive – even when a court rules in nature's favour. The River Ganga in India, for example, was recognised as a legal person in 2017, but by 2023 pollution has continued to the extent that most of its water remains undrinkable.

"Some courts hand down the rulings and then forget about them, they never go back to them again," says César Rodríguez-Garavito, professor of clinical law and director of the More-Than-Human Rights (Moth) Project at NYU School of Law – an initiative that brings together law, science and the arts to advance rights for humans, non-humans and the broader web of life.

To quantify the impact of the court's decision on Los Cedros, Rodríguez-Garavito has spent time in the area, speaking to scientists and other key actors, and observing the outcomes two years on from the ruling. He has looked at the precise ways in which the ruling has been acted on, and the practical impact of that on the forest. His research concludes that Los Cedros has remained a sanctuary for biodiversity – and that this would very likely not have been possible without the ruling. "Definitely, both in and of itself, and compared to other rights of nature rulings, the picture is positive," he says.

However, Rodríguez-Garavito's findings also highlight that the forest remains vulnerable. The Ecuadorian government has passed the burden of protection to other state and private actors, who have limited resources to monitor and protect the land. And mining permitted in nearby areas could have "spillover effects" on Los Cedros, and boost illegal hunting, logging and mining on the reserve’s borders.

In his interview with the BBC, De Coux was adamant there was still work to do. "The game is not over yet," he said. "The forces of the extractive industries are still actively working against us.

"But I'm certainly very happy with the position we're in today because we've got a way forward."

Rodríguez-Garavito says that his research provides a template for tracking and measuring the impact of future legal decisions on the rights of nature. "We wanted to propose a methodology for future similar reports," he says. "We're trying to create some accountability."

The work of the rights of nature movement is powerful, but it cannot operate alone – and nor should it, Gallant says. Moth's work is interdisciplinary, bringing together science, culture and the arts – because, she says, "the judiciary alone can't do everything that's needed to promote a paradigm where the more than human world is valued more centrally and where we structure our politics and our culture to reflect that more".

Gallant points out that, importantly, the rights of nature movement is a vehicle for Indigenous principles and priorities to have sway, and that these ideas are leading the rest of the world.

"These [philosophical ideas] are not new inventions, they are things that Indigenous peoples around the world have been saying for time immemorial," Gallant says. "Movements and organisations in the Global South have been on the frontlines of advancing these concepts politically, legally, socially. It's a really good example of the Global North learning something really important from the Global South."

For more than 30 years, José DeCoux woke each morning to a deafening noise. In his home in Ecuador's Los Cedros forest, monkeys squeal, squirrels scuffle, and 400 species of bird flit and squawk. A mist hangs in the trees, and ferns and mosses in countless shades of green cover every rock and tree trunk.

DeCoux moved to the Los Cedros reserve in northern Ecuador from the US in the 1980s. He was "sort of heeding the call to save the rainforest, or something", he told BBC Future Planet with a smile in April.

With the help of friends and non-profits including Friends of the Earth Sweden and the Rainforest Information Center of Australia, DeCoux bought land in Los Cedros forest, and a conservation and eco-tourism project was born. DeCoux managed the reserve until his death in May, four years after being diagnosed with cancer.

Despite extensive deforestation in the surrounding region, Los Cedros' 11,681 acres (4,800 ha) buzz and thrum with life. Its biodiversity is astonishing: more than 130 scientific papers have been published on the vast number of species that call Los Cedros home – from fungi and orchids to snails, jaguars and bears. Most of the reserve is a cloud forest where the air is heavy with moisture from drenching rain and permanent condensation, which fosters blankets of lichen and strange orchids. Many species can't be found anywhere else, such as the tiny orange Los Cedros rainfrog.

Life continues to thrive in Los Cedros, but its survival wasn't always certain – and it is largely thanks to a powerful, and increasingly influential, global legal movement that the forest is still standing.

In 2008, Ecuador became the first country to change its constitution to state that nature has the same rights as people. The change was led by Ecuador's Indigenous movement, and marked one of the first major steps in what has become known as the 'rights of nature' movement – a movement centred on a legal framework that recognises the inherent right of the natural world to the same protections as people and corporations.

The rights of nature movement "is a move to transform natural entities from objects to subjects, in courts and in front of the law", says Jacqueline Gallant from New York University's School of Law's Earth Rights Advocacy Clinic. "But in a much broader sense, it's been a movement to reanimate and recentre nature as a subject of intrinsic worth," Gallant explains. This is in contrast, she says, to the Western view of nature as "an inanimate backdrop against which the drama of human activity unfolds".

"The rights of nature movement reanimates and recentres nature as a subject of intrinsic worth" – Jacqueline Gallant

To date, initiatives to recognise the rights of nature have been pursued in 44 countries, from Bolivia to Brazil and Uganda to the US. Some cases have defended a single animal, while other legal decisions have recognised the rights of rivers, mountains, and all of Mother Earth. Still, legal practice in this area is relatively new, with few clear precedents for what nature rights look like in action.

DeCoux initially took his case to court in 2019, when a mining company began explorations in the area. DeCoux argued that allowing mining in the forest would violate the rights of nature, and defended Los Cedros forest's right to exist, survive and regenerate. The case was thrown out of the lower courts – the judge "just didn't like it", DeCoux said – but was later selected by the Constitutional Court as a case that would provide a real world of example of the rights of nature. Finally, in 2021, DeCoux won. The judge ruled that mining would harm the biodiversity of the forest, and therefore violate the constitutional rights of nature. "The litigation was successful beyond our wildest dreams," DeCoux said.

The case was an opportunity for judges to look at the rights of nature beyond the theoretical framework of Ecuador's Constitution. It would help determine what these rights look like in action, and set a precedent for future cases, DeCoux believed.

Gallant explains this distinction. The US Constitution includes the right to free speech, for example, and centuries of case law now explain how this right plays out in the real world, she says. "Constitutions lay out the law in a level of generality that doesn't always provide a roadmap about how it plays out in practice," she says. "So that's why the ruling on Los Cedros is really important, because it helps explain what the rights of nature provisions in the Constitution actually mean in practice."

The ruling on Los Cedros was all the more powerful for specifying that it did not only apply to protected areas, but – as with any constitutional right – to the entire territory of the country. The judges were also clear that the area deserves protection in its own right, not just because it provides resources, like clean water, to humans.

Their verdict has turned the rights of nature from a constitutional idea into a practical reality. As Gallant says, "there are people around the world looking at it and seeing how a court has articulated what the rights of nature means in practice, and they say, 'Great, let's try and do this in this jurisdiction'. And that's how the global movement advances".

In Los Cedros, the verdict was resoundingly good news for the animals, plants and fungi that live there. Mining has not happened, and the forest has therefore not suffered. The mining companies had to remove their machinery immediately, and the court put a blanket ban on all future mining and all other extractive activities in Los Cedros. "The companies packed their bags and left less than 10 days after the decision came down from the Constitutional Court," DeCoux told the BBC when we spoke to him.

But the outcome of nature rights cases isn't always so clear, or positive – even when a court rules in nature's favour. The River Ganga in India, for example, was recognised as a legal person in 2017, but by 2023 pollution has continued to the extent that most of its water remains undrinkable.

"Some courts hand down the rulings and then forget about them, they never go back to them again," says César Rodríguez-Garavito, professor of clinical law and director of the More-Than-Human Rights (Moth) Project at NYU School of Law – an initiative that brings together law, science and the arts to advance rights for humans, non-humans and the broader web of life.

To quantify the impact of the court's decision on Los Cedros, Rodríguez-Garavito has spent time in the area, speaking to scientists and other key actors, and observing the outcomes two years on from the ruling. He has looked at the precise ways in which the ruling has been acted on, and the practical impact of that on the forest. His research concludes that Los Cedros has remained a sanctuary for biodiversity – and that this would very likely not have been possible without the ruling. "Definitely, both in and of itself, and compared to other rights of nature rulings, the picture is positive," he says.

However, Rodríguez-Garavito's findings also highlight that the forest remains vulnerable. The Ecuadorian government has passed the burden of protection to other state and private actors, who have limited resources to monitor and protect the land. And mining permitted in nearby areas could have "spillover effects" on Los Cedros, and boost illegal hunting, logging and mining on the reserve’s borders.

In his interview with the BBC, De Coux was adamant there was still work to do. "The game is not over yet," he said. "The forces of the extractive industries are still actively working against us.

"But I'm certainly very happy with the position we're in today because we've got a way forward."

Rodríguez-Garavito says that his research provides a template for tracking and measuring the impact of future legal decisions on the rights of nature. "We wanted to propose a methodology for future similar reports," he says. "We're trying to create some accountability."

The work of the rights of nature movement is powerful, but it cannot operate alone – and nor should it, Gallant says. Moth's work is interdisciplinary, bringing together science, culture and the arts – because, she says, "the judiciary alone can't do everything that's needed to promote a paradigm where the more than human world is valued more centrally and where we structure our politics and our culture to reflect that more".

Gallant points out that, importantly, the rights of nature movement is a vehicle for Indigenous principles and priorities to have sway, and that these ideas are leading the rest of the world.

"These [philosophical ideas] are not new inventions, they are things that Indigenous peoples around the world have been saying for time immemorial," Gallant says. "Movements and organisations in the Global South have been on the frontlines of advancing these concepts politically, legally, socially. It's a really good example of the Global North learning something really important from the Global South."

Archived link

• There is broad consensus that the shadow fleet is an international problem and that international solutions are required, Norway says.
• Since Western nations imposed a price cap on Russia's oil in an attempt to curb vital funds for its war in Ukraine, Russia has increasingly relied on a fleet of often ageing tankers based and insured outside the West.
• Russia's protested, saying that unimpeded passage of ships through Danish waters was guaranteed by the Copenhagen Treaty of 1857.

Denmark is considering ways to stop a so-called shadow fleet of tankers from carrying Russian oil through the Baltic Sea, the Nordic country said on Monday, triggering a sharp response from Moscow's diplomats who said any such move would be unacceptable.

Russia sends about a third of its seaborne oil exports, or 1.5% of global supply, through the Danish straits that sit as a gateway to the Baltic Sea, so any attempt to halt supplies could send oil prices higher and hit the Kremlin's finances.

Since Western nations imposed a price cap on Russia's oil in an attempt to curb vital funds for its war in Ukraine, Russia has relied on a fleet of often ageing tankers based and insured outside the West.

Denmark has brought together a group of allied countries to evaluate measures that would target this fleet, Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen told Reuters in an emailed statement.

He did not say what measures were being considered.

"There is broad consensus that the shadow fleet is an international problem and that international solutions are required," Lokke Rasmussen said.

"It's important that any new measures can be implemented in practice and that they are legally sound with regards to international law," he added.

Countries involved in the talks included other Baltic Sea states and European Union members, the minister said.

Imposing restrictions on ships passing through the straits would be unacceptable, Russia's ambassador to Denmark, Vladimir Barbin, told Reuters.

"The threat to the safety of navigation and the marine environment in the Baltic Sea are not the tankers with Russian oil, but the sanctions imposed by the West against Russia," Barbin said.

"This is what the coalition of states established at Denmark's initiative should be thinking about," he added.

The unimpeded passage of ships through Danish waters was guaranteed by the Copenhagen Treaty of 1857, which remains valid and legally binding, the ambassador said.

Denmark is concerned that old tankers transporting oil through its straits represent a potential danger to the environment.