China releases plan to improve rural workers' skills, CCTV reports
The announcement comes after China in April announced a 10-year plan to build an agricultural powerhouse, amid escalating tensions with the United States, an economic slowdown and challenges posed by climate change.
The plan, issued by several government departments including the Commerce Ministry and National Development and Reform Commission, announced policies including vocational education for rural workers.
China has close to 300 million rural migrants in cities, with around 100 million of them reaching retirement age over the next 10 years, according to official data.
To improve employment security of rural labour, it said it would "strengthen housing security, create favourable conditions for rural workers in cities to enjoy basic public services equally and integrate into the local society as soon as possible," CCTV said.
The report said the scheme would help support job-seeking services for rural labour and support the employment and entrepreneurship of college graduates.
The plan would help improve the supply and quality of workers and better meet employers' needs, CCTV said, citing Zou Yunhan, deputy director of the Macroeconomic Research Office of the Economic Forecasting Department of the National Information Center.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
20 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Could Putin and Xi really invade Taiwan and Europe at the same time? Experts explain why a simultaneous attack is unlikely despite NATO chief's WW3 warning - but China and Russia are still trying to undermine the West
Leading experts have dismissed NATO chief Mark Rutte's claim that World War III could begin with a simultaneous invasion of Taiwan by China and an assault on NATO 's eastern flank by Russia. In a chilling vision laid out to the New York Times this weekend, the former Dutch prime minister said that Xi Jinping, before launching a long-anticipated attack on Taiwan, would first call Vladimir Putin and ask him to open a second front on NATO's eastern flank. Indeed, Western military chiefs have already begun planning for such a scenario. Last month, the former head of the British Army, General Sir Patrick Sanders, revealed the Ministry of Defence has drawn up a response plan for wars breaking out simultaneously on two fronts and added his ex-colleagues were 'really worried' about the prospect. But Sir Lawrence Freedman, Emeritus Professor of War Studies at King's College London, rejected the idea that Putin would ask how high if Xi tells him to jump - even though he is indebted to China's President. 'China has really helped Russia economically and to a degree technologically with its war in Ukraine. But it hasn't gone as far as North Korea, for example, by deploying troops or sending artillery shells' he told MailOnline. 'There is no reason to expect that Russia would do more for China in return. You don't go to major war as a favour, especially not with NATO. You do it for your own strategic interests.' Still, Freedman warned that NATO leaders and defence chiefs cannot afford to overlook the independent threat posed by each powerful military force - nor the increasingly coordinated efforts to challenge Western power in other domains. Other top analysts argue that even if Putin is unwilling to sacrifice his military for Xi's sake, the two powers are now locked in a new Cold War with the West and preparing in tandem to reshape the global order. Russia and China's 'no limits' partnership At the Beijing Winter Olympics in 2022, Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping stood shoulder to shoulder as they unveiled a sweeping joint declaration, proclaiming a 'no limits' partnership and hailing the dawn of a new global order. Though they stopped short of signing a formal military alliance, both leaders made clear their intention to reshape the world's balance of power by undermining and degrading what they perceive to be the West's domination of international political and economic forums and mechanisms. What's more, Xi and Putin appear to have formed a genuine friendship, having met with one another dozens of times over the course of their respective presidencies. While the partnership remains asymmetrical - China is the dominant partner by far - both have a clear incentive to keep it going. Beijing has never formally endorsed Russia's war in Ukraine, but it has provided considerable indirect support, albeit to its own benefit - and China's Foreign Minister is said to have told EU diplomats that China 'cannot accept' a Russian loss. China is one of the primary benefactors of the West's ruthless sanctions regime against the Kremlin. It has become the principal buyer of Russian oil and gas, importing huge quantities of energy, thereby ploughing funds into Putin's war chest. Though Beijing has not yet been found to have directly supplied Moscow with arms, it is widely believed to have provided raw materials, vital components and dual-use technologies vital to Russia's defence industry. Freedman said Moscow has little to offer Beijing in the way of defence and military technology, but pointed out that Russia has one thing that no amount of investment can buy that could prove invaluable for Xi's designs on Taiwan. 'What China doesn't have is combat experience,' he said. 'Russia's military has spent more than three years fighting an open war in Ukraine, particularly in land and air domains, deploying a range of modern technologies. It also has experience fighting and countering US and Western-made weapons systems. 'Moscow could certainly provide input to Beijing in terms of the challenges it is likely to face in an invasion of Taiwan,' he said. Other analysts believe the Sino-Russian relationship extends far beyond mere economic, technological and limited military support. Velina Tchakarova, a geopolitical strategist and former Director at the Austrian Institute for European and Security Policy (AIES), argues the powers have formed a broad strategic understanding in which they leverage their unique advantages in tandem to systematically undermine US and Western influence around the world. Coining the term 'DragonBear' to refer to the Sino-Russian axis, Tchakarova claims the pair are performing division of labour in multiple regions, particularly Eurasia and the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). This sees the economic powerhouse that is China lead on finance, trade and infrastructure, engaging emerging powers and fledgling economies as part of its global Belt and Road Initiative, while Russia acts as a security guarantor and energy partner - an arrangement she believes can function provided neither party encroaches too far on the other's spheres of influence. Meanwhile, both parties occupy leading roles in the development of the BRICS group - a global economic alliance seen by many as an alternative to the G7 and a vehicle for major geopolitical upheaval. 'Russia needs a powerful ally after the precarious isolation by the West, while China seeks a partner with regional power projection,' she wrote in a piece for the Observer Research Foundation. 'The 'DragonBear' is not a classic alliance according to Western ideas and concepts. Rather, China and Russia have tactically entered into a rapprochement... without the need to announce a strategic alliance, let alone a military one. 'China is evidently the stronger partner economically and financially, but it treats Russia as an equal rather than a subordinate counterpart... The unequal collaboration is cemented by the shared geopolitical interest in creating a credible counterweight to US influence in international affairs,' she concluded. Secretary-general Mark Rutte suggested combined attacks from the Chinese and Russian leaders could trigger a World War nightmare and bring the planet to the brink of Armageddon Military equipment takes part in long-range live-fire drills in waters of the East China Sea, in this screenshot from a handout video released by the Eastern Theatre Command of China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) on April 2, 2025 How could China's invasion of Taiwan unfold? Though the likelihood of Xi and Putin collaborating to deliver a one-two punch to NATO is scant, according to Freedman, the prospect of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan appears to be growing more likely with each passing year. Measuring just 36,000 square kilometres, Taiwan is roughly 1/25th the size of mainland China, or about half the size of Scotland - but it is a territory of immense strategic and economic importance. Its elected Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presides over a self-governing, democratic society and has sought close ties with the US, hoping its political, military and economic heft will keep Xi's expansionist tendencies at bay. But China continues to conduct huge and increasingly frequent war games around the island, and Xi's Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has openly declared it is willing to reclaim Taiwan by force if necessary. 'These [blockades and military drills] are happening so regularly, it shows that China wishes to maintain psychological pressure on Taiwan and to continue to remind the international community of its claims and its resolve to see them ultimately fulfilled,' Professor Kerry Brown, former First Secretary at the British Embassy in Beijing, told MailOnline. 'Nationalist sentiment in China is high at the moment, but the costs currently of moving against Taiwan are very, very high. Unless provoked, I cannot imagine that China would do this. But we are living in very worrying and uncertain times. Alas, this issue is now more dangerous than it has ever been before.' In one attack scenario, the People's Liberation Army (PLA) would launch a full naval blockade of Taiwan, choking off vital imports of food and minerals and pressuring the island to submit without a shot being fired. Taiwan, which produces only around a third of its own food, would be vulnerable to such a strategy, particularly given China's naval prowess and litany of weaponry designed to make a blockade stick - from cruise missiles and anti-ship weapons to long-range rockets like the DF-26B. A more direct option would see China mount an amphibious invasion of Taiwan in a massive undertaking akin to the D-Day landings. This operation would likely follow a period of extensive missile bombardments designed to cripple Taiwan's air defences, command centres, and logistics hubs. An initial assault could include helicopter-borne special forces and airborne troops equipped with armoured vehicles, followed by waves of amphibious forces from China's Eastern Theatre Command. In recent months, analysts have noted the deployment of new 'invasion barges' designed to offload troops and heavy equipment directly onto Taiwan's often rugged coastline. A successful invasion of Taiwan by China would herald the advent of a new world order, Professor Brown said, because such an outcome presupposes one of two seismic events - a total defeat of the US military in the Indo-Pacific theatre, or Washington abruptly abandoning a decades-long security partnership with Taipei. Both scenarios would be catastrophic for America, and by extension, Western interests in the highly strategic region. Dr Philip Shetler-Jones, Senior Research Fellow in Indo‑Pacific Security at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) think-tank, said: 'If the PRC controls Taiwan, it gains an advantage in controlling air, surface and sub-surface areas astride the main shipping and air routes connecting Japan and South Korea to their sources of critical imports - especially energy - and markets. 'It would be enabled to challenge the US Navy more effectively across the Pacific.' Dr Sean Kenji Starrs, Lecturer in International Development at King's College London, warned that such an outcome 'would probably mean the end of freedom of navigation in the South China Sea and Taiwan Strait.' These waterways account for a vast proportion of the world's electronics trade, including goods bound for Europe and the US. It would also make it much more difficult for the US to blockade the Strait of Malacca - a vital maritime chokepoint linking the Pacific and Indian Oceans that carries much of China's fuel and exports. 'All of this would basically mean that China could become a peer competitor to the United States in East Asia, thus the end of US hegemony in East Asia,' Starrs concluded. How could a Russian attack on NATO unfold? While China looks eastward, Russia is working hard to reconstitute its military capacity amid the ongoing war in Ukraine in preparation for a potential future clash with NATO. Despite the immense costs of its conflict with Kyiv, Moscow has pushed its economy into wartime mobilisation and is rapidly rearming. A major study by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) concluded that Russia could be ready to launch a fresh conflict against NATO's European cohort by 2027 - particularly if the US under Trump scales down its security presence on the continent. 'European allies can no longer assume that the US will provide the necessary military support to defend the continent against Russian aggression,' the IISS warned. 'Were US forces to disengage from the European theatre from mid-2025, Europe's window of vulnerability would open quickly.' In a parallel analysis, the RAND Corporation argued that the Kremlin is likely to maintain its wartime economy and permanent militarisation irrespective of how the war in Ukraine ends. 'Once [the Ukraine war] ends, this shift to a wartime economy, and the attendant effects on the defence industrial sector, will be difficult to reverse without provoking a backlash,' RAND noted. Russia is operating 'according to wartime rules' with '24/7 defence production', the report said. As one expert explained: 'If Russia decides to reconstitute, it will... Russia is not worried about the next election and will sacrifice healthcare and other social benefits to divert resources toward military reconstitution... 'In Russia, "the war has become the political system".' Ed Arnold, a Senior Research Fellow for European Security at RUSI, told MailOnline how Russia could seek to destabilise NATO with a targeted and calculated invasion. 'What Moscow would try to do is launch a small-scale operation to take a part of a NATO territory and hold it,' he said. 'That would put NATO in a difficult position as to how to respond, whether this would meet the conditions for Article 5.' He added: 'If you're Putin, you're going to want to do that when you have a US president who is ambivalent to NATO at best.' A Swedish artillery team fires a projectile from an Archer self-propelled Howitzer during the NATO 'Exercise Lightning Strike' on November 20, 2024 near Heinu, Finland According to various NATO sources, a potential Russian attack plan could involve landing forces in Finnish Lapland or northern Norway, and amphibious operations to capture the Swedish island of Gotland. The most likely objective, however, remains the Suwalki Gap - a narrow land bridge between Belarus and Russia's exclave of Kaliningrad that borders Lithuania and Poland. Arnold said: 'The Russian scenario could be as small as to enter the Suwalki Gap and seize a few miles of territory, widening the gap by a few miles each side. 'This could sow division and discord in NATO - from one perspective, that's a military incursion on NATO territory that must be defended, but there will be others asking whether we want to risk a war with a nuclear-armed power over such a small bit of land.' Arnold concluded that such an operation was not a highly likely scenario, but one that Western leaders cannot afford to ignore. 'Prior to 2022, many would have said that a full-scale [invasion] of Ukraine is silly, but Putin went ahead and did it anyway.'
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Trump just swung at Putin's war machine. He missed
The United States is launching a trade war against BRICS. In a Truth Social post, President Donald Trump declared 'Any country aligning themselves with the Anti-American policies of BRICS, will be charged an ADDITIONAL 10 per cent tariff. There will be no exceptions to this policy'. While financial markets were breathing a sigh of relief about the postponement of new tariffs from July 9 to August 1, these threats triggered yet more turmoil. If Trump proceeds with new tariffs against BRICS countries, the consequences for US trade policy and global influence could be profound, and not in the positive way that Trump envisions. For starters, new tariffs on BRICS members and partners will not severely weaken the economies of Russia and Iran. An escalation of US-China trade tensions benefits Russia, as it can readily supplant American supplies of oil, liquefied natural gas and coal to China. As Russia-China trade volumes reached $244.8 billion and Russia-India trade reached $70.6 billion, the Russian economy can lean on intra-BRICS trade to fill supply chain gaps. Higher prices on goods supplied by BRICS members and partners will merely accelerate Russia's domestic production targets. President Vladimir Putin has urged Russia to reduce its GDP share allotted to imports to 17 per cent by 2030 and higher costs of foreign goods will give the upper hand to domestic producers of manufactured goods. While Trump's outrage towards BRICS is partially related with its solidarity with Iran against American and Israeli attacks, these new tariffs will have a negligible impact on the Iranian economy. If anything, they could convince Russia and China to deepen their economic ties with Iran and give new momentum to India's May 2024 deal to operate the Iranian port of Chabahar. The impulsive imposition of tariffs on BRICS members and partners will also undo positive steps towards a de-escalation of trade tensions between the US and China. Due to the London and Geneva agreements, the US has agreed to ease restrictions on aircraft engine, semiconductor design software and ethane exports to China. In exchange, China has taken steps towards easing non-tariff barriers on rare earth supplies. These new tariffs could not only stall further trade talks but reignite the industrial supply chain bottlenecks that were ebbed through months of tireless negotiations. Aside from upending the US's bilateral trade ties with key partners, the new tariffs do even more lasting damage to its global image. BRICS countries are expanding the Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA) which will allow them to borrow funds in local currencies instead of the US dollar. Russia's Transfer of Financial Messages (SPFS) and China's Cross-border Interbank Payment System (CIPS) are incrementally diluting SWIFT dominance. These new tariffs will intensify discussions about de-dollarisation as Global South countries seek to insulate themselves from US trade barriers and sanctions. They will also fuel Chinese President Xi Jinping's crusade against 'unilateral bullying' which aims to form an anti-tariff coalition consisting of EU member states, Middle East regional powers and emerging African economies. Instead of being a show of strength that reinforces US hegemony against the Chinese challenge, Trump's tariffs could give Beijing an intended gift. The US's trade war against BRICS is understandable given its frustrations with the anti-Western policies of its member states. Succumbing to those frustrations with impulsive tariffs could do the US more harm than good.
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Silicon Valley v Soham Parekh, the man who had too many jobs
Silicon Valley has long been built on a complex lattice of productivity targets and ambitious hiring metrics, encouraging a generation of workers to embrace a so-called 'grindset' mentality. The hustlers' culture appears to have limits, however, as start-up founders lined up this weekend to call out an Indian software engineer for working with at least four tech companies at once. 'There's a guy named Soham Parekh (in India) who works at 3-4 start-ups at the same time … beware,' Suhail Doshi, the founder of the software company Playground AI, said on X. 'I fired this guy in his first week and told him to stop lying/scamming people. He hasn't stopped a year later. No more excuses.' The post was liked more than 250,000 times. • How I juggle three jobs at once: the rise of 'fractional workers' Founders of other Silicon Valley companies such as Dynamo AI, Synthesia, Alan AI and GitHub also accused Parekh of working multiple jobs. Haz Hubble said his social media company, Pally, offered him a package worth $250,000 a year, before withdrawing the offer when Parekh refused to relocate to San Francisco. Hubble told the US broadcaster CNBC: 'Now we know why!' Matthew Parkhurst, founder of the financial software start-up Antimetal, said on X that his company 'realised pretty quickly that [Parekh] was working at multiple companies and let him go'. Parekh, from Mumbai, has admitted the deceit, telling the technology programme TBPN: 'I'm not proud of what I've done and don't endorse it either.' He juggled roles by working for 12-14 hours every day. The motivation, he said, was that he needed money to clear debts. He did not say how these were incurred. 'No one really likes to work 140 hours a week, but I had to do this out of necessity. I was in extremely dire financial circumstances,' he said. His lifestyle turned him into a 'serial non-sleeper', he added. Parekh is by no means alone, with the rise in remote working since the Covid pandemic blamed for the surge in moonlighting. In India, the practice has increased by 25-30 per cent between 2020 and 2023, according to the recruitment agency Randstad India. It has prompted the use of software to verify applicants' backgrounds and flag any overlapping employment. • The rise of 'polygamous workers' — and efforts to catch them out The background verification firm AuthBridge said 5 per cent of candidates had two jobs, with roughly 90 per cent of cases occurring in the tech sector. In 2022, the IT company Wipro sacked 300 employees who were found to also be working for rival companies. 'This is cheating, plain and simple,' said Rishad Premji, its chairman. The practice is not limited to the private sector. Some teachers in state schools take a salary but rarely turn up as they are busy working in a private school or tutoring. Road sweepers have been known to delegate the job to someone else — usually a relative — while working for a higher salary somewhere else. • Civil servant 'held three full-time jobs simultaneously' Despite his dishonesty, Parekh said he 'cared deeply' about the companies he had inveigled and denied having a team of junior software developers to help him cope with the workload, saying he had no funds to hire anyone. Parekh's exposure has done his career no harm. He said he was working for a new company and wanted to focus on it exclusively, but admitted he had still not resolved his financial problems. He said he may yet approach his current employer to ask if he could take on another job — but vowed to take a more 'candid' approach.
