Live Tv
Rtv Plus
Dealing Cyber Security, Counterterrorism Ops: India, US review policies
International Desk
13 Jan 2022, 19:14
Photo: Collected
Officials of India and the US on Wednesday reviewed the ongoing cooperation in counterterrorism, cyber security and a host of other issues at a Homeland Security. During the meeting, held in virtual mode, the officials from the two countries also identified and fixed future steps that can be taken to explore opportunities and synergies in advancing security cooperation, an official statement said.
The issues of the meeting were how to secure critical infrastructure and global supply chains, maritime security, aviation security, customs enforcement and trade security, among other issues. The senior officers' meeting of the India-US Homeland Security Dialogue was co-chaired by Union Home Secretary Ajay Bhalla and US Under Secretary for Strategy, Policy and Plans in the Department of Homeland Security Robert Silvers. Both sides reviewed the ongoing cooperation and identified further steps that can be taken to explore opportunities and synergies in advancing cooperation in counterterrorism, cyber security, securing critical infrastructure and global supply chains, maritime security, aviation security, customs enforcement and trade security, among other issues, the statement said.
Both sides end up with the positive outcome of the meeting and hope that the existing subgroups under the homeland security dialogue on law enforcement engagement, securing global supply chains, aviation security, investigative cooperation, and capacity building and training would meet separately in the coming months to deliberate and explore how ongoing cooperation can be strengthened further. The meeting concluded with both sides expressing satisfaction with the ongoing partnership and agreeing to deepen bilateral engagement and collaboration in all areas of mutual concern, the statement said.
The two sides look forward to holding the ministerial-level homeland security dialogue later this year, it said.
Source: NDTV
Comments
New resolution on Tibet introduced in the US House
A new resolution has been introduced in the United States House of Representatives titled “Recognizing the 65th anniversary of the Tibetan Uprising Day of March 10, 1959, and condemning human rights violations related to the hydropower dam construction project in Derge”. The resolution that condemns China’s mass arrest of peaceful Tibetan protestors and reaffirms the support for Tibetan self-determination was introduced by Representatives Jim McGovern, D-Massachusetts, and Young Kim, R-California, on Monday, March 11.
The resolution acknowledges the historical events surrounding the Tibetan Uprising Day, particularly the efforts of Tibetan people who formed a human barricade around the Dalai Lama’s residence to protect him from Chinese troops in 1959. Additionally, it acknowledges the recent protests in Derge County, eastern Tibet, against a hydropower dam project that would displace residents and destroy Buddhist monasteries.
Rep. McGovern said: “It’s been 65 years since His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama was forced to flee as the People’s Republic of China forcibly took control of Tibet. Every day since, the Tibetan people have been defending their human rights and fighting for their self-determination. The PRC must comply with its laws and its international human rights obligations, and stop oppressing Tibetans.”
Rep. Kim said: “The Tibetan people have suffered the Chinese Communist Party’s oppression and control for 70 years, and the CCP shows no signs of slowing down until it has erased Tibetan culture. The freedom-loving people of Tibet deserve our support. I’m proud to join Rep. McGovern in a bipartisan call to stand with the Tibetan people and urge the Biden administration to enforce laws in place to hold the CCP accountable.”
The resolution reaffirms the House’s support for Tibetan human rights and condemns China’s efforts to erase Tibetan cultural identity, particularly by condemning projects like the hydropower dam project in Derge. It demands the immediate release of protestors and prisoners of conscience, along with apologies and redress for rights violations.
Additionally, it calls on the Biden administration to urge China to halt the dam project and respect Tibetan input into development projects.
This resolution adds to previous Congressional actions supporting Tibet, including the passage of the Reciprocal Access to Tibet Act of 2018 and the Tibetan Policy and Support Act of 2020. The House also recently passed the Resolve Tibet Act, aimed at pushing China to negotiate peacefully with Tibetan leaders to resolve the conflict in Tibet.
Source: Phayul
Big Tech’s trouble in China: New ‘work secrets’ law could force tough choices
For years, the national and cyber security communities have warned technology companies like Microsoft, Amazon and Oracle that escalating tensions between the United States and China would ultimately make them choose between one of their largest customers, the U.S. government, and access to the state-controlled Chinese market. U.S. companies have long had to balance their values with China’s authoritarian demands, such as extreme censorship of search engines. That was just the tip of the iceberg.
Now, a revision to China’s state secrets law that takes effect in May could very well force the issue.
The law will require business entities in China to identify and disclose to the government “work secrets,” or non-classified information that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) deems relevant to its national security. The revision is purposely ambiguous as to what qualifies, allowing China to force U.S. tech firms (and, of course, other U.S. companies operating in China) to turn over proprietary information that could be used to target the U.S. government or impact the data security of Americans writ large. This becomes a difficult but binary choice for U.S. tech companies that have invested billions of dollars to build up their presence in China. If U.S. tech companies refuse to comply, they risk losing access to the vast Chinese market. If they do comply, they risk threatening U.S. national security.
To eliminate that risk, the Biden administration and Congress should — at a minimum — consider barring technology companies that comply with the new rule from pursuing new government contracts.
Technology companies like Microsoft, Amazon and Oracle are deeply embedded in the U.S. government and enjoy significant advantages thanks to their incumbency in government contracts. Microsoft and Oracle, for example, face no competition for nearly a quarter of their federal contracts. In many cases, secondary IT providers “compete” for the government’s business but use the same underlying systems, ensuring that no matter which bidder is selected, firms like Microsoft and Oracle always win.
These companies also have significant operations in China and large networks of affiliates that work with researchers and universities with direct ties to the Chinese government and military.
These operations risk compromise to America’s national security interests today: Chinese familiarity with and access to information about operating systems that are at the core of our defense enterprise is, manifestly, a source of vulnerability. As President Xi Jinping has consolidated power, the CCP has imposed increasingly strict rules on foreign businesses operating in China and mandated their compliance to maintain market access.
For U.S. technology companies, that has meant requirements that force them to provide the state advance notice of their cybersecurity vulnerabilities, allowing state-affiliated hackers to exploit zero-day flaws before a patch is released. It has also meant compliance with a National Cybersecurity Law that opens many of the products they offer in the United States — including cybersecurity tools sold to the U.S. government — to intrusion by state-affiliated hackers. Microsoft itself has admitted that compliance with these rules has directly led to attacks against governments worldwide.
That threat risk looms larger with the new requirements. U.S. technology companies that conduct research and development in China will now also be required to abide by the new “work secrets” rule if they want to continue to reap the rewards of the Chinese market or use China-based talent to develop products and features banned in China but used globally, including in the United States.
If the past is prologue, these companies will choose to comply. China’s hacking and espionage program is already robust, and top U.S. intelligence officials have voiced their concern about China’s ability to launch a significant cyberattack against U.S. critical infrastructure. Increasing the flow of data from the U.S. government’s largest and most important technology partners directly to the CCP exponentially increases that risk.
To mitigate this, the Biden administration and Congress must step in — the same way they have in recent weeks to improve U.S. port cybersecurity — to stop Americans’ personal data from being sold to foreign adversaries like China and address the threat that Chinese electric vehicle manufacturers pose to national security.
Any action needs to reflect the reality that it is increasingly becoming unfeasible for the companies trusted with U.S. national security contracts to maintain significant operations in China. Lawmakers should adopt new measures to transition to a procurement system that would disqualify any company that complies with China’s state-mandated disclosures from consideration for future government contracts.
Requiring companies to choose between the United States and China will ensure the technology partners the U.S. government chooses share its national security priorities, helping make the tools it relies on safer and more secure.
Paul Rosenzweig is the founder of Red Branch Consulting, a homeland security and cybersecurity consulting firm, and a senior adviser to The Chertoff Group. He previously served as deputy assistant secretary for policy at the Department of Homeland Security and is currently a professorial lecturer in law at George Washington University and a senior fellow in the Tech, Law & Security Program at the American University, Washington College of Law.
Source: The Hill
Decoding China: The race to electric vehicle dominance
China's tech giants, Xiaomi and Huawei, are making significant strides in the EV sector. These companies are combining data and artificial intelligence to redefine the future of mobility.
Chinese electronics manufacturer Xiaomi plans to deliver its first electric vehicle in China on March 28, three years after the company first pitched its idea for a battery-powered sports car.
Now, premium car manufacturers in the US and Germany will have to deal with another competitor from the Far East.
The new vehicle is called the SU7, with SU standing for "speed ultra." The car needs just 2.78 seconds to accelerate from 0 to 100 kph (0-60 mph). The top speed is 265 kph.
The maximum range with a fully charged battery is specified by the manufacturer as 800 kilometers (500 miles). The base price of the SU7 is around €33,000 ($36,000), making the SU7's comparable with a Tesla model 3, and only around a third of the price of Porsche's Taycan.
Xiaomi CEO Lei Jun has his sight set on competitors from the US and Germany. "We don't want compromise or mediocrity," Lei said. "We want to build a dream car that stands up to Tesla and Porsche."
From smartphones to cars
China has long been the world's largest manufacturer of electric cars. E-mobility would be unimaginable without innovations from Chinese companies, this includes many electronics companies that were not originally focused on the automotive industry.
Xiaomi mainly produces so-called intelligent household appliances with web functions, such as door sensors or rice cookers that send notifications to one's cell phone when the rice is ready.
In Europe, Xiaomi is primarily known for its smartphones, just like the other telecommunications supplier Huawei, which has been launching its e-SUVs under the name AITO in China since 2021.
Electronics companies trying to cross over into car making is not limited to China. The Californian company Apple also had the idea of producing cars 14 years ago. However, at the end of February 2024, the iPhone manufacturer from Cupertino announced that the "Apple Car" project had finally been discontinued. The company is said to have invested a total of $10 billion.
China's dominant automobile market
China is the largest and fastest growing car market in the world. Germany's major car manufacturers sold around one in three cars worldwide in 2023. But their market position is now being challenged by domestic e-car manufacturers.
"China leads the global supply chain for lithium-ion batteries," said Bernd Diepenseifen, partner at the consulting firm KPMG.
In terms of battery production, industrial innovation and sales, China is clearly number one on the scale of competitiveness. "Asian suppliers have a dominant position here, at least for the time being," he added. And for German car makers, things are not moving in the right direction.
"The production of raw materials is certainly not a field in which German suppliers are sensibly looking for opportunities, nor is battery production," said Diepenseifen.
The high standards China's car makers are aiming for became even more clear at the Geneva International Motor Show in February.
Not a single car manufacturer from Germany was present, but there were plenty from China. Exhibition vehicles demonstrated a new generation of connected cars, with entertainment packages integrating audio and video streaming services, and navigation that indicates with a countdown when the next traffic light turns green.
China builds a new generation of cars
China's automobile industry today is looking at cars more than as a mere means of transportation. Cars are more than just an engine plus gearbox, and e-mobility is not just a chassis with a socket.
China is thinking ahead with emphasis on automated driving and artificial intelligence, an environmentally friendly transportation concept and technological leadership in industrial production.
This is why electronics and telecommunications giants like Huawei and Xiaomi are positioning themselves in this competitive market.
"Currently, cars are 'mobile data centers'," said Xiaomi boss Lei. "The automotive industry of the future will produce advanced and connected 'smart spaces'."
Chinese EV maker NIO has called its cars a "living room on wheels."
At the IAA 2023 motor show in Munich, Wan Gang, China's former research minister, enthused that electric cars could be used to store energy in the power grid when charging and discharging.
A data-driven future
"For production and the vehicle of the future, 'smart' is the next big step," said Jürgen Unser, who was President of Audi China until January 2024. This includes smart cars, smart production and smart infrastructure.
Production will soon be controlled by data and artificial intelligence. "It is very important for our society, including in Germany, that we become much more open in the way we handle and use data," he added.
Compared to other countries, Chinese drivers are not sensitive to the collection of private data. By using data, the innovative digital industry is then able to develop algorithms for the application of artificial intelligence to develop tools in the future.
"Artificial intelligence will contribute to our progress and prosperity," Unser said. "We need to be fast, open and flexible." However, the data collected must also be exchanged in a regulated manner.
In 2018, the German government and China signed a joint declaration of intent for automated and connected driving.
According to the document, both countries want to create and develop "non-discriminatory multilateral standards and requirements for data access and storage, data transmission and IT security (cybersecurity) in the field of automated and connected driving and the associated infrastructure."
But the reality of sharing data across borders is far more complicated. According to the EU Commission, many EU companies are complaining about difficulties in using industrial data from their subsidiaries in China.
Foreign investors must operate their data centers in China which are usually decoupled from the database or cloud service of the parent company.
China's data and cyber security regulations are "a problem" for European industry, according to reports from Brussels. The transfer of data out of China requires state approval from the cyber supervisory authority CAC, which wants to check all exports of "important data."
The German government is also aware of the high hurdles. Federal Digital Minister Volker Wissing emphasized the need for free data transfer at the German-Chinese intergovernmental consultations in 2023.
The EU and China are currently negotiating uniform industry standards for information and communication technologies (ICT) in the interests of borderless data regulation. They are still looking for common ground.
China outlaws place names that fail to conform to its territorial claims
China has made it clear Mar 15 that geographical names in ethnic minority or foreign languages should reflect the country’s sovereign and extraterritorial claims when translated into Chinese characters. These would include names of islands in the South China Sea, places in India’s Arunachal Pradesh state, and the name of the occupied territory of Tibet.
For this purpose, the Ministry of Civil Affairs published on Mar 15, implementation measures addressing the management of geographical names, which detailed the requirements for translation of place names in ethnic minority or foreign languages into Chinese characters, reported China’s official globaltimes.cn Mar 16.
China recently made it clear that the Chinese name “Xizang” should be used in place of “Tibet” or “Tibet Autonomous Region” to refer to “Xizang Autonomous Region”, which is roughly only the western half of Tibet proper. It thereby made it clear that “Tibet” proper, which includes the Qinghai province and other territories merged with its Gansu, Sichuan and Yunnan provinces as well, no longer exists and should not be used in official documents as a placename.
Set to take effect from May 1, 2024, the implementation measures have stipulated in Article 13 that “place name in foreign language that may harm China’s territorial claims and sovereignty rights shall not be directly quoted or translated without authorization.”
The report cited the implementation measures as saying translation of place names in foreign languages or minority languages should comply with standards formulated by related organs of the State Council, which is China’s cabinet. The standard translations are or will be made public through notices, the national database for geographical names and official publications on geographical names.
The report noted that the State Council had issued a revised regulation on place names in Apr 2022, which was applicable to naming, renaming, usage, cultural protection and other management on geographical names within Chinese territories.
In this connection, Zhi Zhenfeng, a research fellow with the Institute of Law at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, has said that as China still has disputes over some territories with certain neighbouring countries, the use of geographical names of places in disputes directly relates to sovereign rights. Using the incorrect translation or non-standard translation could cause confusion and encroach China’s territorial integrity, he has sought to stress.
The report cited Chinese analysts as mentioning the example of maritime disputes in the South China Sea with countries like the Philippines. When referring to islands and reefs concerned, the use of standard translation is a firm declaration of sovereignty and transliteration of foreign names means concession of legal rights, they were cited as saying.
The report also noted that the Ministry of Civil Affairs had standardized the names of 11 places in Zangnan (the southern part of Southwest China’s Xizang Autonomous Region) in Chinese characters, Tibetan and pinyin in Apr 2023. Using standard place names helps raise awareness of Chinese territory, it cited Chinese “experts” as saying.
The report said the Apr 2023 issuance was the third list of standardized geographical names in “Zangnan” published by the ministry. It added that the first list of the standardized names of six places in “Zangnan” was released in 2017, while the second list of 15 places was issued in 2021.
Source: Tibetan Review
Rare hippo species born in Athens Zoo
The endangered pygmy hippopotamus' birth was "extremely important" fot the Athens zoo. Its name will be decided by a vote.
It was the first birth in 2024 for Athens' Attica Zoological Park that made conservationists extremely happy: an endangered and rare potamus is now part of a hippo family in Greece.
The International Union for Conservation of Nature listed pygmy hippos as an endangered species. About 2,000-2,5000 are estimated to live in the wild. Their natural habitats are swamps and rainforests in western Africa.
"Every captive birth of pygmy hippos is extremely important. We're very happy to see this baby grow into a healthy adult hippo, and hopefully one day reproduce," the zoo's wildlife veterinarian Noi Psaroudaki told Reuters news agency in a report published Wednesday.
Calf's name to be decided by vote
One of the reasons that breeding in captivity has been complicated is the lack of male animals. So, the reaction was accordingly when the zoo found out that the little one is a male hippo.
The calf was born on February 19 and currently weighs 7 kilograms (15.4 pounds). It has no name yet, as it still has to be decided by vote. The hippo is now joining his parents, Lizzie and Jamal, who are the only ones of their species in the zoo.
Baby pygmo hippo will remain with its mother for the next couple of months before it can explore the outdoors enclosure.
TikTok For Sale: Who can buy it and how much will it cost?
The US government is demanding that TikTok sell itself if it wants to continue operating in America. How likely is a sale, who can afford it and what are the challenges of such a takeover?
For Sale: One of the world's most successful social media platforms with a billion users across 140 countries.
Sounds like a good deal for someone with ambition and money. But Chinese-owned TikTok isn't just any short-video-sharing app. It is a phenomenon changing social media and how people communicate.
Claims of national security concerns in the US don't make things any easier. Plus protectionist attitudes and sentiment on China in general have turned dark and Congress is moving fast to force the company's hand.
US Congress in control?
The US government now sees TikTok as more than entertainment — it is a news and information platform that can be used for propaganda, too. For decades, the US had restrictions on foreign ownership of traditional media like radio or cable stations; for policymakers restrictions on TikTok are a logical 21st-century consequence.
On March 13, the US House of Representatives voted to force a sale of TikTok's US business within six months or have it banned from the Apple and Google app stores in the country. To become law, the bill needs Senate approval. President Joe Biden has vowed to sign it if it passes Congress.
TikTok may be waiting for a knight in shining armor to save its US business. Yet the pool of available buyers is small and Elon Musk is already busy reworking X, formerly known as Twitter. Who else can they turn to? What will happen to the 170 million US users if TikTok just can't be sold?
A short history in 60 seconds
This isn't TikTok's first time on the possible selling block. Donald Trump tried with an executive order to force ByteDance, the owner of TikTok, to sell the subsidiary to an American owner back in 2020.
It seemed a deal with Oracle was close, but those efforts failed, as did an attempt to keep the app out of app stores.
Since then TikTok says it has gone to great lengths to delete the data on American users from ByteDance servers and move all that information to US-based servers, a move it calls Project Texas. This should in theory keep the data out of the hands of Chinese surveillance.
Many experts like Milton Mueller, a cybersecurity expert at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, doubt there is any real security threat after having looked at all the evidence. Still, many US politicians and government intelligence and security agencies don't seem appeased and want to take it to the next level.
Who would want to buy TikTok?
With all that in mind, buying all — or just the American part — of TikTok would not be a usual business transaction. It would be a geopolitical minefield. Would ByteDance still be a majority shareholder calling the shots in the background? Who would run and update its powerful algorithm?
Mueller, who looks at TikTok several times a week, thinks a sale is "theoretically possible but highly complicated and not likely." Adding that "China's government might not allow it, and it is unclear what is gained, or even what it means, to sell 'part' of a globally interconnected social media service."
ByteDance seems ready for a legal fight. For its part, the Chinese government has been restrained. But they could try to prevent a sale by putting an export ban on the technology behind the app. Without its algorithm, TikTok would be less attractive.
Besides that, it is hard to put boundaries and prevent access to something as free-flowing as an app. App stores would have to block all new downloads and updates for those who have it already.
There is also a short timeline. Mueller has talked with a number of TikTok people recently who say as a technical or operational matter divestiture doesn't work in such a short period. They would have six months, "whereas the Grindr divestiture from a different Chinese company took a year," he said.
A big big-ticket item
The challenges just pile up. Any ban in America would surely lead to First Amendment constitutional challenges. "It would be US users whose speech would be suppressed, not foreigners or the Chinese government," Mueller said.
Then there is the price. Several analysts think that despite all the difficulties TikTok's US business could sell for over $50 billion (€45.8 billion). There are only a few companies that could afford to spend that much like Apple, Amazon, Google, Meta, Microsoft or Netflix.
Some of these companies would then end up in the crosshairs of antitrust officials for owning too much important technology.
Alternatively, all or part of TikTok could be spun off as an independent publicly listed company. Or US-based private equity giants could step in.
After last week's House vote, former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, said he is working to put together a group of investors to take over the company without announcing any details. Ironically, Mnuchin was one of the people pushing for a sale four years ago while he was a member of Donald Trump's Cabinet.
It is likely not about apps at all
Yet, in the end, it is not about good business or even national security says Milton Mueller. "It is a pawn in the broader US-China power competition, and it is also exploited for symbolic reasons."
"Equating a commercial social media app with espionage, and calling TikTok's Singaporean CEO an agent of the Chinese Communist Party, is obviously inaccurate," but sells well to both Republicans and Democrats "who see the US as engaged in a competition with China to retain US hegemony," he said.
Forcing an ownership sale would also set a dangerous precedent that could be used by other governments against US social media companies.
In the end, Mueller expects such digital protectionism to lead to "less competition and innovation in the social media market." And there is always the next national security threat. Perhaps Chinese-made electric vehicles or battery systems? The retaliation may never end.
US Diplomat Donald Lu denies Pushing Pakistani ex-PM Khan Out of Office
For the first time a top U.S. diplomat for South and Central Asia has for the first time publicly addressed allegations of conspiring to oust Pakistan's former Prime Minister Imran Khan in 2022.
US Assistant Secretary of State Donald Lu on Wednesday rubbished former Pakistan prime minister Imran Khan’s allegations his government was ousted via a conspiracy orchestrated by Washington, describing it as a “conspiracy theory” and a “lie.”
"These allegations, this conspiracy theory, is a lie, it is a complete falsehood," Lu said while responding to a question by committee Chairman Representative Joe Wilson, a Republican from the U.S. state of South Carolina.
Cypher conspiracy
In April 2022, Khan was expelled from power in a parliamentary vote of no-confidence.
Khan has since alleged that a secret diplomatic cable, or cypher, sent by then-Pakistani ambassador to the U.S. Asad Majeed Khan, proves the United States conspired with Pakistan's military and opposition leaders to remove him from office. The cable described a March 7, 2022, meeting with Lu in Washington.
Last August, an American news outlet, The Intercept, published what it said was the text of the cipher.
According to Ambassador Khan's purported cable, the State Department officials at the meeting encouraged Khan to tell Pakistan's powerful military that Islamabad could expect warmer relations if Khan were removed from office because of his neutrality on the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The Pakistani prime minister was in Moscow for talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin on the day the invasion began and failed to condemn it.
"I think if the no-confidence vote against the Prime Minister succeeds, all will be forgiven in Washington because the Russia visit is being looked at as a decision by the Prime Minister. … Otherwise, I think it will be tough going ahead," the document quoted Lu as telling the Pakistani ambassador.
While the State Department has consistently rejected the allegation of conspiring in Khan's ouster, the department's spokesperson Mathew Miller conceded last year that the Biden administration was unhappy with Khan's overtures to Russia.
"We expressed concern privately to the government of Pakistan as we expressed concerns publicly about the visit of then-Prime Minister Khan to Moscow on the very day of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. We made that concern quite clear," Miller said at a regular press conference while responding to a question about The Intercept's reporting.
The Pakistani military and Khan's opponents also have rejected his allegations.
The former Pakistani prime minister is currently serving a 10-year prison term for revealing the contents of the secret cable, a charge he rejects as politically motivated.
Lu called the reporting of the diplomatic cable in Pakistani media inaccurate.
"At no point does it [the cypher] accuse the United States' government or me personally of taking steps against Imran Khan," he told the committee.
Lu pointed out that Pakistan's now-former ambassador Khan had also testified to his government that there was no U.S. conspiracy to remove the prime minister from office.
In March 2022, Pakistan's National Security Committee headed by Khan issued a demarche to the U.S ambassador over his country's "interference" in Pakistan's politics.
After Khan's ouster, however, another NSC committee headed by then-Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif concluded that the diplomatic cable did not indicate any U.S. conspiracy.
"We respect the sovereignty of Pakistan. We respect the principle that Pakistani people should be the only ones choosing their own leaders through a democratic process," Lu told Wednesday's hearing.
The assistant secretary was disrupted several times as some in the audience called him a liar. The proceedings stopped on a few occasions, and Capital Police removed some in attendance for being disruptive.
Lu told the committee that he has received several death threats, and his family also has been threatened over "unfounded allegations" since Khan's removal.
Election irregularities
Addressing reports of irregularities in Pakistan's February 8 general elections, Lu said the Biden administration was persistently urging Pakistani authorities to investigate.
"We as a partner of Pakistan have called for that to be done transparently and fully and for those found responsible for irregularities to be held accountable."
Pakistan's much-delayed elections faced several controversies. A state-backed crackdown on Khan's party, pre-election violence including terror attacks, suspension of mobile internet services on Election Day, and a massive delay in announcing results led local and international observers to question the fairness of the vote.
The United States, U.K. and the EU have called on Pakistan to probe the discrepancies.
In a February 28 letter to President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken, a bipartisan group of 31 members of the U.S. Congress urged the administration not to recognize Pakistan's new government until "a thorough, transparent, and credible investigation of election interference" was conducted.
In a statement on April 13, though, Blinken congratulated Sharif on being elected as prime minister of Pakistan. U.S. ambassador to Islamabad Donald Blome has since met Pakistan's new president, prime minister, as well as foreign and finance ministers.
Representative Greg Casar, a Democrat from Texas who was among the authors of the letter, questioned Lu on the administration recognizing Sharif's government.
"We do not go around recognizing or withholding recognition. We decide whether we are going to engage with the government," said Lu.
Pakistan's polls delivered a hung parliament. Khan's party had to field candidates as independents after it was deprived of a unified elections symbol.
Although candidates backed by Khan's PTI won the largest number of seats in the lower house of the parliament, Sharif's party, which came in second, formed a coalition government with Khan's opponents.
Source: Voice of America
