Israeli Ministers Set to Meet on Next Steps Toward Gaza Truce
© Eyad Baba/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
© Eyad Baba/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
In late 2023, sisters Lisa and Nicole were told they had inherited a substantial sum from their late Aunt Christine. But while they were absorbing this life-changing news, the windfall was just as quickly snatched away.
A man unknown to Christine's family, friends or neighbours, appeared - apparently from nowhere - and produced a will, naming him sole heir to her entire estate.
Doubts about the man's claim grew as troubling details emerged. However, the police and probate service said they would not investigate.
Lisa and Nicole's is one of several similar cases investigated by BBC News in the south of England.
We found mounting evidence that a criminal gang has been carrying out systematic will fraud by exploiting weaknesses in the probate system, stealing millions of pounds from the estates of dead people, and committing serious tax fraud.
Lisa and Nicole were upset to hear about the death of their aunt, Christine Harverson, whom they had not seen since their early childhood. They were also shocked to be told that they stood to inherit her entire estate, including a house in Wimbledon, south London, which could be worth nearly £1m. She had not left a will, and they were her closest living relatives.
The sisters were alerted to their inheritance by an "heir-finder" company, Anglia Research Services. Heir-finders use an official government register that lists estates where no will has been made. They research the dead person's family in order to identify, locate and contact the rightful heirs.
In return for a portion of the inheritance, these companies act on the heirs' behalf and apply for what's known as a grant of probate. This gives them the legal right to deal with a deceased person's estate – in other words, their property, money and possessions.
However, on this occasion, the application for probate on behalf of Lisa and Nicole was stopped in its tracks.
A Hungarian man by the name of Tamas Szvercsok contacted the probate service, and produced a will describing him as Christine's "dear friend".
It named him the beneficiary of her entire estate, as well as sole executor - the person legally responsible for carrying out the instructions in the will.
The possibility that Mr Szvercsok was genuine, initially was not dismissed out of hand.
"It happens - sometimes cases slip through the net and a will is unearthed," says Matt Boardman, a former police officer who works for Anglia Research.
However, there were clear signs something was amiss:
Other even more troubling details stood out.
Christine's home address was misspelled on the will, and even though it was dated 2016, the address given for Mr Szvercsok was a block of flats that had not been built until 2021.
Matt Boardman contacted Mr Szvercsok, who replied by email: "I never heard of any family. I'm the sole executor of her will."
Despite presenting what they thought was a strong case to police and the probate service, Lisa and Nicole were told they would have to bring a civil action if they wanted to prove that the will was a fake. That would cost tens of thousands of pounds which they do not have.
Lisa now says she sometimes wishes she had never been told about the will in the first place: "All it's done is bring misery really, and heartache. It's just a whole nightmare."
Stealing a dead person's property and financial assets appears to be extremely easy under UK law, if no will can be located.
The official government register of unclaimed estates in England and Wales is called Bona Vacantia (Latin for "vacant goods"), and is freely accessible online. It currently contains about 6,000 names and is updated daily.
Legitimate heir-hunting companies use Bona Vacantia to research potential clients, but it also appears to have become a valuable resource for criminals.
To claim an estate where there is no known heir, a fraudster simply has to find a promising name on Bona Vacantia, produce a will quickly enough, and be awarded grant of probate.
Since 2017 it's been possible to apply for grant of probate online, but critics of the system say it is failing to detect suspicious applicants, and it also appears to increase the opportunity for tax fraud.
When someone dies, their estate has to be assessed for inheritance tax. This is not payable on estates worth £325,000 or less, but any amount over that threshold – with some exceptions - is taxed at 40%.
It's the responsibility of the person awarded grant of probate to make sure inheritance tax has been paid.
Applicants for grant of probate must complete a form to say this has been done, but under the current arrangements, they need do no more than declare on the online form that no tax is due.
It is a system that relies largely on trust, but gives ample opportunity for that trust to be roundly abused.
During our investigations we have come across cases where estates have been valued at just under the inheritance tax threshold, even though they include property worth far more.
One of these was the estate of Charles Haxton.
At the time of his death in 2021, Charles Haxton was living alone in a terraced house in Tooting, south London.
He was reclusive and only occasionally spoke to neighbours, although one of them, Roye Chapman, was there for him near the end when he suffered a bad fall outside.
"I rang the police and then got him up and got him into the ambulance," he says. "His head was all cut open, and then two weeks later, he died."
No will was initially found for Mr Haxton, and his name and address appeared on Bona Vacantia. This prompted Anglia Research to look for possible heirs, and they told several of his cousins that they could be in line to inherit Mr Haxton's estate.
Then, as with Lisa and Nicole, the cousins were told that a will had appeared after all, leaving everything to one man - also Hungarian - called Roland Silye.
The family initially accepted his claim, to have been an old friend of Mr Haxton, but one relation, Barry, obtained a copy of the will and was struck by how odd it looked.
It left Mr Silye two properties - not only Mr Haxton's home in London, but also a house in Hertfordshire.
Together, the two properties would have been worth about £2m. However, Mr Silye listed the value of the estate as £320,500 – just £4,500 short of the amount at which inheritance tax kicked in.
What was even stranger was that Mr Haxton had never owned, and had no connection to, any house in Hertfordshire.
We visited this property. It was large and dilapidated, and neighbours told us it had been unoccupied for a long time.
The puzzle of the extra house also caught the attention of Neil Fraser, a partner in another heir-hunting company. He thinks that Mr Silye may have bundled the Hertfordshire property into a will in an attempt to fake ownership.
"He must have gone past that house and thought, 'I'll just take that derelict house. How can I get that house? Well, I can put it inside a will!"
Crucially, the will was accepted by the probate service, who did not check or raise any questions about the Hertfordshire house.
We were unable to trace Roland Silye in our investigation, and his motivation remains a mystery.
The will would not give him possession of the Hertfordshire house - the property registry and the electoral roll name the owner as a woman who would be in her 70s.
However, Mr Fraser speculates that the will could be used in future as leverage to take ownership when the real owner dies.
Despite reporting his suspicions to the police and the probate service, he says action was not taken.
Mr Silye cleared probate not only for Mr Haxton's estate, but also that of George Woon, an elderly man from Southall, west London.
Mr Woon also died in 2021, and shortly afterwards, his name appeared on Bona Vacantia. Mr Silye came forward with a will which named him as sole heir. Mr Woon's house was later sold at auction for £360,000.
We asked an expert in financial fraud, Graham Barrow, to check whether there could be any connection between Roland Silye and Tamas Szvercsok.
Both have names of Hungarian origin, and, according to Companies House, both appear to be directors in a complex and interlinked web of companies.
Mr Barrow established that the address Mr Szvercsok gave in Mrs Harverson's will was also used by Mr Silye for some of his companies.
What these companies do is unclear, although some have been struck off for fraudulent addresses, and others have been warned for failing to provide accounts.
The pattern - multiple businesses, related addresses, similar names - is one which often indicates a criminal network, says Mr Barrow.
He adds that owning multiple companies can allow criminals to disperse funds across different accounts and locations, and makes life more difficult for law enforcement.
Another Hungarian name featuring in this web of companies is Bela Kovacs, who, according to a will dated 2021, was heir to the entire estate of Michael Judd, from Pinner, west London.
According to his neighbours, Mr Judd was a multi-talented individual with a distinguished record in the security services. However, in his final years he had become something of a hoarder, seldom leaving his house.
One neighbour, Chris, told us he thought the will had sounded strange and not only because Mr Judd had never mentioned Bela Kovacs.
A few months before his death in 2024, Mr Judd told Chris he had made a will long ago, but the people named on it were all now dead. In any case, he added, he did not know where it was.
"I suppose I better try and dig it out some time," Chris remembers him saying.
He feels it's inconceivable that Mr Judd would have troubled himself with these decisions if he had made a will three years previously.
We tracked Mr Kovacs down to a luxury estate in the Watford area but he refused to talk to us.
Other factors seem to connect these cases.
The wills made out for Charles Haxton, George Woon and the others we have seen, appear to have been written by the same person, according to handwriting expert Christina Strang.
"The numbers two, four and seven are all written in the same way on several addresses," she says.
She also sees other similarities, such as the spacing of the letters in different signatures, and the positioning of the signatures on the line.
"It seems to be one person actually signing, forging all of these."
Ms Strang also thinks this same person may have also forged signatures for the witnesses named on the wills, none of whom, we found, were apparently known to the deceased, and some of whom might have been completely fictitious.
There are disturbing similarities in the way that properties were treated during and after the probate process:
As a result of our investigation, bank accounts for dozens of companies connected to the suspected fraudsters, have been suspended.
In addition, HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) has told us it now wants to question Roland Silye about inheritance tax which he might owe on the estate of Charles Haxton.
Bela Kovacs was granted probate over the estate of Michael Judd, which was valued at £310,000 - just below the inheritance tax threshold. However, HMRC's interest was also piqued by this case, and it has now suspended a planned sale of Mr Judd's bungalow in Pinner.
Meanwhile, the dispute over Christine Harverson's estate means the probate process has been frozen, and it looks unlikely to be resolved soon. Tamas Szvercsok cannot take possession of her Wimbledon house, but Lisa and Nicole lack the funds to go to the civil court and prove his will is fake.
We wrote to Mr Szvercsok and Mr Silye at the addresses supplied with their probate applications, offering them a right of reply, but we did not hear back.
When we shared our findings with the Ministry of Justice, which is ultimately responsible for the probate system, it told us that it was "working with law enforcement to ensure criminals feel the full force of the law".
However, a different picture emerges from others who know the system.
"Because probate isn't high profile – it's not sort of, for want of a better word, politically sexy, it doesn't stay in the headlines," says former MP Sir Bob Neill, who until the 2024 general election was the chair of the House of Commons Justice Select Committee.
In 2023, the select committee launched an inquiry into the probate system, but it was cut short by the election.
Sir Bob believes an over-eagerness to cut costs by digitising the probate system, has produced weaknesses which fraudsters are now exploiting.
"When you had regional offices you had human awareness, contact and scrutiny that was better suited to pick up cases where things have gone wrong," he says. "A purely sort of automated system isn't really good at doing that."
He says the system introduced in 2017 was a cheap and quick fix. It lacks the sophistication, he says, of programs used by insurance companies to deal with fraud, which can detect patterns of suspicious behaviour.
His concerns are echoed by Anglia Research's investigator, Matt Boardman, who says that previously, executors of wills would have had to attend their local probate registry to swear an oath, which "would allow the registrar to evaluate every single case on its own merit".
He says the system's move online "completely eliminated" the chance to question the executor's demeanour or behaviour.
"Goodness knows just how many of these have already gone through and been processed by the probate registry," he says, "and how rich we're making these people."
Pictures of a weepy Rachel Reeves dominated the newspaper front pages and TV news after her tearful appearance at Prime Minister's Questions earlier this week.
The markets were spooked so much by her emotional appearance that the cost of government borrowing immediately jumped and the pound took a dive.
The sight of most of us crying in the workplace is unlikely to move financial markets, but does it matter if you do?
Does it show weakness, or strength, or simply that you're in touch with your emotions?
Anecdotally, it's not unusual to have a bit of a sniffle at work. Several people got in touch with the BBC to say they had let it all out.
Clara, 48, from Lancaster, said she had become emotional when she was a young graduate getting a "blasting", and years later "in frustration".
"I've also cried after receiving bad news from home and left work immediately."
Emma, meanwhile, felt she had to keep her emotions under wraps because she worked in "a tough male-dominated environment" and would give herself a hard time for "showing emotion or 'weakness'."
Although some research has suggested women are more likely than men to cry, plenty of men told us they had also shed tears in front of colleagues.
Guy Clayton, a doctor, said he had often cried "with patients, colleagues and families over the years, when I've shared their sadness".
A 38-year-old from London who works in finance said he had become emotional at work when dealing with personal issues and felt it showed "a professional dedication" to still turn up.
So is crying a strength or a weakness? Executive coach and success mentor Shereen Hoban says it's old-fashioned to think weeping at work is unacceptable.
"We've moved beyond the old-school idea that professionalism means leaving emotion at the door," she says. "In today's world, emotional intelligence is a strength, not a liability."
Career coach Georgia Blackburn says it's not unusual for people at work to be upset, so firms need to know how to handle and support staff who are feeling a bit fragile.
Ultimately, she says it will mean workers get more done.
"An employer that truly listens, shows compassion and understanding, is so much more likely to keep their staff motivated and happier in the long run," she says.
That's been the case for Amanda in Stockport who contacted the Jeremy Vine show on BBC Radio 2.
She cried at a job interview at the University of Manchester 17 years ago, just after her father had been diagnosed with cancer.
She got the job and is still there.
"I cried every day for about nine months until my dad sadly passed away. It just made me realise what an amazing person I work for, and what an amazing place I work at, where that was OK."
Fashion designer Amy Powney was having a bit of a rough time at the end of last year.
She was having an "intense" time leaving a job, and it coincided with traumatic things happening in her life.
Amy, who founded sustainable fashion brand Akyn earlier this year, also felt pressure to be a "poster child" for ethical fashion.
"My to-do list at that time was: feed the kids, pick them up from school, sort that nursery thing out, design the next collection, make sure the staff are OK, sort out that VAT return... and then save the world," she told BBC Radio 4's Woman's Hour.
"I went through this period of time where I just could not stop crying and I was doing it in public places, I was doing it on stage."
She thinks that showing emotion at work has been "demonised" and is unapologetic about breaking down.
"I just think bring back the crying, bring back the emotions," she says.
"Women in leadership should be able to show their emotion. I think it's a superpower. I think it's a strength."
But not everybody thinks that way. Some people are still a teensy bit judgemental, says Ann Francke, chief executive at the Chartered Management Institute (CMI).
Women who weep are seen as "too emotional" while men who mope can be shamed for being soft and vulnerable, she says.
Junior staff can get away with it more than their bosses, but this shouldn't necessarily be the case, she adds.
"When a senior leader cries, it can be seen as shocking or even inappropriate. But when handled with authenticity, it can also be powerful. It shows that leaders are human and care deeply about what they do," she says.
But if you want to climb the greasy pole, it could be best to keep a stiff upper lip, at least in some organisations, says executive coach Shereen Hoban.
Crying could affect your promotion prospects, she says. "Let's be honest. There's still a bias in some workplaces that sees composure as strength and emotion as instability."
But she says some organisations see things differently, and value leaders who are "real, self-aware, and able to navigate complexity, including their own emotions".
She adds that if you break down once at work it "won't ruin your career", and that what matters more is the bigger picture:
"Your performance, your presence, and how you bounce back or move forward with intention," she says.
Provided by the CMI
© Illustration by Rebecca Chew/The New York Times
© T.J. Kirkpatrick for The New York Times
(德国之声中文网)马英九终于结束了他这次“漫长”的中国之行。 他参加了中共第十七届海峡论坛, 并专门访问了福建宁德下党乡,参观了习近平领导下脱贫成果,走了不少地方。好多活动无疑是为共产党捧场甚至背书。 但马英九这次访问,也许他已察觉到,以往那种绕圈子的说法,共产党似乎总是误解,利用这次中国之行,应该把话说得更明白些。
马英九的统一情怀
在他中国之行的最后一站,即在莫高窟旁的敦煌研究院,他脱稿阐述了他“和平民主统一”的理念。而正是他对这个理念的解释,反映了他的“统一情怀”,但也表明了他的“统一”的底线。而正是这种底线的存在,共产党将不会给她太多好脸色看。
首先,马英九的“统一情怀”是有其历史和血缘的基础。这点在向他这样一个年龄层次,而且祖辈曾生活在大陆的人来说,可以理解。 但马英九这里显然把自己的“统一情怀”绝对化。因为在当代社会,享有类似的文化或者相同的语言,但却生活在两个不同的国度的国家案例不少。他们之所以没有“统一”,是因为当地选民并不认为统一之后一定会带来更多的幸福和自由。希特勒也是一个“统一狂”,所以他非要吞并奥地利,把这个作为“大日耳曼”帝国象征。但二战后,双方还是分离了,而且双方并没有因为回到自己的独立地位而感到难受。相反,享用同一种语言和类似的文化传统民主国家,能从这种和平共处中共同获益。 从这点来说,马英九的“统一情怀”似乎太绝对化了。
两个绝然不同的思路
笔者以为,了解当前国民党对华策略关键在于,他们把最好情景看成了现实,或者是可以实现的现实。那就是双方能平等对待,放弃武力,最终达到和平统一。而民进党则是把最坏情景看成是必然会出现的,即一个威权主义的政权因为接受不了一个民主政权,而且,威权国家认为自己有足够的武力征服对方,所以,中共用武力吞并台湾几率很高。 为此,台湾就必须充分做好防止大陆“武力统一”的准备。
而国民党则在向自己的公众表明,“放心吧,共产党不会打我们的,只要我们也显示出和平的意愿,并且,只要我们确实也愿意统一的话“。 实际上,国民党如果真正地了解自己以往在国共合作的历史,自己心里也明白,两家心里想的还是不一样。
马英九和国民党的说教,有点类似当今的特朗普对待正在侵略乌克兰的普京。 首先,特朗普完全从单维度的角度来比较双方的力量,那就是,俄罗斯的军力远强于乌克兰。国民党对对岸共产党的武力也是如此判断。正是因为如此,特朗普决定说一大堆普京的好话,强调他是个好人,是个热爱和平的人。但使得特朗普沮丧的是,普京并不买他的帐,所以他根本不接受特朗普的和平建议。
同理,马英九以及他的追随者,也希望通过说一大堆共产党的好话,使得对方停止动武。这就是为什么马英九认同“九二共识“的重要性,这也说明马英九为什么说”我们必须相信习近平(不会采用武力来统一)。“ 这也是为什么马英九为什么去花了自己基金会的钱去参观习近平的脱贫项目等等,为共产党背书。
中共不喜欢马英九的底线
但如果我们仔细观察一下马英九的言行,他还是一个有底线的人。 尽管他在维护他的底线方面,做的不仅不够,而且甚至是背道而驰。 但公众必须了解他的底线,那就是他在中国最后一天访问时强调的“和平民主统一“的理念。
首先,如上所说,他的一个大前提就是,大陆和台湾一定会统一。 由于在中国的听众都喜欢听他强调的“统一情怀“,所以,当他脱稿开始提出这个理念时,人们只是以为他就是在讲统一,于是赢得台下一片掌声。但掌声过后,情况就不一样了。 因为他开始强调一些”小前提“,而没有这些”小前提“, 统一还是不可能实现。
首先,双方的统一必须是用和平的方式,而非使用武力。其次,这个统一必须用民主的方式。所谓民主的方式,就是要尊重台湾人民的意愿。 换言之,应该用当代民主的思维,允许台湾人决定自己的命运,是统一还是保持现状。 马英九的话暗示着,中国政府也应该平等地对待台湾政府,尊重当地人民的意愿,毕竟,马英九也曾是这个国家的通过民选被选出的总统啊。
马英九的底线就是体现在“民主“这个概念上。 而正是这一点使得中共非常恼火。 但为了表示客气,中国国台办主任宋涛只是在会上回应了,”应该尊重中国人民的意愿“。言下之意,你台湾人的意愿算老几?统一台湾还不是中国说了算?
当时,在敦煌说这番话的马英九应该也察觉到共产党对他的“民主统一“理念非常反感。所以,他即刻说“我的想法如有不当之处,请批评指正”。
可以想象,随着时间的推移,国民党和共产党在这个议题上分歧将越来越大,且不说台湾人越年轻,越缺少这种”统一情怀“。 就连那个在大陆网上红的发紫的台湾”馆长“,由于“统一情怀”并没有像马英九那样浓厚,当他情不自禁地在大陆人面前表明“我是中华民国人”时,被中国大陆人骂成“台独分子”。一个亲自跑到大陆去赞美中国的台湾人,最终还是被骂成“台独分子”,那台湾的台独分子不就到处都是了嘛。
马英九的底线向国民党提示,即便你说对岸的共产党一百次好话, 一旦涉及到民主,一个威权国家是绝对不会因为你说一些好话而把你的底线当回事的。 而正是因为这一点,双方撕破脸是必然的。这只是个时间问题。
本文作者张俊华为德籍华人政治学者,在德国生活三十余年。他曾就读于德国法兰克福大学,并获得哲学博士学位。此后曾执教于柏林自由大学等高校。现为法国Ecole Universitaire de Management客座教授。
DW中文有Instagram!欢迎搜寻dw.chinese,看更多深入浅出的图文与影音报道。
德国之声致力于为您提供客观中立的新闻报导,以及展现多种角度的评论分析。文中评论及分析仅代表作者或专家个人立场。
© 2025年德国之声版权声明:本文所有内容受到著作权法保护,如无德国之声特别授权,不得擅自使用。任何不当行为都将导致追偿,并受到刑事追究。
(德国之声中文网) 金砖国家领导人将于周日(7月6日)起在里约热内卢举行年度峰会,但此次会议将面临一个显著的“缺席”。中国国家主席习近平将自2012年上任以来首次缺席这一新兴经济体联盟的年度峰会。
金砖国家集团,常被视为制衡西方力量的中国主导力量,此次会议正值其成员国即将面临与美国迫在眉睫且代价高昂的关税战。金砖国家最初在二十年前被构想为一个快速增长经济体的论坛,如今已日益由中国主导,其经济增长速度和规模远超其他成员。
中国方面尚未说明习近平缺席此次峰会的原因。前美国国家安全委员会中国事务主任、现布鲁金斯学会智库学者哈斯 (Ryan Hass) 表示:“我预计外界会对习近平缺席的原因进行猜测。最简单的解释可能最具说服力,习近平最近在北京接待了卢拉。”
习近平并非唯一缺席的重量级人物。因战争罪被国际刑事法院通缉的俄罗斯总统普京也选择不亲自到场,但克里姆林宫表示他将通过视频连线参与会议。同样,伊朗总统佩泽什基安 (Masoud Pezeshkian) 也将缺席,该国仍在与以色列持续12天的冲突中挣扎。
哈斯认为,普京的缺席以及印度总理将作为巴西的贵宾也可能是习近平缺席的考量因素。“习近平不希望被将获得国宴款待的莫迪 (Narendra Modi) 抢了风头,” 哈斯说,“我预计习近平决定委派国务院总理李强出席,正是基于这些因素。”
尽管如此,习近平的缺席对于东道主巴西总统卢拉 (Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva) 来说仍是一大打击。卢拉希望巴西在全球舞台上扮演更重要的角色。在截至2025年11月的一年里,巴西将接连主办G20峰会、金砖峰会以及COP30国际气候谈判,随后将在明年迎来竞争激烈的总统大选。外界预计卢拉将史无前例地寻求第四个总统任期。
经济议题优先 挑战美元主导地位
对于那些将前往“美妙之城”里约热内卢的金砖国家领导人而言,经济议题将是首要议程。卢拉周五重申了寻找美元替代方案以用于金砖国家间贸易的设想。
“我知道这很复杂。存在政治问题,” 卢拉在一次金砖银行活动上表示,“但如果我们不找到一种新模式,我们21世纪的结局将与20世纪的开始如出一辙。”
然而,鉴于包括中国在内的许多国家正与美国进行艰难的贸易谈判,他们可能对激怒变幻莫测的美国总统特朗普持谨慎态度。特朗普已发出警告,从周五(7月4日)起,各国将陆续收到信函,告知其对美国出口商品将被征收的关税金额。他还威胁对挑战美元国际主导地位的国家征收100%的关税。
里约天主教大学金砖政策中心主任费尔南德斯 (Marta Fernandez) 告诉法新社:“我们预计此次峰会将保持谨慎基调:最终宣言中将很难直接提及美国。”她特别指出,对中国而言,“现在似乎不是进一步加剧这两个世界主要经济体之间摩擦的合适时机。”
扩员带来机遇与挑战 内部共识面临考验
除了经济议题,从“中东问题”到“气候变化”,金砖国家成员将不得不克服根深蒂固的分歧。
金砖国家最初的成员包括巴西、俄罗斯、印度和中国,后来加入了南非。近期,沙特阿拉伯、伊朗、阿拉伯联合酋长国、埃及、埃塞俄比亚和印度尼西亚也已加入。分析人士认为,扩员增强了该集团的潜在国际影响力。金砖国家目前的人口占全球近一半,GDP占全球的40%。
然而,金砖国家成员的增加,也催生了许多新的内部矛盾,尤其是在如何强硬挑战美国的问题上。费尔南德斯表示,这种扩张“使得建立强有力共识变得更加困难。”
据瓦加斯基金会国际关系教授斯图恩克尔 (Oliver Stuenkel) 称,由于“利益分歧”,金砖国家成员此前未能就伊朗与以色列冲突以及随后的美国军事打击发表强烈声明。
尽管如此,巴西仍希望成员国能在峰会上采取共同立场,包括在最敏感的议题上。巴西外交部长维埃拉 (Mauro Vieira) 告诉法新社:“金砖国家(成员),在其历史上,已成功地在重大国际问题上发出一致声音,没有理由这次在‘中东问题’上不能如此。”人工智能和全球治理改革也将是此次峰会的重要议题。
DW中文有Instagram!欢迎搜寻dw.chinese,看更多深入浅出的图文与影音报道。
© 2025年德国之声版权声明:本文所有内容受到著作权法保护,如无德国之声特别授权,不得擅自使用。任何不当行为都将导致追偿,并受到刑事追究。
(德国之声中文网)在90岁生日前夕,藏传佛教精神领袖达赖喇嘛周六(7月5日)表示,他梦想还能再活几十年。他当天与成千上万流亡藏人一起祈祷。
隆隆的鼓声,低鸣的号角,回荡在印度达兰萨拉山顶的寺庙中。身着红色僧袍的僧尼齐声诵经,为丹增嘉措祈求长寿。信众们相信他是转世的第十四世达赖喇嘛。
达赖喇嘛看起来健康良好,身穿传统的酒红色僧袍和黄色披肩。他带领众人祈祷。几天前,他刚刚确认,拥有600年历史的藏传佛教转世制度将在他去世后继续存在。
许多流亡藏人担心,中国会自行指定一位达赖喇嘛继任者,以加强对西藏的控制。1950年,中国军队进入西藏并一直统治至今。
“至今为止,我已尽我所能。若继续得到观音菩萨的加持,我希望还能活三、四十年,继续服务众生,弘扬佛法。”他说。
达赖喇嘛的追随者称赞他为争取西藏更大自治所做的不懈努力。西藏是一片高原,面积与南非相仿。
共同愿望:避免痛苦,追求幸福
在他说话的地点——印度喜马拉雅小镇达兰萨拉的主寺中,达赖喇嘛将教义传递给更广泛的听众。自1959年拉萨起义被中国军队镇压后,他便和众多流亡藏人居住于此。
“在我这一生中,我遇到过各式各样的人,有些人信仰宗教,有些人对此毫无兴趣。这是自然的,因为每个人的性情不同。”他用藏语说道。“然而,无论是藏人还是其他人,大家共同的愿望是避免痛苦,追求幸福。”
这位富有魅力的佛教领袖曾表示,达赖喇嘛制度是否延续,将取决于公众意愿。本周三,他确认该制度会继续的声明,令全球信众感到宽慰。
他说,他收到了来自西藏境内和流亡地区的藏人,还有来自喜马拉雅地区、蒙古、俄罗斯部分地区以及中国的佛教徒的多次请求。
他表示,寻找第十五世达赖喇嘛的责任将“完全由”他设于印度的办公室——甘丹颇章基金会(Gaden Phodrang Trust)承担。
金瓶掣签制度被滥用将失去意义
自称是信仰共产主义的无神论者的中国政府则迅速作出回应。中国谴责这位诺贝尔和平奖得主是“叛乱分子”和“分裂分子”。
中国外交部发言人毛宁周三向媒体表示,“达赖喇嘛、班禅喇嘛以 及其他佛教伟大人物的转世灵童,必须通过金瓶掣签的方式确定,并报中央政府批准。”
那只金瓶掌握在北京手中。而达赖喇嘛曾警告称,如果该方法被滥用,将不具备“任何精神意义”。
(法新社)
DW中文有Instagram!欢迎搜寻dw.chinese,看更多深入浅出的图文与影音报道。
© 2025年德国之声版权声明:本文所有内容受到著作权法保护,如无德国之声特别授权,不得擅自使用。任何不当行为都将导致追偿,并受到刑事追究。
高龄少子化已经成为日本社会迫在眉睫的危机,尽管近十年来日本政府一再呼吁并已出台各种政策,但均未能有效扭转这一趋势。将从2026年4月开始实施的育儿支援金政策招致诸多非议,引发日本国民对生育环境和社会不公的再思考。在自民党腐败丑闻和日本生活成本持续走高引发国民日益不满的当下,该政策恐不仅对即将到来的参议院选情助益甚微,亦难从根本上遏制生育率的颓势
(本文首发于南方人物周刊)
南方人物周刊特约撰稿 华浩男
责任编辑:李屾淼
2025年5月5日,日本宫城东松岛市,市民在儿童节活动中举起孩子留影(视觉中国/图)
作为全球经济大国,日本社会长期面临严重的高龄少子化危机。尽管这是发达国家所共同面临的难题,但对日本而言尤为艰难。据厚生劳动省的统计,日本在2024年的新出生人口仅有68.6万,较前年减少4.1万。这也是自1899年实行人口普查以来,日本新生人口总数首次低于70万,总和生育率跌破1.15。
与此同时,日本65岁以上的人口已增至3624万,占总人口的29.3%,75岁以上人口则高达2078万,占总人口的16.8%,社会福利和政府的治理压力空前加剧。
照此趋势,日本政府担忧该国将陷入严峻的萎缩危机,故而将本世纪20年代剩余的5年视作挽救日本社会的最后窗口期。为此,日本政府在近十年内出台了各种生育保障政策。
“儿童·育儿支援金”作为日本政府所倚仗的基本手段之一出台,但因其在机制上需向全体国民征收款项用于补助育儿家庭,因此也被不少网民诟病为“单身税”。
即使承受巨大的社会质疑和在野党的压力,自民党政府恐怕也无法取得预期的效果,这些保障措施在日益攀升的生活成本面前,也只能陷入杯水车薪的窘境。
另外,由于自民党层出不穷的腐败丑闻和执政失能,育儿支援金的出现只能徒增民众的不满,进一步冲击自民党的执政基础,在接下来的参议院选举中,为日本政治增添更多不确定性。
育儿支援金并非突发奇想的产物。早在2012年民主党的野田佳彦政府时期,经由民主党、自民党、公民党三党合意,日本国会就通过了《儿童·育儿支援法》,旨在应对少子化危机,规定了对育儿家庭进行一定的保障和补贴。2024年6
校对:赵立宇
© Daniel Berehulak/The New York Times
© Arash Khamooshi for The New York Times
© Valerie Plesch for The New York Times
© Marvel/Disney
© Pool photo by Chip Somodevilla
© Josh Morgan/Imagn Images
© Kate Medley for The New York Times
© Colin Harnish/Shutterstock
© Eduardo Munoz Alvarez/Getty Images
(德国之声中文网) 在对多个主要贸易伙伴加征关税的最后期限日益迫近之际,美国总统特朗普周五(格林威治标准时间7月4日)透露,他已签署了多封旨在通知相关国家其将面临关税的信函。此举无疑加剧了全球对贸易冲突升级的担忧。
特朗普当天在空军一号上向记者表示:“我签署了一些信函,它们将在周一(7月7日)发出。”他补充说,信函数量“大概会有十二封”,但并未透露具体的收件国。特朗普称,相关国家的名单将在周一公布。
“发送一封信函,告诉他们:‘听着,我们知道我们存在一定的逆差,或者在某些情况下存在盈余,但数额不大。这就是你们在美国开展业务需要支付的费用’,这更简单。”特朗普表示。他还提及,美方曾与英国和中国采取类似做法,并认为这“对双方都非常好”。
关税威胁:从10%到70%的冲击
此前在周四(7月3日),特朗普已预告将通过信函通知贸易伙伴其面临的惩罚性关税,并透露关税税率将在10%至70%之间。目前,欧盟与美国之间的关税争议仍未达成任何协议。
特朗普政府系统性地利用关税作为杠杆,试图迫使其他国家在其他领域做出让步。今年4月初,美国曾对多个国家征收高额附加关税,但随后在90天内将大部分国家的关税降至10%,以便进行谈判。
欧盟的关税豁免期限将于7月9日到期,而其他许多国家的期限更早,在7月8日便告截止。受影响的国家目前正竭力与美国达成协议,以避免更高的关税。美国官员曾暗示,未来几天可能会宣布多项贸易协议。
欧盟面临50%关税重压 美中领导人互动引关注
特朗普曾威胁欧盟,如果不能在7月9日前与美国达成协议,可能面临50%的关税上调。这比目前适用的10%的基准税率高出五倍。尽管如此,他也暗示了延长最后期限的可能性。值得注意的是,特朗普推行的10%基本关税税率,已经远高于此前的关税水平。
欧盟贸易委员谢夫乔维齐 (Maros Sefcovic) 本周在华盛顿进行了进一步谈判,并形容这是一次“富有成效的工作周”。
特朗普的关税政策已在全球范围内引发了与贸易伙伴的争议。针对某些特定产品,如汽车,美国已适用25%的更高关税税率,而钢铁和铝产品的关税税率更是高达50%。
在贸易紧张气氛日益加剧之际,有消息指出,美国总统特朗普周五(7月4日)表示,他可能会访问中国与中国国家主席习近平会晤,或者邀请习近平访问美国。两位领导人上个月曾相互发出访问邀请。
DW中文有Instagram!欢迎搜寻dw.chinese,看更多深入浅出的图文与影音报道。
© 2025年德国之声版权声明:本文所有内容受到著作权法保护,如无德国之声特别授权,不得擅自使用。任何不当行为都将导致追偿,并受到刑事追究。