I am writing for more information on your FAO article. Who is taking the responsibility of authoring the piece?
Beyond it being a caricature of the actual procedures ongoing at FAO, the tone is embracing an overtly racist stance against the Chinese governance of a multilateral institution. "Chinese-run" agency: This is not how to understand the governance of FAO. There was an election and the agency is currently LED by a Chinese secretary general; "Claims of nepotism": Nepotism predates the secretary general and there is no proof in the article that this is occuring with consultants; the claims that "top ppositions" as favours to the Beijing Community Party has no proof and reads like a propaganda piece.
Beyond being offensive, it is blatantly wrong, as this consultancy issue goes LONG beyond the Chinese presidency of FAO.
Your source should be cited, because they clearly do not have the authority to speak for anyone at FAO. Secondly, you should understand the purpose of a trade union (through some basic research) and understand that it is a mechanism to ensure basic worker's rights are respected, NOT as a vindictive tool to "combat worsening conditions." The article is actively harming the objectives of the consultants, and I have to wonder if the goal is not to undermine the efforts of consultants.
At a bare minimum, the blurb description NEEDS to be removed and revised. The fact that it passed an editor's clearance is concerning.