Simon's itching to return and clamp down on our vibrant and sexually confident guest blogging movement (J/K), so before he gets here, I thought it'd be appropriate to bring a fascinating analysis of the whole anti-Japanese protest movement and the domestic political ramifications for the People's Republic:
CHONG: THE CONTROLS OF POWER BEHIND THE ANTI-JAPANESE PROTESTS
SATURDAY, 30 APRIL, LAST UPDATED 05:05
Ming Pao: Iam Chong is an assistant teaching fellow at the Department of Cultural studies at Lingnan University.
Anti-Japanese protest demonstrations have returned to quiet, as authorities again use heavy language to discourage citizens from going onto the streets. Sporatic arrests have also begun in major cities throughout the country. Some say this is to avoid the upcoming May Fourth anniversary, as well as the sensitive months of May and June.
When the demonstrations were red-hot, some people in Hong Kong were still discussing whether they were self-organized or planned by the authorities. It appears that such discussion is no longer necessary. From the perspective of the authorities, they first generously tolerated, and even assisted, the demonstrations, and then followed with social control. The political powers of the country no longer embarrassed themselves in front of the world's media, like in 1989, when their spectacular methods turned them into oppressors. Hu [Jintao] and Wen [Jiabao] today, as well as local governments, maintained a superficially open attitude, as well as the magnanimity of a great nation.
In this series of protests, not only have the authorities grown smarter, but the public has changed as well, demonstrating a new political relationship: let me use an anecdote to elaborate.
A friend in Beijing told me that there was a pop music awards ceremony at the Great Hall of the People. Singers from Hong Kong, Taiwan, and the mainland gathered, as well as throngs of fans. A passionate group of fans near the Great Hall unfurled a banner toward the [Tiananmen] Square to support some singer. Some were even distributing pamphlets. Public security immediately confiscated the pamphlets and dispersed the fans, dampening spirits. Another group of “smarter” fans wearing identical uniforms unfurled a banner as well, but faced against the square and toward the Great Hall at a 45 degree angle. Public security did not intervene at all, and things ended happily.
Many self-motivated individuals have worked with the authorities long enough to know their bottom line, and have a firm grasp on how to find the possibility, time and space for group activities. They also are self-restraint in the extent of their words. The authorities have also learned that the key to controlling society is to not casually show their ugly side and use violence to intimidate.
Demonstrators threw bottles at Japanese restaurants and legations. Public security gently used dissuading words, and the crowds replied, “ we are not contesting the government!” Shanghai public security announced “walking advance paths” to direct the protesting crowds. As the tone of the authorities tightened, the Internet became quiet over the past few days. For example, anti-Japanese messages have disappeared from the front page of “Blog in China” for some time, probably the result of self-restraint and self-examination by the people.
Will this year's May Fourth be like that of sixteen years ago? I am not optimistic that the people will rally forth: today's China can no longer be understood by the idea of two contesting elements of “society” and “the regime,” and the political powers no longer rely on “unitary systems” to directly control society. New power networks are developing in Chinese politics, and minor transgressions and resistance are swirling and struggling in these networks. Apparently passionate anti-Japanese protests appear to be only a minor test of the hidden and secure power networks, and cannot be said to be confrontation and subversion.
Civil Liberties Watch: In South Asia The Acorn goes dark (well, on hiatus anyway) after being banned for a foreign government. In Southwest Asia, the Saudis round-up Christians. At least the North Koreans pretend to allow Christianity.
Linklet Update: Democracy Arsenal and Liberals Against Terrorism look at United Nations reform. You may remember CA's statusreports. India and Japan are both trying to gain permanent seats on the United Nations Security Council.
Linklet Update 2: Jing was unhappy with the Battle of Talas reference. Here's wikipedia's version.
Xu Dunxing, former Chinese ambassador to Japan, says that when then vice-Premier Deng Xiaoping went to Tokyo to attend the exchange of authorizations for the Sino-Japanese Treaty of Peace and Friendship on 23 October 1978, he responded to a Japanese reporter's question as follows: “We call the ‘Senkaku Islands’ the Diaoyu Islands, and we have different names and different viewpoints on these islands,” “We believe that the wise course of action is for both countries' governments to avoid this problem. Putting it aside is not crucial, and there is no problem to wait for ten years,” “The next generation will be smarter than us, and will eventually find a mutually acceptable way to resolve this problem in the future.”
In some ways, I agree with Deng that the future generations will be better at this, but that generation is at least eighteen years late.
Daily Linket Update: Remember the linklet on sexism in The Economist? Well, that stately British "newspaper" managed to throw in Triste est omne animal post coitum in an article on international farm subsidies. Wow.
The information provided for the battle of Talas has a couple of important errors. Mainly that Talas did not in anyway lead to An Lushan's rebellion nor were its ramifications significant at all. The only real significance to the battle is the diffusion of paper technology, and of course the trivia information that this was the only clash between Chinese and Arab armies. The revolt wasn't at all caused by the defeat at Talas, but rather Tang military overstretch, along with a decline in bureaucratic control which led to increasingly decentralized military power.
Not a new item but anyway an important one. It's not a Westerner speaking, this time it's a Chinese. The message - I believe - is above all addressed to his compatriots.
I'm going to quote the whole second part of the article:
When I think of the forced labor in Japanese prison camps, I am reminded of forced labor camps in China, and also of the Chinese miners who lose their lives when forced to re-enter mines that everyone knows are unsafe. Are the rights of China's poor today really so much better protected than those of the wretched "colonized slaves" during the Japanese occupation? There was the Nanking massacre, but was not the murder of unarmed citizens in Beijing 16 years ago also a massacre? Is Japan's clumsy effort to cover up history in its textbooks any worse than the gaping omissions and biased blather in Chinese textbooks?
China's textbooks omit the story of how the Great Leap Forward of the late 1950's was actually the disastrous failure of a harebrained economic scheme by Mao that led to the starvation of 20 million to 50 million rural Chinese. No one really knows the numbers. Nor do we know how many were killed in the campaigns to suppress "counterrevolutionaries" during the 1950's, in the Cultural Revolution during the 1960's, or even in the Beijing massacre of 1989. Yet we hold Japan firmly responsible for 300,000 deaths at Nanking. Does our confidence with numbers depend on who did the killing?
China and Japan both have blood on their hands, but they have important differences as well. Comfort women and others whom Japan has injured or insulted can sue either Japan's government or its big companies, and they can do this in either Japanese or Chinese courts. Japanese who want to can demonstrate in Tokyo shouting "Down with Japanese militarism!"
These things are very different in China. The Chinese government decides on its own whether to give modest compensation to the widows of dead miners. Ordinary workers and farmers are often in the position of issuing appeals to the very people who are oppressing them. Families of Beijing massacre victims to this day have police stationed at their doorways, lest they misbehave. And demonstrators may shout only about approved topics. Before we in China decide we are superior to Japan, we must address our own double standards.
Very courageous stance. I hope you won't consider him "anti-China".
Monthly peak crude oil prices per barrel
since George W Bush took office:
1973 Oil Crisis $55.00
Jan 2001 $30.00
Jan 2002 $20.50
Jan 2003 $34.00
Jan 2004 $35.00
Jan 2005 $49.75
Mon April 25 $54.57
Bill Maher: Michael Jackson invites 12-year-old boys to his ranch for milk and cookies, George Bush invites Saudi Crown Prince to his ranch for milk and cookies.
Al Franken: People are saying that the hand-holding is a Saudi thing. But I think it might be more of a Prince Abdullah thing.
US Senator Chuck Schumer: While Abdullah holds the President's hand, his other hand is picking the pockets of Americans with sky-high oil prices.
Andy Borowitz: Advice to the U.S. gay & lesbian community regarding gay marriage - come up with several hundred million barrels of crude.
Bluejives: US Secretary of State Condi Rice: "my husband...er...I mean the President never holds my hand. Hmmf!"
Bluejives: Prime Minister Junichiro Kozumi: "does this have something to do with me?"
Bluejives: Dear Leader Kim Jong Il: "what a pair of wierdos..."
Bluejives: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's telegram to Premier Wen Jiabao: "hey, how come you never held my hand when you visited me, huh?"
As someone once said, politics make strange bedfellows.
Some confusion is spreading among the ruling class. An internal struggle between factions? Or simply an awful management of instigated popular rage? In any case, very interesting times in China.
Atmosphere can change a lot in only two weeks but dear oldself-criticism is always on the crest of the wave.
To understand why Lien's trip is so devious, it's important to keep in mind that he has never recognized the legitimacy of the 2004 election that he lost to Chen.
Lien's trip takes place in the context of his rejection of this basic democratic requirement. He is being treated as the leader of a local territory paying tribute to the central government; he is acknowledging Hu Jintao's legitimacy as President of China, even while he has withheld that acknowledgement from the elected President of Taiwan. It is perfectly insidious.
Jing, on the contrary, is satisfied with the new brotherhood and focuses on Taiwan protesters.
My two cents: if Lien's trip is not an act of treason, it's a very unfortunate move. Beijing is now actingas the big puppeteer in Eastern Asia and I fear that the head of Taiwan's Nationalist Party is just the last puppet.
Meanwhile, more obstructionism by China in North Korea issue: isn't Beijing part of the problem more than the solution?
But the KMT doesn't see itself as 'Taiwan's' Nationalist Party, it sees itself as _China's_ Nationalist Party (indeed that's the official party name) that happens to be stuck in Taiwan for the moment.
BEIJING, (AFP) - Around 27,000 jurors will report for duty in China next week, state media said, as the country introduces jury trials in an attempt to reform a system widely criticised for its lack of independence.
[...]
Under the current system, judges are the sole arbiters in court cases but they have been widely criticised by the public for lack of independence from the government and the Communist Party.
The legal system is also riddled with corruption.
While China already has jurors, they are largely hand-picked by a court or approved by court officials after they received recommendations from local authorities.
Lack of jury trials is an issue that has historical causes: trial by judge has been the historical norm in China for millennia. A related legal phenomenon unique to China is the petition system. But while such a system has obviously served China sufficiently for millennia, it is apparent that they are not adequate in keeping up with social and technological changes in the past century. Attempts at legal reform are therefore at least a bit encouraging.
On the other hand, in a move that probably preserves stability, but at the expense of the rule of law, the NPC Standing Committee has given its rubber stamp approval of the two-year interpretation of the HKSAR CE term length.
On the lighter side, Peter Payne writes an epic post on Japan. Topcs include the low (1.38 children / couple) birthrate, Japanese writing systems, karaoke, and stuff he's shilling.
India: A Rising Power, although slightly dated, gives a good overview of India's past and current economic status, potential, military strength, and its position vis-a-vis Pakistan, China, Russia, and the U.S.
Key Quote: Most importantly, India's drive for greater power status is driven by intense domestic sentiment, which has viewed the last five centuries of foreign domination with growing contempt. It will not welcome foreign influence that will be viewed as limiting its own potential.
In the wake of Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao's recent visit to India, his meeting with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the general warming of relations between India and China, Sino-Indian Relations: Perspectives, Prospects and Challenges Ahead reviews the collaborative versus competitive nature of the continuously evolving relationship between the two most populous nations on Earth.
Key Quote: The two countries issued a joint declaration on principles for relations and comprehensive cooperation and vowed not to view each other as a security threat. They reaffirmed their determination to resolve their disputes through peaceful means. This is a far cry from the suspicions and hostility between the two Asian powers in the wake of India's May 1998 nuclear tests.
Both the United States and China are vying for strategic partnership with India. Courting New Delhi: Washington and Beijing Compete for Influence, reveals the intricate complexities behind the India-China-U.S. triangle relationship. There are multiple factors which can be either a help or hindrance for both China and the U.S. in wooing India's favor.
Key Quote: China and the United States are increasingly looking to New Delhi to secure the realization of their interests in the complex world of Asian geopolitics and energy security.
Key Quote: Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao has been in India recently talking peace, free trade, and technology cooperation – but the real message was the end of 600 years of Western dominance. "Together," said Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, "India and China could reshape the world order."
Chinese government is the primary driving force for the development of the Internet in China. The authorities see the Internet is a critical instrument to serve its central agenda: economic development to preserve the power status quo of the Chinese Communist Party. Since the Internet first entered China, the government has used an effective multi-layered strategy to control Internet content and monitor online activities at every level of Internet service and content networks.
There are FOUR main approaches of Chinese state control of the Internet: Technology, Law, Self-Censorship and Propaganda. (...)
Thus far, the Chinese government has managed to promote the development of the Internet for its economic benefits, while maintaining enough control over online information. However, despite all the state censorship measures I have described above, it is also indisputable that the Internet is expanding the freedom of information and expression in China. Although many of these changes are still incremental, they are nevertheless profound. In the long term, when the Internet penetration in Chinese society continue to grow, and in the time when more radical social, political change emerges in Chinese society, the Internet and other digital communication technologies such as mobile phones will definitely play a powerful role, hopefully to facilitate those changes towards a positive direction: a peaceful transition to a more open and democratic China.
After Nanjing, the PRC government continues to put the brakes on anti-Japanese demonstrations, arresting 42 protesters for acts of violence in the 16 April Shanghai rally.
In fact, the state media in Shanghai has been acting in curious ways, leading up to today's operation. Whether what the police is doing complements or conflicts with what the newspapers are doing is anyone's guess.
See the extended entry for translations of the news articles.
AFTER THE PASSION OF ANTI-JAPANESE PROTESTS, CHINA ARRESTS 42 IN SHANGHAI FOR VIOLENCE IN DEMONSTRATIONS
TUESDAY, 26 APRIL, LAST UPDATED 18:18
Reuters (Shanghai): Chinese state media reported on Tuesday that police have arrested 42 participants of the anti-Japanese demonstration in Shanghai [on 16 April], and will charge 16 for damage of property.
The arrest operation shows that China is trying to restrain re-enactments of violent resistance, as previous anti-Japanese protests have sent Sino-Japanese relations to their lowest point in decades.
According to the Shanghai Morning News, the 16 “violators of the law” are charged with “taking advantage of the situation to throw rocks and damage shop.” Behaviour of damaging shops and looting seriously disrupt social order, and harm the image of Shanghai city.
The newspaper also reports that Shanghai police is encouraging those who acted illegally during the protests to give themselves up, and others who know of such activities should provide information to the authorities.
State media reported on Monday that police arrested a netizen for attempting to organize an anti-Japanese demonstration for May Day. The Communist Party has already began a widespread campaign to encourage citizens not to “hate Japan,” and has now followed up with the arrest operation.
Media reported on Tuesday that Chinese foreign minister Li Zhaoxing will participate in next week's Asia-Europe conference, but it is not clear whether he will privately meet with Japanese officials.
CFDD CANCELS MAY FOURTH RALLY
TUESDAY, 26 APRIL, LAST UPDATED 05:05
Ming Pao: Tong Zhen, head of the China Federation for Defending Diaoyutai Islands, informed Ming Pao yesterday that when President Hu Jintao gave “five propositions” on Sino-Japanese relations in his meeting yesterday with Japanese Prime Minister Koizumi, it was “our first showing of the cards in years, and established national pride.” In light of the big picture, and to “give the Koizumi government of Japan a chance,” the CFDD and he will postpone plans to apply for a demonstration on the 86th anniversary of the May Fourth Movement.
When we interviewed Tong on Friday (22 April), he said that to reflect Chinese popular opinion, the CFDD and he plan to, either in the name of a group or individually, apply legally for a rally on 4 May. However, when we interviewed Tong again yesterday by phone, he says that he has decided to postpone plans for applyng for the rally, because when Hu gave five propositions when meeting Koizumi, he “considered the big picture, and defended the Chinese position and principles, representing the feelings of the Chinese people, including Diaoyutai-defending patriots.”
Tong says that the CFDD and he will postpone the application also to give the Koizumi government a chance to rectify their mistakes. “The members of the CFDD are well aware of the big picture, and we can express our patriotic hopes in many ways. We will all work well at our jobs, and give much energy to vitalize China.”
Zhong Guohua, Ming Pao Beijing correspondent
Personal spam: please visit my website at http://www.plum-blossom.net/, if you're not offended by my shameless self-promotion.
While we should have the right to protest what we may not like, but this sort of behavior any where in the world may not accomplish much. There are better ways (e.g. diplomacy) to get things done.
Great site ! I'll have to add Simonworld to the blogroll.
Putin, so far, is a guy whose conservative bark is a lot worse than his bite - or the bite of his potential rivals.
It would be nice if Yabloko had not badly alienated the populace in Yeltsin's day and that the liberals were strong and vigorous but unfortunately, they aren't.
They have a few years to get it together to be on par with the neo-Communists and the rightist crackpots so when Putin's successor is chosen, the democrats are a force to be reckoned with. They need the time - badly. I hope they use it.
- Syria opens to multi-party elections. Is the end of Baath near? Coming Anarchythink so. I agree. Add Syrian troops withdrawal from Lebanon... Assad is feeling pressure of emerging democracies around him. Good.
So, do you remember the crowds saying that no, Arab world wasn't ready for democracy, Arabs history was different, they were different...?
It's the same a lot of people are saying of China: a democratic system would be a disaster, a chaos, nationalism would surge... and so on.
Excuses. There will always be an excuse (nothing against you, Kelvin) for those who don't want democracy, liberalization, hope in a single word.
But if Afghans, Iraqis, Lebanese, next step perhaps Syrians can vote, why not Chinese?
If I were Chinese I would feel very offended...
Democracy is a type of government that works best for a nation that is already fairly developed, ie in terms of technology, infrastructure, social institutions, literacy rates, etc. Just as individuals go through different stages in life: infant, childhood, adolescence, adulthood, etc. I believe nations go through different stages of development as well. During 1950-80s, South Korea was not a democracy, it was a dictatorship. But if it weren't for the strong leadership of iron-willed men like Park Chung Hee, South Korea would not be the developed, industrial nation it is today. China is the same. China faces tremendous pressures that few other nation have ever faced.You need some variety of authoritarianism to enforce the discipline necessary to effect development, modernization, and lift people from poverty.
Even Western nations have had traits in their developmental past which were distinctly un-democratic: child labor (ever read Charles Dickins?), robber barons, slavery, etc.
Furthermore, democracy has to arrive when the people, whether they are Arab or Chinese, feel that they are ready for such a thing, not because already-developed Western nations force it upon them at gunpoint, out of self-interest.
Some countries do not want a democracy. They do not want to industrialize or modernize. Should we force democracy upon those people just because we want their oil or because our multinational corporations want to sell more widgets? That is like self-righteous Christians, with their rigid, absolutist worldview, saying that Buddhists or Muslims are heathens, and imposing Christianity upon everybody, whether they like it or not.
I believe that China will eventually evolve to a point were such things will be a reality. But for now, I believe most Chinese are concerned about economic development and lifting themselves out of poverty. You can't really afford to think about "luxuries" like freedom of speech when your stomach is hungry. It seems well-fed Westerners with comfortable living standards have a hard time truly understanding the entire Chinese perspective even while they presume to know "what the Chinese want", even better than the Chinese themselves. Give it another 10-20 years, I'd say, and in the meantime, learn to read between the lines when exposed to anti-China, Western media propaganda.
So, advocating for democracy and human rights in China means being "anti-China". Curious perspective...
In a way, yes.
What is the hidden motive behind all the pretense of the democracy and HR agenda?
Because the West really cares that much about ordinary Chinese people? Maybe a few special groups.
The West actually feels threatened by China's rise, both economically and geopolitically. Almost every Western nation has felt the China effect, ie flood of low-cost goods. The average common Westerner has a rather poor understanding of China to begin with but they "feel" the effects. Much of the Bush Administration's foreign policy revolves around "containing China". "Democracy" and "freedom" are just public relations political euphemisms to put a righteous wrapper on what is decidedly a foreign policy driven by cold hard calculations. Since the US is still the reigning superpower, much of the West rallies behind Bush's China policy, with the possible exceptions of France, Germany, and Russia.
The Western media is typically filled with a distinctly persceptable anti-China bias while providing precious little in the way of context. Ironically, this constant anti-China buzz may actually hurt the cause of free expression in China rather than help it because the leadership will become more inclined to enforce censorship.
I'll remind you all that Taiwan is ethnically Chinesse, and yet it's made the transition. And the main problem with democracy at the point of a gun is national pride more than anything else. As the birthplace of the culture of "face", some might think that China is more sensitive to that; but the Arab nations are not much different.
Introducing democracy by gunpoint is not the best way to do it, but many nations have come into democracy through traumatic means, not the least of which was the French Revolution, which took from 1789 till 1848 to wind down.
China's statist and authoritarian history has left deep, indelible marks on her political culture. It's not going to be easy to reconcile it with the needs of a modernizing society, but I think it's worth it.
The easiest graduation would be to begin with financial transparency. Even the most stalwart Communist agrees that corruption can be a problem. However, by introducing, at the very least, transparent accounting, a culture can be spread that encourages people to take responsibility without having to fear severe repercussions. As that culture of transparency grows, people will come to expect it also of their politicians.
Yes, there are fundamental questions about the nature of Chinese government, where the entire edifice is run by an unelected Party with a parallel hierarchy. However, as people begin to expect openness, they will also expect accountability.
In the end, the CCP must fall from a position of permanent power. This is only natural. Whether it does so gracefully or not is a question that should concern all China-watchers.
A couple days ago, they led a protest in front of the
South Korean mission to the U.N. Next week, I'll be
joining them at a protest at the Chinese Embassy in
Washington. These people, the majority of them young,
are not primarily from either political party.
They're just trying to influence nations in Asia and
elsewhere to treat the people of North Korea as
international human rights law requires.
Despite 3 years of German in high school and another 3 semesters of it in college, my apptitude for the language still sucks and I don't want to spend 2 hours translating it. I guess its a matter of how much you apply yourself in studying it and now im kicking myself for not doing so earlier.
Before the whole China-Japan textbook controversy, the biggest news in China was the Anti-Secession Law and the subsequent KMT visit to the mainland. Today marks the next chapter in that story, as KMT chairman Lien Chan flies across the Strait and returns to a mainland China that he had not been in for over fifty years. As I've blogged about before, the last visit was quite the PR success for the Kuomintang, and even A-Bian has been forced to go along with it.
Personal spam: please visit my website at http://www.plum-blossom.net/, if you're not offended by my shameless self-promotion.
Because so many people seem to be complaining that the last batch of protesting Shanghai beautiesweren'tangryenough, here's a lady from an anti-Japanese protest in NanjingTokyo[ed. Thanks Bingfeng!] on Friday that's showing a lot more passion, although probably not as hot.
State media reported on Monday that Chinese police have detained a netizen attempting to launch an anti-Japanese protest on May Day.
This is the strongest sign to date that China is trying to avoid a re-enactment of this month's violent anti-Japanese protests. Chinese people believe that Japan is whitewashing its history of invasion through authorizing revised textbooks, leading them to the streets in anger.
The Yangtze Evening News reports that the arrested 20-year-old male has the Internet alias YMAKELOVE [ed.: *snicker*], and had been encouraging people on a popular chat room to follow after the protesters in Beijing and Shanghai. The thousands of protesters in the two cities had thrown rocks and bottles at Japanese legations.
The newspaper also reports that he threatened to detonate car bombs at the protests, to create a stronger effect.
This man had encouraged protests in the chat room on the evenings of 19 and 20 April. Police then traced him to an Internet cafe, and arrested him in the morning of 21 April.
Police says that he left school last year for poor academic performance, and accuse him of “fabricating and broadcasting false terror messages.”
After capturing this man on Thursday, Chinese Public Security vowed to severely discipline anyone participating in unauthorized protests.
Previous, protests occurred in many major Chinese cities, lowering Sino-Japanese relations to their lowest point in decades. The Communist Party has launched an advertising campaign to encourage citizens not to hate Japanese people.
Personal spam: please visit my website at http://www.plum-blossom.net/, if you're not offended by my shameless self-promotion.
Enzo posted earlier on how Hu Jintao is anything but a reformer. But how did the leader of China become so seemingly out of sync with the global trend towards openness and liberalization? History gives an answer. For example, Philip Pan reports on how Hu uses his words:
The party's reformist wing has been especially alarmed by Hu's penchant for using hard-line rhetoric from the Cultural Revolution, the devastating political movement that rocked China in the decade before Mao's death in 1976. Hu joined the party as a college student shortly before the movement began and spent much of it as a low-level official in one of the country's poorest provinces.
Wikipedia has this to say about the “Fourth Generation” in the CCP leadership:
fourth generation - Hu Jintao, Wen Jiabao, Zeng Qinghong. These were promoted to top leadership at the 16th Party Congress and are expected to remain in power until the 18th party congress in 2012. Most of them were engineers whose educations were disrupted by the Cultural Revolution and unlike both their predecessors and successors have spent very little time overseas.
In such context, a lot of perplexing questions find their answers. Growing in the shadow of the chaos of the Cultural Revolution would certainly make someone very aware of the possible calamity of the loss of state control. For someone like Hu, political liberalization can very well lead down the path back to the Red Guards. While Enzo is correct in pointing out that Communist regimes don't do reform well (if at all), context is important in figuring out why exactly didn't the “Third Generation” oppress with such ferocity.
And yet, in an ironic twist, hints are showing that the atmosphere of the Cultural Revolution that Hu et al. fear so much is re-appearing. While the recent anti-Japanese demonstrations have nowhere near the insanity of the Red Guards, there is an eerie resemblance. And there's no debating that the CCP has done its part in promoting said demonstrations. The apparent lack of diplomatic dexterity that the 3Gs had mastered so well in recent months are also the direct results of the lack of international experience amongst the 4Gs. A lack of understanding in international relations was also a notable characteristic of the Cultural Revolution, although the results were somewhat different (self-withdrawal in the 1960s-70s, clumsy attempts at aggrandization in the 2000s).
Mao's long shadow extends further than anyone can imagine.
Personal spam: please visit my website at http://www.plum-blossom.net/, if you're not offended by my shameless self-promotion.
Pantech, South Korea's third largest cell phone maker, has opened a plant in Mexico to manufacture cellphones for the Latin American market. Within this article, I found a photo of Latina beauties promoting Pantech phones at a marketing event to celebrate the opening of the new plant.
- Yesterday Philip Pan explained very well which kind of reformer Hu Jintao is.
More than two years after taking office amid uncertainty about his political views, Chinese President Hu Jintao is emerging as an unyielding leader determined to preserve the Communist Party's monopoly on power and willing to impose new limits on speech and other civil liberties to do it, according to party officials, journalists and analysts.
Hu sealed his reputation after taking control of the military at a meeting of the party's ruling elite in September, a final step in his long climb to power. On the last day of the conclave, in his first major address to the 300-plus member Central Committee as the nation's undisputed new leader, Hu warned that "hostile forces" were trying to undermine the party by "using the banner of political reform to promote Western bourgeois parliamentary democracy, human rights and freedom of the press," according to a person given excerpts of the speech.
Hu said China's enemies had not abandoned their "strategic plot to Westernize and split China." He blamed the fall of the Soviet Union on policies of "openness and pluralism" and on the efforts of "international monopoly capital with the United States as its leader." And in blunt language that party veterans said recalled Mao Zedong's destructive Cultural Revolution, he urged the leadership to be alert to the danger of subversive thinking.
No surprise here. As history teaches, communist regimes are not reformable: where Party in power, no real changes; where real changes, no Party in power. A comment in TPD blog pointed out: As the saying in communist circles go. It is better to be an Andropov than a Gorbachev. Right. In communist perspective, Gorbachev's performance was a failure: he wanted to keep USSR alive, he was USSR gravedigger. Hu - like his predecessors - knows that lesson. But... there's a but. You can call it the paradox of authoritarian rulers: if you open, you lose; if you don't... you lose as well. The point is that dictatorial regimes are not only against people but also against the course of history: you can try to delay the moment but - sooner or later - events will prevail. 1989 Tiananmen was a powerful reminder: only a massacre stopped the change in China as in Eastern Europe communism broke up.
To be clear: I'm not among those who think that chinese regime is now on the verge of collapse. Pragmatism in economy, if anything, has given CCP a breath of air (still, it's a double-edge sword). But I also believe that it's only a matter of time: it could be a financial shock, the birth of an underground but organized opposition movement, a thoughtless mistake in foreign policy... I don't know what's more likely to happen but certainly one day we'll see the fall of Beijing wall.
- Racism in China? Andrés Gentry reports. Racism and nationalism often walk together.
Kelvin at Plum Blossom beat me to the first babe post in Simon's absence (must be something in the air), but it does give me a good segue: "Kelvin did a fantastic job on in his post. But what is the recent history of beautiful Korean women in the blogosphere?"
In the interests of journalistic accuracy concerning an extremely important topic, I'd just like to point out that while the photographer behind the Mongolia photos is Korean, the models are 100% Mongolian.
The Nancy Kissel pre-trial hearing is today at 9:30am at the High Court.
I am still looking for any freelancer in Hong Kong who would be prepared to report on the trial for me. The trial begins on May 19th. Please send me an email if you can help.
Curzon at Coming Anarchy discovers that Japan is popular among the Taiwanese (95%!) its old Axis ally Thailand (96%), and plucky Singapore (94%). These countries are looking for a peaceful Japan to export security to their regions.
Not that Nihon always looked favorably on democracies. Two of the first Asian republics, the Republic of Ezo and the Democratic Republic of Taiwan, were united under the Emperor
The Acorn reports that many East Asians are worried about a new cycle of Japanese aggression, and other concerns in the Western Pacific. The greatest winner of trouble times? The answer: India?
Meanwhile, Danieru at Huge Entity finds that the safest places in the world are... North Korea. Maybe fighting a bitter war against freedom is the surest ticket to safety?
Earlier, when analyzing the comments Democratic Underground and Free Republic, I noted a left-right divide in the United States. American politics can also be divided into two left-right divides: globalization and women. It is also too simplistic, but cutting politics like this can be a useful tool.
The Global War on Terrorism may one day be called the Globalization War, or even the Second Globalization War if Britain's early efforts are recognized. In mainstream American politics, this spectrum runs from the far left (those opposed to free trade and the wars used to defend the globalization system) to the far right (those who support free trade and the free trade system).
Thomas Patrick Meussling Barnett is a former Professor at the Naval War College, has worked with the Center for Naval Warfare Studies, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, Central Command, and the Office of Force Transformation. Politically, he is close to Hillary Clinton on globalization -- mainstream Right. He runs a popular weblog, and this thoughts are....
Good news finally on the Chinese leadership front. When Jiang Zemin gave up his control over the military yesterday, the 3rd generation of leadership truly left the stage. Now, Hu Jintao has more control at an earlier age than any leader since Mao, which suggests that the 4th generation's run of leadership will be a vigorous one.
But don't see danger for the U.S. necessarily rising in this pathway, because remember that it's Hu who is pushing the theory of the "peacefully rising China.". Indeed, most experts expect Hu to now be able to chart a more flexible course with Taiwan and Hong Kong since Jiang won't be around any more to trump him with calls of being a soft nationalist. You want a sense of who Hu is? Remember his response on SARS. China did the usual cover-up until Hu stepped forward and forced a level of transparency unseen before in Chinese history. Doesn't make him a perfect guy, but it means his instincts are good, such as his focus on the rural poor in China.
What this tells me is that America has it within its power to enlist China's support for Kim's removal from power, but that we're not signaling in the right way to make clear to China what benefits would accrue to it for this major effort on their part. And that's because we're of two minds on China, and that's too bad, because absent these sorts of Cold War leftovers (Taiwan defense guarantee, North Korea), there isn't much to divide us. China wants our ways, our advice, our progress.
What we can't decide is how important China is becoming to us, and so Kim lives on in our state of strategic confusion.
Again, too bad, because with China's help, Kim is eminently vulnerable. Clearly, we prefer fearing China more than getting rid of Kim. It's really that simple.
China builds a military that's clearly designed to counter our ability to do whatever we damn well please in Asia. Hard to believe, isn't it? Doesn't being the world's Leviathan mean we get to have everyone unable to stand up to us no matter what we do or where we do it? No, it just means it's impossible to wage war successfully unless the U.S. agrees to that proposition. That's real power all right, it's just not unlimited with regard to our own desires. Being Leviathan doesn't mean you're God, just that you can prevent anyone else from assuming that role on anything significant.
When someone gets to the point of accumulating power that calls into question your ability on some specific issue, then you have to start viewing both the rising power and the issue in question differently. We are not doing this yet. We see only the danger, not the possibility. We ask, Will China "behave" in the Gulf? Hopefully not like America does! One Big Banger in the region is enough, I would say.
China's just waking up to a world in which the Core relies on the unstable regions of the Gap for its short-term economic security via energy. You can change that dependency if you want, but it will take some time. Other route is to work the issue with military, but that's takes a military, now doesn't it? We've got one, so we work it. China doesn't, so it's getting one. Sound odd to you? Sounds pretty "real" to me.
The Communist Party is gearing up for its annual session of the National People's Congress in the Great Hall of the Peoples in Beijing. Everyone on our end is concerned about the likely passage of the "antisecession" law, but the real topic of the congress will be making sure the rural poor don't fall too far behind. This is a big topic of PNM-II [Banett's upcoming book, now called Blueprint for Action], and it should remind us that the Gap is all around us here in the Core, in pockets in the Old Core but in big swaths in the New Core. It reminds us that the Core can't move ahead without bringing the Gap along. This isn't neoimperialism or any of that other quasi-Marxist nonsense. This is the reality that the Core needs the Gap to get better if the Core is going to remain the Core. China is that microcosm of the whole, as is India.
We focus only on seeing the threat. We think China's going to get dangerous technology with arms sales from the EU, and we think we can control that transaction. We cannot. China is going to be a global center of high-speed computing. It doesn't need EU arms to pull that off, but the EU needs those arms sales to get access to China. We are tying to manage China's rise by negation, by interdiction, by denial. Think that would have worked for England with the U.S. in the early parts of the 20th century? Think again.
Truth be told, I consider myself the ultimate realist on China’s future. I just define my realism in terms of economics, not ideology or the fanciful notion that national power is only truly expressed through military means. I believe China is “rising,” and that it will be our “near-peer” along a wide variety of diplomatic, economic, and social means not in some distant future, but over the next ten years. I believe we are woefully unprepared for this development, allowing China’s myopic security fixation on Taiwan to blind our vision regarding the true nature of their rising influence not just across Asia, where the vast sucking sound known as China’s demand for goods and raw materials is already reshaping the regional economy, but likewise across the planet, precisely because China is not just hell-bent on synchronizing its jumbled internal rule sets with that of globalization’s ever-more solid rule sets, but intends to forge more than a few global rule sets of its own—especially in the realm of technology standards.
China’s real power on the global stage will ultimately be expressed much like America’s—through its consumers. Right now, only about 120 million of China’s 1.3 billion can be classified as middle-class, but that number is growing by leaps and bounds. Already China boasts the world’s largest cell phone market at 269 million users, and the second-largest pool of Internet users at 78 million. In an advancing global economy defined by connectivity, China can remain greatly under-connected on a per-capita basis and still zoom past America’s totals without breaking a sweat.
Conclusion: Barnett, and by extension the mainstream American Right on globalization, believe
China is a rapidly emerging power, and it is "peacefully Rising"
China's rise will be determined by materialistic concerns -- by pure economics
American policies are helping China rise, but not properly managing that rise
China's leadership is getting progressively better
America lets her relationship with Taiwan entangle America's relationship with China
It's interesting to note where Barnett disagrees with the mainstream far left and the mainstream far right
Unlike DU and FR, Barnett is optimistic on China growth
Unlike DU and FR, Barnett believes our mismanagement of China is easily fixed
Unlike DU and FR, Barnett does not believe China is ambitious to be a super-power
Is this an accurate description of Barnett's views? Does Barnett represent a true mainstream Right in American politics? What are the hidden biases in his approach? What are my hidden biases in this article?
This is how a democratic nation secures access to oil it desperately needs. Iraq - Iran - Venezuela
Any questions?
Using force to get what you want usually ends in unintended consequences. Peaceful negotiation is better for everyone involved. Which country looks better in the eyes of the world?
If mere oil was America's objective, why bother with the decades-long embargo on Iran? Why the long history of oil embargos generally (Iraq and Libya)?
To the extent that Iraq is about oil (geopolitics/grand strategy is the other plausible rationale) it is not about getting oil next week or even next year. It's about long term control; ensuring access to an increasingly scarce commodity.
There have been several concurrent motivations for taking on Iraq over the past 10-15 years: Israel, Russia, China, South Asia, Anti-US Terrorism, Oil, failed Arab states, US domestic politics, US grand strategy, et al. Of those, do not discount the importance of Israel, US oil interests and good old fashioned geopolitics. Those motivations happened to coalesce under the current US Administration.
It will eventually come out that during these heady times, the current US President was/is susceptible to persuasive arguments from trusted advisors. So, it's not abhorrent ideology or incompetence; it's simplemindedness (aka "clarity" aka "vision" aka "leadership") or weakmindedness. Whether for better or worse, we'll never know. History is cruel that way.
Oh dear, there are so many false comparisons and wrong headed assumptions in these 73 words it is hard to know where to begin. Communist nation negotiating? Democratic nation (what, taking oil by going to war?) Holy mackerel! China is simply making deals to get oil just like it should. The US, in addition to making deals as it has for decades, also stands up to tyrants from time to time. As for the oil a country “desperately needs,” there is only one global oil market regardless of who buys or produces the barrel. One more barrel for one means one more barrel for all. All China is doing is buying what it can because it can. As for which country looks better in the eyes of the world? Hmmm. Would the “world” and its oil customers prefer to the let the Chinese Communist Party and PLA handle security so the world’s oil customers can have reliable supplies and stable prices from now on? Oh my. Bring back Simon!
Any questions? For starters, doesn't seem so meek and mild when it comes to the South China Seas. Many feel that the current demonstrations are an attempt to gain an advantage over Japan in the underseas oil ranges that exist between the two countries.
And perhaps one should not credit a country for doing what it has to do and not doing what it could not do...until recently.
How would you feel if you were promised something when you were very young and later realized that those promised goods may never arrive?
I teach at a prestigious economics and finance school in Shanghai, China. My students, freshmen and sophomores, have started to realize that the happiness that they were promised as a youth may never arrive.
Chinese culture is known for its focus on education. Students are told that if they study hard they will get high marks, high marks will mean getting into a good university, a good university will result in a good job, and a good job will mean a happy life.
One student in a recent class proclaimed loudly during a discussion that she was not happy. Her classmates, with their facial expressions, agreed with her proclamation. When will the happiness arrive that we were promised when we were young?
University students are often placed into their major on their first day of college. This means no liberal studies during the first year or so to try and "find themselves" and what path they should take in life. Further, Chinese schools discourage the switching of majors by their students. What is a second year accounting major to do when they realize their passions are elsewhere?
The China Daily recently reported that "... 10 out of every 100,000 Chinese college students once attempted suicide...." and earlier reported that "Among some 2,500 middle school students surveyed in Shanghai, 24 percent contemplated killing themselves."
This issue of happiness is something that needs to be addressed immediately in the Chinese education system.
I've never been to Asia and so can't comment on what it's like there, but it seems like I've met quite a few Chinese nationals here in the US who studied computer programming because their parents forced them to, and now have jobs they hate. Not just the company they work for (there are plenty of crummy places to work), but the actual tasks involved. I've never met a Western engineer who feels this way (though I'm sure they must exist).
I personally love programming, but I don't see how one could do the work if they *didn't* love it. Sitting in front of a computer for hours and hours, day after day, solving one problem after another is not something most people can tolerate.
Earlier I described the view of Asia, and particularly China, from a mainstream far left perspective. That is, Beijing from the further left point of view that has political power in the United States.
Below is the complement to that -- China as seen by the Far Right Free Republic.
Wiseghy This shouldn't be a shock. The Chi-coms see us as strategic competitors. No way they would want to use our navigation systems.
It's becoming increasingly clear that China is planning for the contingency of military confrontation with us in the coming years, and that they see the Europeans no threat to their plans for regional domination.
Avenger "This shouldn't be a shock. The Chi-coms see us as strategic competitors."
No, we (or at least some of us) see them as strategic competitors. They see us as THE enemy.
In certain areas it is becoming a First World military force - in areas such as ballistic and cruise missiles, advanced fighters and multi-role aircraft, advanced submarines with anti-ship cruise missiles.
In certain areas? Heck that's about ALL the areas!
conservlib OK, now the genocide of helpless Christians cannot be defended by the US because 1) the US is not Christian 2) the US hates Christians 3) The Saudis are forcing the US to stay out as the Muslim Arabs cleanse their nation of millions of Christians citizens, 4) the big bad Chinese will beet us up if we come near Sudan.
polymuser Let's see: China owns both ends of the Panama Canal, is buying up all the Caribbean and South American port properties (trade gateways) it can, is building more ports in these areas, is negotiating trade agreements with these nations and Cuba to obtain their raw materials (like oil) in return for capital investment and low cost consumer goods, has military officials meeting with these nations, builds gigantic ships, and is building more nukes. And still considers America an enemy.
Caribbean. Cuba. Panama Canal. Mexico?
Knock, knock, knock...
Conclusion: the far right of mainstream American politics share the following beliefs on Asia
China's government is a conventional strategic threat to the United States
China is building a network of friends to counter American interests
China's army is well organized, trained, and equipped
America has an amoral political class China can use to her own ends
There are three main differences between the mainstream far-left's (Democratic Underground)'s and the mainstream far-right's (Free Republic's) views on China and Asia
DU posters write more about human rights
DU posters write more about history
FR posters write more about "technical" concerns (port ownership, army readiness, etc)
What does that mean for the larger left-right split in America? To what extent are both DU and FR united against American centrists? Those are posts for another time...
These themes are interest to compare against the mainstream far left's. Human rights are almost entirely absent, except for charging America of neglect of them in Sudan.
I wouldn't exactly call FR far-right. Extremely neoconservative? Yes. But far-right brings up images of Hitler and Mussolini (i.e. guys most of FR don't really like to say the least).
I think tdaxp has done an excellent job summarizing (and sanitizing) neo-conservative attitudes though I thought my response in the DU thread was much funnier.
I think tdaxp has done an excellent job summarizing (and sanitizing) neo-conservative attitudes though I thought my response in the DU thread was much funnier.
Thanks for the kind comments. I will try to look at other opinion sources too.
I used "mainstream far right" instead of "far right" because I didn't want to use the term as an insult. The simplistic left/right divide does have some validity, and I think FR definitely falls on the mainstream far right of it. There are definitely people to FR's right (Michael Savage, etc), but they don't have a prayer of influencing US policies. The Free Republic does.
Politically, I think "neoconservative" refers to a particularly academic strain of Right thinking that has its origin in center-left and leftists movements in the 1970s (Senator Jackson, maybe Senator Humphrey, the Social Democrats, Trotskyites, "Right Communists," etc). Today, neoconservatives typically are free traders and believe in an activist foreign policy. I think the the Free Republic posters are much more traditional conservatives, or "paleocons," than neoconservatives.
you are right of course and I should probably have known better than to describe them carte blanche as "neo-cons". However, I wouldn't consider Free-Republic as traditional conservatives either because traditional conservatism doesn't generally promote an activist foreign policy nor profligate federal spending.
I'd hate to start my Simon World appearance with a post against another guest, but open discussion of the issues never hurt anyone, and I've always been known to be something of an @$$. Plus, I'm mostly duplicating what a mainstream newspaper is Hong Kong is saying, so it's not like these are fringe concepts. I hope Enzo isn't offended. ;)
As Enzo mentioned previously, Japanese PM Koizumi has once again issued a statement of apology on Japan's historical aggression. How the PRC government will respond is still not certain, but a Ming Pao article reflects on the sentiments of many Chinese people on the sincerity and forthrightness of Japan's words:
According to the original Japanese transcript provided to Ming Pao via the Japanese consulate, Koizumi used such terms as "deep introspection" (痛切なる反省) and "heartfelt apology" (心からのお詫び), but the English translation used such terms as "deep remorse" and "heartfelt apology" [see note below], which was used by most non-Japanese media, creating confusion. When asked by reporters on whether Koizumi did in fact apologize, PRC Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing said that "it depends on how you translate it."
Note: Babelfish translated 心からのお詫び to "apology from heart", but "heartfelt apology" translated back into Chinese is 衷心道歉, which is somewhat stronger. Notably, 心からのお詫び is passive, but 衷心道歉 is active.
Some knowledged Japanese in Hong Kong point out that when Japanese people wish to express remorse, they can use "owabi" (お詫び) or "shazai" (謝罪). "Owabi" is a lighter form of apology, while "shazai" is considerably stronger. Some experts point out that although Japan has "apologized" for war on multiple occasions, they have continued to avoid using "shazai".
A lot of people would probably see such distinctions as nit-picking and trite, but a lot of people in China and Korea are hoping to see Japan feel apologetic (by whatever definitions they are using), not just to utter the words. I think that the PRC government has done much damage in not clarifying on exactly what Japan has said and done over the past sixty years on this issue. I also think that a lot of the protest tactics and extremist sentiments in the mainland are conducive to solving anything, and are downright revolting. But I don't think it's all state-sponsored anger. This is particularly true in Hong Kong: no one has yet given a good explanation to me how PRC censorship has made Hong Kong also so angry at Japan too. Indeed, "a lighter form of apology" seem hardly appropriate for the heinous atrocities that Japan committed in 1937-45.
Personal spam: please visit my website at http://www.plum-blossom.net/, if you're not offended by my shameless self-promotion.
"Notably, 心からのお詫び is passive, but 衷心道歉 is active."
Well, it's nominalized, but it's not passive. The reason apology was made a noun was that Koizumi was saying that that feeling should always be etched or ingrained (気持ちを常に刻む). Also, translating 痛切 as "heartfelt" is a little off, but that's because it's more like "acute" or "unsparing."
The idea that it could be translated as not being an apology is odd. It's true that, as in a lot of cases, the Chinese-derived compound is more formal than the native Japanese wording; but, you know, in a strange way, you could argue that that makes it less heartfelt-sounding and more like a rote formulation.
I really don't want to get into the nitty-gritty as to exactly how much did Japan apologize for this time. I'm just reflecting the popular sentiments in China right now.
I recall someone said that Japan is saying 'We're sorry that this happened to you' but not 'We're sorry that WE did this to you'. Now I don't think this apology is as insincere as that first example, but I'm getting a bit annoyed at counting how many apologies Japan has made since 19xx. I don't think 'an apology is an apology is an apology'. And whatever apology Koizumi makes always seems to get cancelled out by yet another visit to a certain revisionist Shinto shrine.
All of these people either have or will run for a major party's nomination for President. Farther left than Kucinich, or farther right than Buchanan, someone can't even do that.
Websites also mirror this spread -- Democratic Underground is far left while Free Republic is far right. In a future post I'll look at with the Far Right is saying about Asia today, but below are average Democratic Underground "far left" comments on Asian issues...
aneerkoinois Chinese goal is regime change in Japan and cutting alliance and servitude to US, after which Taiwan will fall into Chinese lap like a ripe fruit.
aneerkoinois (again) We in the West always think in terms of Aristotelian 'Law of the Excluded Middle', but in the East they don't. They accept the 'both and' also as logically valid.
orwell So while the US bludgeons its way across the world stage, leaving car bombs and prison scandals in its wake, China puts another boot squarely up the ass of Uncle Sam, expanding their sphere of influence through trade and third world development.
igil France and China have no such scruples. China says it can legally and properly invade Taiwan; France says, Fine ... now, about that contract?
And China has the cash to buy loyalty. As the US once did.
"LostinVA Exactly,. I think people are too quick to gloss this over because of the Chinese government's less-than-stellar actions. There are still people alive who suffered horribly. China definitely experienced a holocaust at Japanese hands, and the lack of official remorse by the Japanese government has been a continual slap in the face to WWII's survivors. Not teaching what really happened -- or worse, making it sound like it was a GOOD thing they did for China -- is a punch in the face after the slap. I think the rise of RW Nationalism in Japan is directly related to people not being educated about this.
Durant Makes you wonder if Chinese textbooks.. contain references to the people murdered in the Cultural Revolutionthe millions slaughtered by Mao and his henchmen during his reign of terror. Or how much the people of Tibet (what few Tibetans there are) love the Chinese occupation of their homeland. Somehow I doubt it...
ClarkUSA Do we judge Israeli policy now when analyzing what Jews had to suffer during WWII under the Germans? Japan brutalized Asia as much as the Germans brutalized Europe during WWII. Japan may want to get a clue and emulate the Germans post-war, too.
Conclusion: the far left of mainstream American politics share the following beliefs on Asia
China's government is repressive
China's government was even worse in the past
Japan's World War II actions are equivalent to genocide
China is deeply hostile to American and Japanese interests in Asia
China's leadership is much more competent than America's leadership, including their non-Western though patterns
Whether these views are accurate, or whether I accurately captured the mainstream far left, is left to the reader.
What are the views of the mainstream far right? That is a post for another time...
It'll be interesting when you post the 'far-right' opinions, 'cuz I'm pretty sure that I'm going to find myself with the DUers more than the Freeps, which is against pretty much everything else in my political thoughts.
Oh Kelvin, as a regular reader of the Free Republic (hidden one though, I don't dare reveal myself) I can answer that question myself fairly easily.
1) In ALL threads regarding China, invoke the name of Bill Clinton at least once, preferrably 4 or 5 times. Or more appropriately Klintoon, Xlinton, or simply traitor.
2) China is waging economic war against the United States. No ifs ands or buts, anyone who thinks otherwise is a Free "Traitor"(Trader). Impose tariffs NOW.
3) Chinese are a military menace. They apparently have bases all over Africa, South America (especially Panama thanks to another arch-traitor Jimmah Carter), and possibly France, Canada, and California.
4) Note that there is a degree of schizophrenia when it comes to the China threat. While most of the Free Republic posts exhibit of what I call tendency A as previously mentioned, a significant number exhibit tendency B, which is as follows. Chicoms are crap and we can kick their asses without breaking a sweat or better yet invoke Taiwan or Japan to kick their asses. God Bless America!
5) Chicoms are communist thus we can employ every age old pejorative from the aged and well-worn red-baiting playbook add in an uncommon and occassional racist remark and voila.
You may think I'm being facetious and you are right, but really though, beyond the howling and gnashing of teeth over Clinton, unending criticism of trade relations between China and the United States, and China threat fantasies/delirium, and the general anti-communist rhetoric there isn't really that much. Occassionally you may have a mention about human rights, but its generally relegated to bolster criticism of Clinton or criticism of trade policy or general anti-communist paranoia.
The opinions on China via the Free Republic all fall into two broad yet highly conclusive categories. The amusingly uninformed versus the willfully misinformed.
Cell Phone Camera Photojournalism of Bathroom Propaganda Graffiti
The message in the top photo says: Ssi-bal (roughly translates into 'Fucking-A' in English), Dokto is our nation's land.
The object in the second photo is an electric hand dryer, the sort that one finds in public bathrooms. The message on it says the same thing, but without the Ssi-bal. There is a helpful English translation to the right. "Dakeshima' is the Japanese name for Dokto.
The metallic object in the last photo is a toilet tissue dispenser. The Chinese characters read: 'Dan Han Min Guk'.
Dokto is the name of the tiny islets in the Eastern Sea between Japan and Korea. An object of a territorial dispute between the two nations and a source of much anti-Japanese nationalistic fervor, outrage, demonstrations, and protests, Dokto has been a hot topic in the South Korean news media for the past few months. Dokto is to Japan and Korea what the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) were to Britain and Argentina during the early 80s, but without the armed conflict (yet?).
With that said and done, the photos displayed above would probably be not so remarkable except for the fact that they were not found in Korea. They were taken by me, last night as a matter of fact. So there you have it, Dokto-mania is not just in Korea, but it is here in the U.S. as well, manifesting itself in the cramped men's restroom of a certain Japanese eatery in Manhattan. I was tempted to see if there were similar messages scribbled in the ladies room as well but I did not get a chance to do that, I apologize. BTW, sliced, grilled squid makes a great anju to go with some Sapporo beer or cold sake on a Friday evening with friends after a busy week at work.
I wanted to introduce myself better than saying "I'm some blogger who sometimes writes about Greater East Asia" or writing that I've gone to DSU and USD and will be going to UNL. And then I realized how important my friends are, how much I care about them, and how much they define me. So my intro post is basically a shout-out to the friends I've done stuff with recently -- maybe the past two months.
Thanks to Aaron, my oldest friend, whose community blog mine split off from.
And to the always beautiful Kristin, the always heroic/awesome Joh, the successful People's Dan, the sold-out Brandon, and everyone else I'm rudely forgetting.
I have been wondering about why Australia's aid package to Indonesia was so large when they announced it - 1 billion dollars Australian, $50 from every man, woman and child in Australia. Could it have been to buy the support of Indonesia in taking part in the ASEAN summit later this year?
During his visit, designed mainly to drum up Australian investments in Indonesia, Yudhoyono charmed his Australian hosts - even going to the extent of promising to support Australia's inclusion at the East Asian summit in December.
In a speech at Parliament House in Canberra, Yudhoyono acknowledged that the relationship between the two close neighbours had seen many ups and downs over the years. "Recently we have begun to relate to each other differently," he observed.
Yup... I'm sure a billion dollars buys a lot of "good relations"
And not only that political manouevering, but the aid money actually ends up boomerainging back to Australian companies as well. Naomi NoLogo Klein has written in TheNation.com about the vunerability of countries in crisis...
So, we'll have a Koizumi-Hu meeting today. It follows yesterday apologies issued by Japanese Prime Minister at Asian-African summit. Again. Still waiting China's first. It's another chapter in the book of free/unfree societies, brilliantly described by Andrés (BTW, this is - until now - the post of the year in expat community).
Koizumi's one is an act of great responsibility in a very tense moment: Japan has its faults but it wasn't Japan who started and ignited this crisis.
But I'm not sure it will be enough. Nationalist feelings are a very powerful political tool for the regime: for a lot of reasons Beijing needs a time-out now, but the dangerous game could begin again as soon as possible. So, it's unlikely that the Chinese will get the right message: Koizumi's apologies are an opportunity, not a gesture of contrition or the admission that they were right to throw stones at japanese embassy. P.S.Washington Postseems to agree.
I love the way you use all these links to other blogs to write a summary of whatever issue is at hand.
Pretty sharp!
As for this topic, I think we all know how China will react. As I stated on my blog, they will find some reason for Koizumi's apology to fall short of satisfying the Chinese people's "feelings".
That's okay though, it will show the rest of the world (those who don't already know) just how "little" China is.
The whole issue is not about "free speech vs not free speech", not about "free society vs not a free society". This is about what Japan had done in WW2 and never apologise sincerely, and now they are approving a book that denies the history.
It doesn't matter if the book is used by only 1 school or 0.3% of schools. The fact is that this book should not be approved as it becomes a fictional book only. The apology yesterday is rubbish unless: they STOP altering the history, STOP denying history, STOP worshipping the war criminals, STOP conquering the disputed islands and START compensating/helping each individual victims, as what the Germans did.
Not only China is angry, but Singapore, South Korea and Hong Kong also. Just view my blog.
"This is about what Japan had done in WW2 and never apologise sincerely"
I love that weasel-word "sincerely": even if Koizumi were to get on his knees and beat his chest in repentance, I'm sure you'd still say he wasn't being "sincere" - anything to hold on to an excuse to hate.
in the same day japanese pm "apologized" for its wartime past, a few hundred japanese lawmakers went to worship the war criminals in the shrine.
just remind you a few other facts:
japanese refused to apoligize and make compensation to former sex slaves in recent years.
japanese government refused to tell the locations of its chemical weapons left in china during wwii, and dozens of chinese were killed by those chemical weapons in recent years.
what if germans go to worship a a memorial with Hitler and other nazi soilders as "war dead for german nation"? what if germans refuse to compensate auschwitz jews? and what if germans refuse to cooperate with russia and let nazi german bombs kill russians today?
don't let your it-is-a-SOB-but-it-is-our-SOB mentality blind your eyes.
As the Japanese has many levels of apologies, so how sincere is that if the level of the Japanese Government's apology is even lower than what Japanese companies apologise publicly to their customers?
Also, even if they keep saying "we apologise...", but STILL altering the history, STILL denying history, STILL worshipping the war criminals, STILL conquering the disputed islands and HAVE NOT compensating/helping each individual victims, as what the Germans did. Then, how can we see the sincerity in that??
If they do not turn their words into actions, then "even if Koizumi were to get on his knees and beat his chest in repentance", their apologies are still FAKE APOLOGIES.
One needs to read the following articles to know what the victim countries really feel,
From the anti-Chinese Communist Taiwan,
"Japan made an apology back in 1995 but since then what has the Japanese government done over the past decade?" the legislator asked.
"What they have done is not in line with their verbal apology," she said, referring to Tokyo's refusal to compensate surviving Taiwanese "comfort women" who were among an estimated 200,000 Asian women forced to into sex slavery for the Japanese troops during World War II.
"some Taiwan scholars say Koizumi's apology is not sincere because like his predecessors, he used words like "feeling remorse and apology" instead of saying directly that Japan wants to apologize for its war crimes."
From one of the most independent and trusted newspaper in Hong Kong, Ming Pao Newspaper's Editorials (This newspaper always condemn the Chinese Government on 1989 June-4th Massacre, and the way they handle Hong Kong politics),
"In sharp contrast to Japan's attitude is Germany's. Germany, which committed war crimes against people in Europe and other parts of the world during World War II, has for years regarded it of overriding importance to ponder on history. While Japan's neighbours saw waves of protests against its attempts to revise history textbooks and gloss over the fact that it started wars of aggression, German Chancellor Gerhard Shroeder said in Berlin after meeting South Korean President Roh Moo—hyun that every country must find its own way to deal with the glories and shames in its history."
"The whole reason why Sino—Japanese disputes have escalated and Sino—Japanese relations have sharply worsened is that the Japanese authorities have taken provocative approaches to dealing with disputes over history and real interests. It is right and proper for Chinese people to have roared with anger at Japan. It is right and proper for Beijing to have given Tokyo strongly—worded retorts with a view to safeguarding China's interests and the nation's dignity."
"Chinese people do not want to see Sino—Japanese relations deteriorate, nor do Japan's interests lie in their deterioration. Chinese people's demand is sensible and reasonable — that Japan should draw lessons from history, learn from Germany, frankly admit to its mistake of waging wars of aggression and do what may evidence its resolution to mend its way. To break the deadlock, Japan ought to do so."
A poll has found over 94% of respondents are firmly against the distortion of the facts of Japan's war of aggression against China in its history textbooks. Though disputes have arisen between Hong Kong and the mainland, whenever the nation is in difficulty, Hong Kongers will evince their patriotism. Before or after the handover, never have Hong Kongers failed to do so.
These are exciting times. Sure my birthday is but a fortnight or so way (did I mention my Amazon wishlist?), but that is not it. I will be travelling next week for work. I am very fortunate that several diverse, interesting and talented people answered my call to occupy the guest blogging seat during my absence. With the never-to-be-repeated brother guest blogging debacle a distant memory, I am very much looking forward to the output from the following fine people, in no particular order and with a short self-written introduction for each:
1. Kelvin Chan of Plum Blossom: I'm a Chinese university student in Vancouver, Canada. I was born in Hong Kong, but haven't lived there in ages. I get information about the motherland from a variety of online and print sources, and I'm hoping to show an overseas Chinese perspective on what's happening in much of Asia.
2. Bluejives, formerly of Asia Pages: I'm a Korean-American working as a professional indentured servant for an uptight financial news and market data firm in Manhattan.
3. Enzo Reale of 1972: I'm an italian blogger living in Barcelona (Spain). 32 years old, I work in the sales department of a spanish manufacturing company. My favourite subjects are foreign politics and contemporary history with a special interest in communism history and totalitarian systems in general.
4. Dave of daveinchina: I am currently living in China teaching at the Shanghai University of Finance and Economics. I was born in the U.S. and majored in Psychology with graduate work in bioethics.
5. Danial Abbott of tdaxp: I'm a 23 year old community college lecturer in Iowa, USA. I have a graduate degree in computer science and this fall I will be studying political science in Nebraska.
Now you've met them, feel free to introduce yourself. Please give them a warm welcome.
If anyone breaks anything I will haunt you until the end of your days. Enjoy!
One of China's big four banks, ICBC, is getting a US$15 billion bail-out from the Government. It's a no-brainer: it puts China's massive US dollar holdings to use, reduces the bad loans problem (ICBC has 19.5% nonperforming loans in its portfolio) and prepares the bank for a public listing down the track. Combined with the US$45 billion already spent on BoC and CCB, it totals US$60 billion to date spent out bailing its banks. It also highlights a problem with a revaluation of the yuan: these banks are given the money in US dollars and are not permitted to convert it to yuan. A revaluation reduces the value of these bail-outs. And while China's busy sorting out its banks, it also has a stock market problem too - despite the boom its stock market is at six year lows, primarily because of poor accounts, a massive overhang of Government stock and appalling corporate governance.
A look at the CCP's manipulation of Chinese history which concludes brilliantly:
If one can sketch out a paradigm from the aforementioned examples and China's recent spats with Japan, it is that a crime against humanity is only a crime when it is done by someone other than a leader of the Party, and if a Party leader is involved, then said crime is only a "mistake." Richard has Ross Terrill's thoughts and notes the disparity between the Chinese and Western view of the riots.
(15:15) ESWN posts a translation of an essay from a Hong Kong pro-Beijinger, giving us a taste of the other side of the equation.
New blogger Plunge discusses the Japanese colonisation of Korea and says I have come to the conclusion that little good came of the colonization of Korea by Japan and that it has had little impact on the success of Korea in modern times. I am NOT saying it had no positive impact, but that the amount was insufficient to warrant any praise over the condemnation they so rightly deserve for the brutal conditions Koreans had to endure. A comprehensive and thought-provoking piece.
Xinhua: when it is not being an official mouthpiece, it's mega babefest.
Koizumi to apologise again as part of fence mending measures with China, putting the ball back in China's court.
1. The SCMP reports on the hastily drafted ammendments to the Chief Executive law:
Opposition lawmakers have accused the government of creating a legal mess that could see two chief executives elected, for different terms, within 15 days of each other. Officials conceded that such an outcome - although highly unlikely - could actually occur, and was in keeping with the law, however irrational it might seem.
Nothing another interpretation cannot fix.
2. The SCMP also reportsd on the testimony of Raymond So Wai-man, associate professor of finance at the Chinese University, on how the owner of the Eastern Tunnel calculates its return on equity. The prof sees a much higher return on equity than the company, even though he did not know how the company had calculated its return, and that he had never heard of the term "internal rate of return on equity*". Google returns 2,130,000 entries on the subject. It is taught in every elementary finance subject. Except perhaps at Chinese University.
3. The SCMP in an otherwise pointless magazine called FACES interviews Liberal Party leader James Tien about his cars. Remember this is the leader of one of Hong Kong's major political parties. He proudly poses in front of his Ferrari and Porsche, with the Bentley, Audi, Nissan SUV and other Porsche. Excerpts of the interview below the fold. I couldn't make this up if I tried.
Where else in the world could a leading politician have an interview where he boasts about his wealth, his cars and his charmed life?
* IRR is the discount rate where the present value of future cashflows from an investment equal the costs of that investment i.e. the discount rate needed to make the present value of those future cashflows zero. It is effectively the yield of that investment.
James Tien Pei-chun, the 58-year-old chairman of the Liberal Party, legislator and chairman of the Manhattan group of companies, has owned four Ferraris, the entire line of Mercedes-Nenz S Class models and more Porsches than he can recall, not to mention a few Jags and Bentleys...
What cars do you now own?
I have 6 cars. A turbo-charged Bentley Arnage, which is two years old. An Audi S3, the 2005 model...a mutlipurpose vehicle, a Nissan Elgrand...These 3 cars are usually taken care of by my driver. The cars I drive myself are a Ferrari 360 Modena, a Porsche 911 Turbo and a Porsche Carrera S.
Do you worry that your sports cars give people the wrong impression of you? [Ed.- it's hard to see how. This is Mr. 1% we're talking about.]
People generally think one of two things when they see a driver in a sports car. That they either like to drive recklessly or that they want to show off their wealth. But that's never bothered me. Also, I'm not a grassroots politician. If I was a grassroots politician, driving a sports car might raise eyebrows and suspicions of corruption. But as a legislator coming from a business background, I don't think people mind what I drive. [Ed. - interesting how he didn't answer his own question about what kind of driver he is.]
additional poll results from HKU on whether hongkongers think the tax system is fair:
57% say "fair" and 30% say "unfair"
http://hkupop.hku.hk/english/release/release284.html
Yesterday Secretary for Justice Elsie Leung had her defence of the Government's rush to ask the NPC to interpret Hong Kong's Basic Law over the term of the next Chief Executive.
Today Michael DeGolyer explains why it all the protesting matters in the best newspaper article on the topic to date. I urge you to read it all (reproduced below the fold but the conclusion bears repeating: Rules really are made to be followed, not broken. Either rewrite the rulebook or play by it. Something else I read today (I will update when I find the link) noted that "rule of law" is an alien concept in Chinese political culture. Mandarins were only about results although ostensibly they were about the means to that end as well. Process was not important. This Basic Law debacle is the same. The concept of rule of law, even in Hong Kong, has been trumped by the Confucian respect for authority. I have no idea how the two ideals can be reconciled, but somehow they must.
** I'd be very grateful if anyone else comes across the link/blog so I can include the link. **
The rules of engagement
Recently a student asked, "Why are the Democrats always stirring up trouble?'' Since local affairs reporting in the Chinese-language press sometimes differs dramatically from English-language local news, I asked him to clarify.
``Democrats demand Tung Chee-hwa step down. He does, they complain. Democrats want to reform the chief executive election in 2007, but when Beijing says Donald Tsang can only stay until 2007, Democrats insist the Basic Law says he must serve five years, until 2010. Democrats know Beijing wants Tsang, but they make Lee Wing-tat run against him. They know Lee cannot win. Why do they do this? Why do they always cause trouble and oppose everything?''
Good questions.
Even after filling in as acting chief executive for a few weeks, Tsang is obviously so much more competent than Tung at running the government that most people just want to forget the Tung era ever happened. Yet the Democratic Party seems to insist on raining on the parade, no matter who's leading it, no matter what tune the band plays, and no matter what direction it marches.
I am not a Democratic Party apologist or a member of any party in Hong Kong. Like many expatriate professionals, I'm probably closer in policy outlook to the Article 45 Concern Group than the often populist Democrats.
What I want, and what most people want, is good government. But getting it is the trick, a bit like John D Rockefeller's reply when asked how to get rich: ``Buy low, sell high.'' Sage advice. Absolutely fool-proof. Pulling it off regularly is the catch.
Democrats fundamentally believe good government is not a matter of outcome but process. Since Confucius, Chinese governance theory has held that good character and good education makes for good rulers. With good rulers and good government, the good outcome wished for was reached.
Hence the eight-legged essay on Confucian classics as the civil service entry test - education on how to be good as a means to winnow the good man and ensure good government.
In reality, mandarins were expected to do whatever it took to achieve the imperial government's objectives. Tax farmers delivered agreed sums to government, full stop. Though form counted, especially preserving the appearances of obedience and harmony, outcome, not good character, was what really mattered.
Such attitudes survived the collapse of empire, nationalists, warlords and communists.
That is why China's government struggles to implement what they describe as ``rule by law.'' Cadres should follow written rules governing what is permissible or required instead of delivering results, no questions asked.
The difference between outcome and process is a matter of ends versus means. For example, while rape and making love might both end in pregnancy, the way impregnation occurred makes all the difference. Even if the impregnator-rapist were a husband or supposed lover, and even if the mother loves the offspring, means matters.
Process-focused regimes forbid things like torture while result-dominant regimes tend to cross the line. Even America, where legal systems traditionally emphasize process over outcomes, wandered astray at Abu Ghraib. Winning a war outweighed the ethics of the means chosen to wage it.
Democrats believe having good government is the objective, but to ensure it regularly occurs, and to ensure that if a government is not good it will be replaced with one that is, is to insist that processes be scrupulously followed at all times. This is what they mean by ``rule of law.''
Though Democrats strongly support chief executive election reform in 2007, they believe more strongly that the rules as set down constitutionally must be followed. Even if the outcome is good this time - ensuring reform in 2007 and putting a competent person in charge - breaking process weakens the overall power of the law to constrain bad behavior.
History proves the Democrats right.
The first National People's Congress interpretation in 1999 followed a Court of Final Appeal ruling. The government should have amended the Basic Law then, but arguably they had a constitutional right to appeal for clarification.
But there was no legal case or government appeal before last April's unilateral NPC intervention that interpreted away Hong Kong's right to debate, litigate, if need be, then appeal to central authorities on the 2007-08 reforms.
This year our government has short-circuited legal procedures altogether mid-case in its haste to ensure an outcome: an election of the chief executive by the present Election Committee on July 10 before its term expires.
This outcome-dominated thinking threatens our process-oriented Basic Law and common law constitutional tradition.
(17:47) Malaysia Airlines new cabin uniforms...putting the burka back into Boeings.
A debate amongst Hong Kongers over the causes of the Nanking Massacre. These debates can happen in Hong Kong, but need to also happen on the Mainland. While ESWN uses this to demonstrate that even amongst Chinese people there are different interpretations of history, I am not sure that is true on the mainland - at least in public forums.
A team of scientists [Ed. - a team?!?] led by Union Hospital Urology Centre director Chan Leung-wai yesterday issued the results of a study tackling the stereotypical belief that Chinese men were a little lacking below the belt compared with westerners.
"Basically, our conclusion is that the size of Hong Kong men's penises are not worse than our western counterparts," Dr Chan said. "It has always been said that Asian people's penises are smaller, and therefore their sexual performance is worse. Now we have measured it." [[Ed. - they measured sexual performance too? Wowser!]
Funded by the Chinese University, Dr Chan's team recruited 148 volunteers - all ethnic Chinese in Hong Kong - and sized them up. "We basically used a ruler, a flexible one, and pressed it against the pubic bone then measured down to the tip of the penis." They found that in a warm and comfortable environment, the average Hong Kong man's member measured 8.46cm, with a mid-shaft circumference of 8.26cm in its "resting state".
This compared favourably with results from studies overseas, which found German men were on average about 8.6cm in length, Israelis 8.3cm, South Koreans 8cm, Turks 7.8cm, and Filipinos 7.35cm. Italians were biggest, at 9cm, followed by Americans at 8.8cm.
The team had tried to measure the size of the subjects' erections, but found they tended to deflate when the ruler came out. [Ed. - The use of female nurses could have helped.
Allowing the subjects to measure their own erection was not an option. "Definitely not. Otherwise the data would definitely be incorrect - they would be excessively large," Dr Chan said. However, he said literature indicated that stretching the flaccid member could deliver a good estimate of erect length. "We stretched the penis to its maximum, but not to a point where it was painful." It yielded an average size of 10.55cm.
Taller men did not have larger penises, although there was a correlation with age. This led Dr Chan to believe the male organ could be a useful diagnostic tool. "Your penis is a lump of blood vessels, so maybe its length could reflect the actual condition of the blood vessels."
The emphasis was mine. We await Singapore's results with interest.
The penis is an elastic organ but it will only stretch (inflate, tumesce, engorge) to that same limit of elasticity. You don’t need it to be “angry” to measure it. Just grab the knob and stretch… All together now boys, grab… and stretch… (Hey, reminds me of boarding school!)
Just before it rips off is its maximum length.
How large is the Chinese inferiority complex? Inversely proportional.
As for Dr Chan's comments about the assessing the blood vessels via the flaccid penile size, he is REALLY stretching it there.
In fact that's most inane piece of pseudo-scientific medical conjecture I have heard since phrenology was shown to have lumps in it.
If you want to examine the blood vessles, why not... examine the blood vessels with the 1001 DIRECT tests which are available.
Having said that, erectile dysfunction despite Viagra use is an excellent indicator of poor overall arterial health, they say. Not flaccid length though, not by any stretch of the imagination...
Note: This is expanding on previous coverage. The original post and earlier updates are below the fold, in chronological order. The Japan/China riots are covered in another post.
Update April 18th
* ACB retells the story of Hankantou. Comprehensive coverage of the causes of these riots.
*****************************************************************
Yesterday's Daily Linklets mentioned a 30,000 person riot near Dongyang with a report by The Guardian. Today the SCMP has a full report on the village of Huaxi where the riots took place. The villagers are proudly displaying their spoils of war:
I've reproduced the full SCMP article below the fold or you can read another account in The Times. The end result is the same: the villagers are running Huaxi and have kicked the Government out. Rebellion against the rapid pace of development? A fight back by peasants against corruption and greed? Displaced farmers fighting against unjust land grabs and inadequate compensation?
Or the thin edge of a very, very big wedge?
The current Japan/China tensions may in part be orchestrated by the government. But these spontaneous outbursts are a different beast. Interestingly at the moment the Chinese Government doesn't seem sure how to handle either.
* Publius Pundit summarises the thoughts of Thomas Lifson and Luis Ramirez on growing unrest in China. It re-iterates my point that this riot is far more significant that the anti-Japan ones. The timing may be more than co-incidental. Richard isn't impressed by the post and notes there's no sign of a crack in the CCP's rule. That said for a "member of the reality based community" his criticism of The China Project (mentioned below) doesn't wash. Geroge W. Bush's attitude to Taiwan is the key factor in cross-strait relations. You might not like the man, but his attitude is crucial. That said would have applied if John Kerry was Prez.
* Daily Demarche is also summarising various recent events in China as part of the China project, orginally explained here.
* Praktike summed it nicely: Too much China, not enough time. There's always a lot going on with China, but at the moment it seems a particularly "eventful" time.
In riot village, the government is on the run
Didi Kirsten Tatlow
Huaxi is a village in mutiny. Instead of going to work or school on Monday morning, thousands of people milled around its broad, paved streets and - despite the steady rain - the atmosphere was upbeat, even jubilant.
Huaxi has the government on the run.
More than 1,000 police and officials, who arrived before dawn on Sunday to tear down road blocks erected by villagers, instead found themselves involved in a pitched battle.
The police fled.
As I walk towards the middle school at the edge of town, the crowd thickens. Broken bricks and sticks litter the ground.
Inside the school compound, 14 cars lie upside down, windows smashed, interiors ripped up, number plates bent.
A police uniform is draped over one car - a trophy.
On the other side of the large school yard lie dozens of buses. Their tyres have been slashed, and windows smashed. Some have been heaved on their sides.
The trouble in this verdant, hilly part of Zhejiang province , two hours south of the provincial capital of Hangzhou , started in 2001 when local officials handed 66 hectares of land to 13 private and state-owned chemical plants. Wang Weikang , 58, who still farms 933 square metres of land, said villagers didn't know what was happening when they suddenly discovered the land they farmed belonged to someone else.
Villagers say the village committee signed a contract with nearby Dongyang city behind their backs. Dongyang government spokesman Chen Qixian said the deal was lawful, since the village committee had the right to represent villagers.
Mainland farmers do not own their land, instead farming it on 30-year contracts from the government, so no-one had to ask the farmers individually.
The plants were built in 2002 and then, said Mr Wang and other villagers, the sicknesses started.
"Lots of people started falling ill. Some days our eyes would sting ... from the gas from the plants. Babies were born dead or malformed. Nine in the past year alone," he said.
Villagers said the chemical plants polluted the village's water supply. "It had become the colour of soy sauce," said one.
Huaxi's river, the Huashui, runs a strange caramel colour, though the main eyesore are the heaps of plastic bags that cling to its edges.
"We want our land back. We don't want compensation. We want vegetables to grow again and the water to run clean," said Mr Wang.
Opposition to the plants grew.
Unable to get the attention of local officials, villagers went to Beijing to petition the central government - also without success.
Then in March, Dongyang Mayor Tan Yong barred them from a meet-the-public forum.
To stop shipments from the plants, villagers threw up road blocks on March 24 and built straw shelters.
One leader, Wang Zhongfa, was arrested for allegedly inciting the overthrow of the government. That inflamed tempers further. Many of those manning the shelters were members of the Huaxi old people's association, one of the main groups opposed to the chemical plant.
On Monday, many of them sat in one remaining shelter, which they had decorated with trophies from Sunday's battle: police uniforms, riot shields, an ID card, empty tear gas canisters and machetes.
Villagers say when the police - numbering 3,000, they say - arrived, they also brought cattle prods. Wang Xiaomei , 70, said: "Those police. They were worse than the Japanese".
Early on Sunday, rumours started spreading that two elderly women had died when police tried to storm the village and angry villagers poured out of their homes, driving police into the school yard. The police barricaded the gate, but villagers bashed down the brick school wall.
They stoned police. Hand-to-hand combat ensued.
Mr Chen, the Dongyang official who was at the scene, said 36 people, 33 of them police or officials, had been admitted to hospital. "Five of the injured are in serious condition," he said.
But Mr Chen denied anyone had died, and villagers were unable to provide any details of the deaths. "Please believe me. There's no way the government could be covering it up," said Mr Chen.
Yet the government is spooked.
On the way out of town, a siren started up behind us and a tannoy barked: "Pull over!"
I was detained by police, my notes destroyed and pictures wiped from my camera. I have to sign a confession - I broke the relevant reporting regulations of the People's Republic of China by going to Huaxi without asking for permission.
Officials say they generally get a month or two's notice from foreign journalists. Enough time to miss the story, they agree.
Mr Chen said local officials might have stolen money intended for villagers.
He said the situation turned nasty after an influential member of the village committee was unable to persuade a hard-nosed plant boss to pay more for the land.
"Also we are unable to control the factories 24 hours a day. It may be that sometimes they discharge pollutants illegally," he said.
Mr Chen said the government would arrest corrupt local officials if any wrongdoing was confirmed.
But for now, the villagers are in charge of Huaxi and the government is on the run.
April 15th reading
* Echoes has links to several reports on the riot, and notes the WaPo reports the chemical factories that sparked the riots have been closed.
Didi Tatlow's SCMP article on her detention
Normally, when journalists sit down to write their stories, they look at their notes. But I did not have any. They were confiscated by officials on Monday in Dongyang city , Zhejiang province , when I was detained on the way back from reporting a mass riot in nearby Huaxi village.
"Please understand that we have to do this," said Zhang Fahao, director of the local foreign affairs office, my chief captor for six hours that evening. "I'm very sorry. But you broke the law."
Today, an uneasy calm has settled over Huaxi, after up to 30,000 villagers rioted last Sunday against police and cadres who came to tear down roadblocks stopping business at 13 hated chemical plants. Villagers say the plants are making them sick and poisoning the environment.
The riot was big, even by mainland standards. In recent years localised uprisings, especially in rural areas, have become a major issue. Thousands occur each year, and at least a dozen major ones broke out in the last three months of last year alone.
The reasons are almost always the same: government corruption, police abuse and a lack of access to justice.
By the end of the week, the situation had calmed. "Things are quiet now," said one villager by telephone.
Worried for his safety, he did not want his full name to be used. "But I'm not optimistic that this is going to be settled to the villagers' advantage," he said.
"The plants make too much money for the local government. Maybe we need to start demanding they move the village, and leave the plants here."
It would be an innovative solution to what appears an intractable problem in this green corner of Zhejiang. Villagers say the plants, built in 2002 - after local officials handed their farmland over to Dongyang officials without consultation - were constructed illegally.
A development of that scale must be approved by the State Council. But, citing documents from Dongyang's land commission, villagers say the application was not made. The State Council could not be reached for comment.
Dongyang officials are adamant that despite the violent conflict, the plants will not be moved. "That is impossible now," said Chen Qixian , a Dongyang government spokesman.
A week ago, I was driving out of Huaxi on my way back to Hangzhou , the provincial capital, with the story - literally - in the bag. Villagers had been happy to tell their tale, though their accents were hard to follow.
Huaxi was in an uproar, villagers proudly showing off trashed police and officials' cars, buses, ripped police uniforms and red armbands. It had been a melee of epic proportions.
"We got them on the run," they said. "We are like the heroes in The Water Margin", China's famous 14th century novel in which the righteous and downtrodden fight corrupt officials of all kinds.
But I knew that I could not stay long without attracting attention - someone was bound to call the Dongyang police.
Towards the end of my two-hour stay in the village, a couple of black cars pulled up and several young men got out and stared hard at me. Their sour expressions contrasted sharply with the villagers' joy; it was time to leave. I hurried back to the car and we left town.
About 10 minutes down the road, my driver checked his side-view mirror. "We're being followed," he said. A police siren whined and, over a loudspeaker, we were ordered to pull over.
A policeman stuck his head into the window and gave us a giant grin, setting the tone for what was to become a surreal detention where we were handled with kid gloves - although threat was never far from the surface.
"Please come with me," he said to the driver. They conferred in the police car for 10 minutes. Then the driver came back. "We have to go to Dongyang city," he said.
At Dongyang's best hotel, the Splendid Plaza, a cohort of officials was waiting for me and my three companions, two other foreign journalists I had asked along - knowing there was safety in numbers - and a Chinese assistant.
"Please have dinner with us," they said, smiling and smiling. "We would prefer to continue our journey to Hangzhou," we said. "That won't be possible," said Mr Zhang, the foreign affairs director.
We were shown into a large, red-carpeted room. The men were served tea, the women hot water. About eight officials sat around the dining table, though their numbers changed as they came and went, fielding urgent phone calls on their mobiles. Only Mr Zhang and Mr Chen, the government spokesman, were introduced.
The first of a score of excellent dishes arrived. This was a banquet. "We did that for you because you are foreigners," explained Mr Zhang, smiling. "Can you use chopsticks?"
The questioning began, too. Interspersed with commands to toast each other, the officials asked the questions we knew we could not evade: "Where were you? What were you doing in Huaxi? Had you applied for permission to come to Dongyang?"
Dinner dragged on, and at about 8pm - we were picked up at 6pm - Mr Zhang's assistant put the knife in. With a smile. "We must destroy your reporting notes, and you must give us your pictures.
"Also, we will interview you separately and you must sign a confession that you have broken the law."
Chinese regulations governing the activities of reporters are strict. Non-mainland journalists must apply for permission to travel anywhere outside of Beijing.
In practice, many do not, as the system is slow and designed to make reporting virtually impossible.
It is a key mechanism in the government's efforts to stop a clearer picture of the mainland circulating abroad.
We complied, but registered our protest, telling the officials that our notes were actually the property of our employers. We signed a two-page confession that we had violated Chinese reporting regulations.
Memory cards in digital cameras were wiped clean. They insisted on swapping the empty cards for new ones, to make sure the pictures could not be reconstructed.
Finally, at 11.30pm, we insisted on going. "We have co-operated with you," we said. "Now let us return to Hangzhou."
They argued we should stay the night in Dongyang, and, bizarrely, go out tomorrow and "play" in the city.
After much to-ing and fro-ing, we won, and returned to Hangzhou in the early hours of Tuesday.
Our detention had been a golden cage - but a cage nonetheless.
When I first posted on the Huanxi riots I used Didi Tatlow's SCMP article as a reference. She has now followed up with what happened to her in covering the riots: she had her notes confiscated, she was arrested for several hours and even treated to dinner. She considered it a "golden cage - but a cage nonetheless". I've reproduced the full article below. Only last Thursday ACB discussed the suppression of foregin journalists in China.
The number of protests in China is growing fast. Three million people took part in 58,000 demonstrations in 2003, a 15 per cent increase on the previous year, according to Outlook Weekly magazine, a Communist Party mouthpiece.
Virtually none of these was legal - the Communist Party bans virtually all public protest. Nearly all were localised disputes about official corruption, police abuse or conflict over land use, making the anti-Japan protests highly unusual and giving the impression they are officially condoned.
As I said elesewhere, forget about the China/Japan riots. This is where the real action is.
* Richard looks at the riot's aftermath and ponders if this is a storm in a teacup or the start of something bigger.
* Here's an old article declaring Huaxi "China's richest village". Bet it won't be featuring again anytime soon.
* ESWN has photos and a translation of a first hand account of the Huaxi riots, China's newest tourism hotspot.
* Lisa notes an interesting comment by Joseph Wang saying this is not the beginning of the end of the CCP: The basic understanding is that the demonstrators can demonstrate provided that they don't cross red lines such as calling for the overthrow of the Communist Party or any fundamental political change...People are pushing the limits, the government is responding. It's a slow, messy process but over time, something like civil society is developing.
I have a very similar story about 3 chemical plants and a similar number of rioters etc, but my source (A Chinese journalist) gave the village name as Huankantou. They also mentioned nothing about hand to hand fighting, only the police retreating and stripping their uniforms off to try and escape.
Could you drop by my blog or send me an email with your thoughts on this.
I don't like the idea that I might have printed a false story or that my source has renamed somebody elses story.
I don't pay for information, but I don't like to think that I'm using ropey information either.
I have a very similar story about 13 chemical plants and a similar number of rioters etc, but my source (A Chinese journalist) gave the village name as Huankantou. They also mentioned nothing about hand to hand fighting, only the police retreating and stripping their uniforms off to try and escape.
Could you drop by my blog or send me an email with your thoughts on this.
I don't like the idea that I might have printed a false story or that my source has renamed somebody elses story.
I don't pay for information, but I don't like to think that I'm using ropey information either.
Does anybody have some really good pictures of the riots in huankantou. Given other concerns, I can't walk in the with a camer without some pretty obvious risks.
Larry Kudlow also examines the China mess, saying America's China policies aren't helping the current tensions. He also notes the lack of a clear or strong China policy as US foreign policy is otherwise distracted.
Huichieh reflects on the power of blogging after the Singapore CZ affair and has proposed running web symposiums, which sounds very much like the various Carnivals that float around.
(13:38) Even Hong Kong's police are getting into the outsourcing game. If we can get mainland police to work here, think how much the Government could save!
Christ is back and she's Chinese. From the SCMP:
Eastern Lightning, sometimes called the Church of Almighty God, is a fast-growing cult that is believed to have attracted up to a million followers in rural areas across the mainland. Its teachings, which include asking followers to worship a middle-aged woman surnamed Deng as the female Christ, was banned on the mainland along with the Falun Gong in 1999...Its beliefs mix elements of Chinese nationalism with religion, claiming God has been reincarnated among Chinese people and will conquer the west.
Eastern Lightning believes the apocalypse is at hand and the "final Christ" is here to judge the world.
Some let Benedict XVI know, quick! They sound like a charming mob. Also a report from Time back in November 2001 - who I note stole my headline.
It could've been a general munu block you know. But then, you're probably the nail in munu that sticks out most prominently, so yah, I guess they are gunnning after you. Congratulations. ;)
That depends, Fabian. I seem to recall the Little Brother at the head of the rebellion at the end was engaging in orgies and drinking himself stupid. It only took about 20 million deaths along the way.
A company majority owned by its chairman is buying the chairman's personally held Macau casino assets for 253 times the casino's half year earnings. The stock market naturally loved the news, taking the shares from HK$0.70 in September last year to HK$8.50 before the shares were suspended and then rallying even more to HK$9.10 today.
Cecilie Gamst Berg in today's SCMP has an article on racism in China. At first I was going to use it as a talking point on this little discussed side of Chinese life and suggest the more homogenous a population the more likely it is to be racist. I have reproduced the full article below the fold. But, and you know there was a but, there were two parts that stand out...for the wrong reasons.
Firstly, discussing the racist outpourings when Condi Rice recently visited China:
Dr Rice deserves to be attacked for her country's foreign policy and for her own questionable taste in employer. Why would a black woman want to get mixed up with the Republicans at all? But devoting an entire rant to the two things she cannot help - her appearance and her sex - is just scoring easy points.
Wowsers. Talk about slipping in a kidney punch. How does this help an article discussing the racist comments made during her visit. The implication is the author thinks Condi is a fool and betraying her sex and race, but that calling her an "ugly black bitch" is wrong. Ms Berg concludes:
Meanwhile, Dr Rice is a woman of many accomplishments. Let us hope that the ability to read Chinese is not one of them.
Does Ms Berg think the US Embassy and Consular staff in China didn't report these things back to State? Sticks and stones and all of that, but to think that Rice isn't aware of this is naive.
Convenient channel for public fury
The first political discussion I had in Putonghua was in Shanghai, in 1989. I was having lunch with some money changers when some Africans walked past the restaurant. The money changers started making strange animal noises and grimaces. Seeing my puzzled expression, they explained: "They are black devils." In broken Chinese, I asked the head money changer why he did not like blacks. "They are dirty. Their skin is black because they don't wash."
"How about Mike Tyson, do you like him?" I asked. "Oh yes," came the reply. "But he's black." "Yes, but he is American black." The whole table erupted in laughter.
That episode and many similar experiences have led me to believe that racism in China is not so much about skin colour as about what people perceive to be the haves and the have-nots.
I was, therefore, surprised by the vitriolic attacks on US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, posted on the popular mainland website Sina.com, before her state visit to China. Reminiscent of the Cultural Revolution, the rants were full of racist terms like "black devil", "black pig" and "black bitch". Another word frequently used was "ugly".
To my knowledge, Colin Powell - who is also of African origin - never got the same treatment. But then, he is a man. Interestingly, most of the racist slurs on the website had to do with Dr Rice being a woman. Indeed, it seemed that users of the website had the biggest problem with her being a woman and "ugly" - her colour was thrown in almost as an afterthought. And, inevitably, because a woman was the target, the word "whore" was trotted out.
Dr Rice deserves to be attacked for her country's foreign policy and for her own questionable taste in employer. Why would a black woman want to get mixed up with the Republicans at all? But devoting an entire rant to the two things she cannot help - her appearance and her sex - is just scoring easy points.
I do not think the Chinese are any more or less racist than other people. I believe the attacks on Dr Rice - supposedly carried out by members of China's "elite" - have everything to do with a repressed population's need to lash out at someone, to shout out some kind of protest, knowing that there will be no repercussions from the government.
In a country where mature political discussion is not only discouraged, but can be downright dangerous, hurling insults at people for reasons that bear no relevance to what they do or stand for has always been a safe way to vent built-up anger.
Indeed, it is tempting to suggest that Beijing secretly encourages this kind of "letting off steam" - as it has been doing with the anti-Japanese protests and violence, and as it did after the bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade.
The Chinese government is busy enough keeping an eye on everything that goes on in the country. I do not think, as some have suggested, that officials should interfere with this kind of cyber-nonsense, even if they did find it offensive. Whoever posted the messages will one day look in the mirror and start pondering the word "ugly".
Meanwhile, Dr Rice is a woman of many accomplishments. Let us hope that the ability to read Chinese is not one of them.
i should point out that there is a lack of proportion about what happened at sina.com. this story was originally noted by the president of the Chinese Independent PEN, Liu Xiaobo. over the course of five days during ms. rice's trip, he counted 70 racist posts on the topic. sina.com has 20 to 30 million visitors per day, and the racist comments are a tiny minority.
i accept that one is too many, but the writer should not leave the impression that the majority of the chinese people are raging racists.for most of them, the race of ms. rice is of no interest, one way or the other.
Acctualy it where 70 racist posts out of 800 he read, if you can believe an article in The Guardian:(http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1461208,00.html)
I spoke to an American black man in China awhile back and he left this country believing that the majority of the population was racist.
You see, unlike many foreigners, Calvin is fluent in Chinese so he was able to hear and understand the racist comments that were directed at him every day as he walked the streets of China.
He mentioned that life could be difficult at times for a black man in America, but that is almost non-existent compared to China. At least people don't call him a "monkey" to his face when he walks past.
Most of the time he would brush it off and ignore the ignorance, but occasionally he would comment back to the offender in Chinese and once they managed to get over the fact that he could understand what they were saying, they would pretend not to understand his Chinese in hopes of saving whatever little face they could while scurrying away.
I don't know what it's like to be a black man in China, but I do not know what it is like to a Caucasian married to a Chinese in China and it can get pretty ugly at times. When my wife and I walk down the streets holding hands we get some of the nastiest looks you could ever imagine. Once some jerk in a pub actually had the audacity to shake my hand and speak to me in English while telling my wife that she was polluting the Chinese blood by marrying a foreigner.
That was the first time I've actually came close to getting into a physical confrontation with someone in China. Luckily, he was promptly escorted out of the pub by the waiter.
Racism is rampant in China, but hopefully that will change over time as more and more Chinese are exposed to foreigners and able to travel abroad.
Let's hope that Mark Twain was correct.
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness."
As I mentioned on my blog when I posted on this topic, I'm sure their racist comments and small-mindedness do not bother Dr. Rice because she is better educated than most Chinese and she weilds more power in her little black pinky than any man in all of Asia, let alone China.
This is very interesting! I have been going back and forth regarding traveling to China. I'm a African-American woman. I decided not to add China to my travel itinerary because I'm not passionate about it therefore it wasn't worth the headache. I am going to Hong Kong which should be chocked full of interesting experiences.
Note: I am adding to previous coverage, starting from the Update below. The previous coverage is below the fold, in chronological order. The Huanxi riots are covered in another post.
Update April 20th
* Winston Marshall has a typically thorough look at Asian nationalism - he's optimistic that economic reality will force a reconciliation but not solve the longer term problems.
* Larry Kudlow also examines the China mess, saying America's China policies aren't helping the current tensions (via IP)
* Scott Kirwin says the onus is on China to reign things in.
* Some important upcoming dates to watch in this dispute.
* Thomas Barnett says the lack of US interest in the dispute is a problem and the solution is in Japan's hands. He also says:
Everyone knows the outcome: China will get big, Japan will align its stars increasingly with Beijing in the region, and the US will have to go along with that. But everyone is working against that outcome now in an almost knee-jerk fashion.
My own thoughts: There is a clear disconnect in understanding on both sides. Many Japanese cannot understand the depth of feeling by China. Most Chinese cannot understand why Japan continues to provoke. The way forward is better communication and understanding. The reality of the growing economic ties between the two countries is this understanding will come. As Chinese and Japanese businesses deal together, as Chinese work for Japanese bosses in factories in China, as Chinese provincial and local governments deal with Japanese business, as Chinese tourists travel to Japan and Chinese business venture into the Japanese market. When people start dealing with people, rather than abstract concepts, barriers tend to fall quickly.
The Chinese riots also reflect a major domestic political change. The Chinese Communist Party has long ceased to be a party of Communism. It has instead switched to becoming a party of nationalism. It suits to use such occassions as an outlet to allow people to vent. It would much rather than anger is directed externally than people look inwardly and discuss Government failings, such as the riots in Dongyang (more on them in another post). The problem is China will find it hard to contain the emotions unleashed and that will be to its detriment.
China and Japan are both rising global powers. They are both grappling with China's economic rise but also with their emergence as global rather than only regional players. Sometimes that requires setting aside self-interest for a broader global good. It's an issue the United States constantly grapples with. This time China has a chance to assume the mantle of world statesman and deal with this situation. It makes good sense for Japan to join the UN Security Council. In the longer term it will be to China's benefit to have Japan there. To do that China's Government will have to look far further ahead than they have until now and show a willingness to challenege the Chinese public's perceptions rather than pander to them. At the same time some understanding and political nous for Japan would not go astray. Japan knows the reaction it gets from history texts and shrine visits. It might not understand them but it can deal with them by showing sensitivity.
The major issues here seem insolvable. But what's needed is some hard-headed pragmatism. An agreement to disagree but to work together to avoid such flare-ups would be a start. Actually meaning it would be better. Otherwise everyone in East Asia is a loser.
Other reading 13th April
* Curzon restates his argument why none of the fuss makes sense. Read the whole thing and the excellent comments for an overview of why this is a storm in a teacup from the Japanese side. I don't agree with some of his points but I do agree that it seems unlikely that any form of Japanese contrition will satisfy the Chinese public.
* Foreign Dispatches echoes Curzon's points and notes the intensity of anti-Japanese feeling is increasing with the passage of time.
* China, Japan and South Korea are holding a meeting of senior official on greater regional co-operation. I imagine there is plenty else being discussed. The meeting is slated for April 17th, which Asian Gazette points out is also the anniversary of the end of the first Sino-Japanese war. They also discuss Japan's nuclear potential.
* Joe Jones notes Taiwan is worried about the impact of the riots and the sidestep by China's Foreign Ministry over an apology to Japan over the riots.
* Tanuki Ramble says China is being hypocritical in talking about the past and posts a comparison with Tibet.
* In Korea the dispute with Japan is being played out in the corner of TV screens and in train stations.
* ESWN has a comprehensive post (linked yesterday but it bears relinking) outlining the roots of anti-Japanese feeling in China.
* A chronology of Japan's apologies to Korea.
* Sean has more on Japan's efforts to both inflame and defuse the situation.
* Sometimes the best thing to do is keep your mouth shut: “In Korea, the comfort women are now regularly putting on a performance in front of the Japanese embassy. I’ve heard, however, that they aren’t really comfort women, but North Korean agents." - Japanese Society for History Textbook Reform vice chairman Fujioka Mobukatsu.
* (15:07) ESWN this time looks at the falsification of history in China and translates an article with this conclusion:
Why are the many Chinese historians who are angrily challenging and criticizing the new Japanese history school books not also angrily challenging and openly criticizing the historical lies made up by the Chinese Communists? Worse yet, most of those Chinese historians who are criticizing the Japanese lies had been participants in the vast project of the ideological departments to create these historical lies.
Under these circumstances, you would have to suppose that the Chinese Communists will only lie to fool its own people, while they will respect the historical facts when they speak to the outside world about the Sino-Japanese War. But based upon its consistent record of lying, it is impossible to get anyone to believe that. How can anyone believe that a political regime which lies to its own nationals every day and its official historians will be honest with the outside world?
* China's chatroom warriors have been busy, manipulating a CNN poll on the issue with precise instructions. They must have finished up their work in Zimbabwe early.
* (18:02) Andres puts together an impressive piece that should be read in full, titled 0.3% and the free society. His conclusion:
It does no one any good, least of all China, for any of us to engage in apologetics for an unfree society that exhibits the unhealthy and even dangerous characteristics shown all too vividly these past couple of weeks. Continued indulgence of this lack of freedom is no virtue, criticism of the problems this lack causes is no vice. Unfree societies are dangerous to themselves and to their neighbors. Anti-Japanese riots cannot continue forever: as a social topic this will pass and others will appear. However, the problems associated with an unfree society will still be here and that is the real issue.
Amongst other gems he also notes a point about both these protests and the ones after the Belegrade Embassy bombing in 1999: the students used the protests to test how far they could push the government and if the government proved weak in their response then the topic of the protests would turn domestic. That dovetails with the Huaxi riots, but now it's not just students testing the boundaries and the internet and mobile phones are playing a far bigger role.
* Andres also pointed out a tangentially related piece by Running Dog on being sorry in China.
There's an interesting contrast between East Asia and Europe. Germany was able to face up to and sufficiently atone for its actions in WW2 and in return the rest of Europe and the United States responded by banding together and working for a better future. The past was not forgotten but it was not dwelt on either. The result? A Europe now so united it has created the EU and has the euro. Whatever else you think of the EU (and I'm no fan of much of it) it represents a united Europe, something currently impossible in East Asia. Interestingly China is backing Germany and India's attempts at UNSC seats. Along with Brazil the four countries have a pact to push for a seat together. An impasse seems likely, although there are hints that Germany can provide a knife to cut the Gordian Knot by jointly apologising with Japan, providing a face-saving solution and allowing the reform of the UNSC.
East Asia is instead constantly dwelling on the past at the expense of looking to the future. If you are always looking in the rear view mirror you cannot see the road ahead. The past matters. The future matters more.
Other reading April 15th
* Planned protests (repeated from yesterday): Andrea notes a protest due in Xiamen this weekend; Fons notes the same in Shanghai, and Danwei also has heard of the Shanghai gathering. Jeremy also reports on a planned Shenzhen march. Dan Washburn has the detailed instructions on this weekend's protests in Shanghai including the route, what to throw and how to get there. Interestingly it includes how to disseminate the information and a very interesting "Important" section. There is a protest due in Hong Kong this weekend as well. If China wants to put a lid on this thing, it will need to stop these marches this weekend.
The SCMP notes Shanghai public security authorities have not approved anti-Japan marches for this weekend. Could this be the beginning of the end? Plenty of websites, IMs and SMS messages are spreading the word about this weekend's events. Is China realising the subversive nature of modern communications might not always suit its purpose?
From The Standard, a cartoon that perfectly sums up the situation:
Update April 17th/18th
* China clamped down hard on activists in Beijing, preventing large protests there. But Shanghai saw large protests. Dan Washburn has first hand reports, photos and video. There were reports of protests in around a dozen Chinese cities and the Japanese Foreign Minister's visit to China did little to ease tensions. China refused to apologise to Japan over the "spontaneous" protests. Elton John was right.
* Tom has accounts from Hong Kong and Shenzhen's protests. Fumier estimates more reporters than protesters in Hong Kong, with many of the rest trying to get into Sogo and Japanese restaurants.
* Fons has a comprehensive first hand account of the Shanghai protests. He also notes the continuing silence by the mainland media, following orders from the top. SE Asian Expat has several more first hand photos.
* Photojournalist Philippe Roy has an excellent set of photos from the protests.
* Running Dog is back from holidays just in time. First hand account of the Carnival of Hate and a more reflective piece pointing out that not far below the surface of these protests is a disgusting undercurrent of xenophobia. It was only a month ago it was Condi Rice.
* Chris Myrick was there and recounts his experience and has more than 100 photos of the event. Ian Hamet also has a first hand account of the protests (via IP who also has some photos). He also has thoughts on the implications of the protest. Tom isn't impressed by Ian or his coverage. Updated: Ian responds to Tom's "hissy fit". Powerline links to a couple of wire reports, noting it hasn't been getting much play in the US and stating it's chiefly over Japan's UN Security Council bid. Shouldn't bloggers check out some blogs to get a feel for the issues, especially if it's not getting much coverage by mainstream media in the US?
* Andres Gentry's first person account of the Shanghai protest and he has photos too.
* More reaction (again via IP): Brian Dunn agrees with my view the Communists are becoming nationalists (an irony if ever there was one, especially with the planned visit by the KMT's chairman to sign a "civil war accord" with the CCP). Mudville Gazette notes several other China stories (EU embargo, Japan constitutional changes) and wonders if they are somehow linked to the protest. For mine that's mixing several issues into one giant plot - the EU backed down thanks to US pressure and the anti-secession law.
* Amy takes a look at the actual changes being made in the Japanese texts. ESWN translates a Chinese blogger who has done the same and concludes the best result will be a consensus on this piece of history. He also looks at how history is taught in Hong Kong.
* ESWN notes that even "non-indoctrinated" Hong Kongers have very negative feelings about Japan from this saga. It should be noted that Hong Kong was in fact the start of several anti-Japanese organisations, such as the Diaoyu Islands group. In that sense Hong Kong has been leading the fashion. Reports and coverage of the Hong Kong protests.
* ESWN ponders if the protests are being stage managed or are pontaneous. Given the conflicting signals, ESWN points out the third and most likely explanation: the paranoia theory. Well worth a read because his theory explains far more than just the recent actions and indeed can be seen as a general theory behind much of what the CCP do.
* Jodi notes the contrasting methods of protest between Japan and China.
* Muninn provides a comprehensive listing of Japan's apologies to China.
* Sean wonders what these protests mean for the 2008 Beijing Olympics and the 2010 Shanghai World Expo.
* Cicero questions China's claim to moral supremacy over Japan and notes something I pointed out earlier - the use of mobile phones as a key organising and controlling element in these protests. The broader and more interesting points is how far are China's authorities going to allow unauthorised or semi-official protests to go on for? Because the next one might be on a domestic issue rather than a foreign one. Also see the bottom of this post for a pictoral representation of the same idea.
* Joe Jones notes a small protest in Philadelphia's Chinatown.
* Richard wonders if the exercise has been worth it for China.
* Muninn has an excellent essay titled textbook feedback loop and masochistic history which includes this observation: There is NO such thing as apolitical history, NO such thing as doing a history of “just the facts” and completely impossible to exempt oneself from the present when we look at the past. He argues for everyone, including bloggers, to take this opportunity to explore the contradictions of national history itself, rather than fling accusations of hypocrisy at the Chinese or barrages of hateful insult at the growing historical revisionism in Japan. Good advice. Yet again it seems moderation is being drowned out by shrill extremism.
* Quizas has an excellent look at the role of students in the current demonstrations. The conclusion:
It's entirely possible that the students protesting Japan today want to draw upon the lessons of [Dowager Empress] Cixi and encourage the government to be bellicose even at the cost of development. And considering how important Japanese trade and investment is for China, the students are paradoxically calling for their leaders to command a weaker "stronger" China.
It seems to me some of the best analysis and thinking on the current situation is coming from bloggers rather than the op-ed pages of the papers.
* Fons has some practical advice on dealing with the anti-Japan riots for those in business in China.
* Muninn has some translations from Japanese newspapers editorials on the riots.
* Vodkapundit says China has "found its Jews".
* Belgravia Dispatch argues China's current prosperity is a time to face up to its own past to head off potential trouble down the track.
* Oranckay has links to more pictures from the Shanghai protest.
* Todd Crowell dicusses the lessons of history: ...China and Japan have been rivals for the better part of the last thousand years. It should not be surprising that they are still jockeying for primacy in the region. The two countries are still influenced by their common Confucian culture. In Confucian terms, somebody has to be “big brother” and the other “little brother.”
I'm not trying to trivialize the issues that are being protested by the Chinese, but if they are trying to cause change in Japan, maybe some of them can try to talk to their allies in Japan like me instead of trying to force or scare into submission their enemy. A reasonable bridge building effort between activists and experts on both sides to try to address the issues through tactical maneuvers might be useful.
A random off topic comment, but Simon while I was scrolling down I noticed a small mistake on the left menu bar of your blog. Normally I wouldn't have noticed, and I never had before, but a html error caused the text to extend over the colour boundaries. All of this is irrelevant but the attention did lead me to realize that there is a grammatical error in the text. It reads [Praise (Real, Imagined, & Faint). Amusingly enough this is an example of "Engrish" one would normally expect to find in China. Faint is the incorrect word to use in this situation, the proper choice would be feigned. I can see the reason for the error, they are near homonyms and feigned is not generally used often in colloquial English. However the intended definition inferred from the rest of the passage would be of praise that was insincere or facetious. Faint simply does not fit this definition, but the past form of feign does.
It is unfortunate that the Japanese government didn't mention the existing joint study of the Sino-Japanese war going on between a group of historians of China, Japan, and the US (see my notes from one of their meetings muninn.net/blog/2004/02/the-state-of-joint-study-of-the-sino-japanese-war.html)
The program was founded by Ezra Vogel at Harvard and has good funding and has continued for some years. (www.fas.harvard.edu/~asiactr/sino-japanese/)
There is also 2 separate projects: 1) The joint study group between Japanese and Korean historians focusing mostly on disagreements on the details of the 1910 annexation but branching out into issues of textbooks. 2) the transnational history textbook project being worked on by a whole group of East Asian scholars.
As tensions heat up between two of the most powerful Asian nations, with neither willing to 'lose face' by appearing to back down, has Japan just irreversably upped the ante?
In a move certain to further infuriate China, Japan appears to be willing to officially honour those who committed what China believes were 'wartime atrocities'.
There's also a fascinating page of current news articles the rise of China, the collapsing dollar, the
declining U.S. economy, and the New World Order, at http://www.survivalistskills.com/newsitem.htm, which I've been checking daily!
For several weeks, China has been in prey with an effervescence
antijaponaise which becomes extensive. The wave of demonstrations force which, since the beginning of April, extended from Chengdu with Canton then Peijing and Shanghai with the day before of the visit of the Foreign Minister Machimura Nobutoka, had been preceded by a massive campaign on Internet against the candidature of Japan for a
seat of permanent member of the Security Council of UNO, which would come to decrease by as much the privileged position of Peijing on the international scene.
The reason called upon for these demonstrations, very largely
encouraged by the government and an obliging font, would be the incapacity of Japan to recognize the crimes committed during the Second World war, and the authorization of publication granted by the Japanese authorities to a book of history "revisionist". This indeed hard quarrel since the foundation of the People's Republic of China, whose mode sat its legitimacy, to a large extent, on the "large war of liberation against Japan"; but, instead of calming down with the years, whereas Tokyo expressed official excuses via its Murayama Prime Minister in 1995, that the book of history accused is used only per less than 0,1% of the schoolboys, and that Tokyo proposed the constitution of a common historical commission on the model germano-Polish, it tends on the contrary to be radicalized.
It is that for Peijing propaganda hypernationalist, directed
against a scapegoat quiet a long time, constitutes from now on the single source of ideological legitimacy, in particular near an often frustrated youth which does not make any more comparisons between progress of the current period, unequally distributed, and a time Maoist that she did not know and which one hides besides to him tens of million victims. It is indeed frustration, not only of the population, but also of one mode to the power actually limited which this violence directed against Tokyo translates. Whereas Peijing expresses major ambitions on the international scene, asserting the statute of legitimate and natural representative of the Asian pole, multiplying the declarations against inclinations of independence of Taiwan, with the risk to even harm its true interests like showed it
the adoption in full European debate on the lifting of the embargo of the law antisécession registering in the law the legitimacy of the recourse to the force against Taïpeh, the authorities are confronted with the limits of the Chinese power. At the interior, the mode tests enormous difficulties of solving the tensions which increase, in particular in the field of energy and the environment, to meet the fundamental social needs for the population, which it is in terms of teaching, care or retirement. At outside, in spite of the boastings, Peijing knows that its military capacities, in particular naval, remain too limited to enable him to impose its views.
These are these frustrations that also the racist slogans directed
against "the small" Japanese express. The youth of China, worked by the very aggressive historical presentation of its own textbooks, cannot admit that Japan, ex-"tributaire" Empire of China, succeeded, in spite of the defeat of 1945, to rise in the second place of the world economy where it is maintained today with a GDP five times more important than that of the "immense" China. The success of Japan, more still than that of the United States, indeed signs the failure of the Chinese system, which remains centered on itself and last rancours. The success of Japan also repeats humiliations of China when, as of the era Meiji, Tokyo caught up with in a few tens of years the Western
powers, of which it was going to follow with the dramatic consequences that one knows the model of colonial conquests, whereas Empire of China, incompetent to reform itself, was inserted in the rout.
But it is another frustration which also these demonstrations
antijaponaises express, which make fear with the capacity of the
overflows which could reach it directly and which pushed Peijing to prohibit this weekend any demonstration on the place of Tiananmen. At the sides of the attacks against the Japanese "pigs", other signs indeed appeared proclaiming that "patriotism is legal", thus condemning by advance very possible repression. The effective repression of any organized political opposition remains indeed the absolute rule of the Chinese mode since 1989. In this context, the claim of the right to express and to be opposed in the name of "patriotism" is potentially dangerous for a system on the defensive, which faces many dissatisfactions which usually do not find the possibility of being expressed massively.
Last lesson, finally, the violence of the demonstrations
antijaponaises directed against the Japanese goods to China, whereas Peijing is today the second trade partner of the Archipelago, that more than 16 000 Japanese companies are installed there, that 50 billion dollars are invested there, can only make reflect the foreign investors who a long time chose to deny the "China risk" behind the apparent stability of an authoritative mode.
Seizing all the pretexts, sportsmen, energy competitions at sea of Eastern China or territorial disagreements, the tensions between China and Japan could thus be only worsening, quite simply because, far from being justified in the past according to official theses', they have very to actually see with the future and the way in which the Chinese mode tries to ensure its power in Asia vis-a-vis Japan which asserts its "normality today". In this context, only a major systemic upheaval in China would make it possible, as Mao wrote it, to make close-cropped table of the past to set out again on the basis of new
regional co-operation true.
* Director of the Observatory of the strategies Chinese and Asian of the Iris.
Have you read about Hong Kong's recent collapse? The slump in the economy? Riots and looting? An end to trade? No more international contacts or travel? Didn't think so. But some in the Government think it could happen, and soon.
But most disturbing is Elsie Leung, the Secretary for Justice, and her opinion in today's SCMP (reproduced below). Hong Kong's top legal official is basically saying the court system is too slow and unable to handle something of such import. They want to take the short-cut she says is open to the Government and go straight to Beijing. It doesn't say much for her faith in Hong Kong's courts.
Why should this decision be rushed when every other Hong Konger has to wait for the slow wheels of justice to turn? If courts are too slow then fix that.
What really puzzles me is the idea that Hong Kong cannot allow the election for Chief Executive (CE) to be delayed while waiting for the courts to decide the matter. Why is it so vital the CE be elected on July 10th? The Don has been temporary CE for a month or more. I challenge anyone to point out the difference, except perhaps fewer gaffes. It's been business as usual. Hong Kong is continuing to do what it does best: get on with things. Will all this end if the CE election is delayed, even if it requires a new Election Committee to be formed? No, of course not. Is it worth subverting the Basic Law and due process to beat this deadline? No. This idea that certainty is required or Hong Kong falls apart is absurd but drives the Government's thinking.
The reality is no-one cares. The Don will be elected one way or another. It's just a shame it is at such a cost.
The Bar Association has expressed disappointment that the acting chief executive has asked Beijing for a Basic Law interpretation over the term of office of the next chief executive, and that "the legal issues cannot be properly argued and resolved by the court". I would like to explain why the request is essential, even though Hong Kong courts have been asked to determine this issue, and why it does not interfere with judicial independence.
The government respects a resident's right to institute legal proceedings against the acts of the executive authorities and their personnel. The proceedings instituted in respect of the chief executive's term of office relate to a matter of great public importance.
This being so, the government did not oppose leave being granted to legislator Albert Chan Wai-yip to apply for a judicial review. However, the government cannot afford the luxury of letting things run their natural course. It must do everything possible to ensure that the new chief executive is elected smoothly on July 10.
Remedies in judicial review proceedings are discretionary. Therefore, the court may decline to resolve the issue. For example, the court may decide that an applicant does not have sufficient interest in the matter to which the application relates. It may also refuse to intervene in the legislative process prior to the enactment of the Chief Executive Election Amendment Bill.
If the Court of First Instance declines to come up with a remedy in the current proceedings, the issue of whether the new chief executive's tenure should be five years or the remainder of the original term will remain unresolved. Moreover, the question could again be raised by way of a judicial review at any time within 90 days after the amendment bill is passed.
I have every confidence that our courts would act quickly in such circumstances. In the government's view, the Court of Final Appeal would be required to refer Article 53 (2) of the Basic Law, which concerns the tenure of the chief executive, to the National People's Congress Standing Committee for an interpretation. This will all take time.
Some critics have suggested that the election should proceed on the basis that the chief-executive-elect could take office subject to the final determination of the meaning of the relevant article through the courts.
However, the government cannot conduct an election in a manner that contravenes the Basic Law. If the Court of First Instance were to decide that the amendment bill contravenes the Basic Law then, pending an appeal, the government could not proceed on the basis of the amended ordinance. That would be disrespectful to the rule of law. Furthermore, potential candidates and the Election Committee are entitled to know the term of office.
The interpretation, if carried out, will be the same whether it is made by the standing committee on its own volition, at the request of the State Council on behalf of the Hong Kong government, or at the behest of the Court of Final Appeal.
Since an interpretation is provided for in the Basic Law, it is constitutional and lawful. I appreciate the reluctance of many in the legal profession to accept the power of the standing committee to interpret the Basic Law, but such an interpretation is part of our constitutional structure.
Looking ahead, I hope that other issues relating to the chief executive's term of office can be resolved without seeking a further interpretation. The government will help facilitate exchanges between the judiciary, legal experts and academics in Hong Kong and the mainland, with a view to agreeing about how our domestic law can clarify the situation.
A final note. Lawyers were planning to march today from the High Court to the Court of Final Appeal in protest. The walk takes around 6 minutes at a liesurely pace. I wonder which poor customer they'll all bill for that.
Macau, population 460,000, have 8 Chinese and 3 Portuguese daily papers. How do they all survive? The old fashioned way: with Government subsidies.
Australia and China are to start free trade talks. China has been granted market economy status, making anti-dumping actions harder. At the same time Australia has demanded agriculture be included in the agreement. That implies Australia feels it has a competitive advantage in agriculture. Australia, with its high wages and far more expensive costs, is a lower cost producer of agricultural goods than low wage, cheap China. Anyone from the anti-offshoring crowd listening?
Hemlock on the Singapore casino announcement: Who will be the first politician in Hong Kong retarded enough to demand that the Big Lychee follow suit in casino-building ‘in order to remain competitive’ with Lee Kwan-yew’s pathetic experiment in Confucio-socialism? I give my crystal ball a quick polish and stare into it. The slimy, unprincipled, economically illiterate visage of Liberal Party boss James Tien shimmers in the glassy orb.
The first starts as a moving tribute to his late father-in-law. But the final two paragraphs are afflicted by nostalgia disease:
These men saved the world, and to them it was nothing to brag about. They rolled back tyranny, raised families and lived principled lives yet who does our culture celebrate? Porn-stars like Paris Hilton and Ghetto Gangsters like 50 Cent. Who does it look to for wisdom? Traitors like Jane Fonda and singers like Barbara Striesand. While patriots like my father-in-law struggle on fixed incomes and downsized pensions, Jimmy Carter and Michael Moore grow rich from the Anti-Americanism they propagate. The generation that said “Ask what you can do for your country” is slowly being replaced by generations of “What’s in it for me?”
Today we are fighting one of the greatest ideological battles in history, Democracy vs Islamo-Fascism, and we are being forced to do it without the wisdom and strength of the Greatest Generation. In its place we have the spoiled baby boomers who have attempted to destroy all the accomplishments of their parents in a fit of unending adolescent pique. Can we survive with this lesser generation at the helm? Will the achievements of the Greatest Generation prove too deep and lasting to uproot? Can another generation rise to the occasion and show itself worthy of the Greatest Generation’s mantle?
Let me categorically state the men he refers are clearly great men. But it also shows the problem with labelling any generation, be it generation alphabet (X, Y) or the "Greatest Generation" (note the capitals). What is a generation? A cohort of people born between a set of years? But clearly the "Greatest Generation" in this circumstance does not include many Germans or Japanese born in that time. Does it include the millions of Chinese born at that time? Does it include Australians? Ethiopians? Even if it is just Americans does it include them all? Where are the lines drawn and why? I'll assume the "Greatest Generation" (GG) are those the fought for the Allies in World War 2.
The problem with nostalgia is it is easy to remember and glorify the good but difficult to remember the ordinary and bad. Every generation has things to celebrate and things it would rather forget. Let's do a comparison of various "generations". WW2 was a victory over tyranny; the fall of the Berlin Wall was the same. The GG presided over a time of economic prosperity, when standards of living rose and technology rapidly advanced. Ditto or even more so in the current generation. The GG fought off the Nazis and fascism only to have to deal with Communism and the cold war. This generation watched Communism lose the Cold War only to face the rise of militant Islamists. Mr Kirwin laments The generation that said “Ask what you can do for your country” is slowly being replaced by generations of “What’s in it for me?” Really? There are thousands of young men and women in Iraq that would argue that. The so-called "me generation" of ideology free materialistc hedonists is a great marketing pitch but does it really exist? We are fortunate to live in times when our standards of living are so high that we can want things we do not really need. The GG did live lives of great sacrifice and service. But I don't agree that the current generation is selfish and devoid of principles.
The entire second paragraph reproduced above is frankly insulting. Why is the baby boom generation a "lesser" one? Many of those young men did their duty fighting in Vietnam. It was a war fought by baby boom men but being commanded by GG leadership. As for losing the wisdom of the GG, a look at any library or bookshop will attest that this generation's wisdom and strength has been the best document and preserved of all time.
I'll repeat that I take nothing away from the great men mentioned in the post, nor the great men and women of that time. I just get annoyed when people claim there will never be another generation like them. I get even more annoyed when people claim today's generations are frittering away the legacy of their forefathers (and mothers). There is not a shred of evidence to back that up while there is plenty of evidence the current generations are making the world an even better place: a better environment, better health, rising living standards, falling poverty, spreading democracy to name but a few.
1. Free trade: the free flow of goods and services from one place to another.
2. Capitalism: the right of a company to seek the lowest price for the desired quality of goods and service.
3. Cheaper prices and/or better quality goods and services.
4. Poverty reduction in poor countries.
5. The spreading of global wealth.
6. The improvement of working conditions in poor countries.
Good one, Simon. To be fair, the guy did just lose his father-in-law; but he's still making a hash of things. People seem to forget that, at some point, big-mofo projects to extend modernity to the masses (Levittowns, the interstate highway system) are no longer necessary. Or, at least, they're not where resources should primarily be directed. (Some Asian governments, as you know, could stand to learn that lesson.) What you then have are lots of little improvements to existing systems that don't add up to one big, sexy Monument that large numbers of people are solemnly slaving over. But they do add up to continuing progress and contributions to making life better for people.
Kirwin also talks about the selfishness of Baby Boomers without recalling that they were reared by his Greatest Generation, whose touching but misguided desire to make everything cushy and pleasant after the War was one of the irritants behind the disastrous 60's counterculture movement.
And, yeah, the post about off-shoring is...well, we're probably never going to go back to an Organization Man world, however much its "stability" appeals to some people. Even working-class folks in developed countries will have to be nimble and keep looking out for new skills to acquire so they have some resilience if their current industry experiences a downturn. But since the alternative is more stagnation for everyone, the tradeoff would seem to be worth it.
Thanks Sean. I vacilated before posting - I don't want to insult the memory of his late father-in-law, but on the other hand these points need refuting. I hope I was respectful enough. Indeed one of my points is individuality matters far more than "generations" and their alleged values. They just don't exist.
Your points on both the rearing of baby boomers and offshoring are both accurate.
The bubble in Shanghai's property market is destined to pop; the question is how soon and what the ripple effects will be...if nothing else, it will be a destabilising blow to investor and consumer confidence across the country if Shanghai home prices start a downturn before the 2008 Beijing Olympics or the 2010 World Expo...
Farmers can now sell their land-use rights and move to the city. Thinking they have escaped the persecution of corrupt local officials, they could soon find their savings wiped out in a property crash - something they were led to believe the government would never allow.
Yet it is also a paradox of life on the mainland that when the stakes are high, there is less reason to fear a disastrous outcome. The greater the threat to the state, the more effective the response will be. Masses of homeowners may get upset; but they will not be allowed to become a dispossessed, homeless, rebellious class. First, the law is on their side: bankruptcy laws are still too vague for banks to foreclose on properties. Second, the banks themselves can always just be bailed out again.
This might explain why genuine financial-sector reform is still so slow in coming.
Moral hazard - a term China's leadership may soon learn much about. While the world obsesses with China's foreign policy China's leadership have plenty of domestic problems on their plate. Foreign policy provides a welcome distraction from these far more important issues.
Update: Hong Kong version.
From the SCMP:
It was a speculator's dream: flipping a flat for a cool million in profits in 48 hours - without even making a full down payment. Only a day after Sun Hung Kai Properties announced that all of the 800 units available in The Arch had been sold, a 1,093 sq ft flat in the West Kowloon development was sold on the secondary market for $9.08 million - or $8,307 per sq ft.
The unidentified seller had signed a purchase agreement for the unit on Saturday for $7.85 million, after putting down a deposit of about 15 per cent, according to Centaline Property Agency, which brokered the transaction.
I'll bet someone at the developer isn't happy today.
Note to the Vatican: JP2 performed a miracle last night. I arrived home alive after the most harrowing taxi ride I have ever had. I prayed to several other deities as well - it can't hurt to hedge your bets.
It's time to add another point to my Hong Kong taxi guide: kiss the ground and give thanks after every journey.
Thank you to everyone who responded to my plea for feedback and guest bloggers. The feedback has been invaluable and will be incorporated in the weeks to come. For those who offered to guest blog I have or will be in touch with details.
"Singapore has one of the most fair and transparent legal systems in the world. We do not require a foreigner to tell Singapore and Singaporeans how our criminal justice system should function,'' a Home Affairs Ministry spokeswoman said on customary condition of anonymity on Sunday.
"Customary" indeed. No word if she was laughing as she said it. It is true Singapore's legal system is amongst the best in a region that contains Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, Cambodia, Malaysia, China and others. It says a lot about the region's legal system.
Could an anti-trust law finally be on the way for Hong Kong? It won't be before The Don assumes his throne but would he have the nerve to face down the tycoons when he only has a 2 year term?
An unprecedented appeal against human rights abuses has been made by a Hong Konger known by the initials BL, a resident of the city for 8 months.
In what may be a world first, BL has launced a human rights case against his own family. A warning to readers: some of the abuses detailed may be disturbing.
BL's claim outlines a litany of allegations. Between once and three times a day his clothes are changed, usually without his say-so. Even worse, he is objected to exposure of his privates on a regular basis, usually to females. He is often transported to new locations without any prior approval and sometimes against his will. He is forced to eat mush and occassional pieces of toast. He is only allowed to drink milk or water. His movements are constantly watched and he is often forcibly forbidden from approaching certain areas. Occassionally he is allowed to enjoy entertainments of his own choosing, but usually he is subjected to a constant regimen of repeated propaganda*. His attempts at communication are often taken for jibberish and ignored.
Despite all these privations this reporter found BL to be a generally happy and bright young man. His stoic ability to deal with the constant handling and provactions, especially from two older female inmates, is testimony to his specialness. He rarely complains and typically greets friends and visitors with a smile.
Human rights activists are seeing BL's case as a rallying point. "BL is not alone. Unfortunately this kind of treatment is all too common," said Virginia Sourkraut of the Hong Kong Association of Concerned Citizens and Busybodies. "Right across this city and the world there are others suffering in similar silence," she said as she dabbed a Kleenex.
When asked to comment, chief warden Mrs M denied all knowledge of the allegations. "You've got way too much time on your hands" she told this reporter**. On a tour of the facility where BL is being held this reporter noticed several eye-opening incidents but due to a confidentiality agreement cannot be revealed here.
This reporter was lucky enough to spend a few minutes with BL this morning to ask his thoughts. With a trickle of drool and a mouth of only two teeth, this quiet hero said "Ba ba baaaaaaaa" while gesturing wildly and grasping a soft steam engine, clearly a much loved childhood toy. A tear came to this reporter's eye as BL firmly gripping and proceeded to pinch at my arm hairs. This brief but life changing moment was interupted by Mrs M, who firmly stated it was time for BL's breakfast. With a pleading look in his eyes I was made to say goodbye to BL and his two fellow inmates, JC and PB, under the guise of "going to work".
It is hoped the UN with splash millions of dollars on the affected family. Donations can be made via this reporter at the Paypal button or by purchasing items of this Amazon wishlist. Little BL thanks you.
No babies were harmed in the making of this post. A couple of Cokes were consumed, but that was it.
* by Mattel or Disney, usually.
** this reporter declares a slight conflict of interest as he shares the same bed as Mrs M.
Another example of autocratic supression of the freedom of the masses. What does communism really stand for if not to oppose such cases of man's (and worse women's) inhumanity to man.
I hope BL gathers enough momentum to crap over his oppressors.
PS glad he love the steam engine.
Do you remember how the Disney boosters in our government told us that the big plus in setting up a Disney theme park here would be the enormous increase we would get in visitor arrivals to Hong Kong? They appear to be looking at that big increase a little differently now, with the park set to open within months. They are still asking how we can get these visitors here but not in terms of how we can induce them to come. The problem is rather how we can get them through the chokepoints, if we can at all.
What it all comes down to is that the Disney park is indeed likely to bring a boost to our economy, a cost boost. We will have to invest yet more billions to upgrade border crossings, roads and other infrastructure facilities so that visitors to Hong Kong can spend money on goods and services that do not come from Hong Kong and are largely provided by migrant service workers. Others will get the benefit. We will get the cost.
But in the end that was always how it was likely to be. The difference is that we already have more than twice as many visitors arriving each day as we did when the Disney park was first mooted. We never really needed it and all it will do now is make our congestion problems even worse. It is our misfortune that the one chokepoint that could do us some good, the one that chokes off spending public funds for tourist-related projects that never give us a decent return, is the only one we will never get.
For the week from April 25th to April 29th I will be out of blogging range. I am looking for one or more people who would like to step into the guest post seat. You might be a blogger or a reader who's curious and wanting to give it a trial run. All I ask is you post at least once a day. What to write about? The blog's theme is all things China and Asia but really it is up to you. If you're interested please send me an email: simon[at]simonworld[dot]mu[dot]nu
2. Wanted: Feedback
I would very much appreciate any feedback, advice and constructive criticisms you have. You leave them in the comments or send via email. Some specific questions:
(a) What content do you most and least enjoy?
(b) Are there too many links or too few? Which links do you most often follow (if at all).
(c) How often do you read this site? Daily? Weekly? Blue moonly?
(d) Asia by Blog has been superceded by the Daily Linklets. Which do you prefer and why?
(e) Do you blog? What do you do and where are you living? What other blogs and other websites do you read?
You need not limit your comments to those questions. Any feedback, good or bad, is appreciated.
To give you some incentive, all who provide feedback by comment or email will go into a draw and receive a small token of appreciation.
I am a blogger and sometimes commenter who comes because you offer coverage of life and news in Asia that I can't find anywhere else. On the whole, I prefered Asia by Blog more. It was organized in a way that allowed me to hone in more quickly on the things I was interested in. That said, I bet it was a lot more work for you to do and so I'm quite content with daily linklets because I at least get the benefit of your extensive web of blog contacts.
I read your site daily, sometimes through a blog reader and sometimes by direct link.
I particularly enjoy your posts about economics because I feel as if I learn something every time. But since I like the way you think and write, I even am happy reading about Rugby.
I do blog and the other sites I read are linked to on my blog page. My "Daily (practically) Reads" section was created for my own convenience in gathering my favorites in one place. You're there. I added them in the order I found them and not in the order I favor them.
Finally, as for your links, I follow very few of them because I simply lack the time for extended blog reading. When I have had the time, I've usually found it a worthwhile experience to dip into your links and see what's out there.
To be honest, I rarely click the links unless they promise to be weird/funny, but then I don't have any particular interest in China/Asia (clearly it works for those who do). I actually enjoyed your blog much more when it had more personal stuff, when it was still in orange.
I still read you, but--again, perfect honesty--more for the occasional entertaining link and because you're cool people than because I get that much out of it.
I come here to read about HK and Asia from an Australian perspective. I think it was a link from marginalrevolution.com that brought me here.
I have only been reading ocasionaly for the past couple of weeks, so I don't have much to say about the blog as of yet, but I am a Torontonian, now living in Sydney, and I find it interesting to read about what is happening in HK, part of the world I consider to be where the focus will be for the next century.
I like both the Asia by Blog feature as well as the Daily Linklets... although I think I like the Asia by Blog a little more because it tends to have more links than the daily linklets. I always figured the Asia by Blog could work as a larger, weekly or monthly feature as opposed to daily.
My most favorite thing of all were the Asia Blog Awards, that allowed me to browse through and find blogs from different countries that would otherwise be hard to find.
I enjoy most of the links, especially when they have to do with news and culture. Sometimes I wonder how you have enough time to do this!
I am an ethic Chinese born in Hong Kong and now I am living in Canada. I come upon your blog by looking you up at Google. Anyway, I like your serious way of looking at Hong Kong and Asia. I bet that you know your arch-rivial BWG. He's all about satire. You, on the other hand, give a more serious point of view and I like it.
(a) I like the Insta-like information aggregation, but with more personal touch than the Ecosystem champion.
(b) In the posts themselves, I like the number of links. There are only so many certain sites I read on your blogroll, so its size doesn't really affect me.
(c) Some people start their browsing at Yahoo!, Google, Instapundit, whatever. A good chunk of the time, I start here.
(d) I don't really care either way, but I think I'm reading more stuff outside East Asia because of the switch, which is good. It used to be a bit easy to just ignore the SE/S Asia stuff.
(e) Why yes, I do blog. I'm a university student in Vancouver. In terms of blogs, I mostly read stuff on China written by people whose first language is English, for some reason (too lazy to search for that mystical Chinese blogosphere). I mentioned most of the Sinoblogs I read in my own blog post a few days back.
(http://www.plum-blossom.net/blog/archives/2005/04/why_i_write_abo.php)
The rest of the time, I'm surfing for what everyone else surfs the Internet for. ;)
J/K.
I'd agree with the Liuster. I was looking up an old post of yours a while back to link to in a post I was writing and was struck by the contrast between the stuff you used to write and what you do now.
The old style, where you allowed yourself to write about personal stories, allowed you to write more entertainingly. Your more recent emphasis on covering a lot of ground on Asian news and Asian blogs, spreads your writing (IMHO) too thin.
Although I find your current approach a useful way for me to sample Asian news stories, whether through Asia By Blog, or through the Linklets, it is refreshing when a flash of your old writing style comes through again.
Simon, I'd volunteer to help keep your blog's posts ticking over but I have enough trouble with mine as it is so I doubt I'd do yours justice.
On the Daily Linklets / Asia by Blog question, I think both are great but with the linklets it does get a little "busy". perhaps you could categorise the links in a novel way, e.g. by subject - politics, arts, culture, sport, funnies, etc - rather than the drier nation-by-nation headings you used for Asia by Blog. Just a suggestion.
Simon,
Sorry for the late reply, things have been hectic here :-)
I actually preferred the old system for two reasons. I use an rss reader and every time you update the whole list of old material passes by, and I sometimes do not have the time to find out what exactly is new.
In general: in stead of making your selection you try to become more comprehensive and look more like an aggregator than a commentor. While both approaches can be valid, I liked it more when you make a selection, being comprehensive is anyway very hard these days.
This is a daily collection of links, some with commentary, to news stories and interesting blog posts. It will be updated throughout the day with a new timestamp for the updates.
Hong Kong Disneyland watch: you might not be able to buy tickets from the turnstiles. Ostensibly it is to prevent overcrowding but commissions for travel agents are more likely the reason.
US prosecutors will release court documents in the failed case against Katrina Leung, the FBI's erstwhile Chinese informant accused of being a double agent.
This is a daily collection of links, some with commentary, to news stories and interesting blog posts. It will be updated throughout the day with a new timestamp for the updates.
iTunes is coming to Japan (although still no sign here in Honkers). It was held up by the major labels and their worries over copyright. When will they realise it's their business model they're protecting, not copyright?
China released its now annual human rights white paper. No word how many in slave labour camps were used to compile the report.
Brad DeLong points to an FT article again heralding the end of China's fixed exchange rate. A thought: if China liberalises the exchange rate before it liberalises the capital account it will only hurt its export sector, which has been driving growth. If it liberalises the capital account fully, its just as likely the exchange rate will fall as China's domestic savings and capital leave the country for better investment opportunities and returns. The false assumption often made is the yuan is undervalued. That's not so obvious.
Trying to solve China's piracy problem. Perhaps the US should welcome piracy. If American culture and software can create the means to subvert further the rule of the CCP, wouldn't that be a good thing? And that's only going to happen if these goods stay cheap enough for ordinary Chinese people can afford them. Han has a very comprehensive look at the piracy strawman.
The topic of Myanmar's chairmanship of ASEAN next year is so poisonous ASEAN could only talk about it during a coffee break so their comments couldn't be recorded. It pits ASEAN's principles of non-interference against, well, if they had other principles...
Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer on New Zealand's plan to sign the non-aggression treaty with ASEAN:
"Australia is a proud and independent country, we're able to beat New Zealand at rugby, we thrash them at cricket and there is no reason why we should always do what New Zealand does. We're a more confident country than that."
Blasphemous but plenty of potential. Paula would be her usual self and add nothing of value, except to mock applaud and say condensendingly "I'm so proud of you". Randy would use dude four times, wolf like a dog, use the word "pitchy" and finish saying "It was alright, man, it was alright", which could mean anything from it sucked to it rocked. Simon is the voice of reason. Shaky's right - this thing has legs.
A great word and one which, since I'm on a spelling thing today, I will admit to having misspelled (it's so tempting to spell it in a German way, with a 'c') in public. I was quickly being pulled up for it by a loyal but gloating reader.
James Tien's brief, quixotic attempt to challenge for Chief Executive has ended.
Announcing his decision, Tien made it clear he had consulted some Beijing officials about his possible candidacy and got a feeling that the central government will support Acting Chief Executive Donald Tsang. However, he said the chief reason for his decision not to stand was was an internal party poll which showed little support for him in comparison with Tsang, he said.
The poll conducted by the party between March 31 and April 12 on 6,167 people showed 60 percent favored Tsang as the next chief executive, compared to 5.8 percent for Tien, with 34 percent preferring neither.
Ouch, that's gotta hurt. It can't be a surprise, though. James should be happy: he's closed the gap from seventy times worse than The Don down to only ten times worse.
Even if the Liberals and DAB can't stand The Don, he's Beijing's man and they are going to have to live with it. The Liberals were all embarrassed by Tien's run. The SCMP today reports the vice-chairwoman of the Liberals saying But when asked whether they (election committee members) would nominate him, they said it was not so convenient. It speaks for itself.
Amazingly, I almost feel sorry for James Tien today. Almost.
According to a report on the radio this morning, scientists using the latest electron and x-ray diffraction technology believe they might have detected James Tien’s integrity. It’s amazing what they can do these days. Even more unthinkable until recently, members of the DAB are now coming out and reciting, with perfectly straight faces, ‘Donald Tsang would make a really, really wonderful Chief Executive’. The words must taste bitter. Sir Bow-tie can only be enjoying this. I’m enjoying it. How can any right-minded person not delight in the frisson, the schardenfreude, at seeing years of DAB loyalty, patriotism and shoe-shining rewarded with a kick in the teeth from their beloved Beijing? And who can fail to be impressed by their obedience and willingness to take more? There is a PhD thesis somewhere here – United Front tactics as sado-masochism.
This is a daily collection of links, some with commentary, to news stories and interesting blog posts. It will be updated throughout the day with a new timestamp for the updates.
The bald facts: the SCMP reports a survey has found 60% of men would give up two years of life in return for a full head of hair. It found 57% would pay HK$100,000 or more for hair-loss treatment! But help is at hand. The first prize, won by Koji Tanaka, in a Japanese contest for the finest head of new/regrown hair was HK$216,000. Mr Tanaka was considering using the money to buy more treatments.
Australian Wenhao Zhao was arrested yesterday outside Washington's Capitol building. He had two suitcases with him and had asked to see President Bush. The suitcases contained a CD player and some music. Clearly he thought the President needed help with his playlist.
Ironically, the bigger the Chinese economy becomes, the more vulnerable it grows to US countermeasures. And because any US-Chinese confrontation would be economically catastrophic for both countries, and to Japan and South Korea besides, Taiwan's real guarantee against invasion is that it is a poisoned pawn. It would cost China everything it worked for in the last two decades to swallow.
I couldn't agree more.
The Commisar brings the Carnival of the Coward, a continuing expose of Paul from Wizbang. Also check out Michele's thoughts on something I've often said - extremism outweighs moderation in the blogging world (not to mention the echo chamber the encourages extremism). Zombyboy is also hankering for a return to blogging's better days. There seems to be a growing groundswell of readership and bloggers looking for a return to moderation (perhaps a reflection of post-election politics), or is it just nostalgia? I hope the former but fear it's the latter.
In an effort to catch the populist wave, various Hong Kong groups are planning anti-Japan activites including a rally for this weekend. The issue is uniting the Democrats with the DAB, The Frontier and the Federation of Trade Unions. The Professional Teachers' Union is planning a letter writing campaign for all school students in the city. It's good they're being taught understanding and tolerance at such a young age.
China's Vice-Minister for Commerce, Wei Jianguo, said yesterday bilateral economic ties won't be affected by the recent actions. The same article in the (unlinkable) SCMP reports many Japanese citizens in China are preparing to leave if things turn for the worse. Likewise calls for boycotts and vandalism of Japanese stores and products will obviously hurt economic ties. Already there's anecdotal evidence of the impact. This presents another dilemma for China's Government - will it be prepared to let these protests impact on economic ties? The window of opportunity for getting a grip on this thing is quickly closing. The restrictions on official reporting of the event are being undermined by blogs...an interesting twist for those who see blogs as bringers of freedom, democracy and good to the world.
As a thought: what kind of apology would satisfy China and Korea? I fear there isn't one because the issue is too handy for politicians in both places.
Other reading
* Philip Bowring in the IHT points out the real issue is the UN Security Council. He says China's anti-Japan stance hurts China's global standing, saying it is a crude and blatant attempt to protect its privileged position as the only Asian and only developing country that is a permanent member of the (UN Security) council. He also notes the differences in relations between India and Japan with China at the moment.
* Tom Plate warns of the dangers of keeping Japan in its place. A main argument against the integration of Japan -- to focus on that one issue -- into the council core seems more emotional than analytic, and in effect goes like this: Having committed atrocities of the unimaginable kind more than a half century ago, the newer generations Japanese should be denied what makes eminent sense today because of what made no sense back then: Japanese savagery against its Asian neighbors.
* Photos from the protests in Guangzhou and plenty of first-hand photos from the Beijing protests.
* Why Chinese people are pissed off with the Japanese. Naturally China is blaming Japan for the mess.
* Curzon says China's anti-Japanese nationalism is a recent invention.
* Japundit has an interesting post finding it ironic that East Asians are allowing emotions to dominate their lives when much of their culture is about detaching oneself from emotions. The conclusion echoes my thoughts above:
If the Japanese banned the single textbook, renounced all the disputed territory, and apologized once a week for the next five years, the same people would find something else to get upset about. The anger at the Japanese is not the wellspring; it’s the intoxication with emotion.
This is a daily collection of links, some with commentary, to news stories and interesting blog posts. It will be updated throughout the day with a new timestamp for the updates.
Scroll down for today's other posts.
We have a dog, so I can feel for Eugene Oh and Grace Chin, who lost their dog in an attack by some neighbour's dogs. But HK$20mm in damages? Post-traumatic stress disorder? Perspective, people. Perspecitve.
Hong Kong's Government House will be renovated, reports the SCMP, so the next Chief Executive can use it if he so chooses. The Government refused to disclose how much was being spent or if the new CE will live in the house. Tung Che-hwa would not move into the house due to bad feng shui...which makes me wonder how much worse things could have been if he had lived there.
The U.S. trade deficit probably widened in February to $59 billion, the second-largest on record, because of rising imports from China and other countries, economists said before a government report today.
The beauty of trade is one country's deficit is another's surplus. So naturally China must have recorded a massive trade surplus, right? Wrong. China's trade surplus widens as exports surge:
The surplus reached $5.7 billion, up from $4.4 billion in February and rebounding from a $630 million deficit in March 2004.
Hang on a second. China only had a $5.7 billion surplus for the month while the US had a deficit ten times that number? What's going on?
The answer is simple. China is becoming the world's middleman. It imports resources and raw materials from commodity producer countries, it uses its cheap labour to transform those resources into products, and then it exports the finished products to Wal-Mart. China then recycles the "profits" of this process largely by buying US dollars and Government securities. Effectively, the USA is in a giant hire purchase arrangement with China (and others). It might all end in tears. But if the US continues to consume more than it produces and its consumers are rational (in the economic sense) then those consumers are estimating they will be able to repay their accumulated debts down the track. That's their choice. As long as China is prepared to continue funding their largesse the cycle continues.
Imposing tariffs or trade restrictions on China will obviously hurt China itself. But it will also hurt all of those countries that export and run large trade surpluses with China. It will hurt all of those US consumers who are enjoying cheaper clothes, video players and whatever else thanks to China's ability to transform resources into goods reliably and cheaply. America should be thanking China and celebrating the rapid benefits the cycle is bringing both to themselves and the millions of Chinese rising out of poverty.
Next time you hear about the China trade bogey-man, remember this: China isn't the problem, it's the middleman.
The whole "yuan low" thing isn't as much a decision by china to take advantage of its competitors (though that is a huge side effect), it's more a decision by China not to do too many reforms to its extremely undeveloped banking system.
The whole low-RMB situation is actually dangerous for China since the economy is likely to slip when it gets evaluated.
Fabian: that's not part of China's policy. It's a function of having a fixed exchange rate. There's plenty of argument whether China's exchange rate is "too low". The trade surplus seems to indicate it might not be, given it's only slightly in surplus.
Suppose for a moment you have some serious money to spend on a new Hong Kong home. Equipped with at least HK$150 million, which of the following properties would you buy: a 6,000-square-foot house atop the Peak or a top-floor unit in a 1,054-flat tower block on reclaimed land in West Kowloon?
Absurd, you say. How could a Kowloon flat be worth anything near a fully detached house on the Peak?
Easy, argues developer Sun Hung Kai Properties. Tastes among Hong Kong’s well-to-do have changed, it says, and buyers are queueing up to pay more than $30,000 per square foot for penthouse duplexes in the Arch, near Kowloon Station...The duplexes offer easy access to the public transport network and range in size from 3,323 sq ft to 5,497 sq ft.
The highest unit price yet seen for a house is the $26,000 per square foot paid for 57 Plantation Road on the Peak last year. For a flat, the record figure is slightly higher – $28,000 per square foot, forked out last year for a unit in Kerry Properties’ Branksome Crest.
As an aside, it is curious that in Hong Kong all property developments are marketed with very little reference to the place themselves. Arty-farty ads, lifestyle ads, wide open spaces ads, but none that show you the dog boxes they sell at high (but sure to go higher) prices.
I always worry about a product if the advertiser isn't prepared to show it.
This is part of the SimTerror '05 exercise. Click the graphic for more information. You can follow the exercise at Silent Running's SimTerror category.
President of the Republic of Indonesia
Immediate Release. April 12th, 2005.
The Indonesian Security Cabinet met today in Jakarta. Despite the deplorable events in Australia it has been decided the planned military exercises to be conducted by the combined Indonesian armed forces in West Timor will go ahead as planned.
President Simoni remarked: "These exercises have been planned for months. They are part of a regular cycle of such training exercises to keep Indonesia's military world class. I am happy to announce that several senior East Timorese military personnel will observe the exercise first-hand.
On the Sydney bombings, I want to repeat the Indonesian people are with the Australian people at this time. If this horrible event teaches us anything, it is that tolerance and understanding are the ways forward. I hope the Australian public remembers that in the days ahead."
This is a daily collection of links, some with commentary, to news stories and interesting blog posts. It will be updated throughout the day with a new timestamp for the updates.
Scroll down for today's other posts.
In 1962 China and India went to war over their border. A historic settlement of the Sino-Indian border is to be signed today. Changing times. Also India is more efficient than China in using capital. That post finishes with this comment on China's economic boom: one common characteristic of bubbles is that they never feel that way when you are in them. Just ask Alan Greenspan. Also Tyler Cowen notes China's compartively poor use of energy in generating GDP. The China economic machine is awesome, but not surprisingly it is also not very efficient. But why would a quasi-Communist economy with plenty of state owned companies ever be economically efficient? That said at least some Chinese businesses are damn good negotiators.
In retaliation for the anti-secession law, Taiwan has expelled the reporters from Xinhua and People's Daily. Strike a blow for press freedom in Taiwan.
The anti-Japan riots in China over the weekend are an indication of both the depths of feeling amongst the Chinese public and the difficulty the Chinese Government is having in putting a lid on the nationalist frenzy it has whipped up. The Government has already put a clamp on official media reports, but modern communication techniques (including BBS and blogs) and hints of official involvement show that even the Government is divided on how to handle this turn of events. Ironically Japan is now demanding an apology from China. On Sunday the riots continued in both Guangzhou and Shenzhen. The US Consul General in Shanghai was worried enough to issue an alert to American citizens. The danger is this snowballs completely out of Beijing's control. Are they willing to take on what they've created?
Since it is not everyday I watch something that makes the front pages of the international press I find it interesting to compare their reporting with my own impression. My only complaint would be that when it is a large focus on the smashed window, therefore sounding more aggressive than it actually was. This is also the case when it comes to the reported numbers, often citing the highest numbers available, while this was not a very large demonstration.
It seems to me that the Chengdu situation is not so much a clampdown as stopping protestors who crossed the line by vandalizing places of commerce. Business is business, after all.
The Chinese government has been rather hard on Japan for some time, but
especially in recent months. Many Japanese consider the Chinese government
at least an accessory after the fact in the student attacks on the Japanese
Consulate in Shanghai. It is plain to see that the Chinese police aren't
overzealous in putting a stop to the vandalism of Japanese property.
More generally, the Japanese are getting tired of the Chinese government's
selective use of history. The Chinese government is demanding yet another
apology from the Japanese government for the Rape of Nanking and other
acts of Japanese brutality in China before and during World War II.
At the same time, it treats any reference to the more recent, and continuing,
Chinese brutality in Tibet as contrary to the rules of international discourse.
Since Tibet has been incorporated into China, what goes on there is an
internal matter, and foreigners have no right to discuss it.
Many Japanese have lost patience with this one-sided spirit of criticism.
Following is a Japanese comment on the question of relative culpability,
Japanese and Chinese.
This post is part of SimTerror '05. Click the above logo for more information.
President of Republic of Indonesia - Official Press Release
11th April, 2005. Immediate release.
Jakarta - President Simoni of Indonesia has called Prime Minister Brain of Australia over the Sydney rail and other bombings. The President expressed his condolences on behalf of all the people of Indonesia. With all the generosity and help Australia has offered Indonesia in recent times the President has pledged all and any assistance that may be needed. To that end he has offered the use of a small brigade of the Indonesian Armed Forces and a contingent of the Indonesian police force with experience from the recent tsunami to help in recovery efforts. He has asked the Ministry for Culture to organise as soon as is practical a fundraising concert with the best of Indonesia's entertainment industry. The thoughts and prayers of all Indonesians are with Australia at this time.
Stumbling around the blogosphere I came across Angry Bear's post on China's new weapon (via Brad Setser's anaylsis of global reserves accumulation). Kash fantasises about a China holding the US foreign policy hostage to China's massive holdings of US securities. The same lead me to Kash's original post on China's real weapon. In it he speculates what would happen if China decided to dump, say, $100 bn of US government bonds on the market all at once? In fact, what would happen if China simply threatened to do so?...Is China’s influence over the US bond market similarly irrelevant, or is it actually a useful weapon? After weighing the pros and cons, the conclusion is this would impose enormous costs on the US, while imposing moderate costs on China. Read the comments for an even more amusing ride to the corner of Paranoia St and Stupidity Lane.
Kash outlines the likely effects on both countries and puts paid to the scenario even if he doesn't realise it. To summarise in the US:
1. Immediate rapid rise in interest rates and large falls in stocks.
2. Higher mortgage and consumer interest rates, bursting the real estate bubble.
3. Curtailed spending from households.
4. Cuts in business investment.
5. In sum, an immediate halt to US economic growth.
Funnily enough all those effects would also have the up-side of correcting many of the imbalances in the US economy. It would lead to a rapid change in the US trade balance, reducing the need for foreign purchases of US dollars and securities. It would obviously involve economic pain, but it is pain that is due to occur in the US sooner or later regardless, unless Alan Greenspan is able to defeat the laws of economics. The effects on China:
1. Massive capital losses on China's official reserves.
2. Need to buy back yuan sterilisation bonds i.e. a need to inject money into China's already inflation prone economy.
3. China's interest rates would rise with the US, although because credit is often allocated based on other reasons than price it may not be as big a factor. That, however, is rapidly changing as China's banks clear up balance sheets, crack down on corruption and move to a proper price/credit risk model. Mr Bear doesn't mention it but the devaluation of the dollar would automatically mean a depreciating yuan, at a time when many want it revalued.
4. The slowing of the US economy would hit China's exports and slow its economy.
The sum of all this: China would be hurting itself, but hurting the US more, so it would likely use this "weapon". The analysis ignores second order effects (global recession, potential help for the US from others, the higher proportion of China's GDP devoted to trading, knock-on effects on both China and US trading partners to name a few), plus the rapid end to China's massive foreign direct investment inflows that have been responsible for much of its current boom. It also ignores other countries that also hold large reserves such as India (Kashmir), Russia (Central Asia, Putin's moves away from democracy) and Taiwan to name a few. What the post demonstrates is an increasingly common but worrying trend in America - paranoia about China. Many Americans cannot understand China so they are choosing to react in the easiest way: by fearing it.
This is effectively the economic equivalent of nuclear war. It is, especially in the case of the USA and China, a case of mutually assured destruction. What Kash and others seem to miss is how crucial the current system is to China's well-being. China still has 800 million peasants who have barely felt the economic growth that has so benefitted the city dwellers. China's per capita GDP is 1/30th of the United States. Additionally none of the potential issues on the table between US and China are insolvable or even worthy of this nuclear option. That includes Taiwan. And China's leadership are particularly keen to make sure their legacy is a more prosperous China, not the starters of the world's second Great Depression with disppoportionate effects on its population. Finally the analysis assumes China wouldn't mind taking a massive hit on their portfolio and the destablisation of their financial system because of the geopolitical benefits of getting their own way. The Chinese are many things, but they aren't stupid.
This isn't to say the underlying economic problems don't exist. Quite to the contrary. My issue is the focus on China. Japan is an even larger holder of US dollar reserves. As pointed out above several other nations with geopolitical points of difference with the US are also large reserve holders. The sustainability (or lack thereof) of the world's current economic system is for another time. But this scenario, singling out China as the bogey-bear, is far-fetched. It reminds me of the kind of Japan-bashing that was so popular in the 80s, where Japan was destined to rule the world economically. It assumes China weighs the costs and benefits and decides it comes out slightly ahead, so it would go ahead. But the costs to China are far more long term and long range than this analysis gives credit.
China (and others) are lenders to an America that is spending more than it earns. China holds a reasonably large percentage of American debts. But would Japan, Russia and others stand idly by while China decimated their holdings of American debt to further its geopolitical aims?
One of the commenters at Angry Bear said it best:
I don't think China has any great animus towards the US. There is no reason to believe that they do. No great admiration, either. Rather, they are completely indifferent towards the US. They don't care if the US rises or falls. So they have no "long range plans" wrt. the US. They'll play it as it develops. If they have a plan it is concerned chiefly their own long range goals. But they really don't care, one way or the other.
This indifference is very hard for many US citizens to get. The US Is NUMBER # 1...so when someone else merely looks at the US as a fixture of the landscape--something to mate with, run away from, or eat--they just don't understand. "They" must hate us, or love us, and act accordingly.
Well, the Chinese (and the Russians, and the Europeans, and so on) don't.
China can and should be seen as a potential ally rather than a potential threat. It will act how it is treated by America. As China emerges and assumes its place as a global power the rest of the world will need to accomodate, understand and accept. Fearing the sky falling in won't help. Especially when China lives under the same sky.
You forgot to note that if China dumps the American dollar, it doesn't have much to hold up the renminbi's value. Cue: hyperinflation. Considering that the CCP's main claim to power currently rests on the dual-reason of nationalism and a good economy, losing both would be disasterous for the Communists.
Of course, that's assuming that China is a rational actor.
Wow, that's a great post Simon. We've disagreed about some things in the past but this is excellent. Keep it up.
Rajan R, sometimes I think the Chinese have a better sense of cost and benefit than the we do in the west. If not better, than at least different but definitely still rational.
The whole point of Kash's imaginary conversation is that China has a 'nuclear option' -- just because it's not in their best interest to use it, doesn't mean they won't threaten the U.S. with it.
I agree with you that some of the China-bashers on Angry Bear has crossed the line into paranoia -- I'm not sure they're really out to 'get' us per se. I see the situation where China (and other central banks) keeps buying our debts and the U.S. keeps spending as an unhealthy, co-dependent relationship that can't last forever. Like an aristocrat teetering on the edge of bankruptcy who can still get credit on lavish carriages and jewelry from increasingly nervous vendors. They'll have to cut us off eventually, even if they really, really don't want to.
But even using the threat against the US is destructive to China. Kash doesn't believe the consequences are as great for China if they weild the threat - I disagree.
It comes down to the same problem: many see China as a threat. It will become one if that's how it's treated.
Conrad, erstwhile Hong Kong blogger, once against a plan to introduce food labelling in Hong Kong. His basic premise was such labelling imposes an unnecessary cost on food producers and the onus should be on those who want the information to find it themselves. I disagreed with him, saying the benefits outweigh the costs.
I was reminded of this by two articles over the weekend.
Firstly Saturday's SCMP reports the HK Government expects to save up to HK$10 billion over 20 years in medical and other spending thanks to food labelling. The flipside is up to 10% of packaged food products will be forced out of the market due to the costs of including nutritutional information on their labels (which demonstrates the thin margins food producers have). Now of course these are rosy numbers given it was a Government sponsored reoprt. But the program is to be phased in over several years and includes a generous Government assistance program. The first stage demands all foods with nutritional claims to spell out the calories and data on protein, carbs, total fats, saturated fats and sodium. That's a sensible first step which should be welcomed by those products that genuinely believe their own marketing. The second phase will expand the labelling to all food. The study estimated food costs will at most rise by 1%. Most amazingly the Hong Kong Food Trade Association had no position on the issue. What do they do all day?
Food labelling is a case where Government mandated regulation is justifiable. The small additional costs in adding the labels are far outweighed by the benefits to public health. If Conrad doesn't want to read the labels, that's fine. A similar case is the warning messages added to cigarette packets. I doubt their effectiveness but no-one objects to having "Smoking causes cancer" plastered over their packs. The same applies to food.
This segues nicely with the next article. The SCMP yesterday reported an anti-pollution group is trying to speed up the banning of smoking in restaurants and bars in Hong Kong. I have a serious problem with blanket smoking bans. I'll start by saying I am not a smoker and hate them. But I respect that many do smoke and do so as informed choice (those warning labels and all). Now the market is a clever thing. Many restaurants have both smoking and non-smoking areas, catering to both types. One bar in Hong Kong has even banned smoking completely. In other words the market has already found a sensible middle ground on smoking. Non-smokers object to second-hand smoke, so bars and restaurants cater to their needs. Those that want to light up can do so without fear of annoying others.
Smoking banners wonder about the effects on staff. There are several answers. Firstly staff in bars and restaurants know the will be exposed to smoke - they make a judgement if they are willing to put up with it. They are free to say no. As far as creating a "safe" work environment, anyone who's been in a pub after most of the patrons have had a few pints know alcohol can be far more dangerous. So can working in coal mines, flying planes, working in the military or any number of other dangerous jobs. They are part of the working conditions. The end result: smoking bans are wrong. If you want to ban smoking completely, that's a different issue (why not going after boxing while you're at it). But so long as Governments allow legal smoking these restrictions are unjustifiable.
So what's the difference between the two? The food labelling scheme provides clear benefits for little cost. The smoking ban provides few benefits for prohibitive cost. Morally giving consumers greater information improves their ability to choose. But the onus always needs to be on those who wish to restrict freedoms.
Wang Zhenmin, senior research fellow at the Institute of Hong Kong and Macau Affairs, said Tung Chee-hwa's successor shuold be entitled to run for two full five-year terms, in addition to serving the remainder of Mr Tung's term.
He said he had never changed his position on the maximum term a chief executive could serve...However in an article for Ming Pao, he wrote that Article 46 of the Basic Law said no individual could serve as chief executive more than twice - meaning whoever wins in July could serve seven years at most in the job.
Yesterday he reverted to his original stance, saying that if the remaineder of an outgoing chief executive's term was less than half the full ters, or 2.5 years, then it would not be considered a full term.
It's getting embarrassing, all these flip flops. You'd think Beijing would work out its plan and let all the appropriate lackeys know. If they have one.
I am looking for someone in Hong Kong to help me with a media experiment, starting in about a month. Ideally I am looking for a budding or freelance journalist.
If you are up for a challenge, know of someone who might be interested or want more details please send an email to simon[at]simonworld[dot]mu[dot]nu
This is a daily collection of links, some with commentary, to news stories and interesting blog posts. It will be updated throughout the day with a new timestamp for the updates.
Why Hong Kong needs a competition law part 294: the SCMP reports "a cartel of 11 driving schools and instructor unions will stnadardise fees today at the 1997 level to halt cutthroat competition in the shrinking industry." Remember Hong Kong has suffered deflation since 1997, so those prices are higher than current ones. The cartel had the chutzpah to ask the media to disseminate the new fixed prices. The Standard has another example of anti-competitive practices in market stalls. Remember this next time you read about the world's free-est economy.
The SCMP also reports: A stubborn leech took three doctors and five medical examinations to be removed from the nostrils of a 55-year-old woman hiker, a month after it invaded her nose. Another reason not to go hiking in Hong Kong.
Starting Monday I will be participating in SimTerror '05.
Former high flying internet analyst Henry Blodget went to Shanghai where it rained, he checked out some fakes and an exhibition before catching the train to Beijing. People actually get paid for writing fluff like this?
Dinocrat asks how concerntrated and leveraged is China's wealth, to which I'd answer very and not much (China's saving ratio is around 40%). He also points to a show town in Shandong and wonders what the others like.
While Korea is encouraging outward bound investment to offset its large foreign exchange reserves, China is restricting individual outbound investment. It seems a backward step in closing the capital account when Chinese policy has been a gradual opening of the capital account to allow for a free® float of the yuan.
The woman went to see a private doctor, who treated her blocked nosebleed with anti-bacterial medicine. But it didn't get any better for obvious reasons.
Eventually she went to a hospital and while being examined, the doctor the leech creep out. But the doctor wasn't quick enough to snatch it. Now that they knew what it was, they put her (and her leech) under with anaesthetics, and then extracted the leech with instruments. Such as the gory details ...
Beijing will release its interpretation of Hong Kong's Basic Law on April 27th following The Don's request yesterday. Beijing will send representatives to a meeting to consult on the interpretations. Audrey Eu rightly said "It is just a show to pacify the local legal sector. For myself, calling for a two-hour meeting and photo-call session after the government decides to seek the interpretation will not cultivate a good relationship between both parties. The end result. This July 1st rally will again have hundreds of thousands marching, just a couple of weeks before the Chief Executive election. The stupidest part of all this is The Don is by far the most popular politician in the city. But again Beijing and Hong Kong's elite have blundered the sucession, corrupting the Basic Law and process for the sake of political expediency. That might work in China. It appears it now works in Hong Kong too.
Meanwhile The Don has used his official mouthpiece, the South China Morning Post, to print his defence of asking for the interpretation. It's below the fold, with some thoughts on the difference between The Don's words and deeds.
Update: Hong Kong's lawyers are on the march. ESWN summarises some polling and opinions on the rule of law in Hong Kong. It includes this killer quote: "Some barristers only know how to nap while sitting on the toilet". That's going to keep me smiling all weekend.
I have been part of Hong Kong's civil service for more than three decades. Throughout my entire career, I have worked with many people whose driving impulse has been to serve Hong Kong. That remains as true today as it did when I first entered government. The past couple of weeks have been among the most momentous periods since our reunification with the mainland in 1997, and it has left me in the hot seat as Hong Kong's acting chief executive. It is not easy to describe the enormous level of responsibility I feel.
What sets Hong Kong apart is our ability to sustain social stability and economic growth. One key element of our success is the institutions that buttress our development. These include our legal system, which is underpinned by an independent judiciary, our legislature, and our civil service. Each operates independently but is an integral part of the whole. In short, ours is a system of government like many others.
However, Hong Kong has some distinguishing features, including a very internationally minded and outward-looking government, owing to our close integration into world markets long before globalisation became a catchphrase. Within the ranks of our civil service and judiciary are nationals from Britain, Australia, the United States, Canada and India.
Moreover, our Court of Final Appeal calls on some of the most esteemed minds of the common-law world. We have a large foreign population and one of the world's largest consular corps. International chambers of commerce play a very active and vital role in government consultations. Our Basic Law even allows for foreign nationals to be elected to one-fifth of the seats in our legislature.
If you had stopped reading here, you would have thought he was arguing why the Basic Law process should be followed, letting the courts decide. Alas.
Hong Kong's cosmopolitanism long ago planted the seeds of tolerance and respect in our approach to government. As a result, we are committed to dialogue and compromise as the only way to balance the many competing demands and opinions that pervade public affairs. Good government is not a competition. It is not about winning or losing, or whose view or will prevails. It is about making the best decisions for the community.
Inevitably, this will often involve compromise. Indeed, as our society has grown more sophisticated, it has also become more complex and pluralistic. This means that the government can no longer afford to view issues in isolation; its operations need to be decompartmentalised as well as streamlined. This is a difficult task, given that some of our systems have been in place for many years, often entrenched in law.
Of course, pragmatism has its limits, because good government is also about upholding core values. I have often referred to what I call the four pillars of Hong Kong's success: the rule of law, a level playing field for business, a clean and efficient civil service, and the free flow of information. These are values that we simply will not compromise. To do so would mark the beginning of the end for Hong Kong.
Since reunification, we have the added safeguard of the Basic Law, which gives effect to the principles of "one country, two systems" and "Hong Kong's people running Hong Kong with a high degree of autonomy". Good government also requires sharing a vision of the future - the purposes and thinking behind public policies - with the community. Our vision is to develop Hong Kong as Asia's world city.
The Basic Law embodies this vision, laying the foundations for our development over a 50-year period and providing the freedom and the power for us to position ourselves as Asia's world city - and to do it on our own. At the same time, it also embodies the depth of the central government's support for Hong Kong. It is thus crucial to the good governance of the special administrative region.
In many areas - financial services, infrastructure, communications technology, and tourism - I would say that we have reached our goals. Hardly a day goes by when we do not read something in the local press that refers to our status as Asia's world city. Even when people feel that we have not lived up to the standards expected of a world city, we are glad to be held to a high benchmark, because it keeps us on our toes.
Hong Kong's officials share a common mission to maintain the stability and prosperity of our city. Our duty is to make Hong Kong a better place for us all, without hidden agendas. It is an onerous and solemn undertaking, uplifting one day and extremely frustrating the next.
But, above all, it is an honour and a privilege to play such a role in our society, and I know that the vast majority of officials, legislators, judges and civil servants with whom I have worked would agree.
Here endeth The Don's campaign speech. But it is curious that he undermines his point on the rule of law and the Basic Law as "safeguards" given he has circumvented the Basic Law on the clear meaning of Article 45 and the CE's term.
It's a curious political tactic. Usually politicians wait until they're elected before they contradict themselves. This is a clear disconnect between words and deeds. Hong Kong can only hope this is an exception rather than what we can expect from The Don's rule.
This is a daily collection of links, some with commentary, to news stories and interesting blog posts. It will be updated throughout the day with a new timestamp for the updates.
Scroll down for today's other posts.
Asia's already pushing its candidate for next UN Secretary General. You'd have thought they'd be fighting over who won't have to do it.
China's laying the groundwork to block reform of the UN Security Council. They are asking for no time limit on reform (ie it can be postponed indefinately) and consensus from the 191 member General Assembly. That gives every member effective veto power over the reforms. It is death by bureacracy.
The fueding continues between Japan and both China and South Korea. What's most interesting is the differing methods of protest. In China there have been boycotts, protests and online petitions. After yesterday officially telling the media to stop reporting anti-Japan protests, today it emerges China has banned books pleading for greater Sino-Japanese understanding. ESWN has some translations of the banned author's work so you can judge for yourself. Also just to remind you why people in China feel so strongly about this issues, read ESWN's account of the Japanese history textbook revisions.
(17:33) The GaijinBiker points out an interesting angle on the Japan textbook affair. Some well made points. The only problem I have is that history, especially this history, is not necessarily an internal matter. For another take, Laowiseass blames the current anti-Japan feeling on Chinese self-loathing.
It's a small blogosphere. I recently came across John & Belle have a blog, I think via Brad DeLong. A well written philosophy/liberal site with a side of Martha Stewart (pre-incarceration), it turns out John and Belle live in Singapore. Interesting.
How cool is that, to have a famous blogger so close to home? (he's a co-blogger on Crooked Timber)
I don't study at NUS myself, but I've got friends who were taught by him. Quite possibly the first person in Singapore to use blogs as a teaching tool.
Today's SCMP devotes a page to the "problem" of scalpers coming to Hong Kong in the wake of the Rugby Sevens (full article below the fold). Scalpers aren't a problem; they are a solution.
Scalpers can only work when demand for tickets exceeds the supply. Ticket prices are fixed so there is no mechanism for supply and demand to balance. So scalpers correct a case of market failure. They invest time and money in the expectation that excess demand will exist after supply is exhausted. No one forces the buyers of scalped tickets to pay the higher prices. Buyers make a rational decision that the value of those tickets to them is X, and that's what they will pay up to. It doesn't matter who supplies the ticket. And it's still a win-win.
What about the poor promoter? They've set the prices of the original tickets. They cannot complain if they price them too low. There are plenty of ways to solve the competing needs of maximising revenue but still providing tickets to the fans. But try this from the HKRFU:
"It [scalping] prevents tickets from getting into the hands of the people that we think they should be going to at the price we want people to pay for them."
That's the Hong Kong Rugby Football Union doing their best impression of Communism. For some reason sports remain one of the last bastions of command-and-control economics in capitalist societies. It's not just tickets. Think of salary caps, transfers, drafts. They're all market distorting mechanisms. I don't know why they are allowed or encourage in professional sport.
For an excellent piece on the economics of events pricing and potential solutions, read David Webb's Hong Kong's Own Goal. Well worth the time.
There is an easy way to stop scalping. It's mentioned in the breakout box in the SCMP article. Simply charge a high price for the event. You might not sell all the seats, but that's another matter.
Removing the scalp
In Britain they are called "touts". In Australia and North America they are "scalpers", but whichever the country, and no matter what you call them, there is no question as to what they are - parasites - and it looks as though Hong Kong is going to be seeing a lot more of them.
Almost anywhere in the world, if demand for tickets for a major sporting or entertainment event seems likely to outstrip supply, scalpers are there - offering them on the street at double, treble, quadruple or perhaps 10 times the face value. With more and more events on that scale taking place in Hong Kong, people involved in the international pre-owned ticket business are looking at the city with new interest.
Of course there will always be amateurs keen to make a fast buck by selling on tickets for more than they paid for them - often via the internet, the impersonality of which has made the process easier for those who prefer to keep their hands clean of grubby person-to-person sales on the street.
Many scalpers, however, are professionals who travel extensively as part of the job. Quite a few are from Britain, and they run a close second to the country's football hooligans as its least loved exports.
Even on the mainland, train tickets during the Lunar New Year are an especially big industry for touts, and police patrol stations vigorously to crack down on those selling tickets at grossly inflated prices to travellers trying to get home for the Lunar New Year holiday.
In Hong Kong, event organisers in particular loathe them. Just ask Robbie McRobbie, community rugby manager of the Hong Kong Rugby Football Union (HKRFU) who had to contend with the problem at last month's Rugby World Cup Sevens.
"You want to ensure that all genuine rugby fans and members of the Hong Kong community get access to tickets at the prices they're supposed to be sold at," he says. "When you get these people coming in from overseas - mainly Britain - basically doing this as a living, it's ripping off our own friends in the community, which does upset us quite honestly."
For many years when the Hong Kong Sevens was held in smaller venues, ticket scalping was an annually recurrent nuisance. But in 1994, when the event moved to the Hong Kong Stadium with its 40,000 seating capacity, supply began to outstrip demand and the problem all but disappeared.
This year it came back with a vengeance: in the run-up to the Sevens, tickets which cost $1,000 for the three days were being offered on internet sites for five times that sum - and finding takers.
By Thursday and Friday of the week of the match, they were changing hands at similarly inflated prices in popular Sevens watering holes such as the Dickens Bar at The Excelsior hotel in Causeway Bay. Then, over the weekend itself, business took to the streets.
According to Mr McRobbie, the scalpers were not much in evidence around the stadium itself - although a number of fans who attended dispute that - but they were certainly lining the approach route from Causeway Bay.
According to one fan, anybody dressed like a rugby supporter stood as much chance of getting to the games without being approached by a scalper as a tourist would of walking along Nathan Road without being pestered to buy a suit or a copy-watch.
"We tried to take a few measures to reduce the incidence of ticket scalping, one of which was the creation of the Sevens Village, next door to the stadium, with a massive screen to provide an alternative venue for those without tickets, that still had a bit of the atmosphere of inside the stadium," Mr McRobbie says.
"Also, the way in which we distributed the tickets this year, with most of them going through our own rugby clubs, enabled us to track them much more effectively and consequently we are confident that there were far fewer tickets getting into the hands of professional scalpers than in previous years."
Be that as it may, according to computer company executive and long-time Sevens fan Ron Gould, enough of them did. Mr Gould has attended the Sevens almost every year since 1990, even during periods of residence outside Hong Kong, and traditionally organises tickets for a group of friends who travel from the US and Britain to the SAR annually for that weekend.
Usually this is fairly straightforward to arrange, but this year was a Rugby World Cup Sevens event, and ticket availability to members of the general public who do not belong to rugby clubs was restricted. Mr Gould could not get as many as he needed.
"I thought, `let's see what else we can get', and started combing the internet. There seemed to be lots of tickets for sale around the world, but at rather phenomenal prices. You could visit at least two or three websites where tickets were offered for sale at prices of up to £350 [$5,137]. It seemed that there was no shortage of tickets for anybody who was prepared to pay over the odds for them - two or three times the price - and the closer we got to the Friday of the games, the higher the price," Mr Gould recalls.
As it turned out, he was able to obtain all the tickets he needed by legitimate means - although he had to advise his friends to fly to Hong Kong more expensively than they might otherwise have done on Cathay Pacific Sevens packages. Before the matches he met up with a few of them at the Dickens Bar.
The scalpers were there too.
"In the Dickens Bar I would have been able to get extra tickets for $4,500. For a Sunday ticket alone they were asking $1,700, but lesser amounts for the Friday and the Saturday. Outside the ground there were innumerable people asking if you wanted to buy tickets. I went to the ground every day and I got approached every day," he says.
It is surprising, in light of this, that over the entire weekend only one ticket scalper was arrested - albeit, according to sources, a well-known international professional tout.
According to the Police Public Relations Branch (PPRB), a 43-year-old Caucasian male with a British passport was observed by police to be "engaging in activities not compatible with his status as a tourist". Instead of being charged with ticket scalping - an offence under Section 6 of the Places of Public Entertainment Ordinance, for which offenders are liable on summary conviction to pay a fine of $2,000 - he was handed over to the Immigration Department and released on $2,000 bail pending further action.
Mr McRobbie - formerly an officer of the force - is full of praise for the policing of the Sevens, but it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that scalping is an offence which neither police nor the public take sufficiently seriously.
Explaining what looks a lot like inaction on the police's part in this matter, the PPRB says: "Police will consider the relevance and application of various laws in our enforcement actions. Regarding police work during the recent Rugby Sevens tournament, police have deployed adequate manpower to regulate the traffic, perform crowd management duties and to deter and detect any illegal activities."
It says that no records have been kept of past action taken against offenders. In other words, it's no big deal.
Some fans even argue that the touts are supplying a service. John, a British rugby supporter and Hong Kong resident, went on the Sunday without tickets, expecting to buy them from a tout on the way in. He paid just over double the face value for just one day, but less than the $1,000 he would have had to shell out for all three - the only ticket option the HKRFU offered this year.
"It's a classic example of the free market economy in action, and it's very efficient," he says. "If the demand wasn't there the touts wouldn't be.
"Mind you, two things surprised me. One of the tickets - the tout was asking $1,700 for two, but I got them for $1,200 - was a sponsor's ticket. Very naughty, and also quite traceable. The other was that the guy I bought them from had a South African accent. I was expecting a British wide-boy."
Mr McRobbie is less inclined to take a casual view of profiteering on tickets, whether in cyberspace or on the street. The HKRFU took steps to discourage sales through Hong Kong registered websites in the run-up to the game, and the one arrest that was made affords him some satisfaction.
"It prevents tickets from getting into the hands of the people that we think they should be going to at the price we want people to pay for them," he says. "Secondly, this additional money which is being charged on the ticket price is not coming to us, who would be putting it back into the development of the game, but is going into the hands of criminals. The public is losing out and we're losing out. The only people who win in these situations are the professional scalpers."
Internationally, the Sevens is the highest profile Hong Kong event to attract scalpers, but the problem is not confined to it. Tickets were also changing hands at sums considerably above face value for the visits by Manchester United and Real Madrid, and the touts flew in for the games. The more of these events we have, the more such visits we can expect.
Scalpers also let you, the consumer, see an event under the following set of circumstances at a price/trade off you can easily quantify: at the last minute; when you don't want to wait on line or on hold forever to buy the ticket yourself; or when you simply can't buy tickets right out of the gate. The scalper takes on the risk of holding the inventory. I kind of like them and I very much agree with you, Simon.
Better none than wrong data. It is thought that the proportion of trashy data entering the analysis stage is no less than 60 percent among the data publicly unfolded in China at present.
...from the hint in the 1990s to today's unscrupulousness, the industry corruption in the Chinese data industry has probably far exceeded the black whistle in the betting match of Chinese football.
The Don declares the only way forward is to ask Beijing to intervene over the term of the next Chief Executive in Hong Kong. Yesterday's coverage included an op-ed by Margaret Ng that emphasised the importance of the process rather than the politics. Today's SCMP editorial (reproduced in full below the fold) repeats the same point. The Basic Law has the mechanisms in place to properly deal with current events. That process leads to the same end point: asking the NPC to interpret the Basic Law and a 2 year term for the CE. But it would be via the courts, where the arguments on both sides can be aired and ruled upon. The editorial's conclusion:
Mr Tsang says such a move is needed because the government has "encountered a difficulty" and has to deal with a "practical issue". He is right to be concerned that failing to hold the election on time will damage Hong Kong's international reputation. But greater harm will be done by requesting an interpretation that imposes a strait-jacket on the courts and pays no respect to the proper judicial processes.
Set aside if the term should be 2 or 5 years. Its the subversion of due process that is the biggest threat. Worse is the narrow interpretation asked for, only over the CE's term. There are other pressing issues that flow from that decision, such as how many terms and for how long can the next CE serve? It's just setting up for another repeat of this debacle down the track.
The Don is missing an opportunity here. Why not get the NPC to rule on The Link REIT case at the same time?
A request from Hong Kong to Beijing to interpret the Basic Law is a matter of great moment and seriousness. It should be made only out of necessity, not convenience. The Hong Kong government's request yesterday for central authorities to interpret the Basic Law has the great virtue that it will remove uncertainty about the length of the next chief executive's term. It will also ensure that any legal challenge in the courts is doomed to failure. But this pre-emptive move will strike a fresh blow to the rule of law. The move is not, as the government claims, the only solution to the problem - and it is not the best.
Acting Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen made it clear yesterday the main purpose of the interpretation is to make sure no court action can derail the election planned for July 10. Two legal actions have already been launched. His comments amount to an admission that the government wants to tie the hands of the courts before they have even had an opportunity to consider the case. This is not necessary, nor is it desirable. It will undermine the judicial process.
The decision adds to the damage we believe has already been done to the traditional common law approach to the Basic Law by the decision to give the next chief executive a term of only two years. We have argued it breaches the wording of Hong Kong's constitution, which provides only for a five-year term.
It is abundantly clear, however, that Beijing prefers a two-year term. The central government sees a five-year term as being inconsistent with last year's interpretation of the Basic Law which implies there must be an election in 2007 - with some progress towards universal suffrage. A five-year term would conflict with the timetable the central government has laid down. Beijing has the ultimate power to interpret the Law: the term will be two years.
DAMAGE LIMITATION
The sentiment that the timetable should not be interrupted is shared by many in the pro-democracy camp - even if they give a higher priority to preserving the common law traditions and approaches. The question that now arises is how best to limit damage to Hong Kong's legal system. Mr Tsang said the government's request for an interpretation this month was the only viable solution. He said an alternative solution would have been preferable - if only one could be found.
But there is another way forward. It involves trusting the courts and relying on a process provided for in the Basic Law. If the legal actions had proceeded (in the absence of an interpretation) the lower courts may or may not have supported the government's position. But at least the arguments on both sides could be explored and the decision would be in the hands of our judges.
When a case reached the Court of Final Appeal, however, it would be highly likely that the NPC Standing Committee would be asked to step in. The request would not come from the government - it would come from the court, following the provisions of the Basic Law. Article 158 of the Basic Law requires the top court to refer to Beijing provisions that need to be interpreted in order to decide a case - if the articles concerned fall outside Hong Kong's autonomy. The length of the chief executive's term appears to fall into this category. The appointment of the chief executive is made by Beijing: it would be hard to argue the length of the term falls outside the central government's responsibilities.
MORE RESPECT
If this process were followed, the result would almost certainly be a two-year term. But it would be achieved through a process that allows the courts and the NPC Standing Committee to fulfil their respective roles. It would pay more respect to the integrity of Hong Kong's legal system. A hearing in the Court of Final Appeal would also give the court an opportunity to develop the process by which such disputes are to be resolved. The court would probably have to develop a test for deciding the circumstances in which it would ask Beijing for an interpretation. It would be up to the court to decide whether to make such a referral. But there are strong arguments that it would have to do so.
Mr Tsang expressed concern that the whole process could take so long the election would be derailed. This, too, is very unlikely. The court would have to take into account the Basic Law requirement that when a chief executive steps down a new one must be elected within six months. Confidence in the "one country, two systems" concept is damaged whenever an interpretation is delivered. The government claimed, when first requesting Beijing's intervention in 1999, that such a step would only be taken in the most exceptional circumstances.
Now, Mr Tsang says such a move is needed because the government has "encountered a difficulty" and has to deal with a "practical issue". He is right to be concerned that failing to hold the election on time would damage Hong Kong's international reputation. But greater harm will be done by requesting an interpretation that imposes a straitjacket on the courts and pays no respect to the proper judicial processes.
Full text of the NPC request:
[1] On March 12, 2005, the State Council approved by Order No 433 the request of Mr Tung Chee-hwa to resign from the office of the chief executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. According to the relevant provisions of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China and the Chief Executive Election Ordinance of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, a new chief executive shall be elected on July 10.
[2] At a press conference held on March 12, the secretary for justice of the HKSAR explained the HKSAR government's position on the term of office of a new chief executive elected to fill a vacancy in the office of the chief executive, viz that the term of office of a new chief executive elected to fill the vacancy shall be the remainder of the term of the preceding chief executive. Accordingly, we need to amend the Chief Executive Election Ordinance to set out clearly and explicitly the term of office of a new chief executive elected to fill the vacancy in the office of the chief executive which arises other than due to the expiry of term.
[3] Moreover, we have to address a practical issue, which is that the term of the current Election Committee will expire on July 13 this year. At the same time, we need to elect a new chief executive within the six-month limit stipulated in Article 53 of the Basic Law. If we failed to elect a new chief executive on July 10, we would not be able to complete the tasks within the remaining two months. These tasks include further amending the Chief Executive Election Ordinance to change the 120-day limit stipulated therein for electing a new chief executive, forming a new Election Committee, and electing a new chief executive.
[4] If the HKSAR failed to elect a new chief executive lawfully and in time on July 10, it would affect adversely the formulation of major government policies, the governance of Hong Kong and the normal operation of the government. It might even precipitate a constitutional crisis. Also, residents of the SAR and the international community might cast doubts on the determination and the ability of the HKSAR to implement the Basic Law. It would also have a negative impact on the operation of the financial market and the confidence of investors. All these would not be conducive to the prosperity and stability of Hong Kong.
[5] On the term of office of the new chief executive, two different views have emerged in the community. Some support the view that it should be the remainder of the term; others consider that it should be a five-year term. It can be envisaged that the difference in opinion will persist. Moreover, a member of the Legislative Council and individual members of the community have stated publicly that they will be seeking judicial review of the bill to amend the Chief Executive Election Ordinance. In fact, the courts have received one such application on April 4. Therefore, the SAR Government is facing two issues:
(1) in order to ensure the timely completion of the legislative process for the amendment bill, we need an authoritative and definitive interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Basic Law, so as to provide a solid basis for the local legislation;
(2) in the event of a judicial review, once it has been initiated, it will take a relatively long time to complete the judicial process. It is quite possible that we would not be able to elect a new chief executive in time on July 10.
[6] In the past few weeks, the HKSAR government has been actively exploring viable options other than seeking an interpretation. However, we have not yet come across any viable option which on the one hand could ensure the election of a new chief executive lawfully and in time on July 10, and on the other hand, could obviate the need to seek an interpretation by the NPCSC [National People's Congress Standing Committee]. Many in the community have pointed out that, given the pressing circumstances, the only feasible and timely option is to seek an interpretation by the NPCSC.
[7] The HKSAR government very much hopes to avoid as far as possible seeking an interpretation in order to settle the matter. However, having taken into account all the considerations set out above, and bearing in mind the need to ensure the prosperity and stability of Hong Kong and the normal operation of all aspects of the community, I submit, in accordance with Article 43 and Article 48(2) of the Basic Law, this report to the State Council and propose to request the NPCSC to make an interpretation of Article 53(2) of the Basic Law regarding the term of office of the new chief executive.
[8] I hereby submit this report.
Acting chief executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, April 6, 2005
Almost a month ago Kevin Drum pointed to a study on blog behavior and the self-reinforcing nature of bloggers and their links (the full study is "Divided They Blog"). In the extended entry is a chart that demonstrates the links between 40 of the top left and right wing blogs (20 from each side). The diagrams show very little interaction between the two sides. It's no surprise that those with similar partisan viewpoints should link to like-minded others more often - also called incestuous amplification. What is surprising is the lack of any significant linkage between the two sides at all. When it comes to political blogging there is plenty of preaching to the converted but little real debate.
It means is blogging, rather than being different or better, is merely a reflection of the partisanship common in politics. Instead of a chance for real debates over ideas it is far more common to find invective, insults and ridicule. That's a shame because it leaves much of the potential of the blogosphere wasted. Here is a vast, diverse collection of expertise and opinion that rewards insularity and punishes outreach. It is easy to see why.
Blogs live for two things: traffic and links. The bigger blogs derive significant revenues from their advertising, thus making it even more important to increase visitors. The easiest way to do that is to latch onto bigger bloggers with similar politics and views. With so many blogs all clambering for attention "the squeaky wheels get the grease". The more extreme and partisan the greater chance bigger blogs will link and more readers will be exposed to that site. And once it starts working the system re-enforces itself - what worked once will work over and over again. The audience dictates the message and at least in these early days of blogging those most likely to read blogs are the politically active. These readers already have views and are most comfortable with sites that reflect them. Should readers go to sites with who's views they disagree and dare post comments, they are quickly shouted down, although it should be noted often those who post comments at "opposing" sites are asking for trouble.
In short, extremes outweigh moderation. Partisanship outweighs consensus. Shouting outweighs debate. And all that extremism and partisanship and shouting achieves virtually nothing.
I've been fortunate enough to be part of a recent email debate amongst some great bloggers. I commented at one stage how intelligent and civil the discussion had been, despite some firmly held views on a controversial topic. Those involved include William Rice, Nitin of The Acorn, Dan of tdaxp and Bill Roggio of the Fourth Rail. Bill put it best:
I think the conversation is civil because we are like minded individuals interested in a freer and better world. Our ideas or outlooks may differ, but in the end we are working towards the same goals - greater knowledge and the sharing of ideas. We aren't discussing silly conspiracy theories but serious issues that have many different angles that must be addressed.
I am always looking for new ideas and different perspects, and will not cling to my own to the death. If there is a better view than my own, I want to hear it and incorporate it. I have a feeling we all hold this view, hence the healthy debate.
It's not hard to hold a civilised debate. It involves some simple skills and two basic rules. Firstly treat each person with respect; secondly follow Bill's advice and keep an open mind. That's the way of rationality and reason. It involves listening and thinking. It involves adapting and questioning. It involves learning and research. It is not easy. But things worth having rarely are.
We need more links across the divide. But the blogosphere will be a much greater place if we can bridge the chasm. Is the blogosphere ready for sites dedicated to open debate without ad hominem attacks, with moderate or multiple viewpoints, where people follow the rules of listening, respect and having an open mind?
I'm wondering whether the Blue-Red schism is really more a manifestation of intellectual apathy on the part of the populace and less indicative of the ideological differences.
2. Dean Esmay disagreed with some of Kevin Drum's assertions but notes:
I believe that, with rare exception, most of us who have been at the blogging game for more than a year or two simply don't like cross-blog pissing matches, and in a year like 2004, back-and-forth link volleys between Bush and Kerry supporters was almost guaranteed to be nasty. Some people enjoy that sort of nastiness but I don't happen to be one of them and I know I'm not unique in that respect.
It was a very trying and difficult year [2004] and I must admit that during the period from the Democratic convention until election day, I don't think I enjoyed blogging much at all. I hope we never have an election year like that again.
Which proves my point that there has been no room for middle ground. Perhaps it was a reflection of the passions felt in the broader American polity leading up to the election. But shouldn't blogging aspire to being more than that?
1. Dean doubts blogs "get powerful by being 'yes men' to each other".
2. I've missed that bloggers link opponents and explain why they are wrong.
3. Dean would like me to point out successful blogs based on this premise.
I'll start out by making an important point: all generalisations are wrong. Put another way, there are exceptions to every rule.
Sortapundit has a study of Instapundit's linkage patterns which highlights my point. Now it's impossible to ever read anywhere near as many blogs as one would like, and Dean is right that Glenn Reynolds does sometimes link to both sides of debates and those who disagree with him. But Sortapundit's study demonstrates this feedback loop perfectly: the same blogs cross referring and linking. It's not a matter of "yes men"; it's a matter of like-minded people re-enforcing each other's views. Look at the list of those linked by Glenn: most if not all of those blogs have similar opinions and views. There's your example, Dean.
Bryan in Dean's comments notes that many bloggers consider other blogs important sources of information but also ranked newspapers and news portals as significant sources. That makes perfect sense - blogs aren't generally trying to become news sources themselves (although occassionally they are, such as Captain Ed at the moment). But that's not relevant here. I'm not talking about news sources. I'm talking about linkage and opinion.
Plenty of people talk about the "long tail". While I have no proof, I suspect that to a large extent this echo chamber effect is a natural consequence of many blog readers also being bloggers. The blogger will read from their blogroll and that roll will rightly contain those "big" blogs with whom the blogger prefers. It is a human tendancy that we prefer like minded people...just think of your friends. You may differ, perhaps even over politics, but you will share many of the same values and ideas. It's a core element of friendship. Blog linkage can be thought of the same. Just in mainstream media, the big blogs largely lead the daily blog agenda, and smaller blogs take that lead and link to similar pieces. That's how the echo chamber effect flows.
That's not to say bloggers don't ever link to those with differing views. Dean is right that bloggers love to link and discuss why they are wrong. This current exchange is a perfect example of that. But in the main, at least for the blogs I follow, this kind of exchange is rare. It's the exception. In my reading I find the same posts being referred to with similar comments/thoughts by similar bloggers. If it's to link to an "opposing" blogger, it more often than not consists of ad hominem attacks rather than reasoned discource.
Coming back to Sortapundit's piece. The top ranks of blogging tend to be stable. Big bloggers are big for a reason. I haven't done the numbers but certainly in the almost 2 years I've followed blogs the main ones have not changed a gerat deal. The only new "big blogs" are either journalists joining the medium or those that are more extreme than existing big bloggers.
I find this comment by Dean interesting: It is true that in the final few months of the election I was probably linking a lot less lefty blogs. Why? I couldn't bear the nastiness. The concentrated hatred spewed at and about Bush nauseated me. Even then, I still occasionally linked Kerry supporters like Kevin Drum and Andrew Sullivan. Perhaps the 2004 election was a particularly polarised time in the blogosphere, just as it was in the USA. But that statement by Dean is backing what I am saying. The "nastiness" is not as prevelant at the moment but it's still there. (As an aside it's interesting that comment implies Dean is "right" even though his previous paragraph argues against that).
Scott Kirwin asks the same above referenced study be redone in a non-election year. I'm all for that. I suspect the results would not differ significantly. I'd dearly love to have more time to provide more and better examples as proof of my thesis. Until I get that time I'll leave it to each reader to decide if my original premise - that more extreme bloggers get more readers and links and real debate is rare - is correct based on their own reading.
I don't deny civil debates occur in the blogosphere. We're in the middle of one now. But they are the exceptions, not the rule. That's the shame of it.
I'm not so sure it's so clear-cut as that. I think bloggers reach a penetration and saturation point-their blogs even out and the linkification is what it would ever be. I think bloggers find a comfort level and a comfort audience and generally that's where they stay after a year or two into blogging.
Or maybe I'm just being lazy and need to get off my ass and go link to more people.
Honestly the more I looked at that study the sillier it got. How they defined "left" and "right" was extremely arbitrary. They put at least one Kerry supporter in the "right" camp, just for example.
I continue to find the so-called "amplification" or "echo chamber" effect people talk about to be terribly exaggerated. Cross-blog debates happen all the time, including between left and right. I can't think of a week going by without seeing at least one.
The discussions the four of us have had is truly one of the highlights of my blogging.
I had seen the study you referred to and had found it quite intersting. I do have a few thoughts on why our discourse is civil, even in disagreement:
1) All of the four, in one way or another built some mutual relationships via email as a result of their blog. I find that email discourse is usually more polite than blogging comments, though it doesn't have to be.
2) We have not discussed religion, which often can bring out the worst in people. (Please note that I don't think that if we chose religion as a topic that we would be uncivil.)
3) We all share, I believe, a desire for democratic values to be supported. We have a common framework to analyze events.
4) We are not talking about domestic politics, which seems to me can be far more filled with passion than International Relations. Though the lead up to the Iraq War surely tests this thesis.
I hope that we have many more good dialogues and that we find more likeminded bloggers to debate with.
Thanks for your efforts and thoughts on all of our blogs.
Simon
Give us examples of this. I for one only write about issues that I am passionate and or knowledgeable about; I don't write for links. If I wanted links, I would host porn.
Bloggers blog for a variety of reasons, not just for traffic. I've been writing long before Al Gore invented the Internet, and blogs are just another way to keep me from pestering the Wife with my stupid ideas.
Your theory may sound good to you, but I remain unconvinced that it is true. You need much more proof to back it up.
I took a moment to read the study you refer to, and many problems with it leapt to mind.
I believe that what the study shows us best is the divide amongst voters before the 2004 election here in the states.
Most blogs took sides during that election - which could explain the polarization shown by those cool diagrams.
I also believe that the participants were skewed by their own bias towards considering only a single dimension of the political spectrum: Liberal vs. Conservative. In the election of 2004 you would tend to get strong opinions one way or another; after all, very few people believed that any 3rd party had a chance.
What I believe would be more intellectually useful would be the same analysis today (non-election year) with more dimensions to the political spectrum.
For example, Dean Esmay supports Bush (Conservative position) but also supports gay marriage (Liberal position). I support gun ownership (conservative position) but believe that health care is a public good along the lines of fire and police protection (liberal position).
In short I believe that the study is flawed and needs to be redone using a better methodology. In the meantime I do not believe that it gives you the proof that you need to support your claims.
I'm also not so impressed by the study Kevin Drum mentioned over a month ago. In fact, the phenomenon of trackbacks or links from one "side" of the blogosphere to the other is an extremely simplistic view of what it means to "debate." For instance, it's possible that a right-side blogger could comment on a story about social security reform without citing what a left-side blogger thought about it. Instead, he/she might cite several mainstream news sources.
By the same token, a left-blogger like Kevin Drum can post about gay marriage without linking to what a right-side blogger thought about it.
Someone who is arguing (debating) for gay marriage would likely cite sources that they wanted to use to shore up their position. The only possible reason they could have for linking to someone they disagree with was to say "this is what I'm opposed to."
In a real world debate, with teams and a topic and all that, you don't necessarily always reference what your opponent says. You have your own sources to back up what you say.
A more relevant comparison, I might think, is how many times bloggers link to the same media sources. I think you'd find that bloggers are actually referencing a lot of the same material.
Even ignoring all the issues that other commenters have raised with the study, I don't believe it supports any sort of "echo chamber" theory. Reynolds, Sullivan, and Hewitt all disagree with each other on lots of very substantive issues. Dean and Malkin disagree on almost everything. No one knows what Wretchard thinks on anything outside of foreign policy, but everyone links to him on that issue.
The point is that whatever leads to this partitioned graph, it isn't that bloggers don't link to those who disagree with them.
Furthermore, I invoke Occam's razor. If you are going to appeal to the structure of the blogosphere in order to explain the schism in the blogsophere, then you need a second explanation for the exactly corresponding schism in general society. It is simpler to suppose that the same mechanism is at work both in the blogosphere and in general society.
One quick thought: links are not the only evidence of discourse. There are cases where people will refuse to link to sources/groups/etc that they find particularly objectionable (and sometimes, in 'it's all free' blogdom, that includes paid/registration sites). Another missing component of this is that the "internal" discussions of each side are often engaged with (though usually in opposition to) the arguments of the other side.
As I've noted elsewhere real dialogue, the kind that produces changed minds, is a slow process, one which is not, in many ways, well represented by knee-jerk blogging, and which is not at all aided by our "consistency at all costs" gotcha political/media/pundit culture. As you've noted before, I'm in favor of "pragmatic inconsistency" and I'm also a great supporter of people, particularly leaders, who will change their minds, and their policies, in the face of strong evidence.
This is a daily collection of links, some with commentary, to news stories and interesting blog posts. It will be updated throughout the day with a new timestamp for the updates.
The lifting of quotas on textiles would inevitably be a case of free trade working too well, I said last month. Now the USA has pre-emptively begun cases against China to determine if quotas should be re-imposed. Two interesting things here. Firstly the Bush Administration has done this before being asked (officially) by the US textile makers. Secondly while supposedly free trade America panics, the protectionist EU is standing pat. What will be most interesting is to see the reaction and lobbying of American textile importers, such as Wal-Mart, and consumer groups. When the Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements looks at "safeguard procedings", you wonder who are they protecting? They are defending a small group of costly domestic producers at the cost of more expensive goods for literally millions.
SCMP goof of the day: front page main story headlined "Fresh fury over Japan's distorted history book". The by-line: Agencies in Tokyo and Beiing and Chan Siu-sin in Islamabad. Islamabad is in Pakistan. I've heard of outsourcing but putting reporters there to cover events in Japan, Korea and China?
Did the Earth move for you? China will relocate 400,000 people as part of its newest white elephant, the North-South Water Canal.
(16:21) Brad DeLong reflected on the value of books and how they make sure you can always be in the right place at the right time. He then has a follow-up where a curator of rare book's from MIT writes in a short history of personal libraries, and Brad finishes with:
The wonderful and awesome thing is not just that there is someone somewhere on the earth who can answer pretty much any question I might ask, but that so many of them read my weblog. I am truly fortunate.
I'll take that one step further. Set aside the politics, we weblog readers are truly fortunate we are able to read sites by people such as Mr. DeLong and plenty of others who are intelligent experts, doing interesting work they are passionate about and are happy to share it all with the world for free. The democratisation of knowledge continues apace. There is a direct link between effects of Gutenberg's printing machine and of blogs (along with such efforts as Google's online library). Lucky us.
To clarify, I don't think that James Soong decided to visit the mainland on a sudden whim. This was obviously planned well in advance, but the KMT visit's not-too-bad reception back in Taiwan probably accelerated the process. Still, the PFP strategists really should've asked the other organs of the party to keep their mouths shut, since they were (in retrospect) so close to an visit agreement.
I feel so badly for those folks up there in North Korea. They don't stand a chance. If the virus gets started, it will certainly wipe out any population center it encounters.
Donald Tsang has declared we must go to Beijing for a Basic Law interpretation to prevent certian chaos. Today the Executive Council will endorse the decision to ask the National People's Congress to interpret the Basic Law over the next Chief Executive's (CE) term of office. Hopefully they'll at least ask to clarify how many terms the next CE can run for as well...may as well get it all over with in one hit. This will be the third time since 1997 the NPC has interpreted the Basic Law, which makes me wonder what the drafters of the Basic Law think about their work being "corrected" so often.
The term of office of the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall be five years. He or she may serve for not more than two consecutive terms.
Finally from the SCMP op-ed page I'm going to reproduce Margaret Ng, the LegCo representative for the legal profession. Read it all.
The term of office of the new chief executive is a legal question, not a political one. Politically, there may well be much to say for giving Tung Chee-hwa's heir apparent, Donald Tsang Yam-kuen, a two-year rather than five-year term.
But this is not an available option, since the Basic Law is clear and straightforward. Whether a vacancy in the chief executive's office arises as a result of the expiry of his term, his death, resignation or removal mid-term, the new leader is to be selected and appointed by the same procedure, and for the same term of five years.
These provisions may give rise to unwelcome consequences under some circumstances. For example, anticipated reform may have to be postponed because there will not be a chief executive election in 2007. But even so, fudging the law to achieve a political aim will be too high a price to pay. Democracy must be built on a firm foundation of the rule of law.
The government, which has previously taken the position that the Basic Law is straightforward in stipulating a term of five years for any new chief executive, without exception, is now busy making up an "ambiguity". It says that the Basic Law does not say in so many words that a new chief executive elected to fill a mid-term vacancy has the same term of five years, and therefore some other term may be applicable. Perhaps realising how unconvincing this argument is, the government now puts forward another one: that a five-year term will give rise to an "extraordinary" consequence of postponing Hong Kong's democratisation. This is disingenuous, because the government had already rejected this during the Legislative Council's scrutiny of the Chief Executive Election Bill in June 2001.
A legislator had asked about the term of a new chief executive filling a vacancy which arose mid-term. The government answered unequivocally "five years". At that time, Martin Lee Chu-ming and I raised the question that this would have an implication on the timing of the political reform permissible after 2007, should the post fall vacant before June 30 of that year. The administration was asked to consider the matter carefully but, nevertheless, confirmed its position. It should not now profess surprise.
Many and diverse are the attempts of the government to obfuscate the law: that the Basic Law should be interpreted according to practice in the mainland; that one or two Basic Law drafters recalled that less than a full term was intended; that earlier drafts of Article 53 and Article 46, and records of consultation on them, show that questions were raised about what the term should be; and so on.
The bottom line is that the powerful Legislative Commission, a working committee to the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, has taken the view that the new leader serves only the remainder of the term. Thus, all the seeming reasoning of our government is but a charade. Naked power, not the rule of law, governs "one country, two systems".
And so, in the latest round of the so-called consultation of political groups and professional bodies, the government puts the question bluntly: how do they propose to solve the problem?
"The problem" is defined as ensuring that all possible challenges to the government's position will be conclusively put to an end well before the chief executive's election on July 10. The answer that is sought cannot be more obvious: an interpretation by the Standing Committee at the earliest possible date.
Such an event will deal the rule of law and "one country, two systems" a serious blow. It is not just the intervention of the central authorities that will render the adjudication of local courts irrelevant and impotent; the content of the interpretation itself is such that the law will be made to lie.
What she said.
Update 2: Hemlock discusses the Basic Law interpretation with Winky Ip:
The real question is – what’s the point of having a constitution if its meaning is hidden and may bear no relationship to its wording? What sort of guarantees can such a ground-breaking masterpiece provide? Winky, the master manipulator of the public mood, deftly diverts my attention to other matters. “I ordered dim sum and they’ve given me congee,” she says, looking at the tray that has just appeared before her. “And you asked for noodles, and they’ve given you toast.”
We call over Gloria the winsome waitress and point out the problem. With a smile, she pulls out the menu and explains it to us. “What the chef actually intended to mean here by ‘dim sum’,” she explains, “is Cantonese morning meals in general – so obviously that includes congee. And of course toast is simply a form of noodles, both being made from flour.” Winky expresses full agreement, and apologizes to the girl for my habit of always making trouble.
Follow that link "ground-breaking masterpiece". It's hilarious.
Jake van der Kamp, hurry home. Your column has been taken over and they are wrecking it with idiocy.
Today's Monitor column in the SCMP:
When will society stop kidding itself that violent virtual games do no real damage?
Last month, a 20-year-old who kidnapped and robbed a terrified Auckland teenager told police it was like playing the PlayStation game Grand Theft Auto. Meanwhile, GTF is under fire for supposedly inspiring the triple murder of three Alabama police officers and has driven United States Senator Hillary Clinton to say: "Children are playing a game that encourages them to have sex with prostitutes and then murder them."
Now, a Shanghai online game player is accused of killing a rival in a virtual spat that turned personal. Hearing that Zhu Caoyuan had sold his "dragon sabre" used in the online game Legend of Mir 3, Qiu Chengwei, 41, apparently confronted him, brandishing an actual knife. Qiu repeatedly stabbed him in the chest, a Shanghai court was told.
No matter how much pixie dust you spread on your console, you must admit that such reports more than hint at a causal link between gaming and violence. In fact, the link seems as plain as the pistols the GTF gangsters pack.
Actually the link doesn't appear so clear to me. What is clear is a lack of good upbringing. You know, teaching the difference between fantasy and reality. Let's wheel the clock back - violent "games" have been with us since Roman times (the collesuem), right through the Middle Ages (jousting) and to today.
Sure, Legend of Mir 3 is hardly the nastiest game on the block. Indeed, the atmosphere is all tousled hair and swirling mist. Nevertheless, the covetousness it evidently fosters drove a middle-aged man to murder in revenge for the theft the teen committed. So the game effectively generated two crimes.
The case was more complicated than that. The item in question was worth realy money and was sold for real money. I don't condone the murder. But this isn't mere pixels we are dealing with, but personal property. This isn't the first time someone has killed over a theft and it won't be the last. But it hasn't nothing to do with video games.
Parents need to start taking the perils of electronic play seriously. They assume it is no more likely to inflict or exacerbate psychological damage than baseball or hopscotch and tacitly embrace it as a convenient tranquilliser like television, only more effective thanks to the interactive element that makes it "immersive".
That's because most parents believe (rightly) they can teach their kids to differentiate between play and reality. It's why parents let kids watch TV and movies, too.
They do not even want to consider what off-screen forces gaming might unleash. Instead, they cheerfully advertise their bumbling incompetence in relation to all things techy and brag about how slick their children are.
I know because I child-mind for friends. The kids are so casual about how shooting a cop in GTA wins you respect points. Doubtless, soon someone will invent a game where you gain from training a blowtorch on cops and prostitutes.
< i>I know because I child-mind for friends? How does that qualify you? It's play, damnit. Kids have been playing cops and robbers, cowboys and Indians, you name it, for years. Are we going to ban that too?
Maybe it already exists. The momentum of development mirrors the head-long thrust of the action.
Next up is Sony's Narc, in which the police depicted take drugs such as crack, which gives them a lift that helps them catch criminals. Forget ginseng, guarana or ginkgo, the "game" seems to say. If you want drive, take the hard stuff - corruption is cool.
Sure, nobody sane would pretend all games are depraved. Some, such as the classic puzzle Snood, are deliciously whimsical, their only danger their addictive ability to consume time.
Great. Let's just all play Tetris and watch the magical drop in crime rates.
Perhaps, games in the opposite combative mould can sharpen your reflexes and encourage quick thinking, as proponents claim. They insist even pre-pubescents know the difference between events that unravel in pixels and what happens in the "meatspace" inhabited by carbon-based life forms with nerves and feelings.
No cast-iron correlation between digital games and violence has been proven, the apologists say, apparently deaf to media reports and blind to scientific research.
The latter stacks up too. David Grossman, author of a book about the dynamics of homicide called On Killing, has conducted in-depth research showing how "point and shoot" games echo the strategies used by the military to dehumanise troops. He said at the end of the second world war, the US military found at most only 20 per cent of soldiers fired their guns in combat.
By replacing bulls-eye targets with man-shaped targets during training, the military succeeded in demolishing pacifist hang-ups. Consequently, by the Korean war, 80 to 90 per cent of the troops were disposed to shoot and kill. By extension, by buying our children the toys that let them waste virtual humans, we are training them to kill, the theory goes. Confirmation of the brutalising effect of violent games comes from British research. A Middlesex University study involving 204 children aged 12 to 14 found they became noticeably more belligerent - shoving and striking other children - the longer they played them. Likewise, researchers at Nottingham Trent University found children as young as four who were allowed to play mildly violent games showed a drastically higher aggression level. Whatever you make of the research and reports, is it not obvious exposure to any violent medium can be aggravating?
Violent games make kids violent. Then Mum or Dad say "stop hitting or you won't play that game again" and the kid learns what happens in the video game isn't reality. If society is getting more violent from all these video games, why are crime rates, especially for violent crime, falling?
Just try watching House of Flying Daggers or Ong-Bak: The Thai Warrior. In the aftermath, when you waltz out of the cinema, you are bound to feel a little more aggressive than when you walked in - such films are designed to fire you up, trigger adrenalin.
Diving into a game where fists and bullets fly at your alter-ego must surely make you feel more involved and so more aggressive. Especially if you are so tender that you have scarcely kissed goodbye to believing in Santa.
Roll on Hillary Clinton's proposed US$90 million investigation into the impact of games and other electronic media on the "cognitive, social, emotional and physical development" of children. For a generation of vicarious gangsters and swordsmen, however, the damage may have already been done.
Here's the amazing conclusion: reading thi9s article made me more aggressive than before. Before we ban video games, let's ban articles like this.
What Hong Kong property can tell us about China's currency peg.
From today's SCMP business pages:
Speculators seek quick exit from higher rates Investors have cut prices by as much as 10 per cent at major residential estates to attract buyers as mortgage costs climb
Higher interest rates are already having an impact on the property sector, with speculators sharply cutting asking prices, a trend that seems likely to feed quickly into the end-user market. Since Monday property investors have lowered asking prices by up to 10 per cent at major residential estates to whet buyers' appetites, according to property agents.
The SCMP property section:
Speculators in rush to dump holdings
Banks are raising interest rates and investors are offering gifts of cars and plasma TVs to hasten sales
Speculators are moving quickly to dump large holdings of flats as rising interest rates look likely to cause a potential sea change in the investing environment.
The market is starting to see a correction in projects and districts where there has been substantial speculative buying, with asking prices falling by up to 10 per cent. Investors are seeking to get rid of units typically pre-sold "off the plan" with long completion dates so as to minimise their initial capital commitment.
Banks have raised their interest rates in response to changing money market conditions, resulting in the best lending rate going up by 0.5 per cent in two weeks.
In the extended entry is a chart of 3 month HIBOR (i.e. the lending rate between banks in Hong Kong dollars).
Why have HIBOR rates shot higher? Because in the past few weeks money has been flowing out of Hong Kong. For months and years Hong Kong's banking system has suffered excess liquidity. It literally had more money than it could lend. So the "price of money", interest rates, fell to entice more borrowing. But it didn't work. That's why rates got close to zero. This wasn't helped by the low rates in the USA. Because the Hong Kong dollar is pegged to the US dollar, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority must let HIBOR float freely. If you fix the rate of currency exchanges, the interest rate that balances out the FX flows must float. The Fed started tightening rates but HIBOR didn't move because plenty of money stayed in Hong Kong, figuring if the Chinese revalue the yuan the Hong Kong dollar will revalue as well.
While it's impossible to tell for sure, I'd wager that the flight of money from Hong Kong reflects a similar flight of "hot money" from China. Plenty of people are still willing to bet on a yuan revaluation, but it's been a long wait and suddenly other opportunities are looking better. This is especially if the yuan is only moved to a narrow trading band of say 3% of its peg - that's nowhere near enough to justify the costs of carry on the revaluation trade.
Which ironically improves the chances of a revaluation on the yuan.
Are you an economist? Something I never understood: are high interest rates deflationary in themselves, or only through their effect on the money supply? If the US dollar falls and they maintain the peg, that should be expansionary whatever happens to interest rates, should it not? Or have I overlooked something obvious?
I wouldn't say economist, but I've studied plenty of economics.
The short answer is no. The important distinction to make is between nominal and real (i.e. after inflation) rates. If inflation is 5% and rates 6%, the real rate is only 1%. It's also important to note that interest rates are a price themselves - the price of money. Deflation/inflation is commonly referring to the changes in the prices of a basket of goods and services. To some extent interest rates feedback into inflation via their impact on imputed rents and mortgage costs.
Anyways, if real rates are high that puts a squeeze on discretionary spending by consumers and investment by business which should reduce price pressures/inflation. But it is a second order effect and not always clear. Talking about money supply is just another way of talking about interest rates - as I said rates are the price of money.
So to the crux of your question. A fall in the US dollar is, if the peg stays, the same as a fall in the HK dollar. Because the HK dollar is fixed, prices need to adjust instead to balance out flows. Let's say you have a crate of oranges. If it was worth HK$100 before but now the HKD has fallen, the same crate should cost more, say HK$110. At the same time HK people have less purchasing power on imports because their HK dollars can't buy as much as before. but for HK exporters it's boom time, because they have HK costs but receive (say) Euros as revenue. The net impact is the falling dollar will be expansionary for an economy such as Hong Kong's which has a trade surplus.
Another way to think about this is the level of the dollar and the level of interest rates are tightly linked. In fact in New Zealand for a while they were explicitly linked.
I could go on about this for a long time as it is a complicated question. But your basic premise is correct - a falling HK dollar should be expansionary...except the rapidly rising Hibor rate argues that money is flowing out of the city and will thus be bad for asset markets such as property.
There’s a thing called the "Imposible Tinity". If I remember rightly it is: a floating currency, free movement of capital and control of the money supply- you can have any two of them, but not all three. Hong Kong has the first two, so they have no control over supply of money.
But China's Government has a problem. These protests might serve its need to claim nationalist legitimacy now it is no longer Communist, but it hinders China's desire to be a more global power. Often China has been accused of narrowly following its self-interest in global issues rather than adopting a broader view more fitting for a permanent member of the UNSC. The reform of the UNSC is a key challenge for China. The most likely is China will abstain when it comes time to vote for Japan's seat, but that would be at the expense of also endorsing other new members such as Germany, India and Brazil. So China's Government has found public opinion and nationalist fervour is slipping out of its control.
What to do? The SCMP:
Communist Party censors have acted over the rising tide of anti-Japanese sentiment nationwide, ordering all media to drop coverage of public protests against the Japanese government and companies. "No media coverage on anti-Japanese protests [should be allowed]. Journalists should not participate in or conduct interviews to do with anti-Japanese activities," the circular said.
It reminded the media to be vigilant about those trying to take advantage of the anti-Japanese sentiment to put pressure on the government over domestic issues which have triggered sharp debate in the media and internet chat rooms. "[The media] should be highly alert to collusion [among groups which promote] liberalisation, Falun Gong, anti-Japanese [sentiment] and religions," the circular said, using Communist Party references to westernisation and the spiritual group branded an "evil cult" and banned six years ago on the mainland. "[The media] must attach great attention to the issues and maintain a high degree of political alertness," it added.
IT will be interesting to see if the anti-Japan fire can survive without the oxygen of official media coverage.
Digressing from this just a bit, it may be interesting to note this
(India's first prime minister) Jawaharlal Nehru "declined a United States offer" to India to "take the permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council" around 1953 and suggested that it be given to China, according to the United Nations Under-Secretary General, Shashi Tharoor.
In his latest book, "Nehru — The Invention of India," Mr. Tharoor writes that Indian diplomats who have seen files swear that Nehru declined the offer about the same time as he turned down "with scorn" John Foster Dulles' support for an Indian Monroe Doctrine.
Nehru had suggested that the seat, till then held by Taiwan, be offered to Beijing instead. He wrote that "the seat was held with scant credibility by Taiwan." [Shashi Tharoor]
Sorry with the mixup on the blockquote tag on the previous comment. Premature tagclosation ;-)
There's this belief among some Indian commentators that while China may not veto India's position, it may abstain from the vote; they call it the 'historical debt' theory.
It'll indeed be interesting to see if Beijing can successfully rein in the nationalistic fervor it helped to spawn in opposition to Japan. Japan certainly isn't helping matters, as this interesting FT commentary piece points out.
The party inherited its mantle and has almost continuously held power for five decades. Media whitewashing of the war legacy thus helps bolster LDP legitimacy, while friendly reporting on current issues furthers LDP policy objectives. These include a permanent seat on the UN Security Council and rewriting Japan's pacifist constitution.
Abroad, the propaganda tactics can backfire. In China, the Japanese media's nationalistic tone and denials of war crimes helped incite massive protests, with 22m Chinese petitioning against Japan's Security Council bid and mobs attacking Japanese-owned businesses. At home, the tactics are effective at chilling public debate and defusing opposition. If a broad segment of Japanese oppose the deployment of Japanese soldiers in Iraq, the overwhelming majority of media outlets reiterate dubious official assertions that the military, known as the Self- Defence Force, is constitutionally deployed in a "non-combat zone". Amid last year's escalating violence in Iraq, however, mainstream Japanese outlets withdrew their reporters and now simply take news from official military sources. If public sympathy for Japanese taken hostage in Iraq risks embarrassing the government, the media keep repeating the official line condemning them as unpatriotic for being there against the government's will.
I suspect that these feelings of intense nationalism have transcended the control of the governments that coaxed them into being. Divisions between Japan and China are naturally deepening as the two powers compete over resources and influence, and Japan's return to a more proactive foreign policy has stirred up resentment in mainland China and Korea over past colonial abuses.
Politically, the Chinese government will ultimately be able to circumvent any national feelings it finds unhelpful. The danger is perhaps more economic; as recent riots have shown, Chinese nationalism has threatened Japanese property, and may conceivably lead to a chilling effect on the volume of trade between the two countries.
Nitin, if that's true then it has to go down as one hell of a mistake by Nehru. How interesting to think what the world would have been like if he had taken the seat and China didn't get one....
Winston: I agree with your conclusion but I'm not sure China can control what is now assuming a life of its own, hense the title of the post.
I read a great paper in the following. Everyone must read it.
The China Factor and the Overstretch of the US Hegemony
FIRST STORY
A view from an insider
George Zhibin Gu
CHINA IS BECOMING A GLOBAL THEATER
"A new power balance will emerge gradually and most likely indirectly"
STORY NUMBER TWO
A critical view from the center of the Global Power
Chalmers Johnson
CHINA REPLACED THE UNITED STATES AS THE TOP EXPORTER TO JAPAN
"The US is treading the same path followed by the former USSR"
THIRD STORY
A contrarian view from Europe
Andre Gunder Frank
RISING DRAGON
"We are witnessing the re-emergence of Asia"
In regards to China's security council position. Their platform has been almost singularly non-interventionist except in rare occassions where it felt that the resolutions accutely threatened Chinese interests. China (PRC+RoC) has only exercised the veto a total of 5 times, possibly preferring to use bureaucratic obstructions to prevent a vote even coming up as others have mentioned. Compare this to France's 18 vetos, the UK's 32 vetos, the US's 79 vetos, and the Soviet Union/Russia's 122 vetos.
This is a daily collection of links, some with commentary, to news stories and interesting blog posts. It will be updated throughout the day with a new timestamp for the updates.
Scroll down for today's other posts.
Strategypage alleges China is preparing an "out-of-the-blue" attack on Taiwan, under the cover of a military exercise. But curiously for such an important piece of news there is no attribution or source. Even more curious is the alleged timing: China/Taiwan relations have been thawing somewhat in the last few weeks with the KMT's visit and overtures on talks. Glenn Reynolds links to the piece and says:
Macchiavellian plan: Give nukes to Taiwan. Have Taiwan explode one in the Pacific as a "test." Have Taiwan announce that it got them from North Korea and Iran and will acquire more. Watch China deal with both countries...
I know he's joking. What worries me are those who read and think it a good idea. I note Richard is saying the same thing. Update: Nitin has pointed out a story where China's Prime Minister has hlped secure the release of Taiwanese fisherman in Pakistan. It's good China's leadership can take time out from invasion plans to do things like this.
It had to happen. A legal challenge to the new Chief Executive's term was launched yesterday by the "Grassroots Democratic Society". It's a quiotic quest: the NPC will overrule any decision it doesn't like. Today's conspiracy theory: what if someone is bankrolling this quest to force the NPC's hand?
The world's biggest financial institution, Japan Post, is moving closer to privitisation. How big is it? Japanese postal savings accounts total US$1.9 trillion, or between 1/3 and 1/2 of all Japanese savings.
Now you can karaoke anywhere, anytime, without disturbing anyone. How long before someone attaches a phone to it?
In these busy times there are few places where one can have a few minutes of peace and privacy, away from the hussle and bussle and the technological madness of progress. The toilet, that oasis, that serene cistern. But I fear the clever comodes. With the current drive to link everything to the internet, can the iToilet (in your choice of fashionable colours) be far off?
I saw Ming Pao covering Okinotori for a while, and I'd never imagine that the Japanese photos would actually look less island-like than the ones in Ming Pao.
I'm hoping in the decades to come, China will become more like Tiawan and the whole reunification thing will become a moot case as Tiawain asks to become a member state.
As I had hoped, my thoughts on Singapore and Hong Kong blogging generated plenty of comments. In fact the debate has thrown up several different issues.
Some took particular exception to what I implied about the state of blogging in Hong Kong. I should have made it clear in the original post I was discussing English language blogging and meant no disrespect to others. I have already said I cannot read Chinese and am not in a position to pass judgment on the Chinese language blogosphere in Hong Kong or elsewhere. But as ESWN said: In the poem "The Ballad of East and West", Rudyard Kipling wrote: "East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet". This is NOT true for the Hong Kong blogosphere...we need to engage with each other somehow. I could not agree more. One thing this discussion has proved (to me, at least) is a need for English and Chinese language bloggers in Hong Kong to meet and develop links both virtual and real. Kelvin noted the different styles of these blogs. Perhaps we can submit a joint appeal for that HK Government grant.
A broader issue was touched upon and is commonly used against gweilos in this city: you are not of here, even if you live here. To that I take great exception. I would ask those who talk about respect realise it is a two-way street and is something that is earned, not deserved. I sometimes write critically about things in this city because I love it so much. No one has a monopoly on that. I would like to believe that misunderstanding has again played a part in accusing me of "disrespect". I am a Hong Kong blogger. I work here; I pay tax here; my kids go to school here. I live here. As with most things internet, geography should not matter. But if it does matter in terms of "respect for local culture" then I hope my fellow Hong Kong bloggers (expat, Chinese, Indian, gay, whatever) can recognise that. It's called (in that much HR-abused term) "diversity". As Tessa said, the same words viewed through different cultural prisms can have different meaning. I'll say it again: respect goes both ways.
The by-line of this blog has long been "East meets Westerner", a deliberate play on "East meets West". It does not say "Westerner here to subvert Eastern culture" or "Westerner who pretends to represent all things Eastern". Those terms are as meaningless as the phrases. You are welcome to interpret the by-line however you like. I'd prefer to be judged by what I write.
Moving on. Part of the answer is likely found in what La Idler and Samantha said that the internet has been more a part of the average Singaporean's life. The more common linkage and close-knit nature of Singaporean blogging is also reflective if their society. Clearly those bonds are not as close between Hong Kong bloggers.
It also seems blogging has started to enter the mainstream in Singapore. Mr Brown has a regular article in a major paper. Xiaxue has the (in)famous t-shirt deal. In the comments Preetam Rai notes work bloggers are doing through Singaporean public libraries and community centres to run sessions on blogs and other such tool. Today's Standard has an article on Hong Kong political blogging and the SCMP had a rather lame effort (or the full article) over a year ago. Otherwise blogging has not yet registered in Hong Kong's mainstream in the same way. It's time to do something about that.
I am very open to staging some kind of meeting with other bloggers to discuss these and other issues. This is exactly what I was driving at with the idea of an Asian Blogging Convention, perhaps on the back of a Singapore BloggerCon. It can start off as an online forum with topics ranging from those affecting local issues (eg how do we get media interest in blogs in Hong Kong) to broader issues such as the one that started this. Who's keen?
The day an openly (not necessarily exclusively) political local blog hits the real big time, or practical efforts are made on the back of the blogosphere to assert our rights ask for our privileges in meatspace, will be the day the 'political website' laws start to get enforced on blogs.
This is a powerful medium. Blogs and their readers are at the start of a major shift in communication and media. I particularly like Han's comment:
"With many eyeballs, all lies are shallow". Blogs provide the eyeballs to scrutinise what other people say, so that any lies or untruths will be uncovered. The explosion of blogs allow for many people to scrutinise what others say, especially in the mainstream media, provide them with a platform to publish their criticisms so that others may gain from their insights.
Don't kid yourself. This blogging thing is the start of something big.
Update (15:48): For an example of what I'm talking about, Captain's Quarters provides a perfect recent example of how blogs can be powerful. This American blogger is providing extensive information on a Canadian corruption case that is banned from publishing in Canada (via Belmont Club, with some more interesting comments on blogs in overcoming information control).
But, I would like to say, the state of HOng Kong blogging has suffered from maligned treatment between certain bloggers.
I think your idea of outreach is very interesting, Simon, and I would like to see what becomes of it.
certain things have happened, and I am not aware of all of them in any detail, that have kept a certain number of people from feeling comfortable in the hong kong blogging space.
it would be interesting to see if anything is gained by meeting openly about the situation.
This is a daily collection of links, some with commentary, to news stories and interesting blog posts. It will be updated throughout the day with a new timestamp for the updates.
Could the passing of China's anti-secession law marked the high point of tensions and belligerence over Taiwan? Now China is renewing its (highly conditional) offer for talks with the DPP following the visit of KMT officials and offering to help Taiwan join the WHO.
After 27 years Hong Kong's bun scramble has been revived. What has not been announced is the HK Government will be sending "slope engineers" to concrete the towers and prevent slippage.
China's car firms suffer over-capacity, a slowing market and increased competition. So why not go and buy a British dog instead?
Look out for Typhoon Cindy Wind...and you can name your own destructive natural force as well. I wonder if Typhoon James Tien is on the radar?
I've been told Hong Kong Disneyland is going to open in September no matter what. That's despite most of the rides not being ready; a lack of air conditioning and shade due to budget constraints and a lack of adequately trained staff. Disney head office is sending lots of key staff into HK at the moment to bring it up to scratch. Update: ESWN has a look at HK Disneyland's recruitment drive.
Gary Becker argues China might not become the leading nation of the 21st Century. Co-blogger Richard Posner asks if China will overtake the USA but finds too many factors cloud the picture. Posner's is an "on-the-one-hand on-the-other" fence sitting exercise that adds little to the debate. Becker's longer piece rightly tempers the current enthusiasm for all things China, pointing out similar hype about Japan and Germany "overtaking" the US. There's much to be bullish about on China, but it is not inevitable that China's economy smoothly and quickly dominate.
Of the 22 million signatures on the petition circulating China demanding a block to Japan's permanent UN Security Council seat, there's been some interesting names. But the protests are still very real: violent protests in Chengdu.
The two main pro-Beijing parties in Hong Kong have a problem. The business based Liberal Party has a leader with delusions of grandeur. James Tien is hoping that where one opinion poll gives Donald Tsang 70% support against his less than one percent, a new one he has commissioned will give completely the reverse result. The working class based Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB - try saying that quickly) are also tying themselves in knots at the prospect of being ruled by a former British lackey.
Luck and timing have brought Donald Tsang's career to its current height but the "alienation of patriots'' may prevent him from going further, a pro-Beijing legislator says..."There seems a cultural gap and emotional distance between him and the patriotic forces."
After their years of (usually) towing the Beijing line, the two parties find themselves dealing with a Chief Executive (CE) candidate they cannot abide. But over 70% of Hong Kongs and, more importantly, Beijing want him to be the next CE. All of this posturing and pleading is being studiously ignored by the powers in Beijing.
It's almost embarrassing how little sway the Liberals and DAB are seemingly having over the CE election. They'd be better off getting behind The Don and trying to make him feel at least partially grateful for their support. Otherwise it will be a long 5 2 years.
Singapore and Hong Kong are well known rivals. Usually Hong Kong has the upper hand. But when it comes to blogging Hong Kong is, let's be honest, woefully behind Singapore. Singapore blogs have bigger readerships, are more diverse and more interesting.
Why?
Update at 18:03 1st April
I had my own thoughts before posting this question but didn't mention as I wanted to see what others thought. There are some great comments.
Mr Brown and I have been conversing by email and he has agreed to my posting the results.
Mr Brown's first email:
Intriguing thought, your post.
Miyagi, Cowboy Caleb and I were just talking about it over dinner last
night. [Ed. - what a great dinner that would have been!]
Could it be the fact that Singapore is the orphan child of British Colonialism?
Also I think we seem to buzz more because there is no real place for Singaporeans to speak their minds. Blogs offer anonymity and a chance to vent, rant and articulate thoughts that may get you in trouble offline. This is not to say that we live oppressed lives here. Most of us are quite happy and the perceived lack of freedoms is often over-stated in foreign publications. blogs and media. It's not that pathetic as it seems.
We could use more freedom offline but for now, blogs (and even, ahem, podcasts) are pushing the boundaries of tolerance, freedom of expression, and wit. Hopefully, this will spill over to the offline world too.
There seems to be more expats running English-speaking Hongkong blogs, I have noticed. Are there local language blogs booming there? I don't read Chinese blogs, so I am not sure.
I think it also helps that in a very informal way, the core blogging Singapore community sees its role as encouraging the rest of the Singapore blogging community to grow. Sexyblogger was, in part, an attempt to raise the profile of the many Singapore blogs we have. Let a thousand flowers bloom, I say. While not a formal grassroots effort, there are many Singapore bloggers passionate about blogging, and that helps too.
If Singaporeans get used to speaking their minds online, then maybe, just maybe, they will also start asking for their rightful space offline too. Then it will be grand to have played a small part in making that happen.
My dashed off reply:
I had suspected many of the points you (and others) have made. HK is not as English-centric; I can't read Chinese but from what I know there are some but not many of those blogs in HK. Nevertheless the lack of a solid English language audience is certainly a factor. But then why are most Singapore blogs more personal and local compared to those in Hong Kongers? Could it be for the political speech reasons you allude to?
Mr Brown's even quicker reply:
That is an interesting point you make about the local and personal nature of Singapore posts. I suspect that we as a people have been so used to being careful about political talk that it spills over to our personal talk as well. So blogs offer that space of expressing both the political and personal.
But the truth is, much is changing, and our new leaders are trying to open up, It's an eternal tension that our leaders have to deal with. How much is too much freedom? I think this generation and my children's will see many changes. The Internet has opened too many doors and economic opportunities for the Government to ignore. The change towards greater openness is inevitable. The only question is that of rate of change.
I agree that language plays a part. I am sure there are many kick-ass Chinese blogs in Hongkong. Just that Miyagi and I, being of the infamous ACS school (our Chinese very lousy), don't read those.
And so let me expound a little more on my own views and please feel free to contribute more.
1. The language factor is key. Hong Kong is dominated by Cantonese speakers with English quickly being relegated to the third language after Mandarin. Much to the elite's chagrin English proficiency is decling in Hong Kong. Thus those that feel most comfortable in writing in English are expats or "international Chinese". The downside to this is my inability to read Chinese excludes me from much of what happens locally in both the media and out there in the real world. On the other hand in Singapore English is a primary and commonly used language.
2. The nature of blogs in the two places is also shaped by the social and political environment. That's what Mr Brown was getting at and I can only agree. I have nothing against personal diary style blogs and indeed enjoy reading many of them. but the potential for blogging as a new medium and political tool is vast and only just starting to be realised.
3. Blogs themselves often reflect their setting. Singapore seems a more collegial place compared to the individuality of Hong Kong. And so it is with blogs.
There's far more to this and I welcome more debate.
More importantly I implore the Hong Kong Government to not sit idly by while Singapore overtakes our beloved city in this cutting edge field. To the HK Government here's my proposal:
1. Give an immediate grant of HK$50 million to me to set up a project to develop and expand blogging in Hong Kong.
2. I need exclusive use of a Government jet to travel back and forwards to Singapore and other places to better understand the issues.
3. I need a massive grant of free land, cheap loans and preferential treatment to develop a massive property venture on Hong Kong Island, to be called Blogport. To help fund this I will need to be allowed to build 10 luxury condiminium complexes. It's happened before.
would language make a difference?
could there many more chinese-language blogs than english-language blogs in hong kong? as compared to the chinese-english ratio in singapore (i am not aware of any census counts)
here are some hong kong chinese-language blogs that no english-language ones can touch:
Hung One Bean: http://hungonebean.blogspot.com/
Cafe Horizon:
http://www.littlelittle.org/
these people can read and write in english, but they use chinese instead, and i don't even imagine how these results are deliverable in english.
Singapore is an island and their blogs reflect that. The vast majority are very young and their blogs are somewhat childish and incerstuous*. They blog about each other far more than HK bloggers. I think we have some better quality bloggers (Hemlock, Simon, Spirit Fingers spring to mind and others who don't blog often like Fumier, Ordinary Gweilo, Undressed* King on the Blog, Hongkie Town, Daai Tou Laam etc). As for the Singapore bloggers - OK there's a couple of good-looking birds, but the only one who writes well is SPG. Among the guys Expat@Large, mr brown are pretty good but I don't rate the others much. I don't think numbers are everything. The local English media ignore us because we're constantly slagging them off too! I'll post on the subject.
* deliberately mis-spelt to get past the spam-blocker, Simon!
I would agree that there arn't many (non expat) English blogs in HK, while almost all Singapore blogs are in English. Maybe you guys could run a meta blog that has "notable posts" translated from the Chinese blogs in HK. I was once looking at organising something like this Mainland China and Thai blogs.
Another thing we are looking at doing here in Sg is work through public libraries and community centres to run sessions on blog/rss and other social networking tools. That would bring more people into blogsphere and hopefully more interesting writing and interaction.
I haven't spent much time in Hong Kong, thus this comment is based on my experience living in Singapore and New York. Please excuse me if it is irrelevant.
Surprisingly, I've found that the Internet is a much larger part of the average Singaporean's life than a New Yorker's. People my age (mid-twenties) in Singapore started using the Internet heavily in our early teens. Even in 1995 and 1996, when most of the people you'd encounter in online communities were American, it was almost impossible to find a single chatroom without at least one Singaporean chatter. We had BBS's in 1993/1994, and a Singapore-based MUD with hundreds (if not thousands) of users.
Singaporeans seem to really enjoy the heck out of online communities. I remember when I found out my (middle-aged) aunt had IRC buddies, I was shocked. But despite the technological learning curve, she really dug the Internet.
I think most Singaporeans definitely see the Internet as a social arena, whereas most of the New Yorkers I know use it as an informational tool. Perhaps our comfort level with using online communities as social activity is why we've so many blogs and such strong connections between our bloggers?
How dare you make such an arrogant comment on Hong Kong bloggers!! How dare you suggest HK government give you a grant to promote blogging culture!!
I suggest you "grant" yourself some money and time to learn Chinese and Cantonese. Or just "grant" yourself some time for self-reflection and learning to be more humble to local cultures.
I agree that Hong Kong blog culture is not strong enough. But the reason or solution is not about language. Try to know more about the Chinese societies.
Just want to remind you of one more thing you might not be able to understand. There are millions of bloggers in China. Most of them write in Chinese.
They rely on blogs for getting and exchanging information more than people in Singapore and the West because of government's censorship. But I would not come up with any idea of teaching Hong Kong people to write blog in simplified characters.
You are upset for no reason hegelchong. Simon isn't actually asking for government funding, he is actually being sarcastic. The whole asking for money is a parody of the stiffening levels of bureaucratic morrase that smothers Hong Kong as well as the level of collusion between monopolist business interests and the government.
what's the meaning of "east meets west" after all? if eastern languages have to give way to the western counterpart for making themselves visible; if the west, without understanding the eastern cultures and respecting their cultural values, while making stupid and arrogant comments about the place's culture / blogsphere.
and i wonder if the writer knows what is the value of blog, blogger communities, and the new trend in blogger journalism in providing an alternative frame of reference to the world's reality. such value can never be promoted by any "state", it is a counter current to the static hegemony.
please don't think that because you can write in english then you can represent the east to the Rest.
Hegel Chong neatly demonstrates the perils of a language divide. Isn't the lack of proficiency in English the most probable cause of one not being able to understand sarcasm and irony?
Blogs don't provide "an alternative frame of reference to the world's reality". Citizen journalism or distributed journalism is not about providing "alternate frame of reference". It is about revealing the truth.
Ever heard of the phrase "given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow"? That's the maxim formulated by Eric Raymond to describe the process in which Open Source methods of software development attain such excellence.
It equally applies here, "with many eyeballs, all lies are shallow". Blogs provide the eyeballs to scrutinise what other people say, so that any lies or untruths will be uncovered. The explosion of blogs allow for many people to scrutinise what others say, especially in the mainstream media, provide them with a platform to publish their criticisms so that others may gain from their insights.
Any references to "alternate frames of reality" would certainly lead people to conclude that you've either been reading too much of that po-mo crap, or hitting the bong one too many.
I'd like to factor in Internet usage by Singaporeans vs Hong Kongers in their everyday lives. As Samantha rightly states, Singaporeans tend to use the Internet as an extension of their social lives and perhaps Hong Kongers use it to a lesser extent? I am also guessing that blogging is a fad that hasn't caught on with Hong Kongers. Yet. Btw, how often has the media in HK reported on blogging, much less having a blogger write regularly on one of it's major publications? The Singapore media has been quite active in promoting blogs, which simply gets people quite curious over it. That's my take... it's all good though, as the blogging pie is massive and everyone should have a slice of its goodness.
Han, I'm never upset about what simon said. I just find his ideas funny and stupid.
I certainly understand simon's irony. But there are always assumptions behind irony. How come you don't understand my irony?
Even if I didn't understand it, it would not be necessarily a problem of "proficiency". It might be about "culture" (or sense of humour). And how come you guys (and HK government) keep judging people's English?
I do appreciate Singaporeans' blogs. But the problems of simon (maybe including you?) are not about language, not about his proficiency in English or Chinese. The problem is whether you show respect to the local society and cultures.
hegelchong: it's understandable how and why you're pissed off, but I don't think simon means to be completely disrespectful of the local culture in Hong Kong. it's not like he's totally slagging it off...
maybe it boils down to a cultural divide in the end (ironically enough). he's just being critical and voicing his views, and you're viewing it from a more Eastern perspective i.e. as a 'disrespectful' comment on the local culture, not giving 'face' to the local blogging community. chill out, i say! :)
"OK there's a couple of good-looking birds, but the only one who writes well is SPG. Among the guys Expat@Large, mr brown are pretty good but I don't rate the others much." - HKMacs
HKMacs: I'd be curious to know which well-known singapore blogs you've read but don't rate highly.
Chinese is my primary language but I blog in English. I do agree to an extent that the English blogs made by Chinese speaking HK Bloggers is lagging behind SGs ones. (I don't find my blog interesting or worth following to be honest, but at least I made the effort)
But there are again some interesting Chinese blogs around which are worth reading.
This is a daily collection of links, some with commentary, to news stories and interesting blog posts. It will be updated throughout the day with a new timestamp for the updates.
Scroll down for today's other posts.
Quite frankly we are witnessing an incredible historical event and it is going largely unnoticed. 55 years after the Chinese Civil War ended, the two opponents are now openly embracing each other. The visit is seen as a welcome thaw in frosty cross-Straits relations. Thanks should be given to the DPP for bringing together the Communists and KMT. And perhaps the pessimistis on the Taiwan question will realise it's not all doom and gloom and that China has a carrot and stick approach...not just a stick approach.
Mrs M. kindly bought me a copy of Blink by Malcolm Gladwell. It's a good read, linking together anecdotes and research and in an easy to read style. It comes down to a simple rule my high school science teacher once told me: go with your gut instinct. What is illuminating is the unconscious influences and prejudices on our decisions. As I said, worth a read.
Triads in Hong Kong are learning that upsetting the status quo with the cops doesn't pay. Since a police raid last weekend in Kowloon turned ugly, police have raided well-known Triad owned premises nightly, despite major Triad leaders apologising to the police and telling their young "brothers" to pull their heads in. Some might wonder why it has taken such an event to get the police to launch these raids. But in Hong Kong that's how it works: there is an unwritten understanding between police and Triads which keeps Hong Kong largely free of petty crime.
Sobering times for Korean bankers. Sell your Korean beer shares now. I can categorically state there are no harder drinkers in the world than Koreans.
It's not easy being a woman in China. Besides being vastly outnumbered by men, 71% are sexually harassed.
(13:20) Virgin have announced they have finalised details of commerical space flight and the first trip will be in 30 months. Instead of a mile high club there will now be the 100 mile high club. Problems of squeezing pass trolleys in aisles are eliminated as you can now float over the top. Leg space issues in economy class disappear. But what does a spacecraft do if there are no landing slots on its return?
The SCMP Group reported an annual profit of HK$317.5 million on turnover of HK$1.37 billion! That's a 23% profit margin! I gotta start me a newspaper. Maybe they could spare a few dollars and send some reporters to Hunan Normal University's class on sensationilising news.
DEL points to a NYT article discussing the current massive petition in China against Japan's bid for a UN Security Council permanent seat. I mentioned this yesterday and note in passing that what both the SMH and NYT have seen fit to print remains absent from the South China Morning Post. Joseph Kahn points out this petition will force China's Government to take a stronger diplomatic line with Japan and re-inforces my view that China's public opinion is more hawkish than the Government's on Japan. But will the rest of the world allow this to disrupt a much needed and desired reform of the UNSC? I doubt it. In the end the most likely is China will abstain on Japan's entry to the Council and cop a huge amount of domestic flak for it. It's not easy being a dictatorship. Thomas Barnett points to several other interesting China related articles today and rightly deals with them.
I don't see how the PRC's position on Nepal is “tortured” from its position on Taiwan. If Taiwan fell after 1949 and there never was a standoff at the Straits, I'd imagine the PRC government would still say the exact same thing and not feel anything out of place.
Hehe read enough Angry Chinese Blogger and you'll know that the Chinese public opinion is to force every human being in Japan into one spot, then nuke said spot repeatedly (saving just enough for Taiwan, if we have to obliterate it to keep it ours, and deterrents against India and America). :P
And therefore, we are talking about a LOT of domestic flak. Like, seriously, if Japan makes it into the UNSC permanently, the Politburo is probably going to cross its fingers that nothing controversial happens in the next two years, at least. At least, that's the gut feeling that I get from it.
I think Chinese responses to a security council seat for Japan will revolve around what kind of position Japan will get. If it's a non-vetoing position akin to the present 10 non-permanent member seats then they may very well tolerate it. If Japan's security council position comes with a subsequent veto that matches the present 5 permanent security council positions, I'm fairly sure China would never allow that. Frankly, I'm pretty sure Russia would also move to block that as well and the only real support Japan would have is from the United States.
I should also point out that South Korea has openly come out against Japan's security council bid.
[SEOUL — South Korea has decided to work to block Japan's bid to win permanent membership in the U.N. Security Council, the country's envoy to United Nations said Thursday, according to a Yonhap News Agency dispatch from New York.
Ambassador Kim Sam Hoon said: "There are difficulties for a country that does not have the trust of its neighboring countries because of its lack of reflection on the past to play the role of a world leader. We do not think Japan has the qualifications to become a U.N. Security Council member, and we will try to make sure it does not become one."]
Come to think of it, are there any Asian countries that are particularly enthusastic about Japan's security council bid? As far as I am aware, its only the U.S. that has any interests involved in the matter.
I can't read that article...do you mind sending me the text.
Japan should get a seat if they decide to expand the Council. But China has lit a fire that it cannot control. A compromise will be reached but I'm sure whatever it is it won't be enough to satisfy the Chinese public.
Thank you to everyone else who also linked and visited.
As I did last month, some stats for March:
* 17,683 unique visitors made 45,232 unique visits, reading a total of 84,407 pages and drawing 6.1 GB of bandwidth.
* This equals 1,459 visits per day reading 2,723 pages each day. In other words each visitor read 1.86 pages on average. Each visitor returned on average 2.55 times during the month.
* 612 added this site their to favourites. 140 subscribe via Bloglines and 22 via Feedburner.
* 62.5% of you use IE, 20.1% Firefox, 3.1% Safari, 2.9% Mozilla, 1.9% Opera and 1.6% Netscape to browse this site. Almost 85% of you use Windows, 6.3% Mac, 1.8% Linux and curiously some came via Web TV.
* 7% of visits were via search engines, of which Google was 67.5% and Yahoo 23.6%. The top search phrases were "Hong Kong Disneyland", "Nancy Kissel" and "China's Population".
* The most visited individual pages were the "Best Singapore Blog", "Everything you wanted to know about blogging but were afraid to ask" (that post just keeps on going and going), "Invented the abacus but can't add up" (kindly linked by Marginal Revolution).
Damn, Simon, that is extraordinary. I guess it really is just a testament to the outstanding quality of your writing, your thinking, your topics, and just the whole blog.
As my Australian friends taught me to say, Good on you!
Just started reading your blog a few days ago, and am already quite enamored of it. I'm doing the whole 'gwailo in Hong Kong' thing, and it's interesting to see a different (and generally much more mature) perspective on things. I'm a bit of a statwhore myself, so here's mine:
17689 unique users
22430 visits (1.26 visits/visitor) 43890 pages (1.95 pages/visit) 260101 hits (11.59 hits/visit) 7.22 GB bandwidth (337.69 KB/visit)
Odd how two very different sites can attract almost exactly the same amount of visitors over the same period. Look forward to your further posts, and keep up the good work.
Mr Tien said his party would conduct opinion polls this week to find out the popularity of himself and Donald Tsang. "If the polls show my popularity is very low, I will respect public opinion since I cannot hope to catch up in just a few months," he said. A university poll this week showed more than 71 per cent of those interviewed supported Mr Tsang, but less than 1 per cent preferred Mr Tien as the next chief executive.
Mr Tien said another important factor was whether Beijing would allow a fair race or whether it had already anointed someone to become the next chief executive. He said mainland organs, such as the central government's liaison office and the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, would be contacted over the question.
i found it hilarious that in that poll, James Tien is tied at 0.9% with Regina Ip, the former Secretary of Justice whose actions caused 500,000 people to take to the streets. Ahhh!
Today's Standard has piece on the cult of North Korea's President for Life, even though he's dead. It is accompanied by this photo with the caption North Koreans cycle past a poster of the late `president for life' Kim Il Sung in Kaesong, near the demilitarized zone at Panmanjon.
[Photo moved to extended entry]
Look at the two signs above the head of the middle cyclist. A "no cows" sign and a "no tractors" sign. That's modern NK for you: no cows but plenty of holligans. Maybe I'm being harsh - they have a unique way of using busses.
![[boomerang]](http://simonworld.mu.nu/boomerang2.gif){kind=small}
Posted by 
