Wednesday, December 30, 2009
It is always a country prerogative to carry out its own court sentence based on its own laws but the nosy Western media, once again, provides full coverage in its attempt to highlight China’s non respect for Western code of human rights practices. Human Rights organizations of all kinds, like the unknown Reprieve, even jumped onto the bandwagon to try to get into the spotlight.
The rejection of British PM call for clemency is certainly a right move as it goes to show that the Chinese court do not entertain interference from “outsiders” even though they are deemed VVIPs, which to Westerners will always carry some weights. It is good for China to send a clear message to the mainly Western countries and its nosy media that even Western citizens will not be given preferential treatment if there are caught infringing the country’s laws.
The so-called mentally-ill Briton who has been executed by lethal injection, has already been given full access to the Chinese legal system, and he has exhausted every available avenues including the Supreme Court, the highest body to review the case. According to the Chinese, he has failed to prove adequately that he is mentally unstable when he carried out the offence of drug trafficking. I am not a doctor but from my research bi-polar or manic depression is not a mental illness which would bring a person state of consciousness to a low where he does not know what he is doing. From the conversation I gathered through my association with people in the medical line, the state of “highs and lows” in a person can be controlled with proper medication and the person at a certain point of time would be able to realize that he is doing a job which considered illegal.
It is only in the West particularly in Europe which has triggered off protest and also, in one or two pro-Western Asian countries which allowed these media to carry out its news reporting unobtrusively with headline news which would be considered “unfriendly” to China. I am sure you would know which are those countries I am referring to from my earlier articles.
Why is it that China needs to accept Western code of ethics before it can garner respect throughout the world? It had already been “respected” in most Asian and African countries who shared many common bonds of imposing strict laws to curb the many severe crimes in its countries. Is the West respect so important? The media tried to imply that the respect is international. I full disagree. It is only Western or to put it racially “white-man” code of ethics which is not suppose to be a universally accepted stand human rights code for all human beings.The historical issues surrounding the return of Hong Kong to China, the condemnation of China by the British Environment Minister on the failure of the Copenhagen climate talks, the sending of a junior Minister to Tibet to support greater autonomy for the Chinese province all adds to the stickiness of the relationship between the growing world’s power and an ex-colonizer whose international influence is on the decline.
Most Asian countries introduced very tough punishment, including the death sentence, for offences like drugs and kidnapping which had grown quite big and remained as a “sore-thumb” in each country’s government effort to readdress a society where the poverty level is still significant. In fact, most visitors and tourists are provided with clear warning notice that drug trafficking is a capital punishment offence.
Why should China commute the death sentence which has been decided by the higher Court? China should not succumb from the interference especially from the West.
And China should seriously review its existing relations with Britain and possibly, cut down the number of business links with the British.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
The West opinions in its many articles supporting Uighur dissident, Rebiya Kadeer is nothing more than Western propaganda in undermining the image and authority of the Chinese government or the Han Chinese’s control over Xinjiang. Some of these were actually bordering on pure rubbish and are clearly one-sided and typically Western prejudices towards modern China.
Kadeer's allegations of state-sponsored prostitution of Uighur women are simply too hard to believe. Perhaps, only Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International would open their idle ears (with nothing better to do) to excite and spread these fantasies to the gullible Western public.
The despicable woman considers the influx of Han Chinese into Xinjiang as a threat to Uighur culture, which is totally baseless and unjustifiable. Xinjiang is a province of China and its people are considered Chinese whether they are Hui Chinese, Han Chinese, Tibetan Chinese or Han Chinese. Chinese citizens within the People Republic of China are free to move whenever there are job opportunities or feasible business ventures. Even in the US there were no restrictions to stop people from migrating from the Eastern part of US to the West during the gold rush of the early 19th Century. As the mainly white settlers moved to inhabit the Western portion of the US, Red Indians culture and traditions were gradually being replaced and until today it is more or less disappeared, and the Indian Reservations which were established half-heartedly soon gave way to casinos and unscrupulous developers.
On the contrary, there is this current policy practiced by the Chinese government of providing preferential treatment towards minority groups in China; for example, Uighurs, like Tibetans are exempted from China's one-child policy. Every year there are festivals in Tibet and Xinjiang where the locals were encouraged to display their traditional customs and cultures which were still very much alive as I could see in the many documentaries. Beijing actually tried to work with the Uighurs in governing Xinjiang by recognizing it as an autonomous region. The Han Chinese were also jailed by the military police for attacking the Uighurs during the July riots and not only the Uighurs were arrested as portrayed by the West as the only victims.
One of the Chinese netizen correctly challenged Rebiya’s allegations, which the Western media conveniently played along the “bullying” theme without seriously questioning the logical aspect of the facts:
1. Rebiya claims there are 10,000 Uyghurs imprisoned. What proof does she have?
2. Uighur migrants that were recruited to work on the east coast of China went there of their own free will and not force upon them as alleged by her. The Uighurs can always go back to where they came from. To my knowledge, traveling within China for Chinese citizens has never been a problem over the last decade.
3. Who would actually poured money into the highly risky western parts of China? The Han Chinese brought with them money and their entrepreneurial spirit to develop Xinjiang and if these “locals” are smart, they could actually profit or gain in terms of acquiring expertise and learning the trades but they choose to kill the migrants and burned their properties.
4. The Western based Uighur woman claims that she speak on behalf of the Uighurs in China but it is more obvious that she represent thousands of dissidents and exiles living abroad in Western countries and not the 4 millions Uighurs in China.
Every time she was given an opportunity to face the press, she would bad mouthed China’s ethnic policy but I would like to ask a more pertinent question, if it is really that bad then how could she has amassed a fortune of about US$25 million when she was an enterprising business woman before she was deported from China.
Let us quietly ponder about it and not blindly supporting a big liar like what the Western media do.
Monday, November 9, 2009
I have on numerous occasions noted the boastful attitude of the Indian coaches, politicians and their mainly one sided media which highlighted the near impossible feat and the praises only you would find in a country like India.
When the country has successful launched its satellite, it tells the world we will be going to the moon. When it grew at 7-8% GDP, it commented that it will overtake the US in terms of size in 30 years. When it develops a missile which can hit Shanghai, it tells the world they are a potential superpower. When it defeated the Koreans in the semi-final in the recently concluded Asia Cup Women’s Hockey in Bangkok, it again told the world they will win the title handsomely.
These are the words of the coach. "Our girls are talented, they deserved the ultimate honour here. I have asked them to go all out. China are tactically strong, they can trouble us. Unless my girls give one hundred per cent, we can't come out winners. My players will deliver, I believe in their caliber," "China are good at counter attacks, forwards are opportunistic and good inside the circle. So, we have to be cautious, then nothing can stop us from getting the gold,"
The Indian goalkeeper goes on to say, “"After defeating Korea which is a better team than China, we are confident of a good result in the final. We are ready to face the best in the Asia," "Their fullback Ma Yi Bo is good at penalty corners, but their forwards are hungry inside the circle. Not just goalkeeping the whole defence has to combine well and I am sure we will win,"
Are the Indians so sure? Yes the Western media would love to have India to beat China, if they could manufactured the news from here.
In the final, the Chinese women’s hockey team soundly beaten the Indian team 5-3 and won the Cup. Well, being boastful doesn’t help at all, does it?
Sunday, November 8, 2009
I am being kept busy lately with meetings and running personal errands. Also, I was also down with a very bad cough and flu but not the H1N1 which is causing a scare worldwide. I apologize for not updating the blog.
Last week, I was able to review some comments from China’s netizens who were very angry at the aging Statesman who has called openly for the US to remain engage in Asia at a US-ASEAN Business Council dinner in Washington. He quotes that “The size of China makes it impossible for the rest of Asia, including Japan and India, to match it in weight and capacity in about 20 to 30 years. So we need America to strike a balance.”
He could be playing to the tune of the mainly US audience but it at least re-affirmed my belief that Singapore has always been a strong US supporter even though 70% of its population has its roots in China. There are quite a vast number of youth who wish they could be termed “whites” but unfortunately, their skin is still very much yellow. The influence of US entertainment programs and the superiority of “white-man” technology do have a very strong influence on the lifestyle of the average Singaporeans.
Lee Kuan Yew was the person who refused to establish Mandarin as a medium of instruction in the early 70s when he was the Prime Minister of the tiny island but he only relented to allow Mandarin as an important optional language for Singaporeans to pick up when he saw the tremendous progress in the mainland Chinese society since the late 80s. Then he suddenly became the spokesperson for the Chinese government whenever he traveled to various parts of the world because he could speak English fluently. I have seen many Western educated graduates who have adopted a Western lifestyle but they remain very Chinese in their heart. I am clear on this point that I cannot speak for this white-haired grandfather who seem to have an inert fear of being a Chinese.
The action and his past behavior demonstrated that he still treat Chinese as outsiders and he personally fear a resurgent China which will reduce whatever left of Singapore’s political influence in the region.
One netizen commented that Lee is a “political animal”, saying that while Singapore depended more and more on China to develop his country’s economy, he is ushering wolves here to deal with China”.
In short, he is labeled a traitor to the Chinese and who is willing to speak out for the West and to protect their interest, indirectly also safeguarding Singapore’s assets and influence.
A third posting said: “Just because he has achieved some success in Singapore, he dares to play the guiding light that shows US the way. If he has the stuff, he should go to Africa and offer tips on how to shake off poverty and achieve wealth.”
I just do not understand why the Chinese government still regards the senior Statesman as an old “friend” to China when he is actually inviting other military forces to limit China’s influence in the region.
As a comparison, the Malaysian government has never made any comments of this nature even in the presence of the US politicians, businessmen or investors. In fact, the Malaysian government has been very supportive of the Chinese government active role in South East Asia.
Perhaps, the main reason I could deduce from the Chinese government non comment from the many angry comments by its netizens is that it has always been the Chinese reaction to be diplomatic and to manipulate Singapore in other ways possible to channel and to disseminate its mission and vision, both positive and negative to the West.
Singapore is a small country and the question of whether the West’s political and military advisors will listen to his comment is another thing. The reality is that a country needs to be big and powerful before it is heard. A leader’s speech by a big and influential country is normally reported in the media of many countries. For smaller countries, the leader speech normally is not broadcasted widely but only in the home country.
With the current batch of Singaporean leaders who are pro-US, I am not at all surprise that the media in the republic are also pro-US namely Channel News Asia and Singapore’s New Straits Times.
I would like to call the Chinese government to carefully review its relations with Singapore though it may not wish to make a fuss of the elder statesman call to the US to increase its influence in the region. I would place Singapore as next only to Japan in this part of the Asia Pacific as a strong US ally when we compared the nation support to the “white-run” Australia down under.
In times of an outbreak of hostility between China and US over Taiwan in the future, China must not forget that only two countries would come to the US assistance and that is Japan and very likely Singapore. Yes, it is Singapore and not Australia who will provide the necessary supplies bases needed to keep the US armed for its military offence in this part of the world.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
The US is not succumbing to Chinese pressure to meet the religious leader. In fact, this is the first time, the US has a thinking President (and a few advisors) who would be willing to view Sino-US relations from a larger perspective as compared to the past Presidents in over two decades.
The criticisms came from the US rights activists and the anti-China US media. The US had been bombarding the Tibetan spiritual separatist with countless awards which means nothing to the world who is supportive of China. These meaningless awards are only for the Western world to appreciate. Most Asian, African and Latin American countries could not even care whether he had won the Nobel Peace Prize, or not.
The spiritual talk he is embarking on the tour of the US is only a guise of the cunning political figure and his exiled supporters who will take every opportunity to promote his independence cause and to shame China and its people. Let me remind the Western world that the fight for independence among the Tibetan exiles is not a political fight against China’s government but also a fight against all Han Chinese in mainland China and oversea Chinese throughout the world.
And every Western move to support the Dalai Lama independence and separatist activities will provoke anger and retaliation from the many Han Chinese. Of course, there would be a sporadic few in Taiwan, Hong Kong and perhaps, in Vancouver who will listen to the Dalai Lama’s plight but deep inside, I strongly believe they would not support an independent Tibet or allow an almost self governing status with foreign diplomatic rights (which was demanded in the earlier talks a few years ago) to the Dalai Lama and his cliques.
Using religion to shield his political demands is a devious ploy but that had already backfired on many occasions, and ultimately more will come to see the truth. It is only the Western governments who are providing him with the full news coverage as an international political figure. The non interference in Chinese affairs by the US this time is a right decision.
The Dalai Lama had never shown any genuine concern for the welfare of Tibetans. He is more concern of the well being of his spiritual followers who are mostly Caucasian whites. If he really cares about his fellow Tibetans, he should not have escaped to Northern India in the late 50s. As a religious leader claiming to be only interested in promoting religious affairs concerning Tibet, why is he so concern about not being able to meet a top political leader in his trip? Do you think that he and his many cohorts have a political agenda? The answer is an affirmative yes.
Friday, September 25, 2009
The screening of a movie by a Western glorified anti-China dissident in the city of Kaoshiung in Taiwan recently is clearly a move to antagonize China and also, to gain political mileage from the clusters of independence leaning supporters, mainly from the opposition Democratic Progressive Party.
The film which Beijing criticized is a distorted movie that supports separatism and will not help to reunite the various ethnic races on the mainland. Westerners who viewed the documentary will also have a negative perception of the dominant Han Chinese.
A pro-independence singer of a Taiwan's metal rock band invited the self nominated exiled dissident from Xinjiang to visit Taiwan in December 2009, is another move to counter the warming of relations between the Chinese mainland and Taiwan, which is strongly promoted by the ruling Kuomintang Party.
Even the pro-business and tourist association are against the moves to show the movie and to invite a controversial figure to the self-ruled island, which historically has been accepted to be a part of China. Of course, the West which has a hidden agenda was non committal on the issue as against the majority of the nations which evidently supported China’s claim.
The Chinese authorities have indicated that the snubbed on China will not in any way help to promote Taiwan as a priority travel destination for Han Chinese.
Being a politically influential and economically powerful country presently, China should leverage on this position to ensure that only persons who are friendly to the China cause would benefit the most from the enhanced activities between mainland China and Taiwan. The majority of Taiwanese should not be made to suffer by the actions from these pro-dissidents and anti-Chinese supporters.
Saturday, September 19, 2009
I completely agree with US Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, that China would be able to reduce US complete dominance in the high seas, in space and in cyberspace probably in a decade from now.
Further, I am quite confident that as China military power continues to make progressive advancement towards 2050, the challenges to US supremacy in terms of symmetrically head to head in numbers and quality should be not be discounted so openly by the US military think-tank.
It is always a right of a sovereign nation (truly independent and not US subservient Asian countries like Japan and South Korea) to develop its own stable of arsenal to meet its requirements reflective of its size and importance. Historically, the Chinese were at one time a peaceful sea-faring nation in the 14th Century when the US was not even born.
The repeated warnings by Gates are viewed more for lobbying of additional funds from the Congress to develop highly advanced weapons and machines to counter any Chinese upgrade of its weaponry, to keep it one to two steps ahead of its rival.
The US residents realized that it is impossible to continue to keep abreast of the latest in high technology development to maintain its no.1 status throughout the world (given its self appointed role as the “policemen” of the world) if the economy keeps stumbling. In fact, the huge debt owed by the US can only be repaid in the medium to longer term by the sale of its territories like Alaska, Hawaii or perhaps, a portion of New Mexico, as one of the critics pointed out in a seminar on US’s role in Asia.
I would not put it as a threat which was used willingly and aggressively by the US media but the closing of technological gap between the military of the two powerful nations. Even the Russians were making advancement in the weapons and ballistics section of the military recently.
What does Gates actually meant when he said the progress by other nations, namely China, would undermine US power in the Asia Pacific? In the first place, should US be allowed in Asia since most countries have more or less stabilized and why should independent nations in Asia allowed the US to continue establishing military bases in its territories? And why must the US be the only country allowed to set up bases around the world?
We are currently moving towards a world order which must not only be controlled solely by only one power, namely the US. I believe the future order would be transformed to one which is influenced by – US, China, Russia and perhaps, EU (mainly Germany, UK and France).
On another aspect, he said that long range military aircraft would take greater significance in the next decade since the development of new short term Chinese arsenals can counter its short range fighters. China military growth and its development not only focus on short term measures but also long term. I am of the opinion that the Chinese has also extended its long range capability especially in its nuclear submarines and warships which would indirectly reduce the effectiveness of the US long range military aircraft as well.
The US would definitely lose its dominance in the future, It is just a matter of time and the faster the US can come to accept it as a reality, the better it is for the world.
I am waiting anxiously on October 1 on China’s 60th Anniversary of the CPC rule, to review the vast array of its new military warfare on parade to ascertain whether China can truly take its rightful place as a superpower in this century.
Sunday, September 13, 2009
On Saturday, the Democratic Progressive Party which is now in Opposition called for the immediate release of ex-Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian while he appeals against his conviction on graft charges. Last Friday, he was sentenced to prison for life for being convicted of embezzling state funds, laundering money and accepting bribes of around US$28 million.
What is the justification for the release of a rogue President?
Just because he was a former President or that he truly fought for Taiwanese independence. He was actually pandering to the Western agenda to “break up” China to create a position in which a convergence of Chinese conglomerate would be less threatening to Western continued dominance. It is also obvious that the hordes of WESTERN human right activists and the bunch of supporters are behind the charade.
US$28 million is not a small amount in Asian societies. Maybe, in the West the amount is considered insignificant.
Most WESTERN so called experts are now questioning the fairness of the legal system in Taiwan. These people are not stakeholders in the prosperity and unity of the Chinese people. They are merely outsiders who will have no bearing if the Taiwanese political or economic system did not meet up to the expectation of the Western judicial standards.
To these people or the West “white-based” societies, the legal system in non-Western countries are subjected to many irregularities and inadequate “check and balances” that would cast suspicion on the fairness of the trial. That is why historically in circumstance where a foreign national from the so-called advanced nation was passed judgment in an Asian Court, you can almost tell from the faces of its relatives, friends that it is not fair even after so many witnesses were called to testify. In the mind of a Western person, a judge of Asian origin is just not capable to adjudge a person who comes from a place where there is democracy and there is respect for individual freedom.
The case demonstrated to the world that nobody is above the law and that the conviction indicated that there is progress in a civil society dictated strongly by law. The fact that he was not charged while he was a President for two terms even though there were evidences pointing to many wrongdoings was because of his immunity status for being the most powerful person in Taiwan during that time.
I am very sure that the government’s prosecutor would have double checked all the facts of the case, which is subjected to questioning by the legal team of the ex-President if it is not proper or irregular during the trial.
Most Asian commentators were of the view that the Taiwan's judicial system is undergoing a transformation which had already reached a respectable standard as compared to most emerging Asian countries and personally, I think that there is already a certain measure of fairness. The above suspicion appearances without political bias as proclaimed by the West do not even exist in the true sense in Western societies.
Taiwanese legal system allows a convicted person an automatic appeal if it is a life sentence. If the opposition and their Western supporters think the process is unfair then the appeal avenue is a viable platform for them to seek redress but it must be devoid of any Western interference and pressures.
But the system is such that he must be detained and not release as called upon by the opposition and their independence seeking supporters.
From a survey of the Taiwanese public, 50 percent said the verdict proved Taiwan's judicial independence and only 25 percent considered it a political persecution.
I fully disagree with the Western perception that the verdict has divided the island 23 million people which to the contrary has strengthened the people’s resolve to ensure that the Taiwanese legal process takes it full course for person who breaks Taiwanese regulations and statutes.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Nephew of Dalai Lama tried to seek world’s sympathy of an imposed “gag order” by the Taiwanese authorities
By allowing the visit of this despise religious figure to
His nephew told the nosy Western media that there was a "gag order" on his uncle out of fears of
First, his visitation rights are confined to spiritual “comfort” for the victims of the Typhoon Morakot and nothing more. Secondly, this is an island whereby traditional Asian values are still practiced in which the guest will need to respect the wishes of the host. Perhaps a western country may allow you to criticize a “friend” of yours in their house but not in an Asian country.
The host “nation” has every right to set conditions for its visitors in its territory. If the Dalai Lama and his entourage do not like the imposed conditions, they can just hop on the next flight back to
As one demonstrator aptly put it, “the Chinese are here to help (economically), the Dalai Lama comes to make trouble.
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
By China Watcher
Turkish special envoy to the Prime Minister, Zafer Caglayan has conveyed a very eventful and bonding message which states that Turkey understands the measures which China took to deal with the Xinjiang unrest on July 5 2009. This means that China’s decision to send its paramilitary forces to ensure stability and prevent further bloodshed between two ethnic races in China is the correct move. The West reportedly called this action as “a suppression act” which I totally disagree.
The extended warm friendship is without doubt came about after the Turkish government truly understood the actual situation in Xinjiang on that day and NOT from the twisted and highly spun news coming from the West, where its sources are readily and conveniently taken from the Uighur International Council, a body with a publicized aim at seeking independence from China.
The Turkish’s envoy also stressed its country’s opposition to any form of separatism in China and said that the two countries should expand trade and diplomatic ties. This is a blow to the supporters of Rebiya Kadeer, a self proclaimed dissident and her hordes of so-called “supporters’ mainly from Western agencies and organization. The main objective of the independence group is to disrupt the stability in the autonomous region in order to garner world’s sympathy to its plight and to secure a meeting with the Chinese authorities.
The Uighurs were being instigated and manipulated by the external-based separatist movement and there were evidences confirming this matter, supported by the few non coercive statements made by Rebiya’s own family members. I am of the view that the Uighurs are being told to target the country’s dominant Han Chinese in its mission to create instability among the various races. I strongly believe every Chinese – whether it is in China or overseas - should take note of this unhealthy trend.
The Chinese government must stand firm and continue with its development plan for Xinjiang, which has brought a certain measure of success economically over the past decade, though further improvement is needed to bring the status of the Uighurs on par with the local Han Chinese.
I wish the Chinese people of Uighur descent would boldly accept this promising challenge and contribute to the overall well being of a united Chinese society.
Monday, August 31, 2009
The Dalai Lama visit to Taiwan is clearly a political ploy by the opposition, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to create trouble for the administration of Taiwan leader, Ma Ting-jeou. He was invited by seven mayors and local government chiefs from the DPP, where the party quietly has the support of mostly Western organization and its media.
The Taiwanese leader is being criticized for the handling of the devastating typhoon which killed 571 people and the approval was given to appease to the residents for his declining popularity.
The Western media attempt to stir up the Chinese population by making statement that the Taiwanese government snubbed China’s government opposition by approving the visit. This is not the case. The reason behind this was the various attempts by the independence leaning DPP to create instability in the current government in its effort to win over the votes of the people.
China should take note of these few mayors and the people behind the visit and use its political and world’s influence to ensure that these trouble-makers lives would be a difficult one ahead. I am disappointed that these people are traitors to a united China and are playing into the hands of the Western agenda to see a “broken-up’ China. The Dalai Lama, as his usual self, will not reject such a golden opportunity to promote his independence cause under his Tibetan monastery rule.
The Western media is also delighted to provide the publicity to the spiritual leader and to try to portray China as a bully. Sadly, some of the South East Asia media are also openly providing good coverage mimicking Western media namely Channel News Asia, Media Corp, a company based in Singapore. The company is probably headed by a pro-Western editor who I believed had an agenda to promote human rights in Asia but I do not see any article which is critical of the host country. Why? I am sure you know the reason.
It is a blow to the Western world and its media that the Taiwanese leader would not meet the religious leader, which is to play down the importance of the visit and also, to ensure that the visit is more for humanitarian purpose and NOT POLITICAL of which the Western media and its supporters are hoping for.
About 30 people of Taiwan’s non-Han aboriginal community demonstrated outside his hotel Monday, accusing the Dalai Lama of politicking. They told the press that if the religious leader has a heart for the victims, he should not be staying in a big and comfortable hotel.
It is certainly pleasing news this week that the Chinese drugmaker Sinovac will market its H1NI shot at 30 percent cheaper than those offered by Western firms like US pharmaceuticals group Baxter, France's Sanofi-Pasteur, Switzerland's Novartis and Britain's GlaxoSmithKline.
Firstly, it will make the drug available to the less affordable and secondly, it will break the monopolistic hold of western drug companies on poor and developing nations.
In addition to its cheaper price tag, the Sinovac’s H1N1 flu vaccine works after just one dose whereas the Western requires two.
The vaccine currently is undergoing local regulator testing for the right to commercialize the drug after the clinical trials at Sinovac lab had proven to be effective to counter the H1N1 virus.
Expected production rate may not be as fast as the bigger western funded pharmaceutical companies but it is a sure promising sign that at least a non Western company is giving a fight to the West dominated world in which the global’s pharmaceutical industry is largely controlled by US and European firms.
I always feel that China’s biotechnology research and drug development is not too far off from its Western peers.
I congratulate China in this project and I wish that this is the beginning to the production of many more alternatives and options for the world to choose rather than depending on the West.
The future is in Asia.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
I am certainly very proud of Chinese unity in the face of the Australian organizer stubbornness in staging the nation’s biggest film festival by inviting Chinese dissident, Rebiya Kadeer to officiate a film about her life.
Obviously, this dishonest and self proclaimed leader of her tribe would use the opportunity to seek Western sympathizers towards her cause for independence from China. As usual, the West’s hidden political agenda is to continue using the current platform of allowing mostly Chinese dissidents and “outcast” in an attempt to portray a “failed” China both politically and socially in order to reduce the perceived Chinese threat to the present Western dominated societies.
The Western film organizers choose to defend the rights of individuals and said that the invitation is only for the promotion of the film festival but they were completely ignorant of the fact that this woman is a “hated face” in China and the invitation is actually in total disregards and disrespect for the many Han Chinese throughout the world, including overseas Chinese. This woman would certainly use the ongoing publicity in conjunction with the festival to highlight not the FILM but her very own political adventures, which was why the Chinese government has lodged a solemn representation against her visit.
To date, seven directors not only from China but Hong Kong and Taipei have pulled their work as well as its sponsorship from the Melbourne International Film Festival. The directors were clearly not happy with the attendance of this controversial political figure and the showing of the film “Ten Conditions of Love”, a documentary about her life.
Western media of late have been trying to emphasize that her attendance has actually boosted ticket sales and her writings have received good response and most likely, it is not from Asians. This is a normal staple of the Western media hidden agenda, which I am used to anyway.
A woman spokesperson of the Festival adamantly told the media that Rebiya will take her rightful role in the event and the film would be screened as usual. She also added that the act of withdrawal of the sponsors and directors are beyond her control due to circumstances beyond the directors’ control. Really! This is a very shameful and untruthful statement indeed from a one sided organizer.
China has labelled the US-based Muslim minority leader a "criminal" and accuses her of inciting recent violence in the restive Xinjiang region, which left at least 197 dead. Canberra has rebuffed Chinese objections to the visit by Kadeer, saying she is not a "terrorist" and there is no reason to exclude her.
Sino- Australian relation was strong and stable after a mandarin speaking Kevin Rudd has been elected as a PM but I have to say that the culmination of these series of negative events would bring the diplomacy to its previous level of a Tier 3 nation or worse.
I believe that the Chinese resolve on this matter is very strong and united – NO INDEPENDENCE FOR XINJIANG. Even the overseas Chinese is supportive of this matter.
How could the West be so foolish? I do not think so. Confrontational? Most likely.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
The arrest of Stern Hu, a naturalized Australian citizen, has raised all sorts of corporate complications littered with external business risk arising mainly from a different set of political and social environment standards. But the Australian communities have chosen to openly confront the Chinese government in handling of the incident.
A disappointed senator clamored over the lack of direction in resolving the case with the Chinese government has declared his intention to push for the Australian Senate Economics Committee, to inquire into foreign investment by state-owned enterprises and sovereign wealth funds and to recommend an overhaul of foreign-investment regulations. He said that ownership of Australian businesses by state-owned enterprises is an inherently unhealthy thing and once the state-owned bodies have ownership of Australia’s resources it is even more problematic, with a direct reference to China’s international business operating model.
But he must also understand that China can also play the same “business game” and disallowed monopolistic companies like Rio Tinto and similar Aussie companies to operate in China.
The frustration is seen in the many threats and “lecturing” techniques used by the Australian government, media and the business communities to try to pressure China in releasing the detainees.
China is Australia's biggest trade partner, worth $53 billion last year, and iron ore exports injected $14 billion, powered by Rio, Australia's BHP Billiton Ltd and others.
An Australian government lawmaker and foreign policy expert commented that China's justice system had only a "facade of legality" and that Canberra had "learned the hard way" that Australia-China relations must be handled carefully. Is he implying that only the Western forms of justice system are acceptable for “white-based” societies and its people?
I like to acknowledge and agree with the Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Sub-Committee of Australia's Parliament, who openly told the media that the Australian Prime Minister should not intervene with China's top leadership because the days when Western countries can demand exemption for its citizens in any Asian country are over, even in China.
The world is evolving and the new societal order is that it not going to be dominated by Western countries any more.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
It is rare that the Chinese government has admitted openly the act of killing 12 Uighur rioters during the ethnic unrest in Xinjiang recently. Anyway, the West would as usual doubted the figures and would continue to make its assertion that it is much higher, trusting the unreliable sources of the Uighur exiles (or the exiled Tibetans earlier).
I came across the two different reports on the same set of news and I want the readers to take note and tell me the difference.
Western news media
The Chinese news media reported that the Chinese police shot dead 12 "mobsters" during ethnic unrest in Urumqi on July 5, which was necessary to prevent further bloodshed. It went on to mention that three died on the spot and nine after unsuccessful treatment.
The report did not give details of the ethnicity of the deceased, but Beijing has blamed the violence in the Xinjiang regional capital that day on the Uighurs. Chinese authorities previously said the "riot" on July 5 left 192 people dead, most from China's dominant ethnic group, the Han.
The Uighurs, many of whom have complained of repression under China's 60-year rule in the huge mountainous region of Xinjiang, have accused Chinese forces of opening fire on peaceful protests. Thousands of Han Chinese went on the rampage in the following days, arming themselves with makeshift weapons and marching through Urumqi vowing vengeance against the Uighurs in some of the worst ethnic violence in China in decades.
Xinhua news agency
A senior official of northwest China's Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region said here Saturday Xinjiang has the confidence to erase the negative impacts of the July 5 riot "in the shortest time" in an interview with overseas reporters.
Nur Bekri, chairman of the regional government, also said in the interview that on the night of July 5, policemen in the regional capital Urumqi "resolutely" shot 12 mobsters after firing guns into the air had no effects on these "extremely vicious" thugs.
Three of them died on the spot while nine died after failing treatment.
"The police showed as much restraint as possible during the unrest. Many of them were injured and a 31-year-old officer was killed. He was hit by mobsters in the head with a stone," said Nur Bekri. He added that many innocent people were injured in the head by thugs with iron rods, stones and bricks. Knives were also used.
According to the official, the riot has left a total of 197 people dead, and most of them were innocent residents. Nur Bekri admitted that they had never expected a student parade could turn into such ferocious violence.
He said that the local government had taken timely actions to prevent emergencies as soon as they received information on the students' plan.
"But we could never imagine that the mobsters were so extremely vicious and inhumane... We really didn't expect that," he said, referring to thugs entering small alleys and lanes to attack innocent people.
He said that these perpetrators had prepared many weapons such as rods, stones and took actions in various places at the same time, which experts said was similar to the terrorist attacks that occurred in other countries recently. Nur Bekri said as the local situation is becoming more stable, "it won't be long" before the Internet was completely reopened to the public.
He said that during the riot, the Internet and cell phone messages became the main communication methods for mobsters, and it was necessary for the government to shut down the Internet to stabilize people's emotions and restore social order.
He pointed out this is a measure all countries in the world would adopt in similar situations.
Currently some professional web sites are already accessible in the region, he added.
In summary Nur Bekri told reporters the following:
1. The negative effects left by the riot would be erased "in the shortest time" and the government had the confidence to ensure the fast development of the region's economy. He said worries about the future situation of Xinjiang were completely "unnecessary".
2. Statistics show that thousands of traveling groups were cancelled after the riot, involving hundreds of thousands of tourists. He told the press that Xinjiang is capable of providing a harmonious and safe environment for tourists... The riot will not affect the opening up policy of the region and the local authority sincerely welcome businessmen from home and aboard to invest in the region.
3. He refuted foreign reports which claimed that women of Uygur were forced to go eastward to work. Such reports are completely untrue. Before these women were organized to work in other provinces, the government must get permission from their parents and consent from the individuals.The local government spent 300 million to 400 million yuan to provide free courses on technology and language for people going to work in other places. Every year, a total of 100,000 migrant workers from south Xinjiang will be organized to work in other regions to earn more money.
4. He denied that promoting mandarin Chinese in the region was aimed to eliminate or replace ethnic languages. He reiterated that other than learning the Uighur language well, it is very beneficial for ethnic people to learn mandarin and even other foreign language.as this would provide more working opportunities.
5. He revealed that the Chinese government will spend a total of 3 billion yuan rebuilding the old town area of Kashgar, a key city on the silk road whose population is mostly of Uygur ethnic group. The Uighur leader said that most of the houses in the old town were made of brick-wood and were very unstable if an earthquake occurs. Also some residents live on high slopes and their houses may collapse at any time.
Which one will give you a more detailed explanation and which one is more one-sided, bias and inflammatory?
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Lately, the Australian government under pressure from its own media and the opposition has been making lots of diplomatic noises and repeatedly mentioned that the treatment of a naturalized Australian citizen (Stern Hu of Rio Tinto) who was arrested for spying and stealing state secrets may affect China's business reputation and frighten off existing and potential investors.
I applaud China’s strong stand in repudiating these “lectures” coming from Down Under and warned the Australian government very clearly not to interfere in China’s investigation and handling of the case. Hu was accused together with 3 Chinese colleagues of spying and stealing state secrets by allegedly bribing steel mill officials, which may have resulted in huge losses to China’s economic interests and security.
Foreign companies and its staff must abide and respect Chinese laws and regulations when they do business in the country. There is no double standards and everyone is equal when the law in enforced and there is no one set of laws for foreigners and another set for the Chinese residents. The independent judiciary authority in China must be respected.
I am very sure that the Chinese authorities would have sufficiently taken into consideration all negative factors and economic repercussions from this incident and they do require more “lecturing” from a “white-based” country who thinks that there are always right and that only its Western laws and practices are to be TRUSTED.
The international business community and nation states who do business with China would not only take one single incident to cast its opinion on the treatment of foreigners and investors in the country. In fact, China is now looking inwards for more domestic investments and funds coming from “friendly nations” in the Asian region. So Western investments, other than those with high technologies (which is already curb in the US) is only a handful and negligible, of which if it is reduced, would not have a major impact on its economy.
China's last quarter growth was announced at 7.1%, which is encouraging and recovery symptoms were noted. For your information, Western media had earlier pessimistically predicted that China's growth will trickled down to only 5%. So Western views are very bias and one-sided indeed.
Let me remind the Australian government that it stands to lose more if it acts tough on China. Australian strong economic performance for the past few years was due to the increased in demand for its natural minerals like iron ore and copper and dairy products like milk, cheese and butter, a big percentage coming from China. China can always turned to competitors nations in Latin America and Africa for raw materials but can Australia afford to allow its export to drop 50%?
If it is true that Rio is pulling its staff out from China, I would be very pleased if they do so. More importantly, if they are really serious about the withdrawal move, China should just blacklist them and do not allow them to come back to the country in the future.
However, in a few reports both Rio and its mining partner BHP Billiton have denied the malicious and devious Australian Financial report that iron ore shipments to China had been disrupted, by insisting that it was business as usual.
China can just ignore these ridiculous complaints and proceed to administer the correct justice based on Chinese laws if it had been infringed by the company's staff.
Sunday, July 12, 2009
I have taken the liberty to extract 4 Chinese citizens (including the minorities) viewpoints on the Xinjiang incident and I find it more worthwhile and truthful than the many one sided and bias articles and reports from the West. Surprisingly, the comments were taken from BBC, which had been one of the most critical media on China from the Western world.
Harry He, tradesman, Xian says,
I used to work for a travel company, so I've travelled to Xinjiang a lot. I was totally shocked when I heard what happened there. Uighurs believe this is their land, and it is. But Han Chinese have been settling down there since the Tang dynasty, when the Silk Route opened up new cities and new opportunities.
Maybe the Chinese did rule Xinjiang with an iron first. But we are learning the lesson. Things have already got better for ethnic minorities. In some ways, they enjoy more privileges. For example I have to study really hard to get into university while it's easier for Uighurs, as there is a reserved quota for them regardless of how well they've performed.
Uighurs have a bad reputation in the rest of China. They get involved in criminal activities. They also don't speak Mandarin well. That's why many Han Chinese have little respect for them and some even hate them.
Urumqi is a wealthy, modern city. Twenty years ago you couldn't see such prosperity. All this wealth goes back into their education and social welfare. I've been reading blogs and I know that so many people want to talk about it. But I also know that if I post a comment, it will disappear in two minutes.
The government is controlling the information in order to contain the violence. Information should be released step by step, not at once. If they let people comment freely, anger and hatred will spread quickly and some Han Chinese might want to retaliate against Uighurs. I am confident that my government is doing the right thing to bring harmony.
Kalder, IT engineer, Beijing, originally from Urumqi
I belong to the Hui minority group. Back in Urumqi I've got friends from the Hui, Han and Uighur groups. Relations between us have always been fine, that's why I was totally shocked when I heard what happened earlier in the week. I don't think the rioters represent the Uighur minority. Most of the Uighurs are good people and they don't want such things to happen.
I feel that both Uighurs and Hui people are supported by the government. It's easier for us to get into university and there are more opportunities.
It's true that many Han people have come to Xinjiang in the last few years and that more Han Chinese live in Urumqi than Uighurs. But I don't mind that. If I can come to Beijing, why can't Han Chinese go to Urumqi?
I don't feel anybody is looking down on me here because I am from the Hui ethnic group. But I know that Han Chinese look down on Uighurs, because some Uighurs do bad things, like stealing, so they attract bad feelings.
The situation in Xinjiang is getting better and better. People earn more money, their life style is better than before and they are happier. The visitors from other parts of China create more, not less, opportunities. So I think that the most important thing for the future stability of Xinjiang is economic prosperity benefiting everyone.
I am a little bit worried about stability in the short term. My parents told me that they feel much safer now that the army is there. So I think that the army should stay there for a few months at least to ensure the safety of the people there.
Uighur migrant worker, Dongguan, Guangdong province
This Uighur man, who has been working in Guangdong province for five years, wanted to remain anonymous. I was shocked to hear about the recent unrest in Xinjiang. Violence is wrong, from whichever side.
It's obvious that just a handful of people took part in the rioting. My friends told me that they didn't recognise any of the guys that they saw in the TV reports - where were they from?
Attacking people and ransacking shops is definitely wrong, because it undermines national unity. I have many classmates and friends from many nationalities, and we all enjoy good relationships.
We cannot really tell what's happening from the reports on TV. We don't know what's going on behind the scenes. It must have been premeditated; otherwise, how come there were so many people?
I have many friends in Urumqi, but I haven't heard about these reports of large numbers of people at train stations and airports trying to leave.
July and August have always been popular with travellers, and people come and go. It is always difficult to get tickets during these months, and transport terminals are busy when things are normal.
Wang Bin, student, Chongqing, originally from Ningxia
I believe in what the government is saying - that the riots are caused by the World Uighur Congress, which used the Guangdong factory incident to fuel anger among Uighurs. I think that Uighurs are angry because of the failure of the government's ethnic policy. China has given many privileges to minority groups. When Uighurs break the law, for example, they don't get punished as heavily as Han Chinese would. But these privileges fail to bring true benefits to the Uighur people. As the economy develops, the gap between poor and rich within the Uighur ethnic group has become very big, just like anywhere else in China.
And some of them feel that they have been marginalised. I think this is the fundamental reason for the unrest.
In addition, it's true that there are many Han Chinese who went to Xinjiang in the last few years and in some industries there are more Han Chinese than Uighurs. So I think that Uighurs can benefit more from the prosperity of Xinjiang.
I think that the government should start treating all ethnic groups equally. There shouldn't be any preferential treatment for anyone, so that all ethnicities can live together in harmony.
I would like to thank BBC for sharing this information with us.
Friday, July 10, 2009
Recently, Turkey, a poor Muslim country, which is in the middle of nowhere, not European or Asian, continued its negative vibes against the Chinese people (Han Chinese) for mistreating the Uighurs, an ethnic tribe which has close cultural and linguistic ties with them.
The Deputy Prime Minister of Turkey had earlier criticized China for hunting Uighurs openly. Yesterday the Turkish Minister for Trade and Industry called for a boycott of Chinese goods to protest the crackdown in Xinjiang. He commented that since China does not respect human values we should not consume its goods. I do not know the extent of truth in the report and how much spin was put into it which was taken from one of China's most critical papers, the New York Times.
What sort of human values did this stupid Minister used as a yardstick? Since the 1980s, the Han Chinese have been treated well with better economic opportunities and adequate freedom in China and so are the other 53 ethnic races in China, excluding the rebellious Uighurs and Tibetans. Why do they continue to harbor these resentment feelings? It was reported that about 90% of the 156 deaths were Han Chinese. Why is he so disenchanted? The Turkish government throughout history has ill-treated and attempted to assimilate the Kurdish minority from the South East and now he talked about championing human values. What a big hypocrite!
These rebellious people are being heavily influenced and given hope – both from internal and external forces - to fight for independence from China – which I believe is not likely to happen in the next 50 years or so. The reason is very clear. These people cannot co-exist with the Han Chinese and it will not be possible unless they could accept the real truth that they are part of the People Republic of China. Even if China is a democratic state, I am sure every single Han Chinese would not allow this to happen. So the Western “white” society can just forget that if China has an elected government, all these problems would go away.
If the Turkish leaders are so short sighted and cannot see the bigger picture of a trading diplomacy, I would advise the Chinese government to review the current state of relations and if possible downgrade this to a consulate level.
Perhaps, if the Turkish people truly love the Uighurs so much, the Chinese government should contemplate dispatching the 8 million Uighurs to them.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
I am pleased to note the strong Russia stance and support on the violent clashes in Xinjiang by stating unequivocally that it is purely an internal Chinese affair.
In contrast, Western governments have voiced concerns. The West nosy media is even worse taking the opportunity to bash China on the handling of its ethnic minorities and constantly emphasizing stories that the minorities rights have been trampled and that they are being discriminated economically. Repeated very often, the media continue to harp that the Uighurs are closer to its “brothers” in Central Asia than with the Han Chinese and it is only a matter of time when the frustration boils over. That’s not true. In Kazakhstan, the Kazakh and Uighurs are rivals. In Turkey and Iraq, the various ethnic groups though they share the same customs and religion are in an unending tussle over control of territories.
Rightist groups demanded an independent investigation and urged the Chinese government to address the many social ills and economic needs which were the root cause of the deadly protest. If you asked any ordinary Han Chinese in Urumqi or Kashgar, most of them would tell you that the Uighurs (as well as the Tibetans) are being given preferential treatment for university entrance, special funds to establish new retail businesses, easy accessibility to job opportunities and is not restricted to the national one-child policy. Whenever a minority and a Han Chinese commit a criminal act, the punishment would be less severe to the former. Frankly speaking, the Uighurs are actually fighting for secession from the Chinese motherland and that is the underlying reason why it has been very reluctant to accept sincere integration within the Chinese societies.
If you reviewed the racial riot in Xinjiang, it is the Uighurs which had started the “a life for a life” act. They committed acts of torching buildings, cars and murdering civilians – most of them sadly are Han Chinese. So who is the victim? The Uighurs?
The Russian foreign ministry commented that the Uighur separatists used slogans and provoked ethnic intolerance, attacked citizens and beat them, turned over cars and torched them and looted shops and other buildings. It further adds that the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region is an inalienable part of the People's Republic of China and considers that these unfortunate developments are purely an internal affair of China.
On the same day in a phone conversation with China’s foreign minister, the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov expressed his condolences to the relatives of those killed.
I would like to thank Russia for its supportive stance and for being a good friend to the Chinese people.
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
The Uighurs, the ethnic group, in Xinjiang was the main cause of the riots in the capital, Urumqi, on Sunday. China’s CCTV showed that the Muslim Uighurs attacked and kicked Han Chinese. Some of the victims were seen with blood pouring down their faces.
To date, more than 180 people were reported dead, 90% of them were Han Chinese. It is the deadliest racial riot to strike Xinjiang, a Western province of the People Republic of China, since the country open up to the world in 1979.
I am happy to note that there are groups of Han Chinese who have taken to the streets to vent their anger and cried for revenge for the murder of their own kind. The response was seen as positive in the light of the killings of many Han Chinese. The Han Chinese protesters were observed to be carrying clubs and machetes, and there were reports that these groups have gone to the Uighurs populated areas to sent a clear warning to the Uighurs.
Even on the net, there were many angry Chinese surfers of Han Chinese origin who were asking the government to bring those trouble makers to face the full force of the law. The laws are created to maintain order and bring stability to the country. If the Uighurs had infringed the laws then the military police should ensure that these murderers and criminals are brought to justice as fast as possible. The effective administration of justice would be the best possible solution to minimize the growing “revengeful spirit” of the Han Chinese.
Western reports mainly focused on the rights of the Uighurs to protest and highlighted willingly the list of disenchantment and grievances of the Uighurs under Chinese rule. The Western media even denied that there is such a terrorist group like the Eastern Turkestan group, which was responsible for the sporadic bombings across China’s western frontier. The Uighurs protest was not peaceful, as claimed by the Uighur American Association, but it was definitely violent and as noted the damage to buses and buildings were rampant. What is sad is the loss of many Han Chinese lives. The Han Chinese were dragged out of their vehicles and some were beaten to death.
The Chinese government should ignore international human rights group demand for an independent investigation, which is seen as hidden moves to interfere in the affairs of the Chinese people. I believe no independent and truly sovereign nation like China would allow Western based organizations to conduct an investigation on Chinese soil. Do you think the British people would allow a Chinese based organization to conduct an investigation into the abuses of the British forces on Northern Ireland two decades ago?
The Chinese security forces had imposed a curfew in Urumqi and surrounding areas and had also set up checkpoints to flush out the rioters. State Television revealed that the military police have been largely a responsible unit and it showed a high degree of restrain in curbing the violence. Barricades of police using shield to protect themselves against the stream of Uighur rebels seen to be throwing stones and bricks at them. Tear gas was fired to disperse the crowds, both Han Chinese and Uighurs. The military police had arrested thousands and I have heard that those who were not involved in the brutal assault of Chinese civilians will be released after the questioning session ends.
Whether the Uighur’s violent protest was initiated or instigated by the Uighur exiles or motivated by an internal rebel organization, the most important step now is to restore law and order to the region and that all murderers will need to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
Monday, June 15, 2009
At the close of the annual badminton tournament, the press announced that China had dominated by winning 3 out of 5 titles at stake. The Chinese failed to win the men’s doubles and the women singles event.
Nathan Robertson and Anthony Clark were playing at their best level and it is not at all surprise that they were able to win the title this time around in Singapore. Congratulations! The English duo was so happy with the win they thought they had won the Olympic or the world’s title. It is just a Super Series title – that’s all. The news media (mostly from writers who have a fixed Western mindset) praised the players incessantly. But can they repeat the feat in the Indonesian Open or the World Championship in Hyderabad, India? If you asked me, I would say no. It is just that the Asian doubles players are not playing at their best. The top Korean doubles have not been able to settle down since the other half joined serious training after the military conscription late last year. The top Chinese double pair was also absent. The veteran Danish pairs were on the declined and the younger pair was inconsistent. The top Indonesian double pair of Kido and Setiawan has not been able to show the known zeal to win. The Indonesian Open may change things. Doubles play has evolved into accurate and matching reflex oriented moves that the pair which makes less unforced errors will win the match. As such, my reply would still be an affirmative no.
In the women singles event, Zhou Mi beat Xie Xingfang and the press would, once again, extolled the determination of the Hong Kong player and emphasized that Zhou played in a relax mode which actually was the winning factor implying that the Chinese players were brought up like “robots” and could not have gone very far. Just plain jealously, I see it. Let me stressed that Zhou Mi was previously a Chinese player until she was asked to make way for the younger batch of players like Lu Lan, Jiang Yanjiao, Wang Yihan and Wang Lin. She had quit actually but revived her career with the Hong Kong Badminton Association.
In the Singapore badminton draw and probably, in other tournaments as well, there will be many Chinese versus Chinese meetings at the early stages – thus ending a very good player path to the semi or final. A few notable examples were the women doubles of Cheng Su and Zhao Yunlei and women singles player, Wang Yihan and the elimination of Chen Jin in the semis by their colleagues. If these players were to face non-Chinese players in the earlier rounds, do you think that non Chinese player can advance to the semis or finals or we may see more Chinese versus Chinese final like in the mixed doubles? This is the current acceptable draw format based on World Badminton Federation's (WBF) seeding. I do not even relied on the seeding which is clearly not reflective of the rankings. Lin Dan has beaten Peter Gade and Chong Wei more times in the men singles event and yet, he is ranked only as no. 3 after the two non-Chinese players. To be ranked higher and probably get good match up, just play in as many tournaments as possible and score points. Is this a very fair system to use in the future?
At the Open, I also noticed that Singapore is represented by former Chinese based players who have benefited from the “robotic” training programs in China. Why is Singapore so proud – they are not even home grown players? These are imported players like in their table tennis, swimming and diving teams.
In the men singles, Bao Chunlai deservingly beat Ponsana, who as the bias media reported earlier that the Thai should be able to win the title given his strong run in the tournament. What a bunch of crap from these writers? A win is a win and there is no two ways about it.
MS : Bao Chunlai (THA) beat Boonsak Ponsana (CHN) : 19/21 – 21/16 – 21/15
WS : Zhou Mi (HKG) beat Xie Xingfang (CHN) : 21/19 – 18/21 – 21/10
MD : Clark/Robertson (ENG) beat Kido/Setiawan (INA) : 21/12 – 21/11
WD : Zhang/Zhao (CHN) beat Maheswari/Polii (INA) : 21/14 – 21/13
MX: Zheng/Ma (CHN) beat Xie/Zhang (CHN) : 19/21 – 21/19 – 21/11
Friday, June 5, 2009
The rejection of Chinalco bid for a stake in Rio Tinto is a move to keep China away as a major shareholder
The dramatic development of the mining conglomerate, Rio Tinto (Rio), to switch bidding partner at the last minute is perceived strongly within the Chinese community as a concerted scheme by Western financial investors to keep China state-owned companies from controlling strategic assets in Western companies.
The acceptance of the bid from BHP Billiton (BHP) on the grounds that the deal would maximize shareholder value and improve the group's capital structure were merely excuses to deny the Chinese company from taking up a sizeable stake in the mining entity.
Under the deal, BHP would pay Rio $5.8bn to take its equity stake in the joint venture to 50pc. Rio plans to raise $15.2billion through a 21-for-40 rights offer, one of the largest rights issues ever. The new shares will be offered at £14 each, which is 49pc below Thursday's closing price in London.
The Chinalco’s deal involves a cash injection of US19.5 billion as part of Rio’s debt restructuring scheme in return for an increase eventually in the shareholdings for Chinalco at 18 percent.
The Rio-BHP deal would allow Australian miners to control 70% of the world’s iron-ore supplies thus providing them with a stronger position to influence price-setting in both good and bad markets. Though the joint-venture must be cleared by competition regulators at home and abroad, I have no doubt that the Australian authorities would be endorsed as soon as the written proposal is submitted as the joint-venture essentially is a Western based deal (without any Asian company involvement). I hate to sound racist here but that is a fact.
Top institutional shareholders, mainly Western based, have indicated their undivided support of the rights issue if the China’s deal is scrapped. The initial objection to the Chinalco deal was very obvious and smeared with racist remarks highlighted by the “yellow threat” which were actively discussed in the Australian media. I am sure those critics or “racists” were relief and happy over the outcome of the latest development. Even the Australian government and the Foreign Review Investment Board have been weighing the option of how to keep the Chinese at bay over the acquisition issue.
Asian steelmakers from China, Japan and South Korea are crying foul over the deal and the likelihood that there would need to pay higher prices in the future. The outlook does not look good since 60 percent of the iron-ore are purchased from Australia due to the geographical closeness.
For comparison purpose, Rio and BHP joint venture would eventually supply 270 million tons of iron ore a year whereas the top producer from Brazil (Vale) supplies only about 240 million tons annually. The monopolistic power of the tied-up would definitely have a longer term bearing on the price of iron-ore.
The Western based companies with its “colonial mentality” may find it hard to dismantle its “yellow threat” philosophy and we would see more Asian companies be sidelined if it takes similar route to acquire a majority stake in Western based companies.
China would now have to work harder to acquire smaller resources based companies and also, to pursue a longer term objective of dealing directly with African and Latin American countries to build conglomerates free from any Western controlling influence. It may take time but at least it is steady and it is an assured ways of winning genuine and trusted partners.
Forget about Rio and BHP, as there may not be around in the next 10 years. Whether Rio and BHP combined entity would generate an expected more than $10 billion in synergies as announced is just an estimated figure and it may not materialize at all.
Being the largest consumer of resources does have its advantages. Work on it.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Every year around this time, June 4, the world (outside China) seemed to be more interested in the Tiananmen Incident than the Chinese themselves. Why? There are always foreign hands involvements when it concerns China. The Western human rights activists (some of them with a hidden agenda) and the handful of Chinese dissidents continued to highlight the Chinese government brutal use of force as though it is the “killing machine of the last Century”.
There was this article written by a Caucasian human rights supporter which appeared in the Western world and circulated to the many online newspapers in Asia criticizing every aspect of activities of the present Chinese government and what sadden me was he choose to conveniently ignored the many economic and wealth advancement success attained by Chinese societies, at large, under the same Chinese government over the past 20 years.
The Western media had put a spin on the many write-ups of the historical day on Tiananmen Square as a “massacre” in which hundreds and probably thousands had died. Yet to this day, the numbers who died remain unclear and post-event records revealed merely from word-of-mouth by eye-witnesses and information gathered from people who lived around the Square during that time.
I do agree that the present government under the Chinese Communist Party has put in all efforts to wipe out the tainted incident from its historical annals but it has also implemented practical economic measures to bring greater prosperity to the Chinese residents after 1989. The Western world has a different agenda - it would play up the incident every year with the hope to bring down the Chinese Communist Party which is presently governing China. Would it be possible? Not likely.
I would not label “June 4 Tiananmen” as a “Massacre” which was readily accepted without any debate by the Western media (with a hidden human rights agenda) as the numbers were small and there are already new developments and witnesses in which perhaps, a few hundreds could have died more due to the military police actions arising from the many incidences of pillaging and riots which followed the protest outside Tiananmen and not from the tanks that rolled into the Square. Until and unless, there are circumstantial proof that there are thousands which died in the Square, the event will still be remembered as an “Incident”.
What I am baffled is why does a white man need to keep reminding himself of the Incident every year and keep repeating the supposedly atrocity committed by Chinese government during that time? Is he a stakeholder on the matter? The Chinese people are intelligent enough to judge the event and it would come a time in the near future whereby the “taboo’ stigma can be removed for good which would then allow the truth of the incident to surface, not to the Western world, but to the Chinese public.
June 4, 1989 is definitely a historical event in Chinese history and the Chinese government would have to bring out the truth someday at the demands of the Chinese people and not from the pressure from the Western world and its media. The Chinese would have more political rights in the future as I believe the transformation is gradual given the sizeable population and the high percentage of people who have yet to satisfy their security or social needs. Democracy will come to China but it will not be the model promoted by the Western world – it would be a managed democracy.
The few questions posed here is that would China be able to progress economically to its present status if the protest resulted in the fall of the Communist Party? Would the political climate be more stable than it is now? Would the political climate be stable for the business communities to conduct economic activities? But I am very sure that the stand on Tibet (not to allow full autonomy) shall remain regardless of whether China is democratic or autocratic.
The level of corruption and injustice which happened during the time as compared to the present have to a certain extent improved but there is certainly more room for improvement.
On the positive note, the fallout of the Tiananmen Incident has also strengthened the pro-liberal camp of the Communist Party to push forward its capitalist economic policies which was opposed strongly by the conservative camp within the party during that time. The implementation of the pro-liberal economic policy is highly successful and the rest is history.
Compared to the “poor China” in the 70s, I believe that every Chinese resident including the rural peasants have benefited greatly from the China’s open economic policies. There is no guarantee that with an elected government it would have been better with lower level of corruption, accountability and exploitation of workers. Even some of the world past critics and the World Bank has praised China for the elevation of nearly 400 million Chinese from poverty (based on the benchmark of US$1 of expenditure per person per day) since the late 70s.
To better understand China, you will need to learn its 3000 years of rich history under various dynasties and emperors. China has been governed by autocratic emperors in its past and warlords during the Kuomintang and at present, I noticed that China has improved by leaps and bounds under the Collective Politburo of the Chinese Communist Party. Though the mandate from heaven no longer exists, the rule from the people is there, theoretically, from the 60 million members of the party. With economic improvements, ordinary Chinese would demand more political right and I am of the opinion that it will indirectly put pressure on the present single party government to bring changes to the political environment. It may take 30, 40 or even 100 years and I am sure every member of the present ruling party is conscious of the inevitable, but by then China would be highly influential and a strong world power. China would not be weak and take orders from Western powers or Japan again.
The Cultural Revolution, the Great Leap Forward and the Tiananmen Incident are three past human related events or failed economic programs which can be placed in the closet at this period of time until the time is ripe for a re-visit. The younger generations of Chinese leaders in the near future may be bold enough to re-look at those events and put it in the proper historical perspective. If it is a lesson well learned from such events, whether it is good or bad, it should be made known to the Chinese public (not the Western people as it is a Chinese issue) and I am sure the Chinese people would readily accept it since there is no such thing as a perfect Chinese world.
I have always held on to my belief that only by facing the truth from history, we can then really put those dark episodes behind probably forever.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
In terms of bilateral relationship, there is this very unambiguous phrase that each country should respect other’s sovereignty interest over one’s territorial rights. Under the case of Tibet, every country that agreed to set up diplomatic relationship with China has more or less agreed that Tibet is an inalienable part of China.
But Western nations, as usual, choose, to conveniently leave this portion out of its agreement for reasons it seemed, to them, will win them votes for being a government who stands on its own principles, that is, it condones human rights advancement. To me, the meeting of the Dalai Lama may seem “harmless” from their political viewpoint but it is also a moral encouragement to the spiritual leader and his bunch of exiles to work out a long term plan for independence. The Western nations should actually encourage the Tibetans-in-exile to accept “partial” autonomy instead of a “full scale” autonomy which is demanded by the Dalai Lama and his independence cohorts.
African and Asian countries will continue to be the Chinese trusted partners, and they rarely allowed such visits by the Dalai Lama, more so, to meet the senior officials of these countries concerned. No wonder the Tibetan exiled spiritual leader loves the Western people and he will always try to arrange with these sympathetic governments to highlight its full autonomy cause. The cunning and shrewd religious leader knows very well that he will not receive any “red carpet’ welcome from any Asian (except probably Japan) and African countries.
Danish Prime Minister Lars Loekke Rasmussen and Foreign Minister Per Stig Moeller in its official capacity met with the Dalai Lama in Copenhagen on Saturday.
The Chinese government should not only protest over Danish government officials' meeting with the Dalai Lama, but to take the bold step to downgrade the diplomatic status to a “consular” level and to monitor for a period of six months, and if there is no improvement to cut off all ties with the government.
The constant warnings to Western governments in its many meetings with the Dalai Lama will meant nothing if the Chinese government do not take stern actions. The meeting, even after strong verbal reminders from China, indicates that the Western governments do not take the diplomatic relationship with China seriously and there is only one course of action – to downgrade the status not now but immediately. It will serve as a strong message to the Western world.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Every year at around this time, you would be able to hear high handed political rhetoric from the US lawmakers and an incessant stream of anti-China tirades ringing across the floors of the Congress and Senate.
The hottest topic is still the alleged currency manipulation by China. Either the US lawmakers are congregating to try to justify imposing punitive tariffs on China goods which indirectly support the hordes of inefficient and badly managed US’s manufacturers from further revamp and closure or there is a hidden agenda to hold back a rising China.
The accusation of China of keeping the Yuan artificially low is not a new issue but one which was raised countless times by the US politicians since the Bush era. The current US Treasury Secretary has made some remarks concerning China as a currency manipulator when he took office late last year. Since then, he has toned down his aggressive overtures after a meeting with Chinese trade and commerce officials. There will be another round of government to government commercial negotiations in June 2009.
The US lawmakers plan to propose the Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act, which is to counter any currency manipulator nation by allowing the imposition of anti-dumping and countervailing duties on its goods to protect US based industries. Is it not that the US already had existing legislation to bring about fair trade policies and to protect its people from exporting nations?
The question being asked here is “Does China has an obvious advantage in international trade if it manipulates its currency?
First, China does not only trade with the US. It also imports lots of intermediate components from surrounding countries like Japan, Korea and ASEAN to be assembled into finished goods (which is then re-exported to US and EU). The Chinese only makes a small profit margin as a final producer of goods. With the relative lower exchange rate against the US presently, the Chinese would need to pay more local currency to buy the same quantity of intermediate goods. If the Yuan is higher, the producers need not have to spend so much local currency to obtain the same volume of components. The production cost in making the item is therefore lower, making it even more competitive. In the production chain, the actual contribution of the Chinese is in its lower cost of labor of which the US or developed countries will not be able to match.
Second, if China’s currency value (Yuan against US) is higher, it indicates that the US importers would need to pay more US$ for Yuan denominated goods thus making China’s goods more expensive. The US importer which previously imports garment A from China at US$3 per piece would now review its other choices since the price of the same garment A from China has gone up to US$8 (due to the increase in exchange rate). The importer would continue to import from other low cost producing nations like Vietnam, Sri Lanka or India at perhaps, US$7 a piece. The local US producer can only sell the same quality garment at US$12 (due to the higher cost of production). Even if the US succeeds in getting the Chinese to revise upward on its exchange rate, the US would still need to import from other low cost producing countries unless the US would be able to label the other low cost producing nations as “currency manipulator” as well. From the economic standpoint, the US consumers are worse off – they had to pay a higher price for the same quality of goods (US$3 as against US7) – which means a lower standard of living for US residents.
Third, the flow of trade would not just go back to the US if China’s relented to shore up its exchange rate unless the US residents can also adjust to a lower cost of living and/or increasing its level of work productivity. Personally, I think the US residents actually spent more than what they earned which have been happening throughout the last decade. The savings rate in the US society is extremely low. There are just not enough funds to support the the average family expenditure on a rainy day as was observed n the recent financial related crisis. Translated into a macro arena, the outrageous spending by its populace has caused the US economy to be in deficit since the Bush’s Presidency. Is the US single household willing to live a lifestyle similar to a typical Asian household where the apartment/house is much smaller and the car is just a compact? There is also lots of wastage in the US societies. US children are seen to eat only 30-40% of the food served on the table, with the rest going into the garbage bins. If there is going to be any significant decrease in the US’s current account deficit with a heavy reduction in imports (from China), every US individual will need to change their lifestyle. Are there willing to make this sacrifice?
Fourth, politicians felt that is always easy to blame someone when things go wrong and the best possible way is to continue to harp on the low currency exchange and the cheap imports from its top trading nation. China being the biggest creditor to the US will always have to bear the brunt.
As stated before in my article, China must be strong to fend off the heavy rhetoric from these US politicians. It must also accept the fact that one day the US would impose trade protectionist measures on the flow of goods and services between the two countries once the trade friction cannot be managed anymore. A good ongoing initiative taken by China is to diversify its markets elsewhere and reduce the dependence of its exports to the US to, let say, 10% within 10 years’ time. Another suggestive move would be to increase domestic consumption and become less reliance on overseas market.
In the future if those diversification efforts are successful and if these politicians continue to bark, China can just turn a deaf ear.