The Chinese should just allow Google to leave

By China Watcher

Google Inc has just made a threat to pullout from China after hackers have accessed human rights activists’ e-mail accounts. In fact, the illegal retrieval of information was not the main discontentment from Google. The actual reason is that Google do not want to subscribe to Chinese censorship rules.

Chinese rules are meant for an orderly and consistent operation of a search engine and it is crafted to be compliance with domestic laws. Chinese laws are very clear and everyone knows that the forbidden topics which undermine the country’s security like discussion on Tibetan independence and the promotion of the banned spiritual movement, Falun Gong are not allowed. But why is there such a need to hold such discussion on Chinese domain? Isn’t the topics widely discussed outside of China of which most Chinese including overseas Chinese do not give so much prominence on this other than the Western media.

If Google’s latest strategic business plan cannot accommodate the domestic laws of the operating country, I would suggest they go away quietly and not make a fuss out of it.

China has over 350 million Web surfers which is still growing exponentially while its annual search revenue topped USD1 billion in 2009 and is expected to hit USD1.5 billion in 2010. This is a very huge and lucrative market and if Google do not want to play the right rules, the Chinese government should just allow them to leave.

Baidu and Sina, two Chinese owned companies, will obligingly complied with the rules but US companies like Microsoft and Yahoo somehow are doing so reluctantly as they have to respond to its hordes of interfering human rights organizations in its so-called “freedom” nation.

The Chinese government intention to keep pornography out of the hands of China's Youth, is a good move supported by parents and is in line with Asian traditions and customs to promote a healthy and caring society. And the West should not question the motive behind this worthwhile initiative.

Google Inc.'s pullout from China will not disrupt the country's Internet economy and its 30% share would easily be filled and shared between the few likely competitors like Baidu Inc, Netease.com Inc, Sohu.com Inc, and Tencent Holdings Ltd.

The threat by Google to pullout is seen as a ploy by the US based company to use this extra bargaining position in reaching an amicable agreement with the Chinese authorities on how to do so within the bounds of Chinese law. Should the Chinese government be accommodating the threat, more so from a US corporate, which has a reputation of overcharging its customers for its online advertisements?

I would also suggest that all Chinese technology companies who had tied-up with Google to quickly dissociate itself from depending too much on the US corporate who had turned out to be a human rights lover. SINA, one of China's largest Internet portals, will need to locate more trustworthy partners when it decided to sever its ties with Google.

Telecom operator China Mobile Ltd. (CHL) should consider developing its own smartphone processing system than relying on its collaboration with Google on the Android platform.

If Google realized its withdrawal threat within the next few days or months, the Chinese authorities should also seriously consider imposing a moratorium on Google, let say, for 3 years before allowing them back into the Chinese market if it intends to crawl back in the near future.

Full democracy will come to Hong Kong but at China’s pace

By China Watcher

Western media like AFP, Reuters have been reporting every new year concerning marching protest in Hong Kong with headlines like “thousands demand full democracy” (more like only 5,000) and way back in 2003 was even more pronounced like “Half a million on the street”. The news became a bit far fetched when the actual number was only 150,000. So much exaggeration was present that even a commoner will be able to see through the hidden and bias agenda of the Western media in siding with the pro-democracy supporters.

Hong Kong has been ruled by the British for over 100 years but there was no clamoring for full democracy but once it reverted to Chinese rule in 1997, 13 years ago, it had become an annual affair seeking to pressure the Chinese government and the locally elected government or Legislative Council.

Even though half the Council is elected, the pro-democracy camp with the funding from mainly Western non governmental bodies are not satisfied until it achieved full democracy. It is amazing that some of the leaders who are behind the protest had actually fled to Canada, in the early 90s. Many of these PR residents of their adopted countries had started to move back to Hong Kong, knowing that the economic life is better than during the colonial times and that China has kept its promise to let Hong Kong remains self- governed, are the one asking for universal suffrage, and of course with the full backing of the Western “invisible forces”.

If you read the mainly Western news on the topic, the opinions from the Hong Kong people are one-sided, as the published ones are mainly from the pro-democracy camp. I couldn’t be bothered to read the prejudicial comments. A large majority of the people is silent on the issue and there were no comments coming from the pro-China camp who are more keen on economic issues and maintaining the competitive status of the self-autonomous island under the “one-country two systems”,

Democracy is promised in Hong Kong’s constitution, and the Chinese government had mentioned that in 2007 that the territory will only get to directly elect its leader in 2017 and its legislature until 2020. Anyway, 2017 is only 7 years from today.

What is the big fuss and isn’t the roadmap to full democracy clear enough?

Going into 2010

By China Watcher

It has been a great year which we had seen China’s growing world economic power and political influence amid Western continuous pressure to stifle its progress by insisting on a Yuan revaluation, trade protectionism and also, the demand to adopt the Western code of human right practices.

All these hiccups would not go away and is expected to be on the increase and worse still, there are certain Asian countries which allowed its societies to be totally subjected to Western culture and its way of life. The youths of today are exposed to lots of Western propaganda in the form of movies, books, literatures and of course, from the Net which are assimilated wholesale without any thoughts of it being good or bad.

China will continue to lead the challenge against Western ideology and its pressure to submit to a Western order of the day in the next few decades. The Western media had been largely responsible for painting a negative image of China and that is the reason this blog is born in the first place.

For the brand new year, I hope that China would be successful in curbing corruption practices and reduce it to a manageable level and also, to properly handle its worsening environment, both are by-products of a country trying to catch up with the West.

Happy New Year 2010!

China should review its rocky relations with Britain

By China Watcher

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.

Bravo, China.

The West is supporting a big liar in Rebiya Kadeer

By China Watcher

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.

Women Hockey: A boastful India loses the final to China

By China Watcher

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?

Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew opinion re-affirmed the island republic pro-US stance

By China Watcher

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.

US President was right in deciding not to meet the Dalai Lama this time

By China Watcher

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.