Olympics: What is the big fuss about selective Internet censorship for the foreign media?

By China Watcher

The foreign media (mainly western controlled ones) and anti-China human rights groups continue to makes irritating noises when China announced that there will be selective Internet censorship for the anticipated 20,000 reporters and journalists who will cover the coming Summer Olympics in Beijing.

The Western media claimed that China has backtracked on Internet freedoms on its earlier promises of unfiltered Internet access for the Games. They continued to assail the Chinese authorities and once again, lump this controversy with the other now saturated and over-reported issues like pollution, human rights and terrorism threats related to China. Every time there is a slight perceive controversy over matters pertaining to the organization of the Games, all the past negative issues would be repeated over and over again, to highlight it continuously and relentlessly until the hidden objective is achieved.

On a relative scale, small incident like Beijing authorities using huge advertisement boards to “hide” the pollution problem in the city is prominently reported by the Western media just last week. Foreign reporters in Tibet even took the trouble to publish that there is less tourists in Tibet after the riots. Why only Tibet and not the other 32 provinces? Are the Western people so caring about the Tibetans? Do you think the Chinese government really needs to depend on Western tourists? There are many Asian tourists who would love to travel to Tibet for a holiday. I would have no qualms to make such a visit.

It appears as though these anti-China groupings (including the media) do have a coordinated plan to criticize whatever matters (whether big or small) whenever they feel that the run up to the Olympic organizing developments are not up to its own benchmarks. They are obviously taking advantage of the full international spotlight on the Olympics, even before the Games commences. I do hope the Chinese authorities have the most effective public relations strategies to deal or counter these constant barrages of negative portrayal of China by the anti-China groups when they agreed to stage the Games.

Beijing Olympic organizing committee media official, Sun Weide, recently confirmed to foreign reporters that there would not have access to some sites deemed sensitive by the Chinese government (as usual the press just love to hit the Communist rulers which I think is unfair because it is merely a difference in ideology but you know how Western media can be so hypocritical).

Did China actually reverse its pledge of unfettered web access? And was there any agreement with the International Olympic Committee (IOC), on the censoring of certain sensitive sites for reasons detrimental to national security? What are these Internet sites? Falun Gung sites, as we all know, are banned in China and as such, the non availability of these illegal sites is of no surprise. Similarly, banning sites that are deemed to upset the security and stability of the country like Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders and the Tibet Exiled Government are the prerogative rights of the Chinese host, which I am sure was negotiated with the IOC after China has successfully secured the hosting rights. IOC has agreed to the limiting of websites that are deemed pornographic and sensitive sites that are known for damaging the security interests of the host nation. This is within the confines of the Olympic Charter and China has every right to demand this.

I do not understand why the foreign media would ask for complete and unrestricted access to the Internet to perform their job functions in China. The reporters are assigned there to cover the sporting events at the Olympics for their customers (own set of readers) and having no access to the few mentioned banned sites from China would not have any bearing on the quality of their reporting. So, what is the big fuss?

Foreign media is free to publish their work and freely transmitted their content to their own country or elsewhere and why are they so concern about not being able to circulate the news in China. China has a diverse range of local newspapers (national and provincial) to serve the Chinese public. Why must the Western media need to publish reports for the locals? Unless, of course, there is a hidden agenda to spread Western democratic values to the local Chinese in order to bring about a change of political reforms in China. Do you think the present government which has the support of the majority of the Chinese people (who benefited from China’s economic growth) would allow this? Let us be realistic.

Compared to the past, China had already allow more freedom to the press, to enhance basic human rights and the freedom to preach religions sanctioned by the Central government but the West is clearly not satisfied. China will extend more rights for the 3 areas in the future but it will do so at its own pace without sacrificing the stability of the country. And the change will come from the Chinese people and not from some anti-China working groups including the Western media.

Within a month from now, the 29th Olympic Games would have come to a close and the West would not have this added pleasure to attack the Chinese on every occasion. China will need to be patient. I’m sure the Games will be stage successfully.

Today, I am confident that at least 1.4 billion of the Chinese population (excluding the dissidents and Western sympathizers but including the overseas Chinese supporters) or 1/5 of the world’s population would be delighted that China can stand up to the might of the Western media and resist their untoward demands. Even if the Chinese authorities have relented, it will be a compromise stand.

US meddling again in China’s affairs

By China Watcher

At a meeting with the New Zealand Prime Minister, US Secretary of State Condolezza Rice WARNED China that they should not use its massive Olympic security apparatus to crack down on legitimate dissent.

She told the press that security threat has to be understood fully by everybody and that it should not be used to cover or deal with dissent. Rice will head the US delegation to the Olympics closing ceremony. She hopes that the coming Summer Olympics will proceed without a hitch and that the Chinese authorities should make good of its promises to “showcase not just the Olympics but an attitude of openness and tolerance”.

The US experts and Chinese critics claimed that the terrorist and extremist threats that China announces periodically are much less than what it seem to be.

First, the US has no right to meddle in the affairs of another independent and sovereign country. But then, the US is the most meddlesome and nosy country on this planet. The US always argued that they have every right if it affects the fate of human beings (inclusive of citizens of that country) once it perceived that the country’s authorities infringe or contravene the universal international laws. Most of these interventions in the affairs of another country are self-justified under the pretext of individual expression of freedom and human rights values. What constitute universal human rights in one’s country may not be so in another country? Each country with its different culture and practices would have it own version of individual rights. In China, it is the right of every human being to be able to go to school and universities and in later life to be able to earn a decent income with a comfortable living (with a house, car or maybe excesses income to travel). That is the basic right – which is assured in the Chinese Constitutions regardless of race and religion. In Chinese societies, the group community’s rights have a stronger leverage than an individual.

The US version is that the basic right also includes the right to dissent, that is, to voice one’s grievances even to the extent of creating disturbances to the existing social structure. To the West, the US or the European version of right is the internationally accepted standards and every country MUST follow these codes like an edict or commandment. Who gives the right to the US to enforce such ruling? Even in the United Nations, the US led Western nations with its total voting power is less than 50%?

The US courts are supposedly viewed to be independence of the Executive. Recently, the rights of those in Guantanamo Bay is evidently infringed – and to date there is no trial for the suspected terrorists under US laws so how could the US talked so much about rights. Most of the Western nations that preaches the US so-called human rights values continually voiced their support and I will be the first in line, to question them when the mainly Christian values and teachings come under threat from Muslim ideologies in the future. There are already instances of conflicts (like the Muslim conservative dressing codes) and how its non-restriction and free flow of dissent can stand up against the growing practices of another powerful group. It will be interesting to see how it envelopes. What if a state of the US or Canada or Spain want to secede from Federal control? I would like to know how the authorities in such places react and at the same time followed closely to its human right values.

Second, if the Chinese were to IGNORE the warnings from Rice, what do you think the US could do? Even the many vociferous protests from China critics and human right activists’ attempts to dislodge the Olympics over Sudan and Tibet have failed miserably.

Third, the threat from the East Turkestan Islamic Movement or ETIM cannot be dismissed lightly. Just 2 days ago, the terrorist organization claimed responsibility for a pair of bus blasts that killed two innocent lives on 21 July 2008 in southwest China. The group said it would target the Beijing Olympics next month. The comments were made in an online video statement transcribed by the Washington-based Intel Center. The Chinese authorities have however denied that the Uighur separatist group is behind the bombing.

A terrorist expert believed that there are many terrorists groups from Xinjiang who planned to attacks or disrupt events leading to the Olympics but he felt that only the ETIM have the resources and capabilities to do so.

A spokesman for the World Uighur Congress, an exile group, commented that Uighurs in Xinjiang did not engage in terrorism. Even after the latest acknowledgement from ETIM, do you really think so they do not indulge in terrorism? He said that China uses terrorism as a reason to continue to repress Uighurs in the region.

It seems that the West only believe in the statement from such dissident groups including the exile government of Tibet.

China should not give in to the West who are hypocrites and I tend to believe that they have a hidden agenda. Tibet and Xinjiang will forever be part of China whether the West likes it or not.

China beats US in terms of Internet users

By China Watcher

It is official.

In June 2008, China has the world's largest number of Internet users, bypassing the United States, a report from a government-backed center.

China Internet Network Information Center said in its 22th Internet Development Report that there was an additional 43 million netizens for the first half of 2008, giving it a total of 253 million clearly exceeding the estimated US internet population of 220 million.

But the percentage of Chinese people online stands at 19.1 percent, which is still below the world's average 21.1 percent. For comparison purpose, the Internet penetration rate in Japan, South Korea and US is as high as 60 to 70 percent.

For more detail, www.shanghaidaily.com/article/?id=368002&type=National

American Swimmer could possibly fail drug test

By China Watcher,

I always have a strong suspicion against the US swimmers especially the recent Olympic trials. Jessica Hardy who swims in the women's 100-meter breaststroke for the US Olympic swimming team is reported to be tested positive for a banned substance.

Your comment.

China and Russia will continue to strengthen its strategic partnership

By China Watcher

I cannot resist but sense a strong pro-Caucasian fervor and anti-Chinese (or Asians) make-up in the article by Dmitry Shlapentokh on “Wary of China, Russians look West” published on the website, http://www.atimes.com on 23 July 2008.

The author mentioned that when Russia President’s Medvedev took his first overseas trip to China on his ascendancy to power, it did not mean anything to the effect of creating a Chinese-Russian alliance because the Russian people – both elite and popular – approach to China is often guarded. His very own preserved opinion is assured and confirmed when he visited Russia to gauge the views of the Russian people whom he claimed is still very much Western oriented to his relief.

I do not understand this as China and Russia forged only a strategic partnership and it is not even near an alliance but the writer is already so paranoid about the whole matter.

The Russian people are predominantly white Caucasians and obviously, they are quite alarmed by its overpopulated neighbor, which is almost 10 times its own. This is made worse by the Russian and Western media and the Russian education systems of implicitly promoting a “white-only” Russia and exaggerating the threat from its huge neighbor over the past 50 years.

I would not deny the fact that there are bias remarks presented by the largely Caucasian Russian commentators when they covered the Sichuan earthquake disaster or the floods in Guangdong. Even the Western media presenters like BBC and CNN are critical in its reports of the Chinese handling of the disaster relief. It is nothing unusual especially if it is coming from the mainly “white-based” reporters. I could felt on many occasions the immeasurable sense of jealously in its one-sided comments and somehow, these group of people could not accept the fact that China has grown so much economically in 20 years whereby its own Russia’s economic programs were in shambles except maybe, in the last couple of years when crude oil prices were at its historically high, of which Russia has much in production as well as in reserves.

China has emerged from its doldrums and it will be the third largest economy at the end of the year, overtaking Germany. China has never stated that it had become a progressive society and the fact, that it stresses very much internationally as a vibrant developing country with a lot of catching up to do, both in terms of science and technology and societal development, given its vast expanse of land, they had already accepted this as a reality. It is the foreign media and the Western journalists who were trying to exaggerate the Chinese achievements to the extent of instilling untoward fears in its mostly Western readers of the threat coming from the “barbaric yellow peril”. One good example of this stated fear is the enhanced Chinese military threat to peace in Asia which was continuously highlighted in the annual Pentagon report in the US.

The author continued to argue that though the Chinese economy has grown significantly over the past two decades, he pointed out that the Chinese economy also has inherent issues like high inflation. Inflationary pressures only started to surface in the last three years and most of these are cost-push rather than demand pull and if you observed the world inflation situation, almost every nations are facing the same inflation problem due to the sharp spike in crude oil prices which was more pronounced in the last few years. Chinese inflation rate at 7-8% is still manageable and I think the issue has been overblown just to justify his criticisms of the Chinese economy.

Economically, there is still a lot to gain from the Sino-Russia partnership but he continue his critical comment that there is nothing the Russians could gain from such a link-up citing that most of the niche markets are taken up by the Japanese and the American. At present, the Russian are selling its commodities, mostly oil, by rail to the production centers across the Eastern coastal industrial hub of China. China has yet to reach the technological prowess of its East-Asian neighbors of Japan and Korea Republic and it loses out in the export of quality automobiles and electronic goods to Russia. But the Chinese has steadily caught up. Even the Koreans are acknowledging that the technological gaps are closing in with certain electronic products measured in terms of years to only three or possibly four. I am confident that in a decade from today, we will be able to see more quality products coming from China. For example, there are already some good quality shoes and wearing apparels from China if we are willing to pay slightly more. It is only natural for a country industrialization process to move up the technological ladder with the passage of time.

Being a superpower, it need not necessary be associated with the production of high-tech goods alone or having a strong economy, it must be seen to play an active role in world politics and owning a very strong military. Most political analysts are of the opinions that after the successful staging of the Olympics, China will gain an important attribute that is, confidence, which is needed to project Chinese power in the fields of political influence, economy and the military spheres.

Presently, China and Russia have played important roles in the international arena. I hate to disappoint the author in this realm with both countries sharing a lot of common viewpoints and understandings currently, mainly to check the US-dominated Western views or merely to offer an alternative solution, present and future, on how societies are to be shaped. Clearly over here, I think the Russian views are more Chinese-oriented or vice-versa instead of the mainly Western-centric ones.

I also believe that if the US continues to forcefully push for its defense shield in its “satellite” states of Czech Republic and Poland, it will naturally increase the bonding between the two close neighbors. The encroaching and expansion of NATO borders closer to Russia’s borders will be another push factor that will draw Russia and China together. China also had an inert fear that the Western military alliance is so close to Central Asia. The time is not ripe but if the US-Russia relations worsened, formation of alliance is a possibility. China will also seek to evaluate its relationship with the US in a completely different perspective but it will have to take prime importance over economic interests.

The author also hides the notion that a large percentage of the Russian people are also not agreeable to the positioning of the defensive missiles so close to its country. The Russian and Chinese governments have initiated people to people exchanges recently and these programs will go a long way to built trust and rapport at the grassroots between the two great nations.

The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which the writer has conveniently left out in his article, was formed in 2001 as a cooperative forum between China, Russia and the Central Asia States of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. The grouping is not Asian but more Eurasian. The possibility of this bloc turning into a military alliance cannot be dismissed in the near future.

The world is constantly changing and evolving and by continuing to harp on the “old” Europe when Russia was part of the European era in the 16^th and 17^th Century because of common Christian faith and white-based background only speaks volume of the racist and single-minded nature of the writer. Compared to those periods, the world is now more connected and if there is a fusion of societies due to the demographic structure and closeness, there will be no stopping of this natural assimilation unless of course, there are artificial barriers set up to prevent this from happening. The present Russian leadership has announced that, by and large, it is a European nation but due to its sizeable land mass in the Asian continent, it should therefore not practice any look east or west policy.

The trend is changing to a multi-polar world and I am happy to note the gradual positive development in the strategic partnership between China and Russia.

I am certainly not deterred by the anti-Chinese remarks coming from this author who is a naturalized Russian American professor who favored a strong Western alliance which is to include Russia and the US.

Sources of Chinese national pride

By China Watcher

Part 1

Yesterday, I came across a blog article concerning Chinese national pride in the BBC which was openly debated and it has somehow generated an immediate interest in me and also, perhaps to many people especially from the West who may be wondering or puzzled by why there were so many supporters even from ordinary people of Chinese origin, both in China and from overseas, of the Chinese central government stance on the issue of Tibet, Xinjiang and the Olympics.

The author argued that the source of the national pride or immense patriotism was from the many events called the Century of Humiliation comprising the Treaty of Nanjing (1842) and the numerous Unequal Treaties, Destruction of the Summer Palace (1860) and the Japanese Occupation (1931 – 1945). According to him, the series of humiliation leads to the development of suspicious feelings towards the West and the Japanese which until today these sentiments have not really receded. The Western devious motives were being reinforced by the unfortunate occurrence of events like the Belgrade Embassy Bombing (1999), the US reconnaissance plane crashed on Hainan Island and the demand by the West for China to combat world’s pollution as a developed country.

The Tibetan riots and the disruptions to the Torch Relays in London, Paris and San Francisco lends further weight to the belief that the West is frustrating China efforts from taking its rightful place as a major power of the world. The soon-to-be-held Summer Olympics in Beijing is actually China coming on stage to show the world of a modern China which has made remarkable progress in its economy and human advancement over the past 20 years.

I can only agree partially to his supportive viewpoint that the Century of Humiliation was the cause of the “blinded loyalty” to the motherland. My most important reason behind this phenomenon is the imbedded Confucianism philosophy which has played an important role in the daily lives of the average Chinese. Chinese customs, its cultures and the promotion of filial piety in societies have to a large measure assisted to strengthen the fact of unceasing loyalty to the rulers (emperors) to always obey unconditionally and willingly. If you take a look at the Korean and the Japanese societies, even to this day, the traditions of filial piety runs very deep in its modern institutions. The education system in these countries which is heavy on confucian values also plays a part in shaping political opinions.

Confucian tenets emphasizes more on the importance of families, groups and hierarchies over individuals have much to do with the present rulers thinking of giving prominence to collective rights and order or stability of societies. Western societies which emphasize more on individual rights, freedom of speech and the high tolerance of dissent (protest) or differences in opinions within societies are the other extreme form of political and social institutions for its people. Somehow, the West fully subscribed to the fact that its form of governance through democratic institutions is the best and acceptable standards for people throughout the world. The Western viewpoint is such “If it works in our societies, it should work for them”.

With such clear differences, it is obvious that the West would not be able to find it acceptable of an institution that would give more focus on collective rights as against an individual and an orderly society as against the permissible level of dissent that would deemed rude in eastern customary rites. The clashes between the East and West beliefs are real and if this is not resolve, there would be more conflicts of this nature with the rise of China and India.

Most of the influential media throughout the world are still controlled by the West and the majority of them are adopting pre-conceived standards or thoughts that other than democracy ideals and practices, other forms of institutions like managed authority and controlled dictatorship are unacceptable and “enemies” of free institutions and must be condemned.

It is of no surprise that China, an authoritarian country (I would not use the word communism here like what the foreign media did on most occasions to lobby support from anti-communist groups due in part to China’s almost capitalist economy), has become the favorite among the media bashers of the West. Russia (perceived dictatorship and regressive democratic rights) and even Singapore (managed democracy with lesser than acceptable human rights by western standards) are not being spared using the media’s own standards of human rights and freedom of press as a basis to criticize the ruling administration of these countries. Some of these media namely the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, CNN, The UK Guardian are constantly critical of China. Most of the reports coming from such sources are never positive. These media are an extended arm of Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Reporters Without Borders and Free Tibet Campaign, just to name a few.

Even a homeless person in China who was inadequately compensated to move out from his broken hut to make way for a highway received full coverage in the media which otherwise would go unreported if it happened in the US or UK. I would not even want to dwell into the many fabricated stories produced by these media over the past few years, which are numerous.

The superficial and bias reporting without any circumstantial proof also created a sense of unity among the Chinese people and that it is time to stand up against these foreign institutions hidden agenda. The constant barrage of anti-China news with similar themes like China’s older generations who lived through the cultural revolution were not heard, the younger generation was brainwashed, the intellectuals were mere government puppets and the government was awfully corrupted were repeatedly alleged in the reports coming from the West. No wonder the Western people have developed a distorted view on China.

Most of them have never set foot on China and yet they can form critical opinions of China. I casually asked a Caucasian while he was having a holiday in my country about Chinese people and he retorted, “You Chinese people are all the same – barbaric and you have no love for animals by eating them. I was taken aback by such verbal attacks. I am now pondering the question, “Who is actually being brainwashed – the Chinese or the people in the Western world?”

To be continued in Part 2

Ghana and Kenya opposed the UN proposal to allow China to import ivory from Africa

By China Watcher

Even the three pro-Western African nations failed to stop the UN panel from giving the right to China on Tuesday to import African elephant ivory from the huge reserves under strict conditions.

China’s steadfast and systematic improvement in its enforcement of ivory regulations had won over the majority of the votes at the UN Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) in Geneva. Surprisingly, the European Community including Britain and Japan voted in favor of China but not the three African countries namely Ghana, Mali and Kenya. Australia and New Zealand, with its strong environmentalist background, as expected voted against the move.

Conservationists and right groups obviously were not happy by calling it a wrong decision.

Ivory trade was banned globally in 1989, but controlled trade was approved at a CITES meeting in 2002 and then modified to include new conditions at a meeting in 2007.

At the 2007 meeting, CITES also authorized four southern African countries - Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe -to make a one-off sale of 108 tons of registered ivory stocks.

Previously Japan was the only country that have won right from CITES to import ivory from Africa.

China and Japan would now have to bid in a one-off auction of ivory stockpiles from the four southern African countries. The auction was to be held later this year.

Due to the consistent opposition of the three mentioned African states toward China not only in this case but over a few instances in the past few years, it gives me great pleasure to place these three African countries under Tier 2 and not Tier 1 in the list of friendly nations to China.

We hope China, as an economic power, can use this list as a reference when it makes a decision to invest in African countries and promote its most favored trade activities with “friendly” nations.

China joins Russia to veto US led sanctions on Zimbabwe in the UN

By China Watcher

China supported Russia to veto a United Nations Security Council resolution on Friday which would have imposed an arms embargo against Zimbabwe and financial and travel sanctions on President Robert Mugabe and other key leaders of the country's ruling party.

The concerted Western-led resolution managed to secure nine votes, the minimum needed to gain approval in the 15-nation council. But the resolution pushed by the Bush administration failed because of the strong resistance by two of the five veto-wielding permanent members.

Through the Western media reports, we are being constantly made aware of the intimidation and violence created by the Mugabe’s factions against its opponents in the recently conducted one-sided presidential elections. The West continued to report that the main opponent’s party members numbering 113 were killed during the process of the election.

Using the unfair elections as a basis or perhaps, other reasons that we are not too sure of, the West led by the US initiated the resolution with the hope to pressure the Zimbabwe’s government to share powers with Tsvangirai’s party. But the veto has temporarily killed off whatever desires or designs the Western powers had in changing the government of an independent and sovereign nation.

At the recent summit the African Union (AU) leaders adopted a resolution calling for dialogue in Zimbabwe, but did not directly criticize Mugabe or the runoff vote. The AU leaders said they were "deeply concerned" about the situation but their only promised action was to support "the will" for a unity government. Mugabe's government has already denied responsibility for the bloodshed surrounding the vote, which he won after the rival opposition leader dropped out because of claimed attacks on his followers.

The US Ambassador harshly criticized Russia and China for standing behind the cruel and dictatorial regime of Mugabe and the actions against its own people. The US was clearly disappointed at Russia’s position after what the Russia had given its implicit support of the Mugabe’s resolution at the recent Group of 8 Summit in Japan. The US is now questioning Russia’s dependency and reliability as a G8 member. If that is a “yes” requirement being a member of the G8, Russia should seriously consider pulling out as a member of the “rich countries” grouping who I have always deemed as a “white man” exclusive club other than Japan who has previously been classified “specialized whites” during the apartheid era in South Africa. Fortunately, China is not being invited as a member. Not yet.

I wish to point out here that the Russian and the Chinese are only trying to give the South Africa’s government self-appointed role as a mediator to succeed in bringing the conflicting parties to the tables in the hope of finding a compromised and workable solution. Russian U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said sanctions would have taken the U.N. beyond its mandate in trying to punish political disputes by "artificially elevating them to the level of a threat" to international peace and security. Similarly, Chinese Ambassador Wang Guangya, whose nation is one of Zimbabwe's major trading partners, expressed his views that Zimbabwe should be allowed to resolve its political crisis on its own.

The US stance is not always the best way around the political problem in Zimbabwe and so far, tough economic sanctions on Iran and North Korea have not worked and the fact that the people of those countries suffered more in such a situation have prompted the countries to vote against the resolution. We should praise those countries who voted against the resolution considering the strong pressure of the Western powers. I salute Libya, South Africa and Vietnam.

As for Burkino Faso, Costa Rica, Croatia, Panama who voted for it, you are nothing but merely the pawn of the West made up of the US, France and Italy. Sometimes, I wish these countries could decide independently what is good for the smaller developing countries of the world. But then again, the US and the West still wield a strong political and economic influence especially on the smaller nations.

A typical Chinese-American opinion of how the West is currently paralyzed by fear created by the news media

By China Watcher

This is an account of a Chinese-American who had spend an immeasurable time period in both China and the US and I believe his opinions represented the majority of what the Chinese conceived is the perception of the West, especially the Caucasians whites, towards the Chinese people and their rise economically in the world.

He does not think that the Chinese viewers are indoctrinated and blinded by sheer nationalism, when they made their comments on issues surrounding Tibet, the Olympics, the environmental issues, the Chinese currency and the African partnership. He believes that the West is wrong in making such presumptions.

Here is his comment:

The West has for the past 200 years enjoyed almost total domination over most of the world. Intervention and self-righteousness characterizes the western mentality, westerners think they are always right and everyone way is wrong.

Meanwhile, the Chinese have in recent years begun to recover their historic position as the defining great power of this world. People in the West fears this, and as the western media tends to play on people's fears, and fear sells (in New York city, where I lived for 3 years, the nightly news begins with "it's 10 PM, do YOU know where your children are?"), they choose to demonize and instill fear, it is no one's fault, just simple economics. What the people in the west do not understand is that China has traditionally considered itself the center of the world, and that the rest of the world is not better than them. This means two things, first the Chinese only want to be left alone to develop and prosper, and have no desires to throw its weight around. Second, Chinese people in general see the West as a friendly place, and want to have cordial relations (this is partly because the Chinese state controlled media's goal is to maintain stability, and it does not promote fear, ethnic tensions are played down and they try to portray the Han people to be friendly to the minorities).

Soon enough, China will be one of the greatest power on earth, and it is painful to note that the people in the West have let their jealousy and collective insecurities get the better of them, and allowed their fears to drive opinion and blind frank discussion in the media. Fear mongering creates a culture of conflict. 2008 has seen this tendency play out, China's people have in this year finally seen the level of paranoia in the West directed at China, and their opinions are starting to be turned, irrespective of the Chinese government attempts to maintain the image of an orderly house, the Chinese people are becoming very, very angry with the kind of misrepresentation in the West about a country they love and have spent the past 100 years rebuilding from the ashes of conflict sewn by the west. This is unfortunate, because the Chinese body politic is a much more direct representation of its population's moods precisely because it is not a elective democracy, the government is forced to be much more responsive to collective demands than in the west, and if the west continues down this road of paranoia, fear mongering, and accusation without objective information, then the results could only be unfortunate for everyone.

The people of the west think they know everything that's wrong with every place, well they are wrong because no one does, NO ONE should be intervening in anyone else's affairs as if they knew better, this only causes chaos and death. Examples of these failed ventures are Iraq and Afghanistan.

Chinese people want the critics to go to China and talk to them. A rail road anywhere else on earth is a good thing, but in Tibet it is depicted as a transportation that kills wild-life and threatens indigenous culture. Rail roads built by the Chinese in Africa somehow "establishes" some kind of nefarious Chinese influence in a continent in which the Europeans destroyed and it was left to rot in the filth of ethnic strife and disease. What have the Europeans ever done for Africa? I watch the BBC or CNN everyday, and whenever a Chinese person appears on screen, it is somehow always someone nearly incapable of expressing themselves or saying something obviously designed to make them sound ridiculous. Now I assure you there are many Chinese who speak English quite well, they're just not being interviewed.

People in the west are jealous of China growth and development and they think that their historical glory has been taken away. 200 years of world domination seems to have given them the ridiculous notion that they will always rule the world.

Most Chinese believed in the age-old saying, “what goes up, it must come down one day”, and it is time for the West to accept that China will soon be on top of them, and bear in mind, the Chinese do not want world domination, they just want to live in peace.

Before America's economic and political dominance, the European Industrialization Age and the colonization period, China was the middle kingdom even the West has sent explorers to learn from them.

China had 2000 years of history and it genuinely know the meaning of insubordination and respect and they know that power is not an easy thing to possess or to be taken for granted and thus I believe that they are much better in managing it than the immature Americans and Europeans.

American swimming records and drug cheats

By China Watcher

At the current US Olympic trials for Beijing, I was taken by surprise of the impressive times registered by the swimmers in the men and women 100m backstrokes, the women in particular dropping below the 59-second barrier. Six world records have now fallen in the first three days of the eight-day competition.

If the swimmers were Chinese and the world records were broken in an international meet, most of the Western journalists or sports critics would conveniently link or accuse the Chinese of adopting a “systematic” doping program because in their own measurable bias standards, these feats are just beyond the Chinese people to achieve. The Western media would then continue to harp on the use of drugs in the Chinese training program.

When the US swimmers achieved the near impossible feat – lowering of six world records in 3 days – no questions were asked and somehow, everyone seem to accept this as a normal event and that this is a result of good and well planned training.

I have always been suspicious of the US and the Australian swimmers and so far, I can only make insinuations remarks like what the rest of the Western swimmers did to the Chinese swimmers in the 1990s.

Though past Australian swimmer like Ian Thorpe has been cleared of any drug tainted development, I think that the sports doping program especially in swimming is far more sophisticated in that under normal testing using urine samples, these chemical-assisted athletes would most likely escape undetected.

I have always favored a drug testing program that allows for blood test – which is a much better form of testing to weed out the drug cheats. Guess who objected to this form of testing – the US and most of the Western countries. Unless FINA or the IOC approves a more elaborate and effective testing procedures, there will be many Olympians or record breakers who are actually drug cheats.

Lastly, just a point for thought, in which part of the world would we be able to find the most advanced and sophisticated drugs or the best pharmaceutical drug companies? Not in Eastern Europe anymore.

A big NO from Chinese people for Sarkozy’s attendance at the Olympics

By China Watcher

According to an online polling conducted by Sina.com published on Wednesday in China, 88 percent of the respondents were strongly opposed to French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s presence at the opening ceremony of the Olympics. To date, about 100,000 of the Chinese netizens have taken part in the survey.

Earlier on, the French President had made threats to boycott the Olympics ceremony and that his attendance will depend on the progress of the latest talks between the Chinese government and the private representative of the Dalai Lama. Sarkozy has told the French media that he will make a decision at the G8 Summit in Japan this weekend.

The Chinese people are united in its opinion that Sarkozy’s remarks are “extremely unfriendly” and unbecoming from a politician who is supposed to be a matured, responsible and a thoughtful diplomat, who needs to take into consideration the overall Chinese people feelings against the Tibetans minority while making comment on the issue.

Last week, two rude US Congressmen visited China and told the media that they will lobby for the US President not to attend the opening ceremony as a sign of a snub for not being able to meet certain Chinese human rights activists.

As an observer, I strongly believe that the Chinese government will not be easily intimidated by such “threats” or relented from such childish “political black-mailed” techniques used by the Western world. This is international politics and it is not a household education strategy like what a parent would say to his kid, “If you don’t behave, I would not buy you an ice cream”. It will never work in international political diplomacy and furthermore, China is a huge and influential country and even Myammar, Iran or Zimbabwe had not relented with the many economic sanctions initiated by the West.

I am now telling those anti-China supporters and Chinese bashers that China is not begging for these top politicians and celebrities to attend the Olympics Ceremony and if they attend then it is fine and good and if they do not attend, then it will not have any repercussions on the Games.

In fact, this is the coming out party not only for the Chinese in China but also, for all people of Chinese origins throughout the world. From what I have gathered, the Asian people are also SOLIDLY behind China hosting of the Olympics this August.

Go China go! Make it a truly remarkable and the best Olympics the world has ever seen.