China snubs France

By China Watcher

The Chinese premier’s visit to Europe known as a ‘tour of confidence’ has already taken him to Switzerland and later to Germany, the European Union (EU) headquarters, Spain, United Kingdom but not France.

China is still upset over the French President meeting of the Dalai Lama as the rotating EU president’s in Poland last year.

The French President said that he was holding to his ‘values’ when he decided to meet the Western supported religious leader in a Second World War commemoration ceremony in Eastern Europe. The Chinese authorities had told him countless times to look at the Sino-France relationship from a long term and overall perspective rather than listening to Amnesty International, Free Tibet Campaign or Human Rights Watch. But he stubbornly refused due to his so called principled stance. I have never for a single moment thought he is a highly principled person until he used that reasoning to justify his meeting. What a hypocrite!

It is good that China has taken a tough position on this matter. Though Sarkozy’s has stated that the relationship between China and France is important and has become one of interdependence in which both sides needed each other, I would beg to differ. I believe when China told the media that it is up to France to restore the Sino-France relationship to the previous level (since the offence was created by the French side), the genuine solution is there and it pointedly implied that the Chinese could not care much whether the relationship remain cold in the backroom or one that will be term a ‘strategic partnership’ in the future.

I applauded the calculated diplomatic strategy undertaken by China this time around and it is important to show the world (especially the Western media) that China’s being a growing power cannot be taken for granted.

What is the real fuss about Obama’s message?

By China Watcher

These western media are quick to comment about the Chinese government so-called censure of the word communism and dissent in the incoming US President speech commemorating his inauguration.

First, I am surprised that there is a live broadcast on CCTV which I personally feel that it is a sheer waste of televised resources. The deputy director of CCTV summed it very appropriately that the US people care a lot of the presidential inauguration but generally, the Chinese people are not interested or could not give a damn about it. Maybe the small minority and dissenters or “traitors” pay more attention to this. Even if they pay me to do so, I would find it more productive to spend my time elsewhere rather than sitting through the ordeal.

Second, I have always said that why should we let the 300 millions US people to dictate our lives and the more we are connected to US broadcast programs, the more we would be influenced by its activities and ideals, regardless of whether it is right or wrong.

Even at this particular sorrowful state of financial situations, the US people continue to spend lavishly on celebrations and parties. The government could have tone down the celebration aka Hollywood style but that is not to be because they are proud to be “the land of the free”. We believe that there is a full cycle of ups and downs and I don’t think the Americans would have it their "up" every way and perhaps, the next 30-40 years we could see a clear trending downward.

It is the right of the Chinese TV stations to censor anything that is critical of the government in power. The Chinese do have access to the Internet and if there want to view the full uncensored text of the US President, it would still be possible even if the firewalls are active. So what is the fuss?

It has been a known fact that the main US guiding principle is to oppose communism and fascism and to promote western democracy so highlighting it in every US officials messages are not unusual. When the Chinese authorities cut out the “sensitive parts’ of the translated message, it is no big deal to the Chinese but it was a big thing to the US media by making it into headline news especially if there are associated with CHINA.

I am more keen to know how Obama’s team is going to implement its announced stimulus programs and to reform or revitalize the US’s economy and probably, to resuscitate the world’s economy. On that point, it is disappointing to note there were no new concrete economic measures but more of the rhetoric against communism of which the US people comfortably console themselves that they are well protected. Maybe by gazing at the crystal ball we will be able to foretell the US near terms fortunes more vividly than from the highly charged political speech at the inauguration.

Group of Chinese intellectuals demanding change or a bunch of traitors in collaboration with US intelligence

By China Watcher

I read an article from Straits Times Singapore concerning a group of Chinese intellectuals demanding democratic reforms has called for a boycott of China’s state television news programs which they deemed as “low grade propaganda”. I sense that the publicized news to a certain extent have been instigated by various foreign rightist groups who are out to tarnish China and to ensure that China remain less of a threat to the existing standards of democratic ideals and freedom promoted by the West.

The Group claimed that China Central Television (CCTV) has spun its news bulletins and historical drama series into propaganda to brainwash its viewers. I have watched CCTV news, the English version known as CCTV-9 which is available uncensored on my pay TV and I do not see it as any different from others video news channel from the West like the news from BBC, CNN or Al Jazeera. Voice of America and the Christian Science Monitor are fully funded by the US government stations which are set up to propagate Western democratic values throughout the world. If you happened to listen to the news programs, it is not much different from the many state broadcasting media – promoting its own agenda.

CNN continued to propagate its “American superiority’ philosophy on its viewers, which was evidently demonstrated in the invasion of Iraq, not too long ago.. Al Jazeera is stuck on its one sided criticisms on Israel in support of the Hamas movement and clearly these past few days, I have grown numbed over the repetitive showing of the sufferings of the Palestinian just to evoke worldwide sympathy towards their plight.

CCTV is owned by the Chinese government and it is their right to provide new positive updates on the current state of developments in the country. It is wrong for these 22 academics and lawyers to criticize the government owned TV station of being biased and “brain-washing” its viewers when I have personally viewed clips of the milk scandal victims and the prosecution of the people behind the food scare. Perhaps, the negativity of the content has been “watered-down’ not to reflect the seriousness of the issue.

I do agree that you may not see social unrest on Chinese television as it may require higher up permission from various politically linked decision making bodies. China is still undergoing a social transformation and it is acceptable presently not to let others know about one’s “dirty laundry”. Chinese societal make-up has historically established certain “taboos” which shall not be openly discussed. Even during the times when China was ruled by emperors, negative news was rare and exclusive to selective ears and it not reported publicly. Protecting the image and saving grace (or face-value) are considered more important traits.

The change to be a more open society may happen one day but it will take a while for it to be generally accepted by the Chinese public. In the future, it is up to the Chinese people to decide and it may require sometime before the Chinese people could learn to adapt to a more “open society”. A political mature society will gradually require the government-in-power to cede more authority to its news media and also, to produce news content that will be more people-oriented. It may not be the liberal standards of the “paparazzi-type” that we often see on US media but the constructive-type which will help to create a more responsible and effective governance like the “controlled” news reporting in Singapore and Thailand.

It is unrealistic to expect immediate reforms in the Chinese controlled media but, to be fair, I have seen noticeable change compared to a decade ago. Some Chinese viewers pointed out that China's coverage of the Sichuan quake are clear signs that the media is slowly moving towards a more open and transparent state media. Public viewpoints will definitely provide the seeds for change in the future.

There are about 300 million Chinese netizens and alternatives news media are easily available. Generally, the Chinese people are smart who can differentiate the news that are informative and those that are provocative in nature. I am sure there do not need 22 academicians to speak on their behalf.

The deputy director of CCTV defended the station actions by clamoring that even the US used propaganda about weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq to justify its invasion of the independent country. I also wish to emphasize that State TVs also play an important role to provide accurate news to dispel rumours and restore order. The Chinese government had allotted USD4.8 billion to transform CCTV into a globally respected station to match its growing influence in the world arena.
Every ruling government has to face the dwindling economic conditions arising from the US financial crisis and growing unemployment is a pressing problem not only in China but in many developed nations as well and I do not understand Western reports continued insistence that the Chinese leadership is losing control in this aspect which may affect its governing authority. Even democratically elected governments are not spared if you do not create a stable economic environment for its people. So what is the real fuss?

These so-called intellectuals are emotionally moved by the highly promoted societal freedoms of the West and influenced by the Western liberal standards of procedures to resolve matters. If a person truly understands the current political conditions, the gradual change in the societies, the given priorities at various stages of development and the differences in culture between the East and West, they should not be easily “bought over” or instigated by these Western groups.

Happy New Year 2009

To all the blog readers and participants,

China Watcher wishes you a wonderful New Year 2009.

As this is a China related blog, I do hope the Chinese people in China is strong enough to stand up to face new challenges especially in an economic environment which is deteriorating as the day passes by.

New military hotline signals further development of close ties between China and Russia

By China Watcher

This is certainly welcome news for the coming New Year in which there is another strong indication of the development of close military ties between China and Russia with the installation of the new military hotline, at the close of the year of 2008.

The hotline is for use by senior military officers of both countries mainly to obtain more accurate information from each other in order to defuse crisis or resolve issues that may cause diplomatic conflicts due to miscalculated perceptions. Additionally, it can also be used to exchange military information to counter ‘potential enemies’ common to each of them.

Over the weekend, the foreign ministries of the two countries also complimented each other on the strengthening of the strategic partnership and growth of business ties as well.

The phone link is a simple tool to overcome huge bureaucracies to reach the relevant person on the other end of the line. Put this simply, the Chinese or the Russian can now pick up the phone when there is a crisis and ask each other what is going on and what they are doing about it.

The Western media hidden disapproval noted that similar military hotline between Beijing and Washington appears to have stalled. This to a certain extent reflects the sincerity of the US government and the level of mistrust the US had on its relationship with China.

No religious freedoms in China is a myth

By China Watcher

Ever since, China opened up to the world 30 years ago and boldly adopted pragmatic economic reforms to improve the livelihood of its people, there are now 31.4 percent of the population who have practiced some forms of religious beliefs. This represents 300 million people, a huge number of religious believers as compared to the period of the Cultural Revolution when the numbers were very much smaller. Christianity is presently the fastest growing religion in China. The Chinese government recognizes five religions namely Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Catholicism and Protestantism. The places of worship like churches, temples and mosques representing these 5 tolerated religions are allowed. In 2005, new regulations on religious affairs were passed allowing religious organizations to possess property, publish literature, train and approveclergy and collect donations as long as they registered with the state.

The Western media continuous slamming of China for no religious freedom is a myth. Tolerance of religion among the people has also been noticed by visitors traveling to China. It has been the practice of Chinese emperors in ancient times to impose a certain measure of control over religions as it could pose a threat to the existing Confucian order and the governance of the emperor as a mandate from heaven. Hence, it is no different now that the present government in a single party system continues to adopt such administrative style.

In future, I strongly believe that as the government and the people become more confidence and readily accept the demands of the people for a varied lifestyle without undermining the social stability, more tolerance and leeway will be allowed in the social systems. It is for the Chinese people to decide and not from the nosy Westerners and its media.

Yesterday, I have come across an informative article from the Singapore’s Straits Times on the same topic, which is quite enlightening as compared to the many anti-China bashing articles coming from the West. I have enjoyed reading it and I hope you do.

Straits Times dated 18 December 2008

Arrianna Liu, 30, feels more at ease now saying grace before a meal in a restaurant than she did before. It is not just that the government appears to have loosened the reins on religion. People are also generally more tolerant than they were before of religious practices, including those of a foreign religion like Christianity.
"A few years ago, I would worry about how others saw me. But now, yes, there is curiosity but no judgment," said the Beijing-based Liu, who works for a non-governmental organisation.
Indeed, in the 30 years since her birth in 1978 - the very same year that China embarked on economic reforms and opened its doors to the world - Chinese society has undergone tremendous changes that have led to a burgeoning of religious believers.
A government-sponsored survey last year found that 300 million Chinese, or 31.4 per cent of the country's adult population, considered themselves religious believers, much larger than the government estimate of around 100 million.
Two-thirds of the believers are Buddhists, Taoists or devotees of traditional deities such as the Dragon King or God of Fortune. The survey estimated that 12 per cent of all believers - or 40 million – were Christians, up from 16 million in 2005. That makes Christianity one of thefastest-growing religions in China. Some foreign estimates put the estimated number of Christians even higher, from 50 to 70 million. Many attend independent, unregistered house churches.
The government recognizes five religions: Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Catholicism and Protestantism. Buddhism, with an estimated 100 million believers, is the largest. There are around 20 million Muslims, many of whom are from minority ethnic groups such as the Uighurs.
Philosophy professor Liu Zhongyu attributed the spike in religious believers to the religious freedom the Chinese people have enjoyed over the past 30 years and the social problems they faced at a time of rapid change.

After Deng Xiaoping launched economic reforms in 1978, the government began to loosen its control over various aspects of social life, including religion, in order to facilitate the reforms. In 1982, an edict on religious freedom was passed that acknowledged that religion would exist for a long time before eventually fading away. Freedom of religious belief was granted on condition that believers also love their country, support the rule of the Chinese Communist Party and observe the socialist law - in other words, place the state and the party before religion.
The government's decision to allow for greater - if not full – religious freedom is seen by observers as both the result of its growing confidence and a response to society's demand for room to practice religion.

Certainly, Chinese society has undergone great transformation as a result of three decades of reforms. The reforms have increased social and geographical mobility. They have taken the state out of social life so people now have greater freedom to choose where they want to work and live, and whom they want to associate with. But such freedom also comes with insecurities, for the state no longer looks after people from cradle to grave, as it claimed to do during the Maoist era.
Prof Liu, in an interview with the China Daily newspaper, noted: "More Chinese feel unstable and harassed by the rootless lives they live now."

He told the Oriental Outlook magazine that standards of morality were declining and that "people don't trust each other any more. They are looking for something to anchor their lives to," including religion. Other analysts have noted that being part of a religious group, such as a house church, affords believers a social network they can trust.

Looking at it from a different perspective, particularly with regard to Buddhism, is Master Xuecheng, vice-president of the Buddhist Association of China, and abbot of four monasteries including the Longquan monastery in Beijing. He argued that once people have satisfied their basic needs and wants such as housing and food, they would have more spiritual demands.
He added: "Only when a society has prospered and developed can it have the strength to tolerate different kinds of thinking... Only after a society has prospered to a certain level can it have considerable numbers of people with relatively high standards of knowledge and, therefore, the qualification to devote themselves to the study of Buddhist scriptures."

He cited as evidence the fact that Buddhism flourished during ancient China's golden age, the Tang Dynasty, particularly in the region of Chang'an (present-day Xian), at the Chinese end of the Silk Road.

Ms Liu, who has also explored Buddhism, finds Buddhist scriptures too difficult to grasp. They run into thousands of volumes compared with the one-volume Bible for Christians and the Quran for Muslims. Besides, Buddhism "requires you to give up a lot in life", said Ms Liu,adding that she found this hard to accept. Buddhists strive ultimately to chushi, withdraw from the world, she argued.

Some Chinese scholars like Professor Kang Xiaoguang of Renmin University do not think that Christianity will have significant success in China. But the reality is that it is growing at a tremendous pace and attracting many young people.

Kang, who advocates Confucianism as the basis for governance in China, held that those who are less mature, follow fashion slavishly and who worship things Western turn to Christianity, while more mature, knowledgeable Chinese tend to be followers of Buddhism. Christianity is popular among young people, Kang noted, who are liberal-minded, pro-America, anti-establishment and Internet-savvy, and who live in big and medium-sized cities.Xuecheng pointed out that Buddhism, a foreign religion, became rooted in Chinese society after it was localized, adopting the vocabulary of indigenous Chinese thought systems, such as Confucianism and Taoism, and developing its own Chinese canon. He added that Islam and Christianity face the same problem of localization.

However, he noted that Buddhist groups had adopted some Christian methods of spreading the religion, such as through charity work. They are also using modern tools: His Longquan monastery, for example, has a Chinese and an English website managed by volunteer devotees.
A survey of cultural nationalism among Chinese, done by Kang last year, found that 33.5 per cent of respondents thought Buddhism was the greatest of all religions or cultural traditions, 14.9 per cent said that of Confucianism, and 8.6 per cent of Christianity, including Catholicism. Taoism, China's only indigenous religion came in fourth with just 3 per cent.

Although Taoism appears marginalized in Chinese society today, it is very much a part of Chinese life. Xuecheng pointed out that the basic principles of traditional Chinese medicine and the ideas of yin and yang and the five elements all have their origins in Taoism. One might add feng shui, the basic principle of which is to live in harmony with the natural environment.
Analysts are in the main optimistic about the growth of religion in China so long as the government sees its usefulness in helping to maintain a stable society. The government's support for Chinese cultural traditions and indigenous or indigenized religions can be seen in its participation in the first World Buddhist Forum held in China in 2006 and in annual ceremonies to commemorate Confucius and the legendary Yellow Emperor from whom the Chinese are supposed to have descended. As for Christianity, it has adopted a policy of monitoring and controlling but not suppressing it, said Kang.

It remains to be seen whether Christianity will take root in China -and if it does, to what extent and in what form? Will it become a pillar of Chinese society together with Buddhism, Taoism and Confucianism? It is difficult to tell at the moment, but Christianity's growth in China is one of unintended consequences of the reforms Deng Xiaoping launched 30 years ago this week.

The US is only just a country in a very big world

By China Watcher

On December 1, 2008, Mr. Obama introduced US Senator Clinton as the incoming US Secretary of State with comments that he had known Mrs. Clinton as a friend, a colleague, a source of counsel, and as a campaign opponent. He further praised her that she is a woman of extraordinary intelligence and toughness, with a remarkable work ethic. Additionally, he added that Hillary’s good networking with world leaders will help to command respect in every capitol and will also assist to advance US’s interests around the world.

Not too long ago, Obama’s description of the same woman was the exact opposite as someone whose diplomatic records was “thin” and overstated during the Democrat campaign for the US President.

Hillary Clinton promised to make the United States a new force for positive change, saying that as Secretary of State she would work with the world community to solve global crises. She said that the American people have demanded not just a new direction at home, but a new effort to renew America's standing in the world as a force for positive change. What force is she referring to? And does the world really want 300 million voters to decide their fate? The US is just a country in a very big blue world of 6 billion.

Let move across to the music scene. Why? Yes, there is connection to what I am trying to point out.

I am not a great fan of the Oasis pop group which was popular during the 90s. Liam Gallager, one its singers, admitted that he was confused as to why Oasis was not bigger in the US, because their Stateside tours sell-out in record time. He believed that they are not big in the US mainly because of their outrageous behavior and unorthodox attitudes. And his last comment was what captivated me. He said that the US is not the be all and end all for Oasis and the US is a country in a f***ing very big world, so if they don't like us, somewhere else will.

I do hope the policy-making “think-tank” behind China’s future political strategic plan is aware of this fact that the US political influence is on the decline, and the world is moving towards one which is not overly dominated by one power like it is now.

Tibetans fight for independence will be met with the full power and might of the Chinese security Police and the Military.

By China Watcher

There will be no covert plot for independence (disguised as autonomy to misled the West) as announced by the Chinese government. This means that only Tibet Autonomous region is up for discussion for LIMITED AUTONOMY and not Qinghai, Gansu or Sichuan, where there may be sporadic settlements of Tibetans. Though the Tibetans number only 5 million, there are spread across the four provinces and the Western world (short of a clear understanding of Chinese history) has provided the political religious leader, the Dalai Lama, with a “face” in the Tibetans’ 50 years struggle for “disguised autonomy’ from the Chinese government.

Last week in the quiet rebel base in India, the 500 over self appointed “exiled leaders” have decided to delay and play a “wait and see” attitude on its supposedly crafted decision to sever all ties with China and to follow the Dalai Lama “Middle Way” until a time when a consensus could be reached . The meeting was called by the Dalai Lama to all Tibetan exiles to discuss on the future direction of their “lost homeland” and the expected new initiatives against “Chinese rule” in Tibet. Some Western media had confidently predicted the formulation of a more radical approach in the Tibetan rebels’ struggle to achieve independence. How do you declare independence or sever ties with China when the Tibetan rebels or exiles do not even have a “country” or accepted as a recognized entity in the UN? Perhaps, the monks intend to resort to arms in its effort to achieve its goals.

I dare the Tibetan exiles to call for independence and to resort to military means to take back Tibet and the surrounding areas. Tibet is long gone. The Chinese government has a firm control in Tibet for the past 50 years with a strong paramilitary presence as and when needed. Even if the rebels adopt terrorist or military means, there is no chance that the Tibetans would be able to dislodge the Chinese total stranglehold of power from its centralized base in Beijing. This is the truth.

If violence is promoted in its independence plan, I believe there will be a sharp decline in international support (West support, most of the time) for the Tibetans and the objective would even be more remote than it presently is. India may have second thoughts of “leasing” the town for the Tibetan exiles to use given that the Chinese has become more politically influential at the world stage. The Western media will always try to portray a more optimistic outlook for the Tibetans than what it actually is, in order to keep their remaining spirit flying.

I am surprised that certain extremist groups like the Tibetan Youth Congress which has clearly ignored the Dalai’s leadership role in the March’s riots, was present at the meeting.

It was only in the 90s’ that I noticed that there were opportunities for negotiation with the Chinese government since the religious leader fled to India in a failed uprising in 1959. In actual fact, the many chances to negotiate were made available through the western media and rights groups one sided articles threatening China with boycotting tactics like in the recent Olympics, the increased pressure and requests coming from Western leaders who championed the Dalai Lama’s perceived peaceful cause.

Of course, the many “protest” or “petition” by these groups would not have brought the Chinese to the negotiating table if China is not fully integrated in the world community through its opening up economic programs in the late 70s. China an emerging nation needs continued international support and trade linkages to implement its national policy of sustainable economic growth well into the next 30 years or more.

Being someone who can understand the Chinese way of thinking in the People Republic of China, I commended China for being pragmatic by allowing negotiations to take place for the overall economic benefit of its people. The Dalai Lama and his hordes of rebels must understand their limitations and the bargaining power they truly possessed and must not try to ask for “something” which is not on the negotiating tables.

If the Tibetans exiles adopt a radical approach to fight for independence, not by pretending to be one as it is now but by making a clear stance internationally, I am sure the Chinese government will be able to devise a new confrontational strategy of “non-compromise” to wipe out all resistance.

Sadly then, the Tibetan independence fighters will need to bear the full brunt and might of the Chinese Military, and without forgetting the full morale support of the 1.3 billion Han Chinese. The Tibetans will end up like the “Red Indians” in the US.