Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
China Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Beware an angry China
DragonReborn    4/8/2008 4:32:15 PM
h!!p://www.iht.com/articles/2008/04/08/opinion/edbowring.php Here's a pretty good article on why China should not be goaded too harshly about Tibet and Darfur etc, what does everyone think!? P.s Im no PRC Troll! "Tibetans have a strong case against Beijing. But mixing it in with the Olympics and Darfur is a red rag to a wounded young bull. Nationalism is more often aroused by setbacks than success, so the Tibet problems and the possible threats to a triumphal Olympics are stirring it in China. On the horizon is the possibility that these will combine with high inflation, stagnating exports and trade tensions with the United States to create a perfect nationalistic storm. The Chinese leadership faces a difficult balancing act. As its legitimacy is now based on national achievement, not communist ideology, it must appear in step with popular feeling. Yet stability at home and good relations abroad require keeping nationalist emotions in check. The paranoia about evil foreign designs that thrived under Mao and was discarded by Deng Xiaoping is still close to the surface. Almost all of China is offended that foreigners are so keen to lecture them and to encourage the petty boycotts that could spoil the Olympic party. It genuinely infuriates the Chinese that they are blamed for Darfur while their Western critics occupy Iraq. Beijing is happy to let such nationalist resentments vent in the sometimes violent language of Internet blogs and chat rooms. The anger, in turn, makes it easier for the government to pin the Tibetan problems on foreigners and Tibetan exiles headed by the Dalai Lama, to arrest human-rights advocates and crack down on foreign media. Beijing plays up the foreign threat - much like the U.S. government used the Al Qaeda threat as a justification for invading Iraq. For example, Beijing has raised the specter of Tibetan suicide squads organized by the "Dalai Lama clique" attacking the Olympics. Such acts cannot be ruled out. But a cooler government would quietly strengthen defenses rather than raise the temperature - and raise fears that terrorist outrages might be staged to discredit the Tibetans. Under pressure, officials have fallen back on Cultural Revolution language and lies. The Communist Party secretary in Tibet described the Dalai Lama as a "monster with a human face." Less dramatically, Prime Minister Wen Jiabao said that the channel for dialogue with the Dalai Lama was open so long as he "abandoned claims for Tibet independence" and used his influence to "stop the violence in Tibet." In fact the Dalai Lama long ago accepted the principle of autonomy within China, so long as it was real autonomy. And he is at odds with many Tibetans who oppose his advocacy of peaceful means. Equally important is the way official Chinese media has depicted the violence in Tibet as attacks on Han Chinese. This predictably arouses the hackles of the Han, who comprise 90 percent of China's population, and who tend to view Tibet as a backwater they improve by their modernizing drive. They see no reason why Tibetans should be unhappy with Han migration and dominance of trade, and they resent that Tibetans do not feel grateful for the money poured in by the government. "The Communist Party is like a parent to the Tibetan people and is always considerate about what the children need," declared the Tibet party secretary. The party, he said, was the "real Buddha" for Tibetans. This racial/cultural aspect not only makes it even more difficult for China to resolve minority issues, it also raises the Han identity issue in a wider, international context. Racial mythology as well as cultural identity run strong, whether vis-à-vis immediate "barbarian" neighbors - be they Japanese, Mongol or Russian - or toward the Westerners who long lorded it over the Middle Kingdom. How will the Chinese react if the Olympics really do become noted more for demonstrations and boycotts by Tibetan-inspired foreigners than for the achievements of China's athletes and organizers? At whom will popular anger then be directed? If the party is spoiled, whether by Tibet or air pollution, the demand for top level scapegoats may be irresistible. Worse still is if this coincides with heightened trade tensions with the United States, which could arise as the U.S. economy enters a recession. If the Chinese come to perceive that the benefits of globalization have peaked, will the leadership retreat from 30 years of Deng-ist engagement? None of this has to happen. But ethnic pride and thwarted ambitions are powerful forces. It is worth recalling that foreign economic pressures, patriotic fervor and rising military power made a once liberal Japan into the expansionist, militarist and hyper-nationalist Japan of the 1930s. Tibetans have a strong case against Beijing. But mixing it in with the Olympics and Darfur is a red rag to a wounded young bull."
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6   NEXT
xylene       4/10/2008 6:29:44 PM

Stop daydreaming, just sit down and watch Olympic games.


Well that's what George W Bush intends to do.
 
Quote    Reply

Zhang Fei       4/10/2008 9:58:42 PM
xylene: Well that's what George W Bush intends to do.

Lemme guess. Xylene would like GWB to invade China during the Olympics. The basic difference between Bush and Obama is similar to the difference between Reagan and Carter. In response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Carter chose the token measure of boycotting the Olympics whereas Reagan funded the Afghan resistance. It was Napoleon who said "when you set out to take Vienna, take Vienna". Making faces at China with a gesture like an Olympic boycott accomplishes nothing, while shoring up popular support for the Chinese government among the Chinese people. China's not going to do anything rash while Bush is in office. It will wait - wisely, in my view - for an Obama administration to take office.
 
Quote    Reply

Wicked Chinchilla       4/10/2008 11:22:45 PM
Given how much debt the Bush Administration has sold to China do you HONESTLY think Bush would do anything anyway?  Guaranteed, he's not bought, paid for, and owned like the Clintons both are but still.  China achieved most favored nation status under...Bush, China bought a LOAD of our debt under...Bush.  To think he will do anything ignores the reality of the situation.
 
Quote    Reply

xylene       4/11/2008 12:03:24 AM
Actually it was Carter at the behest of Brzezinski that started funding the mujahadeen against the Soviets. Truth is no one knows what Barack Obama policy with China would be. He may fall into line with a succession of other US presidents and start towing the pro-business pro-China line or he may prove to be more confrontational and try to wean us from the China teat.
 
Quote    Reply

Photon       4/11/2008 3:25:20 AM

It's the PLA, CCP and the communist party that you should be aiming at.  They are the responsible element here.  Killing millions of Chinese - the same people who are currently paying the highest price as slaves under the iron boot of the CCP - is the wrong tactic and a waste of effort.  In fact, the CCP leadership would like it very much if we killed a few million innocents and trouble makers for them.
 
The only thing holding the CCP and the party leadership back from doing anything stupid (invade Taiwan) is not the specter of millions of Chinese dead - it is the threat that they personally will be targeted
 
Dictators and totalitarian leaderships don't give a rat's patootie about the masses except when to send them to die or use them up as a cheap labor force.  It is the leadership we should target.  The highly centralized and narrow leader base of a totaltarian state makes it vulnerable to attack - both in the classic warfare sense as well as the non-lethal 21st century style information war. 
 
If you want to kill a snake - do not strike at the body - it will only bite you - you must strike the head.
Have you considered the possibility of having to confronting Sino-centric world-view?  (To put it simply, 'Chung Guo' = 'the Central Kingdom/Empire'.)  It will not matter a lot, as long as a sizable numbers of the Chinese (regardless of whether they were forn in the mainland or the overseas) identify themselves as the concept of 'Chung Guo'.)  The question then becomes, not about a handful of leaders in Beijing, but the rest of the Chinese population.  Meanwhile, when has peripheral Eastern Asian states have made rapid economic, cultural, and military progresses?  Definitely not while all of them were overshadowed by the Sino-centric worldview.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    We can handle culturally learned xenophobia.............    4/11/2008 8:44:51 AM
.......................using the Toyota model.

The Chinese people are the victims here. First kill the PRC bandits and then lets give the Han a chance.

I don't want to murder the oppressed; reeducate or if necessary kill the oppressors.

Commie and Photon; you are two evil faces on a double faced two headed coin. 

Come back to Earth and reality. Neither of you is right or MORAL in this argument.

Herald

 
Quote    Reply

Softwar    ? Permanent MFN for China?   4/11/2008 9:05:28 AM

Given how much debt the Bush Administration has sold to China do you HONESTLY think Bush would do anything anyway?  Guaranteed, he's not bought, paid for, and owned like the Clintons both are but still.  China achieved most favored nation status under...Bush, China bought a LOAD of our debt under...Bush.  To think he will do anything ignores the reality of the situation.


I could be wrong but didn't China get permanent MFN status in 1999 under Clinton (with the whole-hearted approval of a Republican congress)?  I thought that the PRC needed permanent MFN to get into the WTO.
 
Not that Bush would have opposed this.
 
Quote    Reply

SGTObvious       4/11/2008 9:13:50 AM

. Truth is no one knows what Barack Obama policy with China would be.
Especially not Obama himself.  But he's for "Hope" and "Change" and all that stuff.
Hope he changes.
 
SGTObvious

 
Quote    Reply

Softwar    Obama's PRC Policy   4/11/2008 9:52:10 AM

Actually it was Carter at the behest of Brzezinski that started funding the mujahadeen against the Soviets. Truth is no one knows what Barack Obama policy with China would be. He may fall into line with a succession of other US presidents and start towing the pro-business pro-China line or he may prove to be more confrontational and try to wean us from the China teat.


Some clues as to Obama and China - The first quote (and most recent) is so Wal-Mart that its sounds like one of their ads.
I think the second quote here says it all - he is an "engagement" kinda guy.  Engagement is a code-word that means "appeasement". 
 
The last quote is so heart-warming - noting on UN Human rights day that the Chinese ambassador in the UN made an appeal on behalf of family.  Nice of Obama to treat the PRC so gently in terms of human rights.
 
So expect Obama to tow the line set by Goldman Sachs and Wal-Mart politicians in both parties.  The "engagement" crowd has run the show since Clinton took office.  Engagement means trade with China over-rides human rights, economic security and national security.

Senate - May 23, 2007:
China is now the third largest economy in the world and is an increasingly formidable commercial competitor. But China also is our fastest growing overseas market, fueling over $50 billion in U.S. exports that help support thousands of export-related jobs. Many Americans also benefit from inexpensive Chinese products that keep down our cost of living, and China is an important link in the global supply chain that benefits U.S. commercial interests.

Senate record September 04, 2007:
U.S. engagement is vital to maintaining the balance, and therefore peace, among potentially competing powers. In particular, the rise of China requires a clear-sighted view of our interests. A policy that seeks cooperation with China on security, economic, energy and environmental issues, maintains our military strength in the western Pacific, and strengthens our ability to compete must be a foundation of any successful policy.

Senate - December 10, 2007 - On UN Human Rights Day:
China stressed the importance of family and reminded U.N. delegates that every right carried with it companion duties.

 
Quote    Reply

Softwar    Tony Lake and Obama   4/11/2008 10:54:46 AM
FYI - One of Obama's leading national security advisors is Anthony Lake.  The same Tony Lake that rubber-stamped the removal of restrictions on satellite, space and missile technology during the Clinton administration.  Lake is a great advocate of engagement with the PRC and proved it by giving the OK to the transfer of massive amounts of military technology to our pals in Beijing.
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics