open Democracy News Analysis - china - Comments

OSMANLI | TURKEY << on "China-Turkey and Xinjiang: a frayed relationship"

Sun, 01 Nov 2009 12:19:57 +0000

You Europeans, you first before Ezik Soy Discuss your ignorant a Community Head Today we woke up the mountain Kurds and Quits Al AK47 and 50 soldiers a day does not come from the Press 10 15 In general, our martyrs coming as what we blame the Turks

Not logged in on "Beijing’s credibility crisis"

Not logged in — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 00:49:43 +0000

This report is prepared carefully with some historical reference that brings some interesting knowledge about China to readers. The story seems to be created from the time of Mao through Deng Xiaoping, Jiang Zemin to date, a part of China history is in brief. The author does not only present his analysis to the government credibility but also his knowledge about government and leadership.
His wording is rather professional as a politician. The word ‘’the able’’ is used to term the people who are rich enough and educated enough for owning and managing the business units those sold to them, this word is used rather popularly in Asia substituting ‘’the potentials’’ of the west writers. The exact terms in social study are used such as: partnership between capital and power, cohort of capitalist, rich-poor gap, the seeds of social crisis.
However, after got through this report, my concept does not quite agree with what the writer wants to say.
In the paragraph ‘’the rot of corruption’’, The incident in Qi county, Henan province on 17th July 2009 is also an indication of positive governance creditability. The rumour is as usual created in a crowd or crowded place, it leaves no trace behind, then spreading very rapidly. Rumour creation and spreading are always the particular works of crowd, I realize that the above mentioned incident seems to be in favour of a good governance.
Obviously ‘’there had been no leak of radiation’’, if I were a leader of the local authority, I did the same that gives those people a lesson of behaviour to rumour.
In the story about the ‘’son of a rich family’’, the writer mentions a big debate for discussion ‘’the Dollar cage’’. The incident sounds like the same of a certain international court in Europe that desperately threatened to bring America President to court, for his attacking Afghanistan and Iraq, but that court, at last, did keep glossing because that culprit had been the fattest president at that time, he is fully protected in a Dollar cage.
In presenting the incident that happens in Chongqing where 1,500 people arrested in a single crack down of a crime gang. The writer is trying to say that the China government loss governance credibility, but again in this report, he does the China government a favour. After reading the article, I realize that the government worthiness is more and more improved, it even detains the head of justice bureau.
Crime and corruption are hot issues always, not only in China but also in many places in the world. The event where 1,500 people arrested including senior officials must be a compliment to the China government. Furthermore the fall down of the top officials of Shenzhen and Zhejiang or railway must be another compliment to the government.

I'm an american on "China’s Olympics: after the storm"

I'm an american — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 23:57:18 +0000

the tibets are tyrants, that leader is a a believer of Falun Gong- a really wrong religion where people believe once they burn themselves, they will be in heaven. that leader is insane!! :::(((

Anthony Barnett on "Beijing’s credibility crisis"

Anthony Barnett — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 23:35:37 +0000

Thank you for this important article. It contrasts with the way that China's rise in influence in the financial markets and as a corporate power is treated in the west as justifying her rise to influence within the G20 without any sense of an inner crisis.

Tob.rob on "China’s shadow sector: power in pieces "

Tob.rob — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 07:25:04 +0000

China is nowhere near the world's largest economy. It's the world's third-largest economy and the second-largest by PPP.

People who don't understand China tend to complain about it and draw the wrong conclusions. You, Mr. Brown, are one of them.

Get your facts right.

Donon on "China’s shadow sector: power in pieces "

Donon — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 16:32:36 +0000

I agree with some of your arguments, but you're somewhat exaggerating your main point. China is not moving away from the rule of law, it is clearly approaching it. There are many people in the CCP who are genuinely interested in improving the well-being of their citizens -- be it to protect their power, but China is not an anarchist state ruled by mafia thugs. Other than in our Western metropolises, there are no areas in Chinese cities where you will feel seriously threatened. This is something you will come to appreciate when living in China. Of course, you will miss this parts of China if you're travelling the country for only one month. I respect your opinion, but you're not being objective.

jayadam on "Kashgar’s old city: the politics of demolition"

jayadam — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 08:11:34 +0000

I feel really sorry for those local people. The aim hidden under modernisation actually is about moving local population from the centre of the city, so that they can change it's demography, which has been being the toughest barrier for Chinese to conquer this old historic heart land. It seems they are getting there.

lihlii on "China’s shadow sector: power in pieces "

lihlii — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 17:38:35 +0000

Please watch a documentary produced by Mr. Weiwei Ai's Studio to find out what happened to him that caused this head injury.

https://sites.google.com/site/welovelaomatihua/en
http://j.mp/lmth

English and German subtitles are in process. This documentary will tell you how Mr. Weiwei Ai was beaten in darkness in China, and why he was beaten by the State Security Police (similar to STASI).

Best regards,

gw on "China’s shadow sector: power in pieces "

gw — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 03:46:17 +0000

a glance at the author's role, and other publications reveal that he has clearly spent a great deal more than a month in China and is a recognised authority

Ma Bole on "China’s shadow sector: power in pieces "

Ma Bole — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 02:38:46 +0000

Not so fast - China doesn't have the world's largest economy. At least not yet. According to the CIA World Factbook, the size of China's economy (in real exchange rate terms) is only US$ 4.2 trillion, while the U.S. economy measures in at US$ 14.2 trillion. Quite a difference. Even when measuring the Chinese economy in PPP terms, it still trails the U.S. by a considerable amount - US$ 7.9 to US$ 14.2. (It may be cheaper to eat and pay one's rent in China, but the Chinese must still import their oil, iron ore, weapons, etc.) Average GDP per capita (PPP) is just US$ 6,000 for China, while it is US$ 42,000 for the U.S.

The Chinese may be a world power, but they are far from outclassing the U.S.

As for the thuggish CCP - I don't disagree that China is essentially run by the same group of thugs that have run China for 60 years. It's part of the political culture. Convincing the CCP to stop behaving like thugs is like telling a great white shark to stop eating surfers. It's just what they do. The CCP wouldn't be the CCP if they stopped behaving like thugs. Changing China's political culture is a virtual impossibility.

smc on "China’s shadow sector: power in pieces "

smc — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 19:11:27 +0000

I find it weird that you spend a month in a country of a billion people and now you claim to know everything about China??

tszsan on "China’s shadow sector: power in pieces "

tszsan — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 15:15:31 +0000

The problem with transforming the CCP from a vanguard revolutionary party to a governing party is something that the CCP has grappled with for at least 20 years. It is one of the themes of Zhao Ziyang's recent memoirs, regarding the need for the CCP to embrace rule of law instead of rule by individuals. Zhao ultimately sees that only a western-style parliamentary democracy can secure accountability and rule of law. Not sure how that is ever going to be achieved. But one thing is for sure, the increased reliance on police brutality as a response to instability is the most worrying. If the party state cannot handle social instability in a civlised manner it is difficult to envisage it reforming itself

gelosgrapos on "China’s shadow sector: power in pieces "

gelosgrapos — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 21:25:54 +0000

Finally an article that addresses the reality and fragility of China.
I hope all those pundits that are claiming that the 21st Century belongs to the East - led by China - will take note.
One thing is economic growth another is to be sitting on a powder keg of social discontent, injustice and corruption that sooner all later will explode.
For all its faults - and there are many - the West at least still has the rule of law, justice and individual freedom of expression with sites such as this existing and contributing to the "work in progress" that is Western democracy.

claude-uk on "China-Turkey and Xinjiang: a frayed relationship"

claude-uk — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 12:58:01 +0000

Turkey attacked China purely on the ground of supporting their 'Turkic Kin' rather than on human rights, no matter what the actual truth is. While there is no proven evidence for genocide in Xinjiang, listening to any Armenia would expose the cruelty of what Turkey did. Even if the history could be denied by Turkey, how could they deny what they did and what they are still doing to Kurdish people? Be ashamed, Erdogan!

Frederico on "China-Turkey and Xinjiang: a frayed relationship"

Frederico — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 05:11:01 +0000

Seferian and Dreppwn's responses were disturbing. They have made genocide conclusions and now tell us Turkey has no right to take a stance on human rights. (Because in the case of the Armenian matter, the state that Turkey overthrew, the Ottoman Empire, is accused of committing genocide. ) It is as though today's Gemany should be shorn of the right to take a moral stance, because a previous German regime had committed a proven genocide.

The fact is, the Turkish nation has never committed genocide. Centuries ago, the Ottomans were powerful enough to challenge Christian Europe, and as a result, Muslim Turkey has earned the disdain of today's west. Many Greeks and Armenians, raised to hate Turks, love to spread their hatred in the western countries they have settled in, and westerners, with their built-in anti-Turkish bias, simply accept whatever terrible things that are said about the Turks.

The Armenians prospered for centuries in the Ottoman Empire. Trouble started when their leaders started terror groups in the late 19th century to get a share of the threatened nation, once the "Sick Man" was taken down for the count. Any Armenian dying of any cause, even combat, was reported as having been "massacred" in the Western press.

Come WWI, the Armenians joined their nation's enemies, as verified by their own leaders, such as Boghos Nubar. They took a gamble, and they lost. Once the Ottomans were in for the fight of their lives, they decided to resettle their treacherous Armenian population, temporarily. This is what has come to be known as a "genocide," much as there is absolutely no evidence to support an intent for extermination. (As the British discovered when they conducted their early version of Nuremberg, the Malta Tribunal, 1919-21.) Most of the half-million Armenians who died were victims of causes such as famine and disease, which also claimed the lives of the majority of the Turks -- even their soldiers. The ones who conducted the comparatively incidental massacres were not connected with the government (other than the rare examples of corrupt local officials); the culprits were often opportunistic Kurdish and Arab tribes.

But evidence does not matter. Prejudiced westerners are quick to accept the obsessed Armenians' word. A whole dishonest genocide industry has sprung up, financed in good part by wealthy Armenians, and the zealots from this industry who pretend to be "scholars" (few come from the field of history) are intolerant of views other than their own. The charge of "denier" springs up, in an effort to stifle debate. Liberals, who should know better, both in the media and academia, are quick to take the genocide industry's side. The situation is a travesty.

The fact is, the Armenians, when they occupied large stretches of Eastern Anatolian territory from 1914-1919, with their allies (and later without) systematically murdered hundreds of thousands of people, mostly Muslims, but Jews and others as well. (Verified, for example, by a pro-Armenian U.S. team, Niles and Sutherland, in 1919; there are also many firsthand testimonies from their allies, Russian and French officers. Internal Ottoman police reports also provide a range of detail.) The Armenian motive was rooted in hopes for a new state, as well as the Armenians' cultivated racial hatred. The nation of Armenia conducted a second campaign of extermination, when they nearly wiped out their new nation's sizeable Muslim (mostly Azeri Turks) population, from 1918-1920.

The irony is, if any people condcuted a genocide that follows the rules of the 1948 U.N. Convention on Genocide, it was the Armenians. The dishonest genocide industry won't speak of the Armenians' terrible crimes, and most Westerners are ignorant, because the Armenians have succeeded in getting their version of events wholly accepted. (That is what their worldwide terrorism spree in the 1970s-80s was all about.) And Westerners are still so prejudiced, adding to their being brainwashed with all of the destructive and overwhelming Armenian propaganda, people don't care, nor do they question.

It is a deplorable situation that ultimately will change, as it's difficult to keep the truth under wraps forever. In the meantime, bigoted statements as the ones we have encountered from Seferian and Dreppwn, will unfortunately be prevalent.

Dreppwn has raised the specter of Cyprus, another topic where the "Christian" perspective has been accepted in the biased West. For decades, the Greek Cypriot minority, under the leadership of Makarios, oppressed and massacred the Turkish Cypriots. The situation got so awful, in 1960, a Treaty of Guarantee was established, so that the respective mother countries would have the right to step in and protect their own Cypriots, if the threat of ethnic cleansing should surface. In 1974, Greece sent in thugs to take over Makarios' government, and to wipe out the Turkish Cypriots, as the coup leader (Sampson) confessed in a Greek newspaper (that he would not have left a single Turkish Cypriot alive). Turkey was within its legal right to intervene, as even an Athens court found. Yet Turkey has been made out to be the aggressor of this episode, in a western world where the Turks are always given the short end of the stick. Greece was the aggressor, and if Turkey hadn't stepped in, Cyprus today would have no Turks left -- a situation that was familiar regarding the Armenia of 1918. (Today, Armenia is 99% ethnically pure -- after all of their criminal bloodletting that goes unknown.)

As far as this article's theme, the question is, why should it be only Turkey that (very reluctantly, given the economic and political realities) sounds off on the oppression and displacement of the Uyghurs? (An "East Turkestan" link above, http://www.unpo.org/content/view/7872/107/, provided insight as to the country's history.) The Chinese first invaded in the 18th century, and the Uyghurs finally managed independence again for a short spurt in 1864-1876. The Chinese nationalists then kept up their criminal domination, as much as the Uyghurs were successful in setting up an independent East Turkestan Republic twice (in 1933 and 1944). Finally, the communists under Mao muscled their way in, to a country that did not belong to them, much as they did with defenseless Tibet. China has no right to either of these nations that they are slowly displacing with ethnic Chinese, which certainly sounds like a slow road to genocide.

While westerners have been sympathetic to Tibet, why have we rarely, if ever, heard of their objections regarding East Turkestan? It is because the people involved, the Turkic people, don't count, in the minds of prejudiced Westerners.