Archive for ‘advice’

Thursday, January 31, 2013

Huanqiu Shibao on “Ulterior Motives” in Southern Weekly Conflict

Main Link: Global Times: Lay Off Supporting Southern Weekend, Or Else

There’s a blog – kind of a bridge blog, if you like – which deserves a lot more attention. In November 2011, China Copyright and Media translated the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party’s Decision on Deepening Cultural Structural Reform (I could have saved myself a lot of time if I had come across their translation earlier).

Fortunately, I did save myself the time to translate a Huanqiu Shibao editorial on the Southern Weekly / Southern Weekend standoffs with the local propaganda department. They’ve got a translation or rendition of that, too – been online since January 8 this year – including the original commentary in Chinese.  China Copyright and Media  includes posts about Chinese legislation, as well, but obviously, I can’t judge their quality. It’s not my department.

Not the full picture, but an instructive glimpse.

Soft power: the land where the Bananas bloom

So, if you want translations from the real Chinese press – beyond the English-language mouthpieces from China Daily to the “Global Times” which are stuff from a parallel universe, made by the CCP propaganda department for foreigners -, read JR’s China Blog, for example.

But read there, too. There are updates every few days, and sometimes several times a day.

The translator finds a lot of rotten points in the Huanqiu article. But this may not be what matters to Huanqiu, to the China-Daily Group, or to the propaganda department. They can’t overlook many domestic online comments in their threads which are highly critical of their approach.

Song Luzheng, an overseas Chinese journalist or official in Paris, follows the same line as does Huanqiu Shibao, in many of his articles, particularly about the freedom of the press. Some of the readers he – probably – hopes to reach are Chinese readers who are disillusioned former admirerers of “Western” values. There seems to have been a trend since 2008, the botched “Sacred-torch” ralleye in the run-up to the Beijing Olympics which has changed the atmosphere in favor of Song Luzheng, Huanqiu Shibao, et al.

____________

Related

» Readers’ Reactions: I will Endure, May 3, 2012
» Oh Rule of Law, April 11, 2012

____________

Tuesday, January 1, 2013

Quality Assurance: How to Cover China?

When David Barboza, a correspondent for the New York Times in China, reported on the Wen Jiabao clan’s wealth, he did what a good reporter needs to do. Beijing seems to think otherwise.  Now, Chris Buckley, one of Barboza’s NYT colleagues, has visa problems.

According to the Guardian, Buckley has reported from China for twelve years. Those who complain that most media send correspondents without great Chinese language skills to China should think again: does it make sense to send correspondents to China who invested heavily into their China-related skills? It may occasionally make sense, but not as a rule. And once a correspondent with a lot of “China background” gets tricked out of the country by “sensitive” authorities, a paper or broadcaster who wants to make sure that their coverage on China isn’t influenced by the CCP should provide such a correspondent with a follow-up stint in Hong Kong, Singapore, or Taiwan. There’s too little coverage from Taiwan anyway.

A correspondent won’t necessarily allow the CCP to intimidate him or her anyway. But it’s not only for the correspondents to make sure about that – it’s a task for their employers (i. e. the media), too.

In short: the media should do their share to make sure that their correspondents can’t be tacitly or openly blackmailed by the Chinese “authorities”.

Those who can’t put their correspondents into a sufficiently independent position shouldn’t have permanent correspondents in China at all – and they should state this publicly, to their readers. Quality assurance and building trust is the issue here.

It may be a double-edged sword for correspondents to speak out about the conditions under which they report from China. But their employers – and their readers -  should encourage them to be transparent about the forms of harrassment they encounter.

____________

Related

» An Increasing Number, China Law & Policy, July 16, 2012
» Self Censorship, many forms, FEER, April 2007

____________

Tuesday, July 24, 2012

Cheng Tianquan: Citizen Participation in Foreign Affairs

The following is the second half of an article by Cheng Tianquan (程天权), professor and party secretary at Renmin University (or People’s University). The article was first published by Jiefang Daily, and then by the CCP’s website, on Tuesday.

Cheng was born in Shanghai, on March 28, 1946, according to People’s University’s website, and is a specialist in Chinese legal history. From 1986 to 1991, he was the director of Fudan University’s propaganda department. He became professor in 1995, apparently while at Fudan University, and has been Renmin University’s party secretary and administrative affairs’ (or university council) director since February 2001.

[...]

It needs to be pointed out that the building and handling of international relations isn’t only a matter for the national government, but also for the citizens. In this interlinked world, where everyone may widely disseminate news, it becomes important to talk about how citizens can be helped and be guided in their participation in international affairs, and how harmonious “people-to-people” relations can be developed in this global village. Although the government clearly guides public opinion, the so-called “will of the people” has at times kidnapped1) the government’s diplomatic policy-making. It would be promising if influential researchers and think tanks in the field of international issues would make it their task to guide citizens to look at international affairs rationally.

需要指出的是,国际关系的构建与处理不仅仅是国家政府的事情,也是公民的事情。当今天网络世界里,在人人都可以成为有广泛传播力的新闻人的情况下,如何帮助和疏导公民参与国际事务的探讨,构建地球村里和谐地发展的“人与人”关系,显得十分重要。虽然,政府对公民的引导是显而易见的,但是所谓“民意”绑架政府外交决策的事情也时有发生。而在引导公民理性看待国际事务方面,中国国际问题研究智库和相关学者有着影响引导公众的责任,这方面应大有可为。

The appropriate road for international strategic research should also be on various levels. First of all, fundamental research, on the historical as well as the philosophical range, should be deepened.This is important work there are specialists who apparently have nothing to do with international relations, but who in fact have a lot to do with it. After all, language, expression and ideological habits may all constitute obstacles in the field of knowledge and assessment in a broader sense. Just as with obvious cultural differences between the West and China, there are also dissimilarities within the oriental cultural system, on various levels.

国际战略研究的合理路径也应有多个层次。首先,加强基础研究,即从历史的、哲学的层面上深化研究。这是一项非常重要的工作,有些专业好像跟国际关系没有直接关系,但是实际上非常有关联。因为,语言表述、思维习惯、意识形态,还有更广义上的文化差别,都会构成国际关系领域认识研判上的障碍。如文化差别方面,除了西方和中国的明显相异性外,就是在东方文化体系里也是多层次的。

Secondly, the applicability of international-relations theory research, mainly generally used international-relations theory research, at the same time includes the expansion and innovation of these theories.

其次,应用性国际关系理论研究,主要是对通行国际关系理论的研究,同时也包括这些理论的拓展创新。第三是当下应对的即时性对策研究,在智库互动中要有交流,最后要有评估,这样积累起来就形成丰富的案例资源,对以后国家在处理国际事务时会有积极的参考价值。
As a third point, concerning real-time countermeasures, there needs to be exchange between thinktanks and final appraisals. This can build rich resources and case-study material with a lot of reference value for the handling of international affairs. And finally, thinktanks should be encouraged to participate in people-to-people diplomacy2). International experience tells us that an important way to create smooth conditions for a country in the international community is to use people-to-people diplomacy to actively communicate [within the international community], by individual behavior, trade activities, cultural interaction, thinktank exhanges and other diversified means, to enrich the understanding of ones own country among a foreign public, among foreign organizations and foreign media. In this regard, the role of thinktanks is irreplaceable.

最后,要提倡智库参与民间外交。国际经验告诉我们,一个国家要在国际社会上行走比较顺畅,很重要的途径是通过民间外交展开积极沟通,如通过个人行为、商务活动、文化互动、智库交流等多样化手段,丰富海外公众、机构和媒体对本国文化和国家形象的认知。这方面,智库的作用是不可替代的。

____________

Note

1) Cheng’s “kidnapping” remark won’t refer exclusively to the Chinese government’s “management” of public opinion after the arrest of Chinese fishermen by a Russian FSB patrol boat earlier this month. However, the issue of public anger concerning foreign affairs probably led to the  explicit mention of “policy kidnapping” by the public in Cheng’s article.
2) 民间外交 (minjian waijiao) usually stands for what may be translated as people-to-people diplomacy, while 公共外交 would amount to public diplomacy. Please see footnote 1 under that post.

____________

Related

» Jiang Zemin: Importance of Philosophy, Xinhua, April 28, 2002

____________

Friday, July 13, 2012

China doesn’t object to Hegemonism – America Should

A signed People’s Daily editorial suggested  on Thursday that America should play a more constructive role in Asia, and that America was in no position to grade Asian countries. The editorialist didn’t need to invent his advice to Washington. Evan A. Feigenbaum and Robert A. Manning, a short Council of Foreign Relations overview suggests, apparently offered similar advice to the Obama administration, in 2009:

The Obama administration has an opportunity to help define new roles for the United States in this changing Asia. But to sustain its position in the region, Washington will need to move beyond its traditional “hub and spokes” approach to Asia–with the United States as the hub, bilateral alliances as the spokes, and multilateral institutions largely at the margins of U.S. policy. Otherwise, the United States will pay increasing costs to its interests, credibility, and influence.

US Navy visit Hong Kong (archive)

A lot of purchasing power – U.S. Navy visit Hong Kong (archive)

Apart from advocating multi-lateralism, the report advised that Washington should avoid intractable security issues and focus instead on topics ripe for cooperation. If it is true that there were differences between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in 2010 – that’s what this Los Angeles Times article suggests -, Clinton’s “ideas and worldview” have certainly had an impact on U.S. foreign policy in Asia.

That’s basically a good thing. The Philippines, Singapore, and Vietnam certainly don’t mind a situation where they can pit one hegemon against the other, depending on the situation. In that way, the U.S. helps to ensure exactly the “democracy among nations” Beijing is calling for – Chinese foreign minister Yang Jiechi (杨洁篪) came back to the topic less than a week ago, on an ostensibly “non-official” World Peace Forum in Beijing, where he deplored an existing “zero-sum mentality”, and pointed out the need for a strengthened democratization of international relations (国际关系民主化有待加强).

But then, democracy needs limits – and the CCP is the only referee to define such limits. That’s a feature Chinese dissidents at home are familiar with. And besides concepts of sovereignty and equality among states, there is an – imagined – concept of “Asianness” at play in Beijing’s worldview, just as well. Within that Asianness, i. e. close to home, the rules of inter-state democracy doesn’t seem to count quite as much as further away from home. Or, as the same Yang Jiechi as the one who waxed poetic about democratic international relations just recently, reportedly told then Singaporean foreign minister George Yeo (杨荣文) in July 2010 in Hanoi, China is a big country and other countries are small countries, and that’s just a fact.

What is rarely looked at is what the small states make of the situation. It is obvious that even Vietnam, a “socialist country”, welcomes a strong U.S. presence near its coastline, despite an extremely brutal American war on the country which only ended four decades ago. So long as the Americans don’t come ashore, things appear to be fine.

Vietnamese Dignitaries visit USS George Washington

Vietnamese Dignitaries visit USS George Washington, summer 2010 – click picture for US Pacific Fleet video.

As for Singapore, the city-state’s mega-elder himself, Lee Kuan Yew (李光耀), urged Washington in 2009 to strike a balanceAmerica risked losing its global leadership if it didn’t stay engaged not just in China, but in the whole of East Asia and India.

If a totalitarian (Vietnam) and an authoritarian state (Singapore) want a strong U.S. role in Asia, this is hardly based on a desire for democracy or human rights. Clinton’s talk to that end isn’t empty – and the role America is currently playing might also help to make these two concepts more attractive in Asia -, but clearly, neither poor human-rights records nor undemocratic political systems are criteria for exclusion, in Washington’s choice of allies.

That’s why U.S. politicians should spell out – to the American people – what they expect to get out of these informal alliances. If this is about freedom of navigation – and it is understandable if people don’t simply want to rely on Beijing’s assurances -, this should be as much in the interest of China’s neighbors, as in the American interest. In other words, Asian countries, too, need to contribute to a sustainable defense of these rights.

The key issue for the U.S. should be to transform the current relationship with Asian countries from a hegemonic one into a real partnership. As far as that is concerned, both the People’s Daily editorial and other proponents of such an approach have a point. The U.S. should also try to include China in such a security partnership, wherever feasible.

But if China keeps criticizing American hegemonism, without abandoning its own hegemonism, chances are that smaller states will appreciate a choice between at least two hegemons.

As long as the U.S. can afford the defense budget a hegemonic role requires, anyway.

Thursday, July 12, 2012

People’s Daily editorial: Human-Rights Advocacy will Marginalize America

America needed to stop playing the role of a democracy preacher, a People’s Daily (人民日报) editorialist named Zhong Sheng (钟声 – this name or pen name also translates tolling of the bells) wrote on Thursday. It would be much more worthwile to think about how America could join the Asian development process in better ways, how it could play a a constructive role in Asian stability and development. However, if Washington wanted to come up with better solutions, it needed to control itself, and put restraint on its impulse to be a “preacher of democracy”.

美国如何更好地加入亚洲发展进程,为亚洲的稳定与发展发挥建设性作用,这是一道值得思考的难题。要想解答得好,华盛顿先要调整好自己的心态,克制住总想当“民主说教者”的冲动。

You can ring my Belle

“Hello Asia – you can ring my Belle.” (Click this picture for five questions to a hegemon).

Zhong’s signed editorial refers to statements by U.S. secretary of state Hillary Clinton during her Asian tour that “Asian countries needed to expand the scope of human rights”, and “commended” certain countries to obliquely hint at China (还借“表扬”某些国家来影射中国), thus acting as a “human rights preacher” once again.

美国国务卿希拉里·克林顿在亚洲访问期间,称“亚洲国家有必要扩大人权范围”,还借“表扬”某些国家来影射中国,再次扮演了一个“人权说教者”的角色。

The Financial Times had referred to Clinton’s speech as part of an increasingly intense geo-political debate about Asia’s future, writes Zhong Sheng. However, this wasn’t only a debate, nor had America set out on which side of the debate it wanted to stand. Essentially, holding the great banners of democracy and human rights high was a major matter in America’s strategy of “returning to Asia”.

英国《金融时报》在评论其讲话时写道:希拉里的讲话是一场有关亚洲未来的、愈演愈烈的地缘政治辩论的一部分。然而,这不只是一场辩论,美国人也没有摆出要与哪一方辩论的架势。实质上,高举民主、人权大旗是美国“重返亚洲”战略的重点所在。

Who gave Americans the right to arrogantly assessing the democracy status of Asian countries, asks Zhong Sheng. Americans themselves possibly shunned to answer the question, or believed that there was no need for an answer. Exactly the problem’s deceptiveness could create could lead to a failure of the “return-to-Asia” strategy to reach its standards.

是谁给了美国人如此傲慢评点亚洲民主的地位?美国人可能不愿去细想这个问题,甚至会认为这是一个根本不需要问的问题。可恰恰就是这个问题造成的假象,可能会导致美国“重返亚洲”的战略无法“达标”。

Some of America’s recent measures, from military exercises and increased military deployment, demonstrated how America did its utmost to demonstrate the adequacy of its role in Asia. To hold the banners of “democracy” and “human rights” only served to safeguard its so-called guiding moral status.

美国最近的一些做法,显然是在竭力证明其在亚洲主导地位的合理性。搞军演、增驻军,以塑造其安全提供者的角色;高举“民主”、“人权”旗帜,则是要维护其所谓道义上的主导地位。

However, the more America failed to restrain itself from such policies, the more people would ask themselves what America actually feared to lose. There were two points which Washington didn’t understand: the cause for America’s estrangement with Asia and its need to “return” had been caused by the reduction in its involvement on the one hand, and on the other hand, because of major changes in the Asia region’s political and economic structures, American status was changing as a result.

但是,美国越是迫不及待地这么做,就越是会让人产生美国是在担心会在亚洲失去什么的感觉。有两点华盛顿没有弄明白:美国之所以会感到与亚洲疏远并需要“重 返”,一方面是因为对这一地区的投入相对减少,而另一方面,则是因为这一地区的政治、经济结构已经发生了重大变化,美国的地位将因此而不同。

The editorial cites factors such as a comparatively successful Asian handling of the international financial crisis – it attributes the crisis exclusively to Western countries -, to flourishing regional cooperation, and to mutually beneficial cooperation between Asian countries which had at the same time been exploring successful development paths, in accordance with their national conditions.

亚洲国家,尤其是东亚国家,成功地抵御了西方国家引发的金融危机的冲击,实现了经济较快增长。目前区域合作蓬勃发展,发展前景十分广阔。这个成就的取得,一方面得益于亚洲国家之间不断扩大的互利合作,另一方面则得益于区域国家积极探索适合本国国情发展道路的实践。

The development of Asian countries shows that Asians are able of solving problems on their own, on their path of development, and to find a road different from the West’s in building political systems, in accordance with their national conditions.

亚洲的发展表明,亚洲人有能力解决自身发展过程中的问题,并且找到一条与西方不同、适合各自国情的政治制度构建的道路。

America was in no position to grade Asian countries, or countries worldwide, in terms of democracy and human rights. No size fitted all models. Practice had shown that it was exactly some countries that had drawn a tiger with a cat as a model (照猫画虎) and copied American-style democracy which had led to serious “acclimatization problems” leading to development lags, with some even unrevived to date.

美国不是亚洲和世界民主和人权的评判者。世界上更没有放之四海而皆准的民主模式。实践证明,恰恰是某些亚洲国家“照猫画虎”地照搬了美式民主体制,才带来了政治体制的严重“水土不服”,造成了发展滞后,有的甚至到今天也没有缓过劲来。

America’s actual diplomatic considerations and abusive use of democracy issues had already incurred criticism from all sides. America’s Time magazine had pointed out in an article that America’s Middle-East policy was showing double standards, and that a country’s democratic status didn’t define if America worked with it – American interest did.

美国出于外交上的现实考虑而滥用民主的做法早已招致各方批评。美国《时代》周刊的一篇文章就曾指出,美国对中东国家的民主状况有着明显的双重标准,最终决定美国与一国关系的因素并不是该国的民主状况,而是美国的自身利益。

As a Pacific nation, America and Asian countries had inextricable links. America hoped to have a share in the fruits of Asian development, which was a matter of course. Nobody wanted to squeeze America out of Asia. However, Asian countries commonly expected that America would become more actively engaged in Asian development and cooperation. But it seemed that Washington had difficulty in looking at regional participants as equal players.

美国是一个太平洋国家,与同样濒临太平洋的很多亚洲国家有着千丝万缕的联系。美国关注亚洲发展,希望更多分享亚洲发展成果,理所应当。没有哪个国家要把美国挤出亚洲。相反,亚洲国家普遍希望美国能更积极地投入到亚洲的发展与合作中来。但当惯了主导者的华盛顿,要想放下身段,以平等参与者的“身份感”来看待亚洲,参与亚洲事务,看来是有很大难度的。

If America turns against the general trend of Asian development and cooperation, and play the role flag-waving preachers, and gesticulate at Asian democracy from commanding positions, and even, by this approach, build “contingents” to check and balance China, America may well end up marginalizing itself.

如果美国逆亚洲发展合作的大势而动,总要以一种举旗者、说教者的角色出现,总是居高临下地对亚洲民主指手画脚,甚至想靠举旗来组建起一支制衡中国发展的“队伍”,最终就有可能使自己边缘化。

____________

Related

» Clinton warns on West PHL Sea Dispute, GMA, July 12, 2012
» After 2 million tons of bombs, Telegraph, July 12, 2012
» 人民日报7月12日评论, BBC, July 12, 2012
» Clinton Praises Mongolian System, WSJ, July 9, 2012
» Diplomat in Chief, LA Times, July 8, 2012

____________

Friday, June 22, 2012

Soft Power: Go and Buy a Hat

After so much advice has been given to China’s dictators so far this year, as to how they could boost their (or their country’s, which is basically the same thing in their view) soft power1), JR does not intend to keep his expertise to himself either.

If soft power matters to them, China’s leaders should wear bigger hats. Or, rather, they should start wearing hats at all.

Now, I know that this is problematic, given that people who were “beaten down” (i. e. humiliated, pushed around, killed, etc.) during the Mao era had to wear big paper hats. Bamboo hats may not be deemed desirable for other reasons. But how about Bao Zheng‘s hat, for starters?

The idea came to my mind as a preliminary remedy to China’s (alleged, anyway) soft-power woes when drawing knowledge from the wisdom of my commenter threads.

In September last year, King Tubby had this to say about the Pope and his speech to German parliament:

[I]f Ratzinger wants to make pronouncements to parliaments, he should turn up in a business suit like any other advocate. Put someone in a few colourful vestments and they acquire some sort of undeserved mystique and their words take on a false gravitas plus a whiff of insence.

Iconography designed for the credulous.

The hat the Pope wore in the Bundestag – that and the papal white robe was King Tubby’s point of criticism here – was actually small, but even then, Angela Merkel visibly envied him. Imagine her facial expression if the Pontiff had chosen a miter or a spiked helmet instead.

Some time after 1976, the Chinese ruling class has chosen to wear suits and ties on formal occasions – you know, the ones the English imposed on us, as Marcel Pagnol wrote much earlier2).

Talking about les Anglais, the Queen wears hats, too. Even when of comparatively moderate size, and even among lots of other people with hats, a hat of your own adds to your conspicuity.

a small hat makes a big difference

Even a small hat makes a helluva difference

Manmohan Singh wears something like a hat, too. If you are asked who of the G-20 guys is the one from India, you’ll probably guess him correctly, even if you never cared before.

You won’t see Hu Jintao smile happily too often, but he’s radiant in his Sun-Yat-Sen suit. Add a Bao Zheng hat (see above) or a spiked helmet (Germany invented the Sun-Yat-Sen suit), and Hu will smile Barack Obama (who doesn’t wear hats either) off the global stage anyday.

Hu & Cie would thus improve their standing, and even do away with the habit of slavishly aping the West at one go.

P.S.: It is quite true that hats of whatever size didn’t work terribly well in that case. But then, what can you expect when your country has mainly barter trade to offer, and little else? If you want to avoid a cold war, you have to be in a position to appeal to the greed of the free world, by bluff or substance.

For similar reasons, soft power is also unlikely to take off in that guy’s place.

Lastly, let me get back to King Tubby’s advice to the Pope (see above, para 5). King Tubby referred to the timeless papal style as iconography designed for the credulous.

But that’s the point, isn’t it?
____________

Note

1) Peking Duck, Rectified Name, The Atlantic, and many comments here.
2) “Le spectateur de théâtre porte un col et une cravate, et ce costume anonyme que les Anglais nous ont imposé.” (La Gloire de mon Pere, 1957)

____________

Related

» Gonna Buy a Hat, Chris Rea, 1987

____________

Friday, May 11, 2012

Experts: How to Win Friends Abroad, and to Lose them at Home

Huanqiu Shibao quotes the gist of what ten academics said in a Central Party School discussion on May 5. This post contains translations from four of the quotes, and a few comments from the Huanqiu readership.

Wang Fan (王帆, Professor, Director of the Institute of International Relations, and Assistant President, China Foreign Affairs University):

In terms of power and politics in Asia, the cold-war mentality won’t go away. China should reduce the negative effects of cold-war mentality, manage crises, and take preventive measures against crises. In the framework of the maintained status quo, a consensus with America should be worked out. On the one hand, multilateral security cooperation should be strengthened, on the other, untraditional security cooperation should be strengthened, and the East Asia Kyousei Forum (东亚共生) model be used, to solve issues of balanced development in East Asia.
从亚洲地区权力与政治的现状来看,冷战思维是不可能消除的,中国应减少冷战思维的负面影响,管控危机、预防危机。在维持亚洲现状的情况下与美国达成共识。一方面加强多边安全合作,另一方面加强非传统安全合作,充分利用东亚共生的现象,解决好东亚均衡发展问题。

Zhang Yansheng (张燕生, the Institute for International Economics Research of the National Development and Reform Commission’s academic-commission secretary):

In the next few years, according to the current pace of development, the size of China’s economy will overtake America’s. During this process, there will be competition between China and America, and China  [correction, May 12: America] will do everything in its power to hold China back. This is a critical stage for China as a country. To respond to these unfavorable prospects, China needs to change its development pattern and establish a pattern which lends support to a order and to a legal system. From an export-oriented economy, it must internationalize [in terms of] talent, markets, industry, capital etc., strategically and structurally link China with the international systems, and structural transformation is the core here.
未来几年,按照现有的发展速度,中国的经济规模将会超过美国。在这个进程中,中美会出现竞争,美国会千方百计地阻止中国。因此,对中国来说,这是一个国家发展的关键时期。中国若要应对这一不利前景,必须改变前30年的发展模式,建立一个基于规则和法制的发展模式,由外向型经济转变为人才、市场、产业、资本等的国际化,在体制、战略和结构上与国际制度接轨,其中体制转变是核心。

Shao Feng, (邵峰, CASS Global Economics and Politcs Research Institute’s Strategy Office director):

A country’s overall level of development is the actual embodiment of its soft power. Four international strategic issues urgently need research and solutions:

  • the issue of strategic timing, how China should seize its opportunities and solve issues inherited from history
  • the issue of China having too few friends internationally, of how to win more friends through the establishment of common values and common benefit
  • the issue of raising China’s international image, and
  • the issue of building the national economy and society.

国家整体发展水平才是国家软实力的体现。中国国际战略研究急需研究解决以下四个课题:一是战略时机问题,中国应如何抓住时机,解决历史遗留问题;二是中国在世界上朋友太少,如何通过建立共同价值观和共同利益,在国际社会争取更多朋友;三是提升中国国际形象;四是加强国家经济、社会等建设。

Wang Hongxu (王红续, Central Party School International Strategic Research and Chinese Diplomacy Research Office director):

In the definition of international strategies [an international strategy], the domestic environment and the international environment are equally important. China’s current unbalanced development and cultural soft power stays far behind its economic development, and its position in international public opinion and  discourse dominance [also: the right to speak - 话语权] is weak. In view of that, China still needs to practise, on the global stage, the basic strategy defined in the 1980s. Obviously, there need to be adjustments in accordance with new situations and new characteristics. China hasn’t yet achieved an international cultural strategy, and that has to change.
在制定国际战略时,国内环境和国际环境同样重要。中国目前的发展不平衡,文化软实力大大滞后于经济发展,在国际舆论和话语权方面处于弱势地位。鉴于以上情况,中国在上世纪80年代制定的基本战略还需要继续实行。当然,要根据新形势和新特点,进行适当调整。目前,中国还没有成体系的国际文化战略,这一情况需要改变。

-

Comments from the Huanqiu Shibao readership:

It only takes very small numbers of troops to regain ones territories and territorial waters! Why all the pondering? In the War to Resist America and to Aid Korea, and the self-defense strike against Vietnam, it took very few troops! These so-called experts are apparently all women! — There is no masculine disposition here! This becomes especially apparent in the ideological methods. Take these [experts] and put them next to Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaoping to compare their ideological methods would do too much honor [to these experts].
收复自己的领土领海而动用非常少量的军队!用得着这样思前想后的吗?和在抗美援朝战场及对越反自卫击战投入的兵力比 真的只需动用非常少量的军队!这几位所谓的专家应该都是女性!—没有男子汉的气质与胆量!特别是体现在思维方式上更是如如此 当然啦 拿这几位和毛泽东,邓小平去比较思维方式确实是太高看其人了.
– 21 minutes ago

This bunch of traitors is misleading the citizens! Stomp [them]!
这群汉奸又在误导国民。脚踩!!!
– 26 minutes ago

In reply to the previous comment:
Correct. 正确
– 13 minutes ago.

[A rather sophisticated comment - and too sophisticated for JR to grasp its first line (谁想打仗让谁上好了)]:

[...] A bunch of screaming and chattering lunatics. Do you know the cruelty of war?
谁想打仗让谁上好了,-群哇哇乱叫的疯子,知道战争的残酷吗?
– one hour ago

I can’t translate the replies to the latter comment, but neither of them appears to be friendly, but one of the three (possibly all the same person) writes:

In the past, territory was given away in exchange for peace, but in the end, there was still war. Cruelty? I would rather die than live without dignity, sovereignty is fought for, it’s not resistance with each passing day.
你就是一sb,以前用领土换和平还不是最后要打仗,残酷?情愿死也不要无尊严的活着,主权是打来的,不是天天抗议
– one hour ago.

____________

Related

» First School Lesson: Patriotic Essays, Sept 1, 2009
» Concerning Traitors, Aug 25, 2009
____________

Update/Related

» Orgasm is Easy, Rectified.Name, May 12, 2012

____________

Thursday, May 3, 2012

Huanqiu Shibao on Chen Guangcheng: “The Rise of China is the World’s Rich and Colorful Stage”

In an article of May 3, 10:22 local time, Shan Renping (单仁平) of Huanqiu Shibao (“Global Times”) describes Chen Guangcheng as a man who seemed to like his “policial super-role” (超级角色) very much. “Some Western forces” had taken “unusual ways of interfering, and Western public opinion and “some Chinese activists on the internet” had turned Chen into a human-rights brand. In fact, however, ordinary people had to cooperate with the big political powers who made their [own] arrangements.

Chen’s supporters had had a much clearer picture of that than Chen himself, and had hyped his case from an individual grassroot issue into a “microcosm” [literally: miniature, 缩影] of China as a country.

Some Western forces and their supporters in China will always need tools to struggle with China’s current political system, and “luck” and “disaster” become the matter of those who serve as tools. Everything can be distorted and labeled. Such a tool will not be lonely and may enjoy other benefits, too. Of course, if they go too far, they will pay the price.
西方一些力量和他们在中国的支持者们永远需要与中国现行政治体制做斗争的工具,“有幸”或“不幸”成为这个工具的人和事,都会变形,被标签化。做这样的工具,可以不寂寞,也会有其他利益。当然如果他们做过了头,也会付出代价。

Chen was just a very small case on Chinese society’s road ahead, and wouldn’t hurt stability in China, or the Chinese cause of human rights to develop further in a normal way. If they should experience “such a matter” again, China’s officials could be absolutely somewhat more at ease (以后遇到这样的事,中国官方完全可以更坦然些). “Some groups on the microblogs” who “warmed themselves at the fire” were on the fringe and did not represent the attitude of Chinese society.

Western public opinion was often looking for a crop in China, to inflate and exaggerate things. Chen Guangcheng and his supporters on the one hand, and Western public opinion, had benefitted each other this time, to blacken China’s ways.

Shan Renping advises the U.S. embassy to work “in accordance with its functions”, to distance itself from inappropriate activities, and to focus on garnering positive feelings among Chinese mainstream society, rather than act as a support for Chinese extremists.

Can the Chen Guangcheng case subside now? Hopefully. But there are some people inside and outside China who don’t want that. In that case, we will see some more quixotic pipedreams. The rise of China is also the world’s rich and colorful stage.
陈光诚的事情会就此平息吗?希望是。但中国国内和国外都有一些人未必愿意。那就让我们多看一些堂吉诃德式的妄想症好了。中国的崛起也是世间丰富多彩的舞台。

____________

Update/Related

» None of my Business – Readers’ comments, May 3, 2012

____________

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 40 other followers