Posts tagged ‘America’

Thursday, July 25, 2019

Huanqiu Shibao editorial: “Pillar of Humiliation” for “Hong Kong Traitors”

Huanqiu Shibao editorial, July 25, 2019. Links within blockquotes added during translation — JR
The piece seems to mark a departure from a moderate, “positive” style Huanqiu Shibao had taken a few years ago, and a return to more strident presentation of China as a potential victim to “foreign forces'” imperialism, and to character assassination.

click picture for CCTV coverage on Xinhua editorial

Hong Kong also featured prominently in recent Xinwen Lianbo news, the main CCTV new broadcast at 19 hours China local time. This was also the case last night:  Hong Kong people from all walks of life condemn foreign forces’ interference in Hong Kong’s affairs / Hong Kong must not tolerate incitement of trouble by foreign forces / Xinhua quoted: In- and outside forces ganging up to shamefully harming Hong Kong.

But back to “Huanqiu Shibao”‘s editorial.

Main Link: Hong Kong’s new batch of baffling modern traitors (香港出了一批有迷惑性的现代汉奸)

In the process of Hong Kong’s extremist forces’ demonstrations becoming more and more violent, the involvement of Western forces, too, becomes more and more obvious. Their involvement in the fermentation in Hong Kong’s society can not be separated from a number of traitorous persons who cooperate with and assist [those forces]. Jimmy Lai, Martin Lee and others can be rated as representatives of this number of traitors.

在香港极端势力示威越来越暴力化的过程中,西方势力的介入越来越公开化,而这种介入在香港社会发酵,离不开一批汉奸人物的配合与助攻。黎智英、李柱铭等人堪称这批汉奸的代表者。

The controversy about a legislation draft in Hong Kong has turned into turmoil all over the territory of Hong Kong. It has wreaked havoc and has pounded the foundations of rule of law in Hong Kong. The dramatic developments “rhyme” very well with the global tensions in Chinese-American relations. From last to this year, Jimmy Lai’s, Martin Lee’s and other old-hand “democratic leaders'” contacts with US and Western governments have reached unprecedented closeness, increasingly taking the shape of unbridled collusion in the support of the inflated Hong Kong street politics. This growing collusion provides Hong Kong street politics with its evil fuel.

香港围绕一项立法的争议激化成全港大动荡,直至暴力肆虐,冲击到香港法治的根基,事态的戏剧性发展与中美关系出现全局性紧张的大环境是非常“押韵”的。从去年到今年,黎智英、李柱铭等老牌“民主领袖”与美国及西方政府、议会的接触达到空前密度,形成越来越肆无忌惮的勾结,这些勾结为香港街头政治的膨胀提供了罪恶的燃料。

And that’s not all. These extremists have noticed that the strategic contest between China and America is intensifying, that Washington spares no effort to find levers and to put pressure on China. They actively exploit the opportunity and squeeze the ocean with their own importance, but also make every effort to display their usefulness in squeezing China.

事态的演变不仅于此。这批极端人物看到中美的战略博弈逐渐趋紧,华盛顿不遗余力地启动能够对北京施加压力的各种杠杆,他们积极地往上凑,不仅挟洋自重,而且极力向美方展示自己协助遏制中国的工具意义。

These people have wild ambitions: to turn Hong Kong into a special field of the strategic game between China and the US, to help maximize Washington’s and the West’s influence grow in Hong Kong, to “balance” the basic law’s “one country” content and to minimize “one country, two systems”, even hollow the term out and make it lose any real substance, turning Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy under the “two systems” into actual independence.

这些人有一个野心:把香港变成中美战略博弈的特殊角力场,让华盛顿和西方在香港的影响最大化,“平衡”基本法中“一国”的内容,让“一国两制”机制中的“一国”最小化,甚至名存实亡,让“两制”下香港的高度自治成为实际上的独立。

There have always been traitors in the game between China and the outside world, and even appeared at critical moments of such standoffs. Apart from working as immediate forces for outside forces invading and suppressing China, but also helped to break the internal unity of Chinese people and help foreign forces to brainwash the Chinese. People like Jimmy Lai and Martin Lee are exact models of modern-age traitors.

汉奸都是出在中外博弈乃至发生对抗的特殊关头,他们的作用除了直接为侵略和打压中国的外部势力效力,还包括破坏中国人的内部团结,帮助外部势力给中国人洗脑。黎智英、李柱铭这些人就是典型的现代汉奸。

Playing the banner of striving for Hong Kongers’ “democracy” and “freedom”, these modern traitors are more baffling than traitors in history. They borrowed this banner from the American and Western forces that are attacking China. At the times when [those forces] advertised the spreading of “democracy” and “freedom” to China, their real goal was to prevent China from becoming rich and powerful, and to destroy the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.

香港出的这批现代汉奸打着为港人争“民主”“自由”的旗号,比历史上的汉奸更具有迷惑性。他们的这一旗号是从美西方攻击中国的势力那里借过来的,后者在标榜对华传播“民主”“自由”的时候,真正锁定的是阻止中国走向强盛,破坏中华民族的伟大复兴。

Jimmy Lai’s and Martin Lee’s structures are small. They are only seeking their own and a small group’s benefit, but what they betray is the great objective of the Chinese nation. With American and Western forces, they build an alliance to pin China down, and what they have in common is that they lose their head because of material greed.

黎智英、李柱铭等人的格局很小,他们追求的仅仅是个人和小团体的利益,背叛的则是中华民族的大目标。他们与美西方的势力结成牵制中国崛起的同盟,利令智昏是近代以来汉奸们的共通点。

During his visit to the US in May this year, Martin Lee met with Pompeo, Pelosi, and others. Media coverage reflected that he clearly discussed the use of opposition against the “fugitives extradition” bill for tactics to strike at Hong Kong’s social order. Although “veteran” oppositionals like him and Jimmy Lai have lost their leadership role in the demonstrations against the bill, they still make every effort to freeload on the [protesters’] short-lived enthusiasm, fishing for ill-gotten political gains, and continuing their role as traitors.

李柱铭在今年5月的访美中与蓬佩奥、佩洛西等人见了面,媒体的报道反映出,他显然与美国高官商讨了利用反修订《逃犯条例》来打击香港秩序的策略。他和黎智英这批“老资格”的反对派虽然在反修例的示威中失去了主导权,但他们依然极力想蹭热度,捞取政治油水,继续发挥他们的汉奸作用。卖港和私赢在他们那里实为一回事。

Jimmy Lai has been described as Hong Kong opposition’s “largest financial backer”, but where his money comes from has always been questioned. More than a month ago, when Hong Kong’s situation became chaotic, his company’s shares rose sharply, making the questions reaching new heights. What kind of external benefit links his company’s capital has with American and Western capital is believed to be Jimmy Lai’s underpants which he doesn’t dare to show.

黎智英被称为香港反对派的“最大金主”,但他的钱是从哪儿来的一直饱受质疑。一个多月前香港局势乱起来,他公司的股票却突然暴涨,使这种质疑达到新的高潮。他的公司与美国和西方资本有什么外界不知道的利益关系,这被认为是黎智英不敢解衣示人的内裤。

To bring Hong Kong into the focus of Chinese-American games is also treason to the benefit of seven million Hong Kongers. America hasn’t any authority over Hong Kong, and outside regular trade links with Hong Kong, it won’t invest great resources into encouraging “democracy”. Freeloading for itself and its closest allies is Washington’s policy now. Washington’s only use for Hong Kong in this game with China is to mess Hong Kong up as an international financial center, to destroy harmony between mainland society’s harmony with Hong Kong, and to add any kind of trouble to pin down Beijing.

把香港变成中美博弈的新焦点,这同样是对香港七百多万市民利益的根本背叛。美国对香港无任何管治权,也不会在与香港正常贸易机制之外为鼓励它的“民主”大规模投入资源,华盛顿现在连对最亲密盟友也奉行揩油的政策。美方利用香港同中国博弈的唯一方式就是搞乱这个国际金融中心,破坏内地社会与香港的和谐,用在香港制造各种麻烦牵制北京。

The traitors Lai and Li have already quenched Washington’s urgent thirst for new game pieces. They aren’t in the trials of China’s history, but specializing in trying to please the Western forces, having assigned themselves to the American and Western camp to their bones.

黎、李这批汉奸解了华盛顿急需一张新牌的渴。他们不在乎中国历史的审判,更专注于取悦西方势力,他们已经在骨子里把自己归入到美国和西方阵营。

However, traitors have always been outside forces’ cheap goods of use, and have therefore also been looked down upon. Lai’s and Lee’s exits from the stage will certainly be be nailed to Hong Kong’s historic pillar of humiliation, and in the West, they will be forgotten ghosts.

然而汉奸在外部势力眼里从来就是廉价的利用品,而且他们在被利用的同时亦会受到鄙视。黎、李之流的下场一定会被钉到香港历史的耻辱柱上,而在西方那边,他们都将是过眼云烟的孤魂野鬼。

____________

Related

Szeto Wah, 1931 – 2011, Jan 2, 2011

____________

Updates / Related

Dialling up Rhetoric, SupChina, July 25, 2019
A traitor only needs to match the definition, Aug 25, 2009

____________

Friday, July 19, 2019

You want to defend Democracy, Mr. Rasmussen? Introduce a dedicated Property Tax

In an op-ed for The Guardian, former NATO secretary general Anders Fogh Rasmussen calls on Europe to

stand up for Taiwan’s self-determination and treat it as a fully-fledged member of the alliance of democracies. In a globally interdependent world, failure to defend our values in east Asia and beyond will eventually lead to the erosion of those same values at home.

The headline – (Now Europe must defend Taiwan) – is more spectacular than Rasmussen’s actual text, where the man who led the West’s military alliance from summer 2009 to fall 2014 doesn’t exactly call for a formal military alliance with Taiwan. As far as military cooperation is concerned, his op-ed remains vague.

It does, however, make tangible demands, by citing American measures in support of Taiwan as examples for Europe, or by accusing European governments of allowing China to bully them into accept its version of Taiwan’s status. Rasmussen also encourages the European Union’s incoming leadership to start practical measures to strengthen Taiwan’s position economically.

Op-eds like these are icebreakers – this one doesn‘t touch on “taboo” issues, at least not yet. And it remains to be seen if Rasmussen is up to a stronger European voice and economic policy in Taiwan‘s favor, or to full military cooperation. If the latter is the case, the EU would have a long way to go – it is anything but a “Pacific player”.

In 2014, Rasmussen wrote an op-ed for the Telegraph which was built in a similar way. Back then, he drew on Russia‘s annexation of Crimea and demanded to “invest in defence of democracy.” Now, he is drawing on the obvious crash of China‘s “one-country-two-systems” policy in Hong Kong.

Is Rasmussen‘s op-ed good news? Basically, yes. Taiwan needs support indeed, and supporters don‘t need to be likeable, as long as their support is sustainable. But Rasmussen’s suggestion that perhaps it had been “naive to believe that this erosion of Hong Kong’s democracy was not inevitable” is cute. I don‘t think that Michael Heseltine, the UK’s trade minister back then, gave democracy in Hong Kong much thought when he had his arguments with  Chris Patten.

What seems to become apparent is a rift within Europe. China, obviously, would love to see an ever-more integrated European Union, provided that such a union would collectively sing the correct tune on Beijing‘s policies, and on Taiwan. In western Europe, bigger countries seem to be less concerned about China‘s – or Russia‘s, for that matter – role in Europe than smaller ones, especially the Netherlands, and Denmark. In eastern Europe, things may evolve differently.

Even if sympathetic with, or loyal to Taiwan, Europe‘s ordinary citizens need to be careful when it comes to utterances like Rasmussen‘s. For decades, China has counted as a huge business opportunity, and western companies were only too happy to throw their technology at it. That was in the interest of investors, but not necessarily in the interest of the European workforce. Now, who exactly is expected to invest in the defense of democracy? There isn’t only a rift between countries – there’s one between income groups, too.

As Rasmussen said, in a globally interdependent world, failure to defend our values in east Asia and beyond will eventually lead to the erosion of those same values at home. But the defense of democracy still starts at home.

If the EU – or single countries of it – want to strengthen Europe’s global military role, I have some words of advice for their  leaders, too. Introduce a meaningful property tax to just that end – one that is going to tax you. Show that you are serious about defending democracy.

____________

Related

Rising aggression against Taiwan, Jan 28, 2017

____________

Thursday, July 4, 2019

Updates: Huawei / Hong Kong / Taiwan

Heading into a few weeks of working at half speed, but while the muse keeps kicking me, I don’t feel like doing long translations yet of, say, the Bulgarian president’s visit to China. But the following two news items – neither of them really new – may remain interesting as summer moves on.

Huawei

Trade conflict between America and China – no blog yet either, but here is a bit of it, by means of a few links.

Huawei advertisement, Bremen Central Station, December 2018

“2019 will be big (thanks to
a 6.21 in display)” – advertisement at
Bremen Central Station

A public warning by the Czech cyber watchdog is met with some heavy-handed PRC diplomacy,

Sinopsis wrote in December, with some more entries on the same subject following during the first half of this year.

Addressing concerns about a “kill switch” that could be added to Germany’s G5 infrastructure if Huawei were involved, the company’s Germany boss Dennis Zuo said in an interview with German daily Handelsblatt on February 20 that such a practice by Huawei would be technically impossible – only single components were supplied by any company.

Asked how Huawei would react if state or party demanded access, and if they actually had “a chance to say no”, Zuo said that Huawei would say no indeed – Huawei was owned by its staff, not by the Chinese state. Asked if they would go to court against the Chinese state, Zuo said that they wouldn’t do that, but “we would refuse [access] in any case” (“wir würden dies auf jeden Fall ablehnen”).

German Data Protection Commissioner Ulrich Kelber, also in an interview with Handelsblatt, pointed out that “the US itself once made sure that backdoor doors were built into Cisco hardware.”

Hong Kong / Taiwan

And Hong Kong’s Chief Executive Carrie Lam, in June, awarded Taiwan a democracy and rule-of-law prize, although a somewhat embittered one:

____________

Updates / Related

2019 HK extradition bill, Wikipedia, acc July 4, 2019

____________

Saturday, June 8, 2019

Once upon a time in America

We pride ourselves on our friendly relations and open borders with our two North American neighbors.

Ronald Reagan, US president, November 9, 1985

Saturday, June 1, 2019

“Trade War”: Doing their Worst, doing their Best

Probably, there would be a (not inevitable yet) moment when nearly everyone realized that the trade conflict between America and China has turned into an economic war. The moment isn’t easy to define in advance. Maybe it’s when China halts its rare-earth exports. But that war would be the first war that might benefit school children’s education as they are running out of smartphones. Can war be war when it makes people smarter?

The Economist, not quite the Great Friend of the Chinese People more recently, tried to sound some more understanding notes than usual last month. Addressing accusations that China had ‘reneged’ on commitments made earlier during the talks, the paper points out that “complicating matters, negotiations have been conducted in English, with the draft agreement […] also in English. As it is translated into Chinese and circulated among more officials, changes are inevitable.”

And Mahathir Mohamad, Malaysia’s prime minister and no Great Friend of the Chinese People either, claims that he doesn’t really care about who’s spying on him or his country: “We have no secrets,” and …

“… let them do their worst.”

Not sure if Malaysian techies would agree. But if they really have no secrets, Mahathir may be right, and Malaysia has nothing to lose, because it has nothing.

For people who still use their 1990-something mobile, Digital Trends offers an instructive overview of what is at stake for Huawei, and the company’s American trade partners and customers.

Not so different from Mahathir, but from a more neutral position,  Singapore’s prime minister Lee Hsien Loong advocates openness, as this approach has benefitted Singapore since ancient times – no, he didn’t really say that.

But he has a clear message to both sides in the conflict, and an explanation as to why Washington’s unilateral approach is no option for Singapore:

Singapore cannot afford to adopt the same point of view. Being small, we are naturally disadvantaged in bilateral negotiations. We need to reform and strengthen multilateral institutions, not cripple or block them. More fundamentally, confining ourselves to a bilateral approach means forgoing win-win opportunities which come from countries working together with more partners. We need to build a broader regional and international architecture of cooperation. When groups of countries deepen their economic cooperation, they will enhance not just their shared prosperity but also their collective security. With more stake in one another’s success, they will have greater incentive to uphold a conducive and peaceful international order. This will benefit many countries big and small.

Huanqiu Shibao comes up with what they see as their country’s head of delegation‘s role at the summit:

After Lee Hsien-Loong had concluded his speech, He Lei asked the first question in the plenum, a two-fold one: firstly, how can China and America set out from the big picture of maintaining regional and global peace, from the great trend of peaceful development, thus properly settling the current contradictions and problems? And the other question: Singapore’s leader advocates that small countries should not take sides while the big countries’ relations are experiencing contradictions. How can, under the current conditions, a constructive conduct be achieved, and taking sides be avoided? Lee Hsien-Long replied to the first question that China and America needed to talk frankly, at the top levels, about the most fundamental problem, i. e. China’s current development, and the outside world’s need to adapt to China’s development. China and other countries all needed to adjust and adapt to this fact. Under this prerequisite, one by one and by discussing the issues as they stand, we will solve problems. Lee Hsien-Loong believes that in this process, China and America would gradually strengthen trust and make progress. As for the second question, Lee Hsien-Loong replied that “we do our best to be friends with both sides, maintaining relations on all fields, but will actively avoid to choose sides and join teams.”
After the banquet, He Lei’s assessment was that Lee Hien-Loong’s speech had been relatively peaceful and reasonable, and he was satisfied with Lee Hsien-Loong’s answers. He Lei said that Sino-Singapore relations had continuously improved in recent years, with continuous high-level exchange, which had established a good basis for a speech as given by Lee Hsien-Loong that evening. This was also a result of China’s continuous expansion of influence. He Lei, who has attended all of the three most recent Shangri-la meetings, has a profound feel for this.
李显龙演讲结束后,针对李显龙的发言,何雷在全场率先提问,包括两个问题:第一个是中美两国在当前如何能够从维护地区和世界和平的大局出发,能够从和平发展的大趋势出发,妥善解决当前存在的矛盾和问题?另一个问题是,在当前大国关系存在矛盾和问题的时候,新加坡领导主张小国不选边站。在当前这种局势下,如何做到积极作为、避免选边站队?对于第一个问题,李显龙表示,中美两国需要在最高层面开放坦率地接触,讨论两国之间最基本的问题,即中国正在发展,而外界需要适应中国的发展。中国和其他国家都需要调整并适应这一事实。在这一前提下,再逐个地、就事论事地讨论并解决问题。李显龙认为,在这一过程中,中美双方能够逐渐增进信任,取得进展。对于第二个问题,李显龙答道,“我们尽自己所能和两边都做朋友,发展并保持各个领域的关系,但主动地避免选边站队。”

____________

Related

Surveillance tycoons, Bloomberg, May 22, 2019
America must strike a balance, Nov 7, 2009

____________
Saturday, March 2, 2019

Belarus, Russia: together, but not THAT together (yet)

The following is a translation of a Guanchazhe newsarticle, published on February 23.

Main Link: Lukashenko: no Merger with Russia at any Time

News bubbled last week that “Belarussian president has agreed to a merger with Russia”. It also caused a former NATO secretary‘s “concern”, who demanded on that occasion that Belarus protect itself against “Russian threats.”

“白俄罗斯总统同意与俄罗斯合并”的消息上周传得沸沸扬扬,还引来了北约前秘书长的“关怀”,借此要求白俄罗斯保护自己免受“俄罗斯威胁”。

Belarussian president Lukashenko personally rebuked the rumor on February 22, stating the importance of national sovereignty and independence. He also said that as president, he would not merge Belarus into another country at any time.

对于这一传言,白俄罗斯总统卢卡申科2月22日亲自辟谣,他重申了国家主权和独立的重要性,并表示作为总统,任何时候都不会将白俄罗斯并入他国。

According to the Belarussian president’s press office on February 22, Lukashenko said on that day, while inspecting the Military Academy of Belarus and having exchanges with the academy’s teachers and students, that “national sovereignty and independence are the most important achievements we have made now. To have become the first president of this sovereign and independent state is something that makes me proud and happy.”

据白俄罗斯总统新闻局22日消息,卢卡申科当天在视察白俄罗斯共和国军事学院并与该学院师生进行交流时表示:“主权和独立是我们当今取得的最重要成就,我为能成为这个主权国家的第一任总统感到骄傲和高兴。”

Concerning speculation abroad that Belarus could merge into Russia, Lukashenko asked back: “What kind of people could allow such things to happen, after having established and lead an independent country? Would you destroy it with your own hands by letting it become part of another country? Poland or Russia? I will never take this road.

对于外界有关白俄罗斯并入俄罗斯的猜测,卢卡申科反问:“什么样的人会在建立和领导独立国家之后,允许这样的事发生?你会亲手去摧毁它,让它成为其他国家的一部分吗?波兰还是俄罗斯?我永远不会走这条路。”

Lukashenko emphasized that he had clear boundaries that he would never cross, among them, as the most important one, that of defending his country’s sovereignty and independence. He appealed not to pay attention to foreign conjectures that Belarus could lose its sovereignty and independence.

卢卡申科强调,自己有明确的不能逾越的界限,其中最重要的界限就是守卫本国的主权与独立。他呼吁,不要去理会外界关于白俄罗斯会失去其主权和独立性的猜测。

However, he said on the same day that “Russia is our important friend. No matter how many contradictions and disputes we may have, we and Russia will always be together.”

不过,他当天也表示:“俄罗斯是我们重要的朋友,无论我们有多少矛盾和争执,我们和俄罗斯永远在一起”。

Before, there had been rumors abroad that “Belarusian president Lukashenko has announced preparations to merge with Russia,” even with people relating that he had said that “tomorrow there can be a merger into Russia, no problem.”

此前,外界曾盛传“白俄罗斯总统卢卡申科宣布准备与俄罗斯合并”一事,甚至有人转述卢卡申科的话说:“明天就可以并入俄罗斯,没问题”。

Guanchazhe online checked on many Russian and Belarusian official media reporting that Lukashenko had not announced a “Belarusian-Russian merger,” but had made a vigorous statement about the two countries’ union (Guanchazhe note: the original word was объединение, meaning union or unification, translated as integration by Russian media.)

观察者网查证多家俄媒与白俄罗斯官方媒体报道,卢卡申科并没有宣布“白俄合并”,而是对两国联合(观察者网注:原文объединение意为联合、统一,俄媒译为一体化)进行了积极表态。

Reacting to the sentence of “merger tomorrow”, TASS quoted Lukashenko’s original words as being “provided that you are prepared, we can have a union tomorrow (объединиться вдвоем), that’s no problem. But are the Russian and Belarusian people well prepared? (но готовы ли вы),” “if well prepared, we will fulfill the will of the people.”

针对那句“明天就合并”,塔斯社援引卢卡申科说法,其实原话是这样,“只要你们准备好,明天我们就可以联合(объединиться вдвоем),这点没有问题,但是白俄罗斯人和俄罗斯人们准备好了吗?(но готовы ли вы)”,“如果准备好了,我们将履行人民的意志。”

According to Belarusian newsagency belta.by reporting, Lukashenko had previously also reiterated that sovereignty was sacred and could not be violated.

据白方官媒白俄罗斯通讯社(belta.by)报道,卢卡申科此前也重申了主权神圣不可侵犯。

Meanwhile, Russian president Vladimir Putin had vaguely commented about “Belarusian-Russian integration”, discussing his opinion about “independence” and saying that “there is no completely independent country in the world. No matter if they are big or small countries, today’s world is interdependent.”

俄罗斯总统普京则对“白俄一体化”进行了模糊表态,他谈到了自己对“独立”的看法,称“世界上不存在完全独立的国家,无论是大国还是小国都是如此,现代世界相互依存。”

On February 22, Lukashenko also mentioned the INF treaty. He said that Russia had not violated the treaty in question, and voiced concern that America could deploy missiles after its withdrawal [from the treaty]. He believed that this could create a very big threat to Belarus. He said that Belarus would need to consider countermeasures.

22日,卢卡申科也谈及了《中导条约》问题,他表示,相信俄方未违反相应条约,并对美国在退约之后可能在欧洲部署导弹表示担忧,认为这将对白俄罗斯造成很大威胁。他表示白俄罗斯需要与俄罗斯共同思考如何采取回应措施。

____________

Related

We are no scroungers, BelTa, March 1, 2019
How the EU lost Ukraine, Der Spiegel, Nov 25, 2013

____________

Monday, February 18, 2019

Sony ICF 2001 – Early Days of Global Digitalization

Among the large variety of receivers currently available, the Sony ICF 2001 is unique. […] suggests the Sony is probably the first portable shortwave receiver designed to overcome the general public reluctance to tune to shortwave and international broadcasts. With the Sony ICF 2001, nearly anyone can call up a distant station, if the frequency is known.

This is how then South African foreign broadcaster Radio RSA reviewed the Sony ICF 2001 at the time.

Sony would certainly agree, as can be seen from the early 1980s artwork on the box: that wasn’t a receiver, it was a technological sunrise, with a glorious new millennium booming into your face.

Sony ICF 2001 packing

Proclamation of a new Era: Sony ICF 2001 packing

While reviewers at Radio RSA apparently admired the receiver’s sophistication, they did see a potential problem:

The convenience of the ICF 2001 is obviously unique, but for the established shortwave hobbyist, the lack of a conventional tuning knob can be a drawback.”

And battery consumption was deemed “a little high” – average battery lifetime was estimated at around ten hours.

Great points in its favor, as seen by the reviewers, was excellent sensitivity, selectivity, automatic gain control, and just the right bandwith (as long as users wouldn’t want to bother about choosing the right bandwith).

A shortwave listener in South Bend, Indiana, listened to the Radio RSA review on March 14, 1982, and recorded it. About 35.5 years later, he posted it online.

It’s a fascinating document to listen to. The review contains a short original soundtrack of the ICF 2001’s performance, and a bit of (feigned, I suppose) political innocence:

But let’s try medium wave and let’s try Channel 702, broadcasting from Bophuthatswana.

Summing up, the reviewers pointed out that the ICF 2001

has several features not found on other portables, namely the six-channel memory.

OK – that was in 1982.

A shortwave radio blogger who bought a Sony ICF 2001 in 2015 highlights the built-in antenna trimmer – a great feature indeed, and one the Sony ICF 2001 D (the Sony ICF 2010’s edition for the German market) was lacking.

Obviously, when the year of 2001 really arrived, the internet had been there for years, and even the world’s most incredible shortwave receiver wouldn’t lure a dog from behind the stove, as a German saying goes.

That said, it might still work on dogs older than forty.

Wednesday, January 2, 2019

2018 Headlines (3) – Tsai Ing-wen’s Presidency after the November Municipal Elections

Radio Taiwan International (RTI) aired interviews with two political scientists on December 21, Lin Chong-pin (林中斌) of Tamkang University and Yu Chin-hsin (or Yu Ching-hsin, 游清鑫?) of National Chengchi University, discuss Taiwan’s November municipal elections and Tsai’s chances to get re-elected as president early in 2021, and the future of Tsai’s mainland policies.

Lin Chong-bin discussing Trump Kim meeting, South China Sea, on July 1, on VoA Haixia Luntan (click picture for video)

Lin Chong-bin discussing Trump Kim meeting, South China Sea,
on July 1, on VoA Haixia Luntan (click picture for video)

Born in 1942, Lin Chong-pin is a rather familiar face in Taiwanese and North American media. According to Wikipedia, he became a geologist around 1970, after studies at National Taiwan University and Bowling Green State University, and started political studies in 1978, at Georgetown University.

He served as an assistant to then US ambassador to the UN, Jeane Kirkpatrick, and returned to Taiwan in 1995. He became a member of the Mainland Affairs Council in 1996, served as an advising member of the National Security Council from 2002, and as deputy defense minister from 2003 to 2004.

The Wiki entry also contains a list of books he authored, in English and in Chinese, and a gist of his views and assessment records of international politics.

%d bloggers like this: