The OHCHR’s “Xinjiang Assessment” causes Beijing a practical Headache

^{Probably one of China’s vocational schools (click picture for source)}
There have probably been few high-ranking UN officers who know better what human-rights violations are, than Michelle Bachelet, the 7th United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, who left office yesterday, after presenting the OHCHR Assessment of human rights concerns in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, People’s Republic of China. And if there were statistics, it could well turn out that many of those who attacked her for being slow  (or worse) in publishing the OHCHR Assessment were close ideological neighbors of those “Chicaco Boys” who had Ms Bachelet – and her mother – tortured in Chile, in 1975.

Every paragraph of the Assessment is worth to be read carefully. It provides information about how China’s “judiciary” and extra-judiciary systems work. China itself has no face to lose anymore, but the report also contains a line that must have been really severely contested between the OHCHR and Beijing, because of the practical effects it may have on Chinese officials:

The information currently available to OHCHR on implementation of the Government’s stated drive against terrorism and “extremism” in XUAR in the period 2017- 2019 and potentially thereafter, also raises concerns from the perspective of international criminal law. The extent of arbitrary and discriminatory detention of members of Uyghur and other predominantly Muslim groups, pursuant to law and policy, in context of restrictions and deprivation more generally of fundamental rights enjoyed individually and collectively, may constitute international crimes, in particular crimes against humanity.

It is unlikely that any criminal “tigers”, i. e. high-ranking officials, will ever be arrested because of human-rights violations in their capacity as Beijing’s henchmen in Xinjiang – but lower-ranking “flies” have always been a different story. To maintain its system of terror and intimidation, Beijing must keep its “flies” assured that they will be protected by the mighty Chinese Communist Party.

That’s how the OHCHR report may provide a glimmer of hope for Uyghurs, and how it may cause a headache for Beijing.

____________

Note

“The Journey never ends”, M. Bachelet, August 31, 2022
“Firmly opposes”, PRC Mission, August 31, 2022

____________

Uighurs yesterday is Han Chinese today

Click picture for tweet

____________

Related

“Uighurs Today is the Han Chinese peoples’ Tomorrow”, August 19, 2018
____________

Press Review: Xi Jinping’s New Year’s Speech comforts the Bereaved

–
Guanchazhe newsitems on home page today (Sunday):

1)	Tianjin is considerate — netizens, inasfar as their comments aren’t removed – praise the municipal authorities, including the Tianjin Municipal Party Committee Propaganda Department, for timely information,
2)	a woman whose brother lost his life in military service (in East Turkestan) got wet eyes when listening to Xi Jinping’s new year’s speech (清澈的爱、只为中国), and
3)	an academic currently in America who believes it’s in the Chinese genes to help each other.

Guanchazhe online, Shanghai, Jan 9, 2022–

____________

Tendencies: Germany’s next China Policy

China didn’t feature prominently in Germany’s 2021 federal election campaign – at least not at the surface.
Somewhat underneath, and not really overreported in the German media, are donations and sponsorships that benefitted the political parties – or one or two of them – in the run-up to the Bundestag elections on September 26.
The picture, according to statista.de (quoting Germany’s federal parliament administration and only recording donations of more than 50,000 Euros):

CDU/CSU (center-right):	3,340,860 Euros
FDP (neoliberal):	2,055,454 Euros
Greens (ecological):	1,790,548 Euros
AFD (right-wing, neoliberal):	100,000 Euros
SPD (social democrats):	50,000 Euros

This is not the full picture, of course. Donations from 10,000 to 50,000 Euros will probably only appear in the political parties’ annual accounts, likely to be published around a year and a half after they happen.
Also, [Update, Oct 8: committed event] “sponsoring” [of party congresses, for example] amounts don’t need to be published in detail – there is no way of knowing who donated, and which amounts.
Still, the above-50,000 statistics give us an idea: the social democrats were considered dead in the water. That, at least, was a general belief into August this year, and that’s as far as the statistics go. Some corporations and lobby organizations may have tried to make up for their negligence when the SPD began to soar in the opinion polls.
Before we get to the China issues, let’s take a look at the 50,000-plus donations in relation to the actual votes for the parties.

Blue: donations >50,000
Red: actual votes
(relations, no numbers)

This doesn’t mean that the SPD wouldn’t like to get donations, and grassroot donations can make a difference too, but it is obvious that the industry didn’t bet on the social democrats and the left party.

China issues in the campaign

Hong Kong’s political activist Ray Wong, now living in German exile, German sinologist David Missal and other activists and human rights groups put a “China elections check” online for those who were interested in the party’s positions concerning China.
They asked each political party represented in Germany’s incumbent federal parliament, the Bundestag, eight questions, and according to the organizers, only the AFD didn’t respond.
That said, the CDU/CSU were “neutral” on seven out of the eight statements.
All eight statements can be considered a demand Missal, Wong and the organizations supporting the project would subscribe to.

The parties’ positions in detail

Statement 1

–

Statement 2

–

Statement 3

–

Statement 4

–

Statement 5

–

Statement 6

–

Statement 7

–

Statement 8

–

Political parties by rates of agreement, neutrality or disagreement with / towards the statements, in descending order (respectively)
Party / party group agrees with the statements (pro)
The Greens		6
SPD		4
FDP		3
The Left		3
CDU/CSU		0
Party neither agrees nor disagrees with the statements (neutral)
CDU/CSU		7
FDP		5
SPD		1
The Left		0
The Greens		0
Party / group doesn’t agree with the statements (opposed)
The Left		5
SPD		3
FDP		0*)
The Greens		2
CDU/CSU		1
________ *) corrected (Oct 8), down from 3

Outlook

At least for now, the CDU/CSU’s chances of heading (or even just joining) a government coalition have deminished, as both the FDP and the Greens are currently moving closer to the SPD, with some unfriendly noise especially from the CSU, the CDU’s Bavarian sister party.
This would mean that exactly the three parties that find most common ground with the Wong/Missal statements would be in government.
The picture would become much friendlier for pro-China lobbyists if the tide turned again,in favor of the CDU/CSU.
The proof of the pudding is the eating, and the industry will almost certainly become more generous with its donations to the Social Democrats, but for those who want to see a government with clear-cut positions on Chinese crimes against human rights, the trend isn’t looking bad.
The CDU/CSU didn’t really care, and documented that publicly.
____________

Related

Germany after the federal elections, Sept 27, 2021
Guanchazhe flatters Austrian Supernova, April 7, 2018
____________

China’s Hate for the Free Flow of Information: Fascism is the absolute Principle

More than fourty years ago, China started policies of reform and opening up. The latter part is often overlooked, but the Chinese authorities had to find new ways to deal with a greater flow of free information, or, as Deng Xiaoping put it, “when you open the window, you can’t stop the flies and mosquitos from coming in, too”.

Despite the ostentatious nonchalance, the party made great efforts to keep the flies out anyway. Really inquisitive international press was only available in international hotels or airports, and shortwave broadcasts from the outside world remained heavily jammed. And to this day, “Uncle Policeman” will take care of the rest of the flies.

Uncensored info, hence harmful
–

Shut up, we don’t care

What the CPC may not have hoped to achieve though was a fairly successful immunization program against flies. They achieved it anyway. This vaccine’s effect is that it makes most Chinese people ignorant – or nearly ignorant – of information deemed undesirable by the party. Around 2008, “Anti-CNN” propaganda rose – at least partly, it seems – from the Chinese grassroots. On the eve of the Beijing Olympic Games, Chinese people appeared to be simply fed up with bad news about Tibet or Xinjiang, no matter if true or not, and any lapse in any overseas picture editorial room was gladly taken as proof that news about uprisings in China’s Tibetan or Turkic colonies were fake news.

But the real sources for the willful ignorance lie deeper. For one, there’s a natural desire of people to be proud of their country, even if there is little reason for that, and that seems to be a particularly strong desire in some East Asian countries.

Then there was an actual source of pride: China’s rising economic and political power, and a series of economic crises in the West. In the minds of many, might made right if only it led to even more might for the motherland.

Not all Chinese nationalists deny that Tibetans or Turkics are going through hell. Rather, they believe that they deserve no better, and that “those guys” had been pampered by their Han rulers for too long.

Obviously, that kind of news isn’t fit to print or be broadcast by China’s “Global Times”, or CCTV. It is enough that people know that their party’s “toughness” on “terrorism” knows no limits, and that resistance is futile.
The latter bit is immportant, too, because Han people, too, have grievances. They must not even dream of getting a verdict in their favor, when the party says “no”. The brutal message from the top is targeting “national minorities” for now, but as Rebiya Kadeer said in 2018, “Uighurs’ today is the Han Chinese peoples’ tomorrow”.

For the more general public inside China – the news has to be more subtle.
While the faces of many of the cadres “interviewed” by CCTV about their “ethnic work” speak volumes, the message itself is that the loving care of the party for the masses earns itself enthusiastic reactions.
The essence of these domestic news: resistance is futile, but then, there’s no reason for resistance, anyway, is there? Our cultural massacres are a beautiful garden.

And for audiences outside China, plain denial is the only possible answer – if that turns out unsuccessful, you can still try to sell the camps in East Turkestan as “vocational schools”.
–

Shut up and join us – you are part of the United Front

What strikes me most is the wide-spread preparedness among overseas Chinese people to take part in Beijing’s disinformation work.
A desire to be proud of the motherland may be one motivation for that, just as it has been among Chinese at home and abroad since 2008.
Intimidation may be another. As Joanna Chiu noted in a recent article for the “Toronto Star”,

Beijing leaders truly feel anyone of Chinese descent is fair game and they have a right to curtail their freedom of speech years or even generations after they settled abroad.

What Joanna Chiu wouldn’t write either, but what has to be said, is that “socialism with Chinese characteristics” isn’t socialism. It’s full-blown fascism.
Let me apply some of Matthew Lyons definition (the link will take you to more paragraphs):

Fascism is a form of extreme right-wing ideology that celebrates the nation or the race as an organic community transcending all other loyalties. It emphasizes a myth of national or racial rebirth after a period of decline or destruction. To this end, fascism calls for a “spiritual revolution” against signs of moral decay such as individualism and materialism, and seeks to purge “alien” forces and groups that threaten the organic community. Fascism tends to celebrate masculinity, youth, mystical unity, and the regenerative power of violence. Often, but not always, it promotes racial superiority doctrines, ethnic persecution, imperialist expansion, and genocide. At the same time, fascists may embrace a form of internationalism based on either racial or ideological solidarity across national boundaries. Usually fascism espouses open male supremacy, though sometimes it may also promote female solidarity and new opportunities for women of the privileged nation or race.

When you encounter people on Twitter who dedicate many hours of their days to support Beijing’s disinformation work, they won’t necessarily be paid by Beijing. To think that to be the only explanation underestimates Beijing’s success in immunizing its underlings against unwelcome information. You aren’t necessarily dealing with troll factory products. You may be dealing with real-life fascists.
–

Shut up – you are doing it, too

To enter discussions beyond a few tweets with them may or may not be worth the trouble. In my view, it can be instructive to debate with them when you are aware that “your” side – the West, Japan, India or what have you – are no foreigners to disinformation either. But you won’t get much out of debates with fascists when you can’t stand justified criticism of racism, injustice or other deficits of the society you belong to (or feel you belong to).

On the other hand, you shouldn’t feel discouraged by such expedient “criticism”. When a reported million of Uyghurs is or was in internment camps, some individual stories that emerge internationally may indeed be fake news. China is “re-educating” its nationalities – Han included – on a massive scale, so obviously, some editor will pick the wrong photo or the wrong person.
What you should be aware of is Beijing’s nihilistic script. “You do it too, so even if we did commit atrocities (which we don’t, it’s all fake news), it would be nothing worth to be reported.”
It’s not the West that is running a massive brainwashing program against its own people, it is China that does so. It isn’t the West that is threatening war on its neighbors; it is China.

And while there are places in the West and elsewhere in the world that are rife with racism and bigotry, those aren’t usually run by the state as they are in China. Even most of the “pro-China” guys you meet on Twitter, whitewashing China’s crimes against human rights, would choose a life as a black person in the U.S., rather than an Uyghur’s life in East Turkestan, if they had to choose.

But they can’t admit that. After “a century of humiliation”, they feel that it is time for some fun. After all, they are consumers, too, and “me, me, me & now” is the absolute principle.

FMPRC Press Release re Taliban visit: “the East Turkestan Islamic Movement is an international terrorist organization”

The following is a translation of a press release by the Chinese foreign ministry. Links within blockquotes added during translation.

Main Link: Wang Yi meets with Abdul Ghani Baradar, person in charge of Afghanistan’s Taliban political committee

On July 28, 2021, State Councillor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi met in Tianjin with Abdul Ghani Baradar, person in charge of Afghanistan’s Taliban political committee, who is on a visit to China with a delegation. People in charge of the Talibans’ religious committee and propaganda committee are travelling with Baradar.

2021年7月28日，国务委员兼外长王毅在天津会见来华访问的阿富汗塔利班政治委员会负责人巴拉达尔一行。阿塔宗教委员会和宣传委员会负责人同行。

Wang Yi said that China is Afghanistan’s biggest neighbor, has always respected Afghanistan’s sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity, has always maintained non-interference in domestic politics, and always pursued a friendly policy to the entire Afghan people. Afghanistan belongs to the Afghan people, Afghanistan’s future and destiny must be in the hands of the Afghan people. America’s and NATO’s hurried withdrawal from Afghanistan actually symbolizes the defeat of America’s Afghanistan policy, and the Afghan people now had a major opportunity to stabilize and develop their own country.

王毅表示，中国是阿富汗最大邻国，始终尊重阿主权独立和领土完整，始终坚持不干涉阿内政，始终奉行面向全体阿富汗人民的友好政策。阿富汗属于阿富汗人民，阿富汗的前途命运应该掌握在阿富汗人民手中。美国和北约从阿仓促撤军，实际上标志着美对阿政策的失败，阿人民有了稳定和发展自己国家的重要机遇。

Wang Yi pointed out that Afghanistan’s Taliban are an influential military and political force in Afghanistan, showing promise to play an important role in the peace, mediation and reconstruction process. It was hoped that the Afghan Taliban would put attach most importance to the national and the people’s interests, hold high the banner of peace talks, establish peace objectives, establish a positive image, and pursue a policy of tolerance. All factions and ethnic groups should unite unanimously, genuinely implement a principle of “Afghans lead, Afghans own”, promote the process of peace and mediation to achieve substantial results, independently establish a broad and tolerant government structure that corresponds Afghanistan’s national conditions.

王毅指出，阿塔是阿富汗举足轻重的军事和政治力量，有望在阿和平和解和重建进程中发挥重要作用。希望阿塔以国家和民族利益为重，高举和谈旗帜，确立和平目标，树立正面形象，奉行包容政策。阿各派别、各民族应团结一致，真正把“阿人主导、阿人所有”原则落到实处，推动阿和平和解进程尽早取得实质成果，自主建立符合阿富汗自身国情、广泛包容的政治架构。

Wang Yi emphasized that the “East Turkestan Islamic Movement” is an international terrorist organization listed by the United Nations security council and an immediate threat to China’s national security and territorial integrity. To crack down on the “East Turkestan Islamic Movement” is a common responsibility of the international community. It was hoped that the Afghan Taliban would draw a firm dividing line between themselves and the “East Turkestan Islamic Movement” and similar organizations, to apply resolute and effective strikes, clear out obstacles for regional security, stability and development cooperation, play a positive role and create favourable conditions.

王毅强调，“东伊运”是被联合国安理会列名的国际恐怖组织，对中国国家安全和领土完整构成直接威胁。打击“东伊运”是国际社会共同责任。希望阿塔同“东伊运”等一切恐怖组织彻底划清界限，予以坚决有效打击，为地区安全稳定及发展合作扫除障碍，发挥积极作用，创造有利条件。

Baradar expressed thanks for the opportunity to visit China. He said that China had always been a good trustworthy friend to the Afghan people, and praised China’s just and positive role in the Afghan peace and mediation process. The Afghan Taliban were sincere in striving for real peace, wanted to work together with all sides in a commitment to the establishment of a broad and tolerant government structure accepted by the entire Afghan people, with a guarantee for human rights and the rights of women and children. Afghanistan would not allow any forces to use Afghan territory to do things that would endanger or harm China. The Afghan Taliban believed that Afghanistan should develop friendly relations with its neighbors and the international community. The Afghan Taliban hoped that China would participate even more in Afghanistan’s peace and reconstruction process, and play a big role in future Afghanistan’s economic development. The Afghan Taliban would also make efforts of their own to create an investment-friendly environment.

巴拉达尔对有机会到访中国表示感谢。表示中国一直是阿富汗人民值得信赖的好朋友，赞赏中方在阿和平和解进程中发挥的公正和积极作用。阿富汗塔利班对争取和实现和平抱有充分诚意，愿与各方一道，致力于在阿建立广泛包容、被全体阿人民接受的政治架构，保障人权和妇女儿童权益。阿塔决不允许任何势力利用阿领土做危害中国的事情。阿塔认为阿富汗应同邻国和国际社会发展友好关系。阿塔希望中方更多参与阿和平重建进程，在未来阿重建和经济发展中发挥更大作用。阿塔也将为营造适宜的投资环境作出自己的努力。

Also on the same day, assistant foreign minister Wu Jianghao held talks with Baradar and his delegation and had in-depth exchanges of ideas about matters of common concern, enhancing understanding and broadening consensus.

同日，外交部部长助理吴江浩同巴拉达尔一行举行会谈，就共同关心的问题深入交换了意见，增进了了解，扩大了共识。

____________

Related

Promising Profits, Febr 19, 2018
Syrian oppositionals visit China, Febr 17, 2012
____________

Sherman-Xie Tianjin Meeting: “The Eyes of the Chinese Common People are Sharp”

The following is a translation of a rant by China’s deputy foreign minister Xie Feng (谢锋), as rendered by a number of Chinese mainstream media (with Shanghai newsportal Guanchazhe apparently as the original source), in a meeting with U.S. deputy secretary of state Wendy Sherman and her delegation in Tianjin on Monday.

The meeting apparently didn’t make it into Monday’s main Chinese telvision newscast, “Xinwen Lianbo”.

Links within blockquotes added during translation. My translation may contain errors, and corrections aind suggestions are welcome.

Main Link: Deputy Foreign Minister Xie Feng’s Tianjin Talks with U.S. Principal Deputy Secretary of State Sherman

(Guanchazhe online news) In the morning of July 26, Chinese vice foreign minister Xie Feng held talks in Tianjin with American deputy secretary of state Wendy Sherman.

（观察者网讯）7月26日上午，中国外交部副部长谢锋同美国国务院常务副国务卿舍曼在天津举行会谈。

According to Weibo @玉渊谭天 news¹⁾, Xie Feng said during the talks with Sherman that Chinese-American relations were currently in deadlock²⁾ facing serious difficulties, the basic cause of which was that some people in America regarded China as an “imaginary enemy”.

据微博@玉渊谭天 消息，谢锋在和舍曼会谈时表示，中美关系目前陷入僵局，面临严重困难，根本原因就是美国一些人把中国当作“假想敌”。

Xie Feng said that for some time, some people on the American side had embellished Sino-American conflicts as so-called “Pearl-Harbor moments” and “Sputnik moments”. Some experts and scholars stated clearly that America is comparing China to second world wartime Japan and the cold-war Soviet Union, wanting to establish China as an imaginary enemy country, to reignite a sense of national purpose by demonizing China, thus deflecting the American people’s discontent with domestic politics, the economy and society, shifting the blame for deep-seated American structural contradictions onto China.

谢锋表示，一段时间以来，美方一些人在渲染中美冲突和美国面临的挑战时提到所谓“珍珠港时刻”和“斯普特尼克时刻”。一些专家学者明言，美方是在把中国比喻成二战时的日本、冷战时的苏联，想通过树立中国这个“假想敌”，重新点燃国家目标感，通过妖魔化中国，转移美民众对国内政治、经济、社会的不满，把美国内深层次结构性矛盾甩锅到中国身上。

Xie Feng pointed out that the entire American government and society were mobilized to comprehensively contain China, as if America’s domestic and external problems could be easily solved and as if America could become great again, and American hegemony continue, if only China’s development was contained. America readily criticized China, and things looked as if without gossiping about China, nothing could be said and done in America. We urge America to change its current, extremely mistaken, thought and its extremely dangerous China policy.

谢锋指出，美全政府全社会动员，全方位遏制中国，似乎只要遏制住中国的发展，美内外难题就能迎刃而解，美国将重新变得伟大，美国治下的霸权就可以延续。美方动辄拿中方说事，好像不扯上中国，都不会说话做事了。我们敦促美方改变当前这种极其错误的思维和极其危险的对华政策。

Xie Feng said that the eyes of the Chinese common people were sharp. America’s “competition, cooperation, confrontation” trichotomy was just America’s smokescreen. The innate character were confrontation and containment, while cooperation was a stop-gap plan of convenience and competition was the discourse trap. When China is needed, cooperation is demanded; when there’s an advantage [on America’s side], there’s decoupling, blockade and sanctions; and in order to contain China, [America] unscrupulously applies conflict and confrontation. If only matters of concern to America should be solved, if only results wanted by America should be reached, if benefits are unilateral and there’s always leeway for extreme measures [for America], how in the world can that be justified?!

谢锋表示，中国老百姓的眼晴是雪亮的。美方的“竞争、合作、对抗”三分法就是遏制打压中国的“障眼法”。对抗遏制是本质，合作是权宜之计，竞争是话语陷阱。有求于中方时就要求合作；在有优势的领域就脱钩断供，封锁制裁；为了遏制中国，不惜冲突对抗。只想解决美方关切的问题，只想得到美方想要的结果，单方面受益，既要坏事做绝，还想好处占尽，天下哪有这样的道理?！

Xie Feng pointed out that America’s so-called protection of the “rules-based international order” was just about packaging its own and a minority of Western countries’ “lineage rules and gang regulations”, to be used to block and suppress other countries. America is turning away from the international community’s accepted international law and international order, damagaging the international system it once participated in building, [then] building a new stove to throw the so-called “rules-based international order” out. Only in order to play shameless games, to usurp and change rules to restrict others, to strive for its own profit, it wants to execute the “law of the jungle” where you either eat or are eaten.

谢锋指出，美方所谓维护“基于规则的国际秩序”，就是想把自己和少数西方国家的“家法帮规”包装成国际规则，用来规锁打压别国。美方抛弃国际社会广泛接受的国际法和国际秩序，破坏自己曾经参与构建的国际体系，另起炉灶抛出所谓“基于规则的国际秩序”，无非是想耍赖，想篡改规则限制别人、谋利自己，是想施行弱肉强食、以大欺小的“丛林法则”。

Xie Feng said that what the world needed most these days was joint cooperation, rising to the challenges from the same boat³⁾. The Chinese people loved peace, actively promoted the building of a new world order of mutual respect, fairness and justice, cooperation and double-win, the building of a community with a shared future for mankind⁴⁾. China wanted to interact mutually with America on an equal footing, seeking common ground while keeping differences. America should change its ways⁵⁾ and choose meeting with China halfway, mutual respect, fair competition, and peaceful coexistence. Healthy and stable Sino-American relations are not only in both sides’ interest but also the international community’s shared expectation.

谢锋表示，当今世界最需要团结合作、同舟共济。中国人民爱好和平，积极推动构建相互尊重、公平正义、合作共赢的新型国际关系，构建人类命运共同体。中方愿与美方平等相待、求同存异。美方应该改弦易辙，选择与中方相向而行，相互尊重，公平竞争，和平共处。一个健康稳定的中美关系不仅符合双方利益，也是国际社会的共同期盼。

Xie Feng said that America should first solve its own human rights problems. From a historical perspective, racism and genocide against native people; seen from reality, 620,000 people died from inactivity in fighting the virus; from a global perspective, putting all military might into wars of aggression, using lies to provoke wars, bringing the world serious disasters. What is America’s advocacy role for democracy and human rights based on?

谢锋表示，美方应该首先解决好自己的人权问题。从历史看，对土著居民搞种族灭绝；从现实看，消极抗疫造成62万美国人死亡；从世界看，长期穷兵黩武，用谎言挑起战争，给世界带来深重灾难。美国凭什么以全球民主人权自居?

Xie Feng said that America wasn’t qualified to wave around and making indiscreet remarks⁶⁾ about democracy and human rights in China. If there was no strong and effective leadership of China’s Communist Party, no strong governing system, no appropriate road of development for China, and if the Chinese common people were denied democracy, freedom and human rights, how would the Chinese people be able to release such huge creativity and productivity? How did China, an enormously large country with more than a billion inhabitants, create the two miracles of rapid economic growth and long-term social stability? How was the Chinese nation able to perform the great leap of standing up, prospering and becoming strong within just 100 years? Western opinion polls show that the Chinese masses’ satisfaction with Chinese government exceeds 90 percent – an amazing rate for any country.

谢锋说，美方没有资格在中方面前指手画脚谈民主人权。如果没有中国共产党坚强有力的领导、没有一套行之有效的政治制度、没有一条适合国情的发展道路，如果老百姓都被剥夺了民主、自由、人权，中国人民怎么能释放出如此巨大的创造力和如此巨大的生产力?中国这么一个十几亿人口的超大规模国家怎么能创造经济快速增长与社会长期稳定两大奇迹?中华民族怎么能在短短的100年间迎来从站起来、富起来到强起来的伟大飞跃?西方民调显示，中国民众对中国政府的满意度超过90%，这在任何一个国家都是惊人的。

Xie Feng said that Chinese culture advocated not to do to others what you don’t want others do to yourself, as it had no hegemonic genes, expansionist moods, or any precedent cases of coercion of any other country. Facing external interference, China had adopted adequate and lawful countermeasures to defend the country’s righteous interests, to protect international fairness and justice, and never ran to other peoples’ doors to pick fights, to reach into other people’s property, let alone occupy other countries’ territory – not even an inch. The patent and intellectual property on coercive diplomacy⁷⁾ is all belonging to the Americans, as America applies sanctions on a grand scale, long-arm jurisdiction and interference in domestic politics. America’s so-called “interaction with other countries from a position of strength” is really just about bullying others based on one’s power, tyrannize others based on one’s power, [with the idea that] might makes right. It is coercive diplomacy through and through.

谢锋表示，中国文化主张己所不欲、勿施于人，从无霸权基因、扩张冲动，从不胁迫任何国家。面对外来干涉，中方采取的是合理合法反制，捍卫的是国家正当权益，维护的是国际公平正义，从未跑到别人门口挑事，从未将手伸进别人家里，更没占领过别国一寸土地。胁迫外交的发明权、专利权、知识产权，都非美国人莫属，是美国大搞单边制裁、长臂管辖、干涉内政。美方所谓“从实力地位出发与别国打交道”，本质就是仗势欺人、恃强凌弱、强权即公理，是彻头彻尾的胁迫外交。

____________

Notes

1)	I’m not familiar with this account, but this way of quoting Xie Feng may intend to carry his message the Chinese public in a less official way than through the Chinese foreign ministry’s website
2)	or, in other translations, in a stalemate
3)	Please see Adam Cathcart’s great comment with classical background – two antagonized parties, condemned to cooperate
4)	More literally translated: a community of common destiny for mankind
5)	Literally translated, this could be mounting a new bowstring (or a string on a musical instrument) and change track”. This is sort of loaded, as the saying has also been used in the context of self-criticism and becoming a new man. The memory of that isn’t really cherished by the common people and doesn’t look like a constructive remonstrance to me.
6)	literally: pointing fingers and drawing feet
7)	more literally: diplomacy that threatens violence

____________

Related

G7, small-circled cliques and factions, May 4, 2021
Anchorage meeting,wise and competent, March 15, 2021

____________

Updates/Related

“Taiwan most important in Tianjin talks”, RTI, July 27, 2021
____________

Wolf Warrior Diplomacy on Vacation, while Party expects Returns on Investment

Twitter can be fun, but would be a waste of time if all the information you can get passes by without some reflection on it. Learning by repetition. Here goes.

China’s recent diplomacy has been referred to as wolf warrior diplomacy (戰狼外交) in recent months – or in fact for years (as Sweden can tell) -, but it has become a much more frequently used term with the COVID-19 crisis.

As Washington and Beijing traded accusations and conspiracy theories about the COVID-19 origins during the first half of 2020, Beijing’s propaganda machine continuously switched gears between angry statements and more or less funny cartoons on “social media” platforms like Twitter, depicting Trump administration officials as dorks or hypocrites. Chinese foreign ministry (FMPRC) spokesman and communications director Zhao Lijian as well as Chinese media outlets like CCTV-English, People’s Daily in English, Xinhua news agency etc. took leading roles in “anti-American” (反美) enunciations.

But wolf warrior diplomacy apparently didn’t lead to results that would have satisfied Beijing after all. On Tuesday (August 4), China’s ambassador to the US, Cui Tiankai, told an NBC anchor and a wider online public that

The normalization of relations between our two countries and the growth of this relationship over the decades has served the interests of both countries and the world very well. It’s quite clear to all of us are still enjoying the positive outcome, the benefit of this growth of relationship. Nobody can really deny this.

Societal differences should provide opportunities for mutual learning, Cui suggested.

Cui himself didn’t have to make a u-turn to emphasize the “positive outcomes” of Sino-US relations – he had never been a wolf warrior diplomat anyway, and Washington wouldn’t have been the place to test these fruits of Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era / Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy anyway. And when he made the essential swipe – there needs to be one in every Chinese representation to Americans these days, to show that the speaker is not afraid of his audience -, he smiled as if he wanted to apologize for what he was saying.

Click picture for video

His boss, foreign minister Wang Yi, didn’t have to turn everything upside down either. But to show that Xi has always been a great supporter of dialogue, he inaugurated a Research Center for the Guiding Role of Xi Jinping’s diplomatic Thought at the FMPRC on July 20.

According to “Radio Free Asia” (apparently not safely verified), fifty-centers have been told to switch their messages from “anti-American” to “double-win” (click picture for details)

Thusly illuminated, foreign minister Wang addressed an online forum of American and Chinese think tanks (including Henry Kissinger and Kevin Rudd, apparently) on July 9, Germany’s foreign minister Heiko Maas in a video conference on July 24 (not without informing his colleague in Berlin that the problems in Chinese-American relations are all created by America), and, most recently, the readers of Communist Party organ “People’s Daily”.

Chances are that US secretary of state Pompeo and his network have struck the right note in communication with Beijing during the past months, and distancing from China could become a bipartisan American policy. However, the Trump administration may not be able to take traditional allies as far along in their cause as they would like to.

Australian foreign minister Marise Payne told a press conference with US secretary of state Michael Pompeo that “we make our own decisions and we use our own language”, and that “the relationship with China is important and we have no intention of injuring it”.

Sydney Morning Herald correspondents wrote on August 1 that Joe Biden, the US Democrats’ presidential nominee, was

expected to be closer to what Australia is trying to do: transition to a multipolar region where Beijing is accommodated but counterbalanced by regional powers including Australia, India, Indonesia, Japan, Vietnam and the US.

At times, Trump and Pompeo’s approach seems to be an attempt to maintain the US as regional hegemon – something Canberra quietly gave up on a few years ago.

[Lowy Institute executive director] Fullilove says in some ways a Biden administration would be tougher on China and may make requests of Australia which are harder to refuse.

The correspondents also pointed out that both Japan and New Zealand, while basically following the US / Australia lines, had kept a rather low profile, thus protecting their trade interests with China.

Germany wasn’t exactly the first country either to throw a gauntlet at Beijing, or to publicly take note of China’s internment policies in East Turkestan, or its breach of international law by imposing its “national security law” on Hong Kong. Berlin’s position was further complicated as Germany’s leadership currently chairs the EU in a rotational arrangement, having to find as much common ground among Beijing-leaning EU member states and more resilient members.

Only when Hong Kong’s government announced a “postponement” of Legislative Council elections by a year, ostensibly because of the special administrative region’s COVID-19 crisis, Germany joined other countries and suspended its extradition treaty with Hong Kong. On August 3, French foreign ministry sharply criticized Beijing’s “national security law”, and halted ratification of its extradition treaty with Hong Kong, which had been in process since 2017.

A few days earlier, and five days after his conversation with Germany’s foreign minister, Wang Yi had been on the phone with his French counterpart Jean-Yves Le Drian,

Austrian public radio ORF‘s China correspondent Josef Dollinger arguably provided one of the more succinct summaries of European policies. Asked on July 29, the morning when the EU governments presented their agreed reaction to Beijing’s Hong Kong policy, if Washington’s chances of isolating Beijing could be successful, he said that conflicts with China could not be painless, and that while

you can ride a tiger gone wild without getting bucked off – difficult as that may be -, you shouldn’t keep shouting “I’ve got him, I’ve got him.”

Man kann zwar auf einem wild gewordenen Tiger reiten, ohne abgeworfen zu werden – auch wenn’s schwierig ist -, aber man sollte dabei nicht ständig rufen, “ich hab’ ihn, ich hab’ ihn”.

In the EU, disappointment about stalling talks on a comprehensive investment treaty with China have likely added to a hardening position.

And while America’s allies have resisted Pompeo’s calls to join them on the warpath, it does appear that China underestimated the impact of its Hong Kong policies, at least in democratic countries.

All the more, Wang Yi himself, too, tries to stick to a script that would paint China as the natural and predetermined victor to emerge from the beginning struggle. Among some double-win promises, he also threatened America with history’s pillar of shame (恥辱柱).

No matter how much, or little, pressure China may feel as a whole, Beijing’s diplomats are having a tough time of it. It is one thing to open a Xi-Jinping shrine at the FMPRC. To deliver on hard issues is another. The leadership and its personality core have significantly raised investment in diplomacy. They will expect more than just damage control in return.

____________

x