China is distorting truth and justice, making history take a different form.
By Chang Se-jeong
They were relatively quiet in June, but boisterous in October.
The Chinese government’s attitude toward the Korean War has changed drastically in less than half a year.
In June, the conscientious non-mainstream historians made an attempt to make a new interpretation of the Korean War and it did not provoke much response from the Chinese government.
In contrast, in October, the Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping uproariously praised the Korean War as “great and just war for safeguarding peace and resisting aggression.”
Beijing’s attitude toward the Korean War has changed as drastically as the temperature in June and October, and its frivolity makes many Koreans puzzled.
No matter what they say, it is considered as universally acknowledged common sense in the international community that North Korea made a surprise invasion of the South on June 25, 1950.
Russian leader Joseph Stalin had approved Kim Il Sung’s war of aggression, and even Russia acknowledges the southward invasion.
The only countries asserting a different theory on how the Korean War had begun are North Korea and China.
And we can exclude North Korea from this discussion since we cannot expect Pyongyang to behave with common sense.
Why does China use praises such as “great” and “just” to describe the tragic war that resulted in millions of deaths when it has vowed to become a responsible member of the international community?
A straightforward reason is China’s own understanding of the Korean War.
China perceives the Korean War as two separate wars, the “War of Joseon” and the “War to Resist America and Aid Korea.”
The War of Joseon is a civil war between South and North Korea.
Therefore, the current history textbook used in China avoids describing which side is responsible for starting the war.
Instead, it simply states, “A civil war broke out in Korea.”
It is a result of the calculation that there would be no gain for China by taking a side with either the South or the North.
China considers that the war of Joseon broke out on June 25 on the 38th parallel line and ended near the Amnok (Yalu) River in North Korea’s defeat.
Meanwhile, China thinks that a new war begun on Oct. 25 in the same year, as the Chinese People’s Volunteer Army crossed the Yalu River.
The Chinese intervention marks the beginning of the War to Resist America and Aid Korea.
Since the battle line started at the Yalu River and ended at the Demarcation Line in July 1953, China argues that the war ended in China’s victory.
Since China thinks that it had defeated the aggressor threatening the Northeast region of China, it advocates the Korean War as just and great.
Such a perspective is contrary to the view many Koreans share.
Koreans think that China deserves to be criticized for intervening in the war at its own discretion without the approval of the rightful owners of the Peninsula.
Looking at the Korean War as two separate wars became a mainstream theory in China several years ago; it is just that Koreans were not aware of it.
It becomes very convenient to China if it divides the Korean War into two.
If the conservatives in Korea condemn China, they would argue that what they called “just” was not the entire Korean War but just the part that belongs to the War to Resist America and Aid Korea.
It will slip through the resistance and criticism from Korea by making the question irrelevant.
Just as the Monkey King in the Chinese epic novel “Journey to the West” transforms into different creatures, China is distorting truth and justice, making history take a different form.
At the bottom of China’s transformation trick is a strong obsession to safeguard its own interests.
However, China might try all sorts of absurd rhetoric and tricks to present the truth in different packaging, yet they won’t be able to change the essence of the tragic war that killed millions.
Frankly, I am worried about the Cheonan incident.
Beijing is trying to see the aspects it wants to look at, and its perspective on the sinking of the Korean naval ship has a close resemblance to China’s perception of the Korean War.
I am concerned how China might transform the Cheonan incident in the future.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Boost for China visionaries
By Alvaro Vargas Llosa
LIU Xiabo's Nobel Prize is bringing attention to the contradiction between China's 21st-century economy and its medieval political environment.
This is not the first time that a closed political system has coexisted with a relatively open economy.
But China is the only one to emerge as a leading capitalist power under dictatorship in a context not defined by the Cold War.
During that period, socialist countries that engaged the West economically tacitly served to validate Western freedoms; right-wing capitalist dictatorships also validated them because they embodied the economic success of free markets, while their political atrocities were offset by the horrors of communism.
The case of China poses a much greater dilemma for the West.
If China is going to define this century, the dominant paradigm might well be a system of one-party rule in which a man such as Liu can be sentenced to 11 years in prison for signing Charter 08, a manifesto calling for human rights, multi-party democracy, freedom of expression and an independent judiciary.
What a perfidious turn of events, after the triumph of Western liberal democracy over communism was supposed to have spelled the "end of history".
But awarding Liu the Nobel Peace Prize, among other gestures, could help strengthen the hand of those inside the communist bureaucracy pushing for reform.
This is what Beijing's reaction to the prize, including declarations of political war against Norway, the arrest of critics and the harassment of Liu's wife seem to indicate.
This looks very much like a sign that the guardians of the status quo are feeling insecure.
In six decades of Chinese communism, the impossible has sometimes happened.
During the Tiananmen crisis in 1989, premier Zhao Ziyang called for democratisation.
He was purged and replaced by Jiang Zemin, but the world was given notice that a titanic ideological split had taken place at the very top of the system.
The more China opens its economy, and the larger the middle class grows, the more intense the pressure for a modern political environment from within will become.
The Chinese leaders know it well -- hence their desperate response to this year's Nobel Peace Prize.
With a little encouragement from outside, today's Chinese visionaries, including the 10,000 people who have already signed Charter 08, will deliver their people from authoritarianism.
LIU Xiabo's Nobel Prize is bringing attention to the contradiction between China's 21st-century economy and its medieval political environment.
This is not the first time that a closed political system has coexisted with a relatively open economy.
But China is the only one to emerge as a leading capitalist power under dictatorship in a context not defined by the Cold War.
During that period, socialist countries that engaged the West economically tacitly served to validate Western freedoms; right-wing capitalist dictatorships also validated them because they embodied the economic success of free markets, while their political atrocities were offset by the horrors of communism.
The case of China poses a much greater dilemma for the West.
If China is going to define this century, the dominant paradigm might well be a system of one-party rule in which a man such as Liu can be sentenced to 11 years in prison for signing Charter 08, a manifesto calling for human rights, multi-party democracy, freedom of expression and an independent judiciary.
What a perfidious turn of events, after the triumph of Western liberal democracy over communism was supposed to have spelled the "end of history".
But awarding Liu the Nobel Peace Prize, among other gestures, could help strengthen the hand of those inside the communist bureaucracy pushing for reform.
This is what Beijing's reaction to the prize, including declarations of political war against Norway, the arrest of critics and the harassment of Liu's wife seem to indicate.
This looks very much like a sign that the guardians of the status quo are feeling insecure.
In six decades of Chinese communism, the impossible has sometimes happened.
During the Tiananmen crisis in 1989, premier Zhao Ziyang called for democratisation.
He was purged and replaced by Jiang Zemin, but the world was given notice that a titanic ideological split had taken place at the very top of the system.
The more China opens its economy, and the larger the middle class grows, the more intense the pressure for a modern political environment from within will become.
The Chinese leaders know it well -- hence their desperate response to this year's Nobel Peace Prize.
With a little encouragement from outside, today's Chinese visionaries, including the 10,000 people who have already signed Charter 08, will deliver their people from authoritarianism.
China-Japan dispute overshadows summit
By Jamil Anderlini in Beijing, Ben Bland in Hanoi and Michiyo Nakamoto in Tokyo
Hillary Clinton’s meeting with 16 heads of state at the east Asia Summit in Vietnam on Saturday was supposed to be a powerful signal of the renewed engagement of the US with the region.
But on her arrival in Hanoi, the US secretary of state found herself in the midst of a flare-up in smouldering Sino-Japanese relations that eclipsed the rest of the summit.
One western diplomat described China’s acrimonious outburst and last-minute cancellation of a formal meeting between the Japanese and Chinese prime ministers as an “ambush” that took Japanese diplomats completely by surprise.
Wen Jiabao, China’s premier, and Naoto Kan, the Japanese prime minister, did get together for a very brief “unofficial meeting” away from the cameras on Saturday.
But that was only after Beijing had sent a strong message by cancelling what would have been the first official meeting between the two leaders since a spat that began in early September when Japan detained a Chinese fishing boat captain in disputed waters.
Delegates to the summit and analysts said Beijing’s anger and resentment appeared to be directed mostly at one man: Seiji Maehara, Japan’s newly appointed foreign minister who is regarded as a China hawk and supporter of closer ties with the US.
Chinese analysts said Beijing had identified Mr Maehara as an obstacle in Sino-Japanese relations and was doing everything it could to undermine him since he stepped down as transport minister to take up his post.
His move came just days after the arrest of the Chinese fishing boat captain in early September.
The captain was later released but not until Sino-Japanese relations had deteriorated to their lowest level in at least five years.
On Saturday an editorial in Wen Wei Bo, a pro-Beijing newspaper in Hong Kong, said it was Mr Maehara who had insisted on the arrest of the Chinese captain and called the minister a troublemaker who should be dismissed for harming Sino-Japanese relations.
“Maehara has a long history of unfriendly words and actions towards China and since the incident his irresponsible comments have not been helpful in repairing relations,” Song Zhiyong, an expert in Sino-Japanese relations at Nankai University, told the Financial Times.
“It’s not up to China to recommend who Japan should appoint as their foreign minister but Maehara must change his attitude if Sino-Japanese relations are to be repaired.”
Japanese media reports have interpreted the weekend’s incidents as a reflection of Beijing’s nervousness about domestic opinion towards Japan.
Anti-Japanese protests have broken out in cities across China and Beijing is loath to show any weakness that could prompt demonstrators to direct their ire at the ruling Communist party.
The trigger for Beijing’s outburst and cancellation of the planned meeting between Mr Wen and Mr Kan appeared to be a Friday morning meeting Mr Maehara held with his Chinese counterpart, Yang Jiechi.
Media reports quoted Mr Maehara afterwards as saying China had agreed to a high-level meeting and to restart talks with Tokyo over disputed gasfields in the east China Sea.
Japanese officials later dismissed suggestions that he had ever made such a claim.
But Hu Zhengyue, an assistant Chinese foreign minister, accused Japan of “ruining the atmosphere” for a planned Wen-Kan summit by making “false statements” about the foreign ministers’ discussions.
Mr Hu also referred to a meeting between Mrs Clinton and Mr Maehara in Hawaii on Thursday, in which the secretary of state restated the US position that it was bound by treaties with Japan to help defend the disputed uninhabited islands at the heart of Sino-Japanese tensions.
“[Japan’s] actions before and during the summits have damaged the atmosphere between the leaders of the two countries,” Mr Hu said.
In contrast to the vitriol directed towards Mr Maehara Chinese state media said Mrs Clinton’s meetings with the Chinese foreign minister in Hanoi on Saturday and with Dai Bingguo, the Communist party official in charge of foreign affairs, were cordial and polite.
Mr Yang, the foreign minister, “urged the US to act cautiously” and “not make any irresponsible remarks” in relation to the Senkaku islets.
His meeting and the one between Ms Clinton and Mr Dai were described in Chinese official accounts as “candid and friendly” and filled with discussions about “dialogue, mutual trust and co-operation”.
Hillary Clinton’s meeting with 16 heads of state at the east Asia Summit in Vietnam on Saturday was supposed to be a powerful signal of the renewed engagement of the US with the region.
But on her arrival in Hanoi, the US secretary of state found herself in the midst of a flare-up in smouldering Sino-Japanese relations that eclipsed the rest of the summit.
One western diplomat described China’s acrimonious outburst and last-minute cancellation of a formal meeting between the Japanese and Chinese prime ministers as an “ambush” that took Japanese diplomats completely by surprise.
Wen Jiabao, China’s premier, and Naoto Kan, the Japanese prime minister, did get together for a very brief “unofficial meeting” away from the cameras on Saturday.
But that was only after Beijing had sent a strong message by cancelling what would have been the first official meeting between the two leaders since a spat that began in early September when Japan detained a Chinese fishing boat captain in disputed waters.
Delegates to the summit and analysts said Beijing’s anger and resentment appeared to be directed mostly at one man: Seiji Maehara, Japan’s newly appointed foreign minister who is regarded as a China hawk and supporter of closer ties with the US.
Chinese analysts said Beijing had identified Mr Maehara as an obstacle in Sino-Japanese relations and was doing everything it could to undermine him since he stepped down as transport minister to take up his post.
His move came just days after the arrest of the Chinese fishing boat captain in early September.
The captain was later released but not until Sino-Japanese relations had deteriorated to their lowest level in at least five years.
On Saturday an editorial in Wen Wei Bo, a pro-Beijing newspaper in Hong Kong, said it was Mr Maehara who had insisted on the arrest of the Chinese captain and called the minister a troublemaker who should be dismissed for harming Sino-Japanese relations.
“Maehara has a long history of unfriendly words and actions towards China and since the incident his irresponsible comments have not been helpful in repairing relations,” Song Zhiyong, an expert in Sino-Japanese relations at Nankai University, told the Financial Times.
“It’s not up to China to recommend who Japan should appoint as their foreign minister but Maehara must change his attitude if Sino-Japanese relations are to be repaired.”
Japanese media reports have interpreted the weekend’s incidents as a reflection of Beijing’s nervousness about domestic opinion towards Japan.
Anti-Japanese protests have broken out in cities across China and Beijing is loath to show any weakness that could prompt demonstrators to direct their ire at the ruling Communist party.
The trigger for Beijing’s outburst and cancellation of the planned meeting between Mr Wen and Mr Kan appeared to be a Friday morning meeting Mr Maehara held with his Chinese counterpart, Yang Jiechi.
Media reports quoted Mr Maehara afterwards as saying China had agreed to a high-level meeting and to restart talks with Tokyo over disputed gasfields in the east China Sea.
Japanese officials later dismissed suggestions that he had ever made such a claim.
But Hu Zhengyue, an assistant Chinese foreign minister, accused Japan of “ruining the atmosphere” for a planned Wen-Kan summit by making “false statements” about the foreign ministers’ discussions.
Mr Hu also referred to a meeting between Mrs Clinton and Mr Maehara in Hawaii on Thursday, in which the secretary of state restated the US position that it was bound by treaties with Japan to help defend the disputed uninhabited islands at the heart of Sino-Japanese tensions.
“[Japan’s] actions before and during the summits have damaged the atmosphere between the leaders of the two countries,” Mr Hu said.
In contrast to the vitriol directed towards Mr Maehara Chinese state media said Mrs Clinton’s meetings with the Chinese foreign minister in Hanoi on Saturday and with Dai Bingguo, the Communist party official in charge of foreign affairs, were cordial and polite.
Mr Yang, the foreign minister, “urged the US to act cautiously” and “not make any irresponsible remarks” in relation to the Senkaku islets.
His meeting and the one between Ms Clinton and Mr Dai were described in Chinese official accounts as “candid and friendly” and filled with discussions about “dialogue, mutual trust and co-operation”.
With wealth comes fat, China finds
Obesity becomes more common as the traditional diet of vegetables and rice is weighted down with meat, oil and sugary snacks. And why ride a bike when you can drive your car?
By Lily Kuo
Tian Ning has been the unglamorous subject of a reality intervention TV show called “Tian Weighs 462 Pounds.” Over six months, he has made progress toward his goal of 220 pounds.
Tian Ning shuffled unsteadily across his room at a weight loss clinic in Beijing, not exactly looking like the picture of health, but triumphant nonetheless.
In six months, Tian has gone from the unglamorous subject of a reality intervention television show called "Tian Weighs 462 Pounds, Beijing's Fattest Man," to a man eagerly approaching his ideal weight of 220.
His meals are monitored and a machine jiggles his midsection for an hour of exercise each day at the Kelikexin International Weight Loss Club.
For a bit of extra exercise, he goes for walks by himself.
"When I get down to [220 pounds], I'll be ready to go home," the 29-year-old Beijing resident said recently. "I can live a normal life."
To Tian, his progress represents a new lease on life — one he hopes will include a job in computer programming and a happy marriage — as long as he can control himself in a city where inexpensive, unhealthy food abounds and exercise is not part of the daily lifestyle.
Throughout China, but especially in cities such as Beijing, Shanghai and Tianjin, the ongoing fight against growing waistlines has developed a few new wrinkles.
Diet fads and weight loss centers are on the rise as the traditional Chinese diet of vegetables and rice in many cases has been expanded, adding meat, oil and plenty of sugary snacks and drinks available at fast food chains and neighborhood shops dotting city corners.
Experts say reasons for the weight gain other than lousy eating habits include poor city planning — the dearth of green space and parks in Chinese cities — and general attitudes toward exercise and leisure.
Bicycling, a key way for many Chinese to remain lean, is out of fashion.
An estimated 200 million Chinese adults are considered overweight and of those about 75 million are heavy enough to be categorized as obese, according to health experts.
While not as severe a problem as in the United States, where estimates place more than 60% of adults as overweight or obese, experts say China increasingly faces a population coping with heart disease, diabetes and other weight-related illnesses.
Drugs, treatment and access to good doctors are expensive and beyond the reach of average Chinese.
The government is spending $125 billion to revamp the health system to cover all Chinese citizens by 2020, but the plan is not expected to cover common diseases associated with weight.
Chen Chunming, who leads research teams at the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, an agency of the Ministry of Health, said government officials have initiated efforts to address the health risks.
"The government understands that if the situation is not controlled it can get serious," Chen said.
"We've already started to pay attention to the issue of obesity and overweight so we're not pessimistic about the future."
In Beijing, the city critics have called China's fattest, the municipal government last year announced a campaign called "Healthy Beijinger: A 10-year Plan to Improve People's Health."
The campaign is aimed at overall health but one of its specific goals is reducing the amount of fat Chinese adults eat each day.
Officials hope to reduce the number of overweight children in high school and primary schools from 17% to 15% by 2018.
The initiative has included sending informational nutrition pamphlets as well as 600,000 tape measures to schools with instructions from the Beijing Municipal Commission of Education that students should measure their parents' as well as their own waistlines and endeavor to lose weight over the Chinese New Year holiday.
For employees of state-owned companies, communist-style group exercise, or "radio calisthenics," were brought back in August and will become mandatory sometime in 2011.
The Beijing Federation of Trade Unions has hired 5,000 instructors to teach employees how to maximize the eight-minute exercise routine.
Higher incomes have meant more people are eating rich, high-caloric diets and following sedentary lifestyles, a scenario that has also translated into a thriving weight loss industry.
The weight loss center that hosted Tian for free, for example, has expanded to 1,000 locations across the country since it opened in 1993.
But the ongoing growth of China's economy — and a quest for the good life — is bound to continue influencing how the population responds to calls for healthy eating and fitness, said Paul French, co-author of the recent book, "Fat China: How Expanding Waistlines are Changing a Nation."
"The idea of going and mucking around in your garden, that's like being a peasant," French said.
"Why would you ride a bicycle when you can drive a car? Luxury is idleness."
By Lily Kuo
Tian Ning has been the unglamorous subject of a reality intervention TV show called “Tian Weighs 462 Pounds.” Over six months, he has made progress toward his goal of 220 pounds.
Tian Ning shuffled unsteadily across his room at a weight loss clinic in Beijing, not exactly looking like the picture of health, but triumphant nonetheless.
In six months, Tian has gone from the unglamorous subject of a reality intervention television show called "Tian Weighs 462 Pounds, Beijing's Fattest Man," to a man eagerly approaching his ideal weight of 220.
His meals are monitored and a machine jiggles his midsection for an hour of exercise each day at the Kelikexin International Weight Loss Club.
For a bit of extra exercise, he goes for walks by himself.
"When I get down to [220 pounds], I'll be ready to go home," the 29-year-old Beijing resident said recently. "I can live a normal life."
To Tian, his progress represents a new lease on life — one he hopes will include a job in computer programming and a happy marriage — as long as he can control himself in a city where inexpensive, unhealthy food abounds and exercise is not part of the daily lifestyle.
Throughout China, but especially in cities such as Beijing, Shanghai and Tianjin, the ongoing fight against growing waistlines has developed a few new wrinkles.
Diet fads and weight loss centers are on the rise as the traditional Chinese diet of vegetables and rice in many cases has been expanded, adding meat, oil and plenty of sugary snacks and drinks available at fast food chains and neighborhood shops dotting city corners.
Experts say reasons for the weight gain other than lousy eating habits include poor city planning — the dearth of green space and parks in Chinese cities — and general attitudes toward exercise and leisure.
Bicycling, a key way for many Chinese to remain lean, is out of fashion.
An estimated 200 million Chinese adults are considered overweight and of those about 75 million are heavy enough to be categorized as obese, according to health experts.
While not as severe a problem as in the United States, where estimates place more than 60% of adults as overweight or obese, experts say China increasingly faces a population coping with heart disease, diabetes and other weight-related illnesses.
Drugs, treatment and access to good doctors are expensive and beyond the reach of average Chinese.
The government is spending $125 billion to revamp the health system to cover all Chinese citizens by 2020, but the plan is not expected to cover common diseases associated with weight.
Chen Chunming, who leads research teams at the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, an agency of the Ministry of Health, said government officials have initiated efforts to address the health risks.
"The government understands that if the situation is not controlled it can get serious," Chen said.
"We've already started to pay attention to the issue of obesity and overweight so we're not pessimistic about the future."
In Beijing, the city critics have called China's fattest, the municipal government last year announced a campaign called "Healthy Beijinger: A 10-year Plan to Improve People's Health."
The campaign is aimed at overall health but one of its specific goals is reducing the amount of fat Chinese adults eat each day.
Officials hope to reduce the number of overweight children in high school and primary schools from 17% to 15% by 2018.
The initiative has included sending informational nutrition pamphlets as well as 600,000 tape measures to schools with instructions from the Beijing Municipal Commission of Education that students should measure their parents' as well as their own waistlines and endeavor to lose weight over the Chinese New Year holiday.
For employees of state-owned companies, communist-style group exercise, or "radio calisthenics," were brought back in August and will become mandatory sometime in 2011.
The Beijing Federation of Trade Unions has hired 5,000 instructors to teach employees how to maximize the eight-minute exercise routine.
Higher incomes have meant more people are eating rich, high-caloric diets and following sedentary lifestyles, a scenario that has also translated into a thriving weight loss industry.
The weight loss center that hosted Tian for free, for example, has expanded to 1,000 locations across the country since it opened in 1993.
But the ongoing growth of China's economy — and a quest for the good life — is bound to continue influencing how the population responds to calls for healthy eating and fitness, said Paul French, co-author of the recent book, "Fat China: How Expanding Waistlines are Changing a Nation."
"The idea of going and mucking around in your garden, that's like being a peasant," French said.
"Why would you ride a bicycle when you can drive a car? Luxury is idleness."
Powerful China is no master of paranoia
By C.W. GUSEWELLE
The world’s most populous nation is governed by a clique of unprincipled and frightened men.
So desperately insecure are China’s masters that the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to one of their subjects is construed as an “attack” by foreign powers and an insult to the Chinese people.
It borders on the ludicrous to suggest that the Norwegian Nobel Committee could further dishonor a Beijing dictatorship that has made the absence of honor its principal rule of governance.
True, the recipient of the prize, Liu Xiaobo, is in prison, serving a term of 11 years.
His offense? Advocating judicial reform and respect for human rights.
Outrageous suggestions indeed!
For good measure, his wife is effectively under house arrest, allowed to venture out only when accompanied by police.
A courageous advocate for political reform, Liu was among the authors of a manifesto titled Charter 08, published in December 2008, on the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The declaration was adopted in 1948 by the United Nations General Assembly on a vote of 48-0, with eight nations abstaining.
China’s was among the “yes” votes — for whatever little that has meant.
Among Charter 08’s demands: election of public officials; an independent judiciary; freedom of association and of assembly, expression and religion; and amendment of the constitution to establish and guarantee those rights.
Never mind that those are entitlements subscribed to — even if sometimes imperfectly enforced — by every other allegedly civilized country on the planet.
Or that some 10,000 people around the world, including many thoughtful individuals — even some prior communist officials inside China — have endorsed the charter.
It was way, way too much for the nervous bosses in Beijing and their judicial flunkies.
They reacted to that demonstration of courage by the people they rule in the only fashion they know — vindictively.
And in denouncing the award of the Nobel as a plot against them by a hostile world, those in the Chinese regime only compound their shame and unwittingly confess their paranoia.
Their power in some matters is very great.
They’ve harnessed the atom. They’ve ventured to the edge of space. They can silence cell phones and block the Internet.
They can lock up their critics and dominate competition in the export of defective goods.
But what it’s clear they cannot do is master their crippling fear of change.
The world’s most populous nation is governed by a clique of unprincipled and frightened men.
So desperately insecure are China’s masters that the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to one of their subjects is construed as an “attack” by foreign powers and an insult to the Chinese people.
It borders on the ludicrous to suggest that the Norwegian Nobel Committee could further dishonor a Beijing dictatorship that has made the absence of honor its principal rule of governance.
True, the recipient of the prize, Liu Xiaobo, is in prison, serving a term of 11 years.
His offense? Advocating judicial reform and respect for human rights.
Outrageous suggestions indeed!
For good measure, his wife is effectively under house arrest, allowed to venture out only when accompanied by police.
A courageous advocate for political reform, Liu was among the authors of a manifesto titled Charter 08, published in December 2008, on the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The declaration was adopted in 1948 by the United Nations General Assembly on a vote of 48-0, with eight nations abstaining.
China’s was among the “yes” votes — for whatever little that has meant.
Among Charter 08’s demands: election of public officials; an independent judiciary; freedom of association and of assembly, expression and religion; and amendment of the constitution to establish and guarantee those rights.
Never mind that those are entitlements subscribed to — even if sometimes imperfectly enforced — by every other allegedly civilized country on the planet.
Or that some 10,000 people around the world, including many thoughtful individuals — even some prior communist officials inside China — have endorsed the charter.
It was way, way too much for the nervous bosses in Beijing and their judicial flunkies.
They reacted to that demonstration of courage by the people they rule in the only fashion they know — vindictively.
And in denouncing the award of the Nobel as a plot against them by a hostile world, those in the Chinese regime only compound their shame and unwittingly confess their paranoia.
Their power in some matters is very great.
They’ve harnessed the atom. They’ve ventured to the edge of space. They can silence cell phones and block the Internet.
They can lock up their critics and dominate competition in the export of defective goods.
But what it’s clear they cannot do is master their crippling fear of change.
Risks linger as China, Japan spar over islets
By James Pomfret and John Ruwitch
HANOI -- Japan and China talk of building a strategic partnership but they can't seem to avoid tactical scraps.
A high-profile breakdown in diplomacy over the question of whether Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao and Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan would meet one-on-one at a regional summit in Hanoi has raised questions about the risks from lingering brinksmanship between Asia's two biggest economies.
After some encouraging steps to repair a rift over Japan's detention of a Chinese fishing boat captain in disputed waters in the East China Sea, possibly rich in oil, natural gas and minerals, ties once again crumbled.
The reasons are not crystal clear.
Assistant Chinese Foreign Minister Hu Zhengyue accused Japan of ruining the atmosphere by "inflaming" the East China Sea issue in collusion with others -- a veiled reference to the United States.
But below the surface, personal grudges, sensitive domestic political considerations and lack of policy coordination are likely to have played a part.
The tension was so awkward that unease spread among Southeast Asian nations at the regional talks, deflecting focus away from other topics like currency pressures, and prompting U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to offer to mediate trilateral talks with Japan and China to cool things down.
In the end, Kan and Wen did have a one-on-one chat, away from the cameras and for only 10 minutes, Japanese officials said.
No mention was made of the meeting by state Chinese media.
"It is very difficult for China and Japan to step down from the summit point of the crisis in September," said Shi Yinhong, international relations expert at Renmin University in Beijing.
PERSONAL VENDETTA?
The row might be Chinese recrimination for the at-times blunt diplomacy of Japan's new 48-year-old foreign minister, Seiji Maehara, Shi said.
Maehara once called the Chinese suspension of high-level official exchanges "extremely hysterical," comments which a Chinese foreign ministry spokesman called deeply shocking.
"In China's eyes, the single biggest obstacle for rapprochement is the Japanese foreign minister," said Shi.
"I think he, personally, plays a very negative role."
China and Japan talk of building a strategic relationship, but the two can get mired in distracting issues such as visits by Japanese leaders to a wartime shrine, and the Senkaku isles.
China is Japan's biggest trading partner with bilateral trade worth $270 billion in 2009.
All this comes as a strengthening China, which suffered a Japanese occupation of parts of the country from 1931 to 1945, flexes its muscles on the world stage, moving further from a stance of non-interference in the affairs of others, partly driven by its voracious appetite for resources.
"China's leaders have realized that maintaining economic growth and political stability on the home front will come not from keeping their heads low, but rather from actively managing events outside China's borders," wrote Elizabeth Economy, director of Asia Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.
China and Japan have long-locked horns over sovereignty claims in the East China Sea, but such disputes have rarely damaged commercial ties.
SMOULDERING EMBERS
The stakes are potentially huge.
A disputed undersea basin could yield 20 million barrels of oil and 17.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, equal to a fifth of China's gas reserves.
While previous rows over the islands have tended to fizzle out, reported curbs of rare earth minerals, crucial for the manufacture of high technology products, have complicated the diplomatic dance, with Japan in particular highly reliant on the metals and eager to not get squeezed.
China produces some 97 percent of global rare earths and has promised not to abuse its virtual monopoly, yet Japan has still scrambled to ease its reliance on China by staking deals with other nations like Vietnam.
Stability-obsessed leaders in Beijing also have domestic considerations to consider, with anti-Japan protests likely to flare-up again at any time.
Some Japanese media have blamed domestic pressures on the Chinese Communist leadership for not compromising with Japan.
"The smoldering embers of the anti-Japanese demonstrations and growing social gaps could well turn into criticism of the (Chinese) government," the Nikkei daily said in a commentary.
"It is also possible that an intensified consciousness of being a major power is giving rise to internal conflict within the Chinese Communist Party over policy."
Many Chinese still harbor deep resentment of Japan's wartime occupation and have pressured Beijing to stand up to Tokyo as a matter of principle.
Territorial disputes resonate in many of China's Southeast Asian neighbors which have overlapping claims in the South China Sea and are unnerved by China's assertiveness and growing navy.
"China is transforming the world as it transforms itself," wrote Economy in her article.
"Never mind notions of a responsible stakeholder; China has become a revolutionary power."
HANOI -- Japan and China talk of building a strategic partnership but they can't seem to avoid tactical scraps.
A high-profile breakdown in diplomacy over the question of whether Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao and Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan would meet one-on-one at a regional summit in Hanoi has raised questions about the risks from lingering brinksmanship between Asia's two biggest economies.
After some encouraging steps to repair a rift over Japan's detention of a Chinese fishing boat captain in disputed waters in the East China Sea, possibly rich in oil, natural gas and minerals, ties once again crumbled.
The reasons are not crystal clear.
Assistant Chinese Foreign Minister Hu Zhengyue accused Japan of ruining the atmosphere by "inflaming" the East China Sea issue in collusion with others -- a veiled reference to the United States.
But below the surface, personal grudges, sensitive domestic political considerations and lack of policy coordination are likely to have played a part.
The tension was so awkward that unease spread among Southeast Asian nations at the regional talks, deflecting focus away from other topics like currency pressures, and prompting U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to offer to mediate trilateral talks with Japan and China to cool things down.
In the end, Kan and Wen did have a one-on-one chat, away from the cameras and for only 10 minutes, Japanese officials said.
No mention was made of the meeting by state Chinese media.
"It is very difficult for China and Japan to step down from the summit point of the crisis in September," said Shi Yinhong, international relations expert at Renmin University in Beijing.
PERSONAL VENDETTA?
The row might be Chinese recrimination for the at-times blunt diplomacy of Japan's new 48-year-old foreign minister, Seiji Maehara, Shi said.
Maehara once called the Chinese suspension of high-level official exchanges "extremely hysterical," comments which a Chinese foreign ministry spokesman called deeply shocking.
"In China's eyes, the single biggest obstacle for rapprochement is the Japanese foreign minister," said Shi.
"I think he, personally, plays a very negative role."
China and Japan talk of building a strategic relationship, but the two can get mired in distracting issues such as visits by Japanese leaders to a wartime shrine, and the Senkaku isles.
China is Japan's biggest trading partner with bilateral trade worth $270 billion in 2009.
All this comes as a strengthening China, which suffered a Japanese occupation of parts of the country from 1931 to 1945, flexes its muscles on the world stage, moving further from a stance of non-interference in the affairs of others, partly driven by its voracious appetite for resources.
"China's leaders have realized that maintaining economic growth and political stability on the home front will come not from keeping their heads low, but rather from actively managing events outside China's borders," wrote Elizabeth Economy, director of Asia Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.
China and Japan have long-locked horns over sovereignty claims in the East China Sea, but such disputes have rarely damaged commercial ties.
SMOULDERING EMBERS
The stakes are potentially huge.
A disputed undersea basin could yield 20 million barrels of oil and 17.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, equal to a fifth of China's gas reserves.
While previous rows over the islands have tended to fizzle out, reported curbs of rare earth minerals, crucial for the manufacture of high technology products, have complicated the diplomatic dance, with Japan in particular highly reliant on the metals and eager to not get squeezed.
China produces some 97 percent of global rare earths and has promised not to abuse its virtual monopoly, yet Japan has still scrambled to ease its reliance on China by staking deals with other nations like Vietnam.
Stability-obsessed leaders in Beijing also have domestic considerations to consider, with anti-Japan protests likely to flare-up again at any time.
Some Japanese media have blamed domestic pressures on the Chinese Communist leadership for not compromising with Japan.
"The smoldering embers of the anti-Japanese demonstrations and growing social gaps could well turn into criticism of the (Chinese) government," the Nikkei daily said in a commentary.
"It is also possible that an intensified consciousness of being a major power is giving rise to internal conflict within the Chinese Communist Party over policy."
Many Chinese still harbor deep resentment of Japan's wartime occupation and have pressured Beijing to stand up to Tokyo as a matter of principle.
Territorial disputes resonate in many of China's Southeast Asian neighbors which have overlapping claims in the South China Sea and are unnerved by China's assertiveness and growing navy.
"China is transforming the world as it transforms itself," wrote Economy in her article.
"Never mind notions of a responsible stakeholder; China has become a revolutionary power."
‘Rebalancing’ China
The New York Times
China’s artificially cheap exports are flooding foreign markets, undercutting industries, threatening the global recovery, and angering many.
Beijing has resisted demands to allow its currency to rise against the dollar.
A new proposal could offer a way out.
The Obama administration, which has been trying to rally pressure on Beijing, is calling on the world’s largest economies to agree to a target for the size of their trade imbalances.
At a meeting of finance ministers of the Group of 20 leading economies, the United States proposed that deficits or surpluses in a country’s current account — the trade balance and some financial transactions — should be brought under 4 percent of G.D.P., by 2015.
This country’s current account deficit amounts to 3 percent of its G.D.P.
Still, a 4 percent target could help reduce the world’s largest imbalances.
China’s surplus is 5 percent of its G.D.P.; Germany’s surplus is 6 percent.
These huge surpluses mean exports from China and Germany are hogging demand in other countries.
As consumer spending falters in deficit countries, including the United States, surplus countries must start buying more of their own, and others’, products.
Some countries balked at the number.
The group agreed in principle, and China has signed on so far.
Focusing on its surplus wouldn’t mean that China’s currency manipulation was off the hook.
To meet the target, it would have to let the renminbi rise to increase its imports and temper export growth.
But the new goal acknowledges that China also has other tools to increase spending at home, improve the lives of its people, and reduce external imbalances.
It could raise wages and deploy some of its mountain of reserves to pay for long-neglected social spending on health care, education and pensions.
A declining Chinese surplus will not close the American current account deficit.
That mainly requires Americans to save more of their income.
The change would increase China’s demand for imports from America and others.
Countries that have cheapened their own currency to protect themselves from China could let their currencies rise and draw more American imports too.
Putting targets on deficits and surpluses might put some nations in a straitjacket.
And there is no enforcement mechanism.
Still, reframing the problem this way might bring China around.
It allows Beijing to claim it is not caving to Washington — and pitch policy changes as a much-needed effort to spend more money, where it belongs, at home.
China’s artificially cheap exports are flooding foreign markets, undercutting industries, threatening the global recovery, and angering many.
Beijing has resisted demands to allow its currency to rise against the dollar.
A new proposal could offer a way out.
The Obama administration, which has been trying to rally pressure on Beijing, is calling on the world’s largest economies to agree to a target for the size of their trade imbalances.
At a meeting of finance ministers of the Group of 20 leading economies, the United States proposed that deficits or surpluses in a country’s current account — the trade balance and some financial transactions — should be brought under 4 percent of G.D.P., by 2015.
This country’s current account deficit amounts to 3 percent of its G.D.P.
Still, a 4 percent target could help reduce the world’s largest imbalances.
China’s surplus is 5 percent of its G.D.P.; Germany’s surplus is 6 percent.
These huge surpluses mean exports from China and Germany are hogging demand in other countries.
As consumer spending falters in deficit countries, including the United States, surplus countries must start buying more of their own, and others’, products.
Some countries balked at the number.
The group agreed in principle, and China has signed on so far.
Focusing on its surplus wouldn’t mean that China’s currency manipulation was off the hook.
To meet the target, it would have to let the renminbi rise to increase its imports and temper export growth.
But the new goal acknowledges that China also has other tools to increase spending at home, improve the lives of its people, and reduce external imbalances.
It could raise wages and deploy some of its mountain of reserves to pay for long-neglected social spending on health care, education and pensions.
A declining Chinese surplus will not close the American current account deficit.
That mainly requires Americans to save more of their income.
The change would increase China’s demand for imports from America and others.
Countries that have cheapened their own currency to protect themselves from China could let their currencies rise and draw more American imports too.
Putting targets on deficits and surpluses might put some nations in a straitjacket.
And there is no enforcement mechanism.
Still, reframing the problem this way might bring China around.
It allows Beijing to claim it is not caving to Washington — and pitch policy changes as a much-needed effort to spend more money, where it belongs, at home.
China rebuff angers govt, ruling parties
Toshimitsu Miyai and Yuko Mukai
HANOI--China's last-minute rejection of a meeting between Prime Minister Naoto Kan and his Chinese counterpart, Wen Jiabao, has renewed anti-China sentiment among the Japanese government and ruling parties.
Soon after China announced its rejection of Kan-Wen talks Friday evening, Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Tetsuro Fukuyama appeared displeased when he was asked by reporters whether the government would renew its request for a summit meeting.
"Are you asking me if Japan will ask [China] to hold [a meeting]? We have no such a plan," Fukuyama said.
In Tokyo, Yukio Edano, deputy secretary general of the Democratic Party of Japan, criticized China.
"It's hard to understand why China rejected a meeting [between Kan and Wen]," he told reporters.
According to a senior Foreign Ministry official, China told Japanese officials Friday evening the meeting could take place at the hotel where Wen was staying, starting at 6:35 p.m.
However, circumstances took a turn for the worse when a foreign news agency reported that the Japanese and Chinese foreign ministers, in talks Friday morning, had agreed to resume talks about joint development of natural gas fields in the East China Sea.
Fukuyama said the report had angered China.
When Japan, China and South Korea held a three-way summit meeting earlier Friday evening in the same hotel, one Japanese Foreign Ministry official told reporters the Japan-China summit meeting would be held soon after.
But another ministry official told reporters the meeting would not be held.
China's sudden change of heart confused Japanese government officials.
Initially, some Japanese government officials believed China was positive about arranging for a bilateral summit meeting to take place in Hanoi.
This belief reflected the fact that China is drawing increasing criticism from the international community over its response to the recent collisions between a Chinese fishing boat and Japan Coast Guard vessels off the Senkaku Islands, as well as the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobo, an imprisoned Chinese pro-democracy activist.
Thus the Japanese side assumed Beijing wanted to mend ties with Japan.
Some in the Foreign Ministry voiced a hard-line stance, saying it was not necessary to hold a summit meeting with China if Japan had to beg for it.
It appears the administration of President Hu Jintao was concerned that anti-Japan rallies in inland regions had not stopped and Beijing fears the demonstrators might turn their criticism against the government.
This, too, may have contributed to China's reluctance to hold a bilateral summit meeting.
Furthermore, Wen had faced growing criticisms in China about his agreement with then Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama over resuming negotiations about a treaty on development of the natural gas fields in the East China Sea at their meeting in May in Tokyo.
Fukuyama attributed China's rejection of talks to the issue of the natural gas fields, but an assistant vice minister of the Chinese Foreign Ministry told reporters it was because of the Senkaku Islands issue.
Beijing seems to have hardened its stance toward Japan because Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara has repeatedly said, "There is no territorial dispute over the Senkaku Islands," and mentioned China's restriction on exports of rare earths.
Another factor behind the rebuff was the fact that Japan has strengthened its collaboration with the United States over strategies toward China.
Diplomatic sources also attributed China's attitude to the fact that videos of the collision of the Senkaku Islands recorded by the JCG were submitted to the Diet.
Aides to Kan said the prime minister voiced irritation before his departure for Hanoi, saying, "Why can't I hold a summit meeting even though I talked with State Councilor Dai Bingguo?"
In many past cases, Japan-China summit meetings on the sidelines of international conferences were scheduled in advance.
But this time, Japanese government officials said the Chinese side did not say anything about bilateral talks even after Wen arrived at his hotel in Hanoi.
A senior Foreign Ministry official said in disgust, "I don't remember anything like this ever happening."
At a press conference Friday, Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshito Sengoku urged China to react more flexibly.
"Though there are cases when tension can't be avoided, isn't it necessary to wisely ease tension in a cool-headed way?" he said.
The latest developments proved it is not easy to improve Japan-China relations.
The refusal to hold the summit meeting will likely affect Hu's visit to Japan in mid-November, which coincides with a summit meeting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in Yokohama.
HANOI--China's last-minute rejection of a meeting between Prime Minister Naoto Kan and his Chinese counterpart, Wen Jiabao, has renewed anti-China sentiment among the Japanese government and ruling parties.
Soon after China announced its rejection of Kan-Wen talks Friday evening, Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Tetsuro Fukuyama appeared displeased when he was asked by reporters whether the government would renew its request for a summit meeting.
"Are you asking me if Japan will ask [China] to hold [a meeting]? We have no such a plan," Fukuyama said.
In Tokyo, Yukio Edano, deputy secretary general of the Democratic Party of Japan, criticized China.
"It's hard to understand why China rejected a meeting [between Kan and Wen]," he told reporters.
According to a senior Foreign Ministry official, China told Japanese officials Friday evening the meeting could take place at the hotel where Wen was staying, starting at 6:35 p.m.
However, circumstances took a turn for the worse when a foreign news agency reported that the Japanese and Chinese foreign ministers, in talks Friday morning, had agreed to resume talks about joint development of natural gas fields in the East China Sea.
Fukuyama said the report had angered China.
When Japan, China and South Korea held a three-way summit meeting earlier Friday evening in the same hotel, one Japanese Foreign Ministry official told reporters the Japan-China summit meeting would be held soon after.
But another ministry official told reporters the meeting would not be held.
China's sudden change of heart confused Japanese government officials.
Initially, some Japanese government officials believed China was positive about arranging for a bilateral summit meeting to take place in Hanoi.
This belief reflected the fact that China is drawing increasing criticism from the international community over its response to the recent collisions between a Chinese fishing boat and Japan Coast Guard vessels off the Senkaku Islands, as well as the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobo, an imprisoned Chinese pro-democracy activist.
Thus the Japanese side assumed Beijing wanted to mend ties with Japan.
Some in the Foreign Ministry voiced a hard-line stance, saying it was not necessary to hold a summit meeting with China if Japan had to beg for it.
It appears the administration of President Hu Jintao was concerned that anti-Japan rallies in inland regions had not stopped and Beijing fears the demonstrators might turn their criticism against the government.
This, too, may have contributed to China's reluctance to hold a bilateral summit meeting.
Furthermore, Wen had faced growing criticisms in China about his agreement with then Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama over resuming negotiations about a treaty on development of the natural gas fields in the East China Sea at their meeting in May in Tokyo.
Fukuyama attributed China's rejection of talks to the issue of the natural gas fields, but an assistant vice minister of the Chinese Foreign Ministry told reporters it was because of the Senkaku Islands issue.
Beijing seems to have hardened its stance toward Japan because Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara has repeatedly said, "There is no territorial dispute over the Senkaku Islands," and mentioned China's restriction on exports of rare earths.
Another factor behind the rebuff was the fact that Japan has strengthened its collaboration with the United States over strategies toward China.
Diplomatic sources also attributed China's attitude to the fact that videos of the collision of the Senkaku Islands recorded by the JCG were submitted to the Diet.
Aides to Kan said the prime minister voiced irritation before his departure for Hanoi, saying, "Why can't I hold a summit meeting even though I talked with State Councilor Dai Bingguo?"
In many past cases, Japan-China summit meetings on the sidelines of international conferences were scheduled in advance.
But this time, Japanese government officials said the Chinese side did not say anything about bilateral talks even after Wen arrived at his hotel in Hanoi.
A senior Foreign Ministry official said in disgust, "I don't remember anything like this ever happening."
At a press conference Friday, Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshito Sengoku urged China to react more flexibly.
"Though there are cases when tension can't be avoided, isn't it necessary to wisely ease tension in a cool-headed way?" he said.
The latest developments proved it is not easy to improve Japan-China relations.
The refusal to hold the summit meeting will likely affect Hu's visit to Japan in mid-November, which coincides with a summit meeting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in Yokohama.
Hearing China's take on Senkakus
By MARK SCHREIBER
The most recent territorial dispute over the Senkaku Islands, located southwest of Okinawa, was triggered on Sept. 7 when a Chinese trawler attempted to ram two Japanese Coast Guard vessels.
The blurry details of the collision were finally made public last week in a video released to the Diet.
Downplaying the incident, Spa! (Oct. 19) ran an article reporting that most Chinese people were comparatively subdued over the Senkaku issue, and noting that Japanese restaurant franchises in Chinese cities were doing "business as usual."
But that Spa! issue went on sale four days before Oct. 16, the day that protests flared up in Chengdu, Sichuan Province, and four other cities.
In Chengdu, store windows and display cases at a branch of the Ito Yokado supermarket were smashed by demonstrators campaigning for a boycott of Japanese goods, and according to other media reports, cars with Japanese nameplates were damaged.
Sunday Mainichi (Nov. 7) reflected one widely voiced viewpoint in the Japanese media that the demonstrators were "letting off steam" because they were forbidden from airing grievances over domestic concerns — such as university graduates' difficulties in finding jobs and the country's growing income disparity — and that Japan was merely being used as a handy scapegoat.
A Chinese commentator named Shi Ping echoed similar views in Friday (Nov. 5).
China-watcher Masaru Soma also pointed out the timing of the demonstrations, which occurred on the weekend just before the Central Committee of the Communist Party convened in Beijing on Oct. 18.
Writing in Shukan Post (Nov. 7), Soma suggested the demonstrations may have been a part of behind-the-scenes moves by supporters of Vice Premier Xi Jinping to gain influence in his push to succeed paramount leader Hu Jintao.
Reportage in the Chinese media about the Senkaku dispute and subsequent demonstrations has been largely downplayed in foreign media, no doubt due to the general view that China's media merely parrots the official party line.
But Chinese correspondents posted in Japan have been issuing a regular stream of coverage, and what they have been writing is quite interesting — particularly, a tabloid named Huanqiu Shibao (Global Times), which is published by the Central Committee organ Renmin Ribao (People's Daily).
On Sept. 21, under the headline "Finding the Achilles' heel of Japan," Global Times editorialized, "It should be apparent by now that China will be forced to endure long-term conflicts with Japan, and emphasizing only friendly relations is not prudent... China needs to be certain of Japan's soft spots for clearly targeted reactions."
"The pain has to be piercing," the piece went on.
"Japanese politicians need to understand the consequences — votes will be lost, and Japanese companies have to be aware of the loss of business involved. Japanese citizens will feel the burden due to the downturn in the economy. China's domestic law, business regulations and consumers can all be maneuvered."
The "Achilles' heel" on which the Chinese media is focusing appears to be Japan's patriots groups.
China has long raised objections over the visits by parliamentarians and Cabinet members to Yasukuni Shrine, but Chinese readers are likely to form the impression that Japan's uyoku dantai (patriots groups) are the prime cause of the current discord between the two nations.
For instance, on Oct. 18, Global Times ran a front-page story titled "Japan needs to halt fanatic nationalistic sentiment."
The piece went on to label the Japanese government's gravitating to political expedients [sic] as "succumbing to the pressure of extremists."
Another newspaper, Cankao Xiaoxi (Reference News, Oct. 8), published by the Xinhua news agency, ran a translation of "A black sun rises in a declining Japan" by Mark MacKinnon, the Beijing bureau chief of Toronto-based Globe and Mail.
The article, originally published in Canada on Oct. 5, examined what MacKinnon viewed as a "tide of rising nationalism" sweeping Japan.
Meanwhile, the Oct. 18 cover story in Renwu Zhoukan, a nationally circulated weekly magazine that somewhat resembles U.S. gossip magazine People, carried a cover story titled "The Shintaro Ishihara you don't know," a 14-page article interviewing and profiling Tokyo Gov. Shintaro Ishihara, who is known for his nationalist sentiments and who frequently ruffles China's feathers through statements in the media.
"Some Chinese, even more educated and sophisticated Chinese, view the possibility of resurgent Japanese nationalism as a legitimate threat," an American working in Shanghai told The Japan Times.
"In his memoirs, former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger touched on how he was able to exploit Chinese fears of resurgent Japanese militarism during negotiations in the early 1970s.
"As a case in point, the Chinese media was all over a recent announcement (reported by Xinhua on Oct. 21) that Japan will increase its submarine fleet by the current 16 to 22 vessels," the executive pointed out.
The pressing question now is whether, and to what extent, Japan will reassess its trade and investments in China.
In a 42-page cover story titled "China Risk," Shukan Diamond (Oct. 30) advises Japanese businesses to contribute to Chinese society by setting down roots in the local community.
But it acknowledges that good corporate citizenship might not be enough: Reforms and marketing open measures aside, the intrinsic nature of China's political dialectic means "anything can happen at any time."
The most recent territorial dispute over the Senkaku Islands, located southwest of Okinawa, was triggered on Sept. 7 when a Chinese trawler attempted to ram two Japanese Coast Guard vessels.
The blurry details of the collision were finally made public last week in a video released to the Diet.
Downplaying the incident, Spa! (Oct. 19) ran an article reporting that most Chinese people were comparatively subdued over the Senkaku issue, and noting that Japanese restaurant franchises in Chinese cities were doing "business as usual."
But that Spa! issue went on sale four days before Oct. 16, the day that protests flared up in Chengdu, Sichuan Province, and four other cities.
In Chengdu, store windows and display cases at a branch of the Ito Yokado supermarket were smashed by demonstrators campaigning for a boycott of Japanese goods, and according to other media reports, cars with Japanese nameplates were damaged.
Sunday Mainichi (Nov. 7) reflected one widely voiced viewpoint in the Japanese media that the demonstrators were "letting off steam" because they were forbidden from airing grievances over domestic concerns — such as university graduates' difficulties in finding jobs and the country's growing income disparity — and that Japan was merely being used as a handy scapegoat.
A Chinese commentator named Shi Ping echoed similar views in Friday (Nov. 5).
China-watcher Masaru Soma also pointed out the timing of the demonstrations, which occurred on the weekend just before the Central Committee of the Communist Party convened in Beijing on Oct. 18.
Writing in Shukan Post (Nov. 7), Soma suggested the demonstrations may have been a part of behind-the-scenes moves by supporters of Vice Premier Xi Jinping to gain influence in his push to succeed paramount leader Hu Jintao.
Reportage in the Chinese media about the Senkaku dispute and subsequent demonstrations has been largely downplayed in foreign media, no doubt due to the general view that China's media merely parrots the official party line.
But Chinese correspondents posted in Japan have been issuing a regular stream of coverage, and what they have been writing is quite interesting — particularly, a tabloid named Huanqiu Shibao (Global Times), which is published by the Central Committee organ Renmin Ribao (People's Daily).
On Sept. 21, under the headline "Finding the Achilles' heel of Japan," Global Times editorialized, "It should be apparent by now that China will be forced to endure long-term conflicts with Japan, and emphasizing only friendly relations is not prudent... China needs to be certain of Japan's soft spots for clearly targeted reactions."
"The pain has to be piercing," the piece went on.
"Japanese politicians need to understand the consequences — votes will be lost, and Japanese companies have to be aware of the loss of business involved. Japanese citizens will feel the burden due to the downturn in the economy. China's domestic law, business regulations and consumers can all be maneuvered."
The "Achilles' heel" on which the Chinese media is focusing appears to be Japan's patriots groups.
China has long raised objections over the visits by parliamentarians and Cabinet members to Yasukuni Shrine, but Chinese readers are likely to form the impression that Japan's uyoku dantai (patriots groups) are the prime cause of the current discord between the two nations.
For instance, on Oct. 18, Global Times ran a front-page story titled "Japan needs to halt fanatic nationalistic sentiment."
The piece went on to label the Japanese government's gravitating to political expedients [sic] as "succumbing to the pressure of extremists."
Another newspaper, Cankao Xiaoxi (Reference News, Oct. 8), published by the Xinhua news agency, ran a translation of "A black sun rises in a declining Japan" by Mark MacKinnon, the Beijing bureau chief of Toronto-based Globe and Mail.
The article, originally published in Canada on Oct. 5, examined what MacKinnon viewed as a "tide of rising nationalism" sweeping Japan.
Meanwhile, the Oct. 18 cover story in Renwu Zhoukan, a nationally circulated weekly magazine that somewhat resembles U.S. gossip magazine People, carried a cover story titled "The Shintaro Ishihara you don't know," a 14-page article interviewing and profiling Tokyo Gov. Shintaro Ishihara, who is known for his nationalist sentiments and who frequently ruffles China's feathers through statements in the media.
"Some Chinese, even more educated and sophisticated Chinese, view the possibility of resurgent Japanese nationalism as a legitimate threat," an American working in Shanghai told The Japan Times.
"In his memoirs, former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger touched on how he was able to exploit Chinese fears of resurgent Japanese militarism during negotiations in the early 1970s.
"As a case in point, the Chinese media was all over a recent announcement (reported by Xinhua on Oct. 21) that Japan will increase its submarine fleet by the current 16 to 22 vessels," the executive pointed out.
The pressing question now is whether, and to what extent, Japan will reassess its trade and investments in China.
In a 42-page cover story titled "China Risk," Shukan Diamond (Oct. 30) advises Japanese businesses to contribute to Chinese society by setting down roots in the local community.
But it acknowledges that good corporate citizenship might not be enough: Reforms and marketing open measures aside, the intrinsic nature of China's political dialectic means "anything can happen at any time."
Saturday, October 30, 2010
China’s Fast Rise Leads Neighbors to Join Forces
By MARK LANDLER, JIM YARDLEY and MICHAEL WINES
Prime Minister Wen Jiabao of China, left, with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India on Friday in Hanoi, Vietnam. India is promoting itself in the region as a counterweight to China.
HANOI, Vietnam — China’s military expansion and assertive trade policies have set off jitters across Asia, prompting many of its neighbors to rekindle old alliances and cultivate new ones to better defend their interests against the rising superpower.
A whirl of deal-making and diplomacy, from Tokyo to New Delhi, is giving the United States an opportunity to reassert itself in a region where its eclipse by China has been viewed as inevitable.
President Obama’s trip to the region this week, his most extensive as president, will take him to the area’s big democracies, India, Indonesia, South Korea and Japan, skirting authoritarian China.
Those countries and other neighbors, though with varying degrees of candor, have taken steps to blunt China’s assertiveness in the region.
Mr. Obama and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India are expected to sign a landmark deal for American military transport aircraft and are discussing the possible sale of jet fighters, which would make the Pentagon a major defense partner of India for the first time.
Japan and India are courting Southeast Asian nations with trade agreements and talk of a “circle of democracy.”
Vietnam has a rapidly warming rapport with its old foe, the United States, in large part because its old friend, China, makes broad territorial claims in the South China Sea.
The deals and alliances are not intended to contain China.
But they suggest a palpable shift in the diplomatic landscape, on vivid display as leaders from 18 countries gathered this weekend in Hanoi’s sleek glass-and-steel convention center, not far from Ho Chi Minh’s mausoleum, for a meeting suffused by tensions between China and its neighbors.
Most Asian countries, even as they argue that China will inevitably replace the United States as the top regional power, have grown concerned at how quickly that shift is occurring, and what China the superpower may look like.
China’s big trading partners are complaining more loudly that it intervenes too aggressively to keep its currency undervalued.
Its recent restrictions on exports of crucial rare earths minerals, first to Japan and then to the United States and Europe, raised the prospect that it may use its dominant positions in some industries as a diplomatic and political weapon.
And its rapid naval expansion, combined with a more strident defense of its claims to disputed territories far off its shores, has persuaded Japan, South Korea, Vietnam and Singapore to reaffirm their enthusiasm for the American security umbrella.
“The most common thing that Asian leaders have said to me in my travels over this last 20 months is, ‘Thank you, we’re so glad that you’re playing an active role in Asia again,’ ” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in Hawaii, opening a seven-country tour of Asia that includes a last-minute stop in China.
Few of China’s neighbors voice their concerns about the country publicly, but analysts and diplomats say they express wariness about the pace of China’s military expansion and the stridency of its trade policies in private.
“Most of these countries have come to us and said, ‘We’re really worried about China,’ ” said Kenneth G. Lieberthal, a China adviser in the administration of President Bill Clinton who is now at the Brookings Institution.
The Obama administration has been quick to capitalize on China’s missteps.
Where officials used to speak of China as the Asian economic giant, they now speak of India and China as twin giants.
And they make clear which one they believe has a closer affinity to the United States.
“India and the United States have never mattered more to each other,” Mrs. Clinton said.
“As the world’s two largest democracies, we are united by common interests and common values.”
As Mr. Obama prepares to visits India in his first stop on his tour of Asian democracies, Mr. Singh, India’s prime minister, will have just returned from his own grand tour — with both of them somewhat conspicuously, if at least partly coincidentally, circling China.
None of this seems likely to lead to a cold war-style standoff.
China is fully integrated into the global economy, and all of its neighbors are eager to deepen their ties with it. China has fought no wars since a border skirmish with Vietnam three decades ago, and it often emphasizes that it has no intention of projecting power through the use of force.
At the same time, fears that China has become more assertive as it has become richer are having real consequences around the region.
India is promoting itself throughout the region as a counterweight to China; Japan is settling a dispute with the United States over a Marine air base; the Vietnamese are negotiating a deal to obtain civilian nuclear technology from the United States; and the Americans, who had largely ignored Asia as they waged wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, see an opportunity to come back in a big way.
In July, for example, Mrs. Clinton reassured Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines and other countries by announcing that the United States would be willing to help resolve disputes between China and its neighbors over a string of strategically-important islands in the South China Sea.
China’s foreign minister, Yang Jiechi, reacted furiously, accusing the United States of plotting against it, according to people briefed on the meeting.
Mr. Yang went on to note that China was a big country, while staring pointedly at the foreign minister of tiny Singapore.
Undaunted, Mrs. Clinton repeated the American pledge on the South China Sea in Hanoi on Saturday.
China’s rise as an authoritarian power has also revived a sense that democracies should stick together.
K. Subrahmanyam, an influential strategic analyst in India, noted that half the world’s people now live in democracies and that of the world’s six biggest powers, only China has not accepted democracy.
“Today the problem is a rising China that is not democratic and is challenging for the No. 1 position in the world,” he said.
Indeed, how to deal with China seems to be an abiding preoccupation of Asia’s leaders these days.
In Japan, Prime Minister Naoto Kan and Mr. Singh discussed China’s booming economy, military expansion and increased assertiveness on territorial disputes.
“Prime Minister Kan was keen to understand how India engages China,” India’s foreign secretary, Nirupama Rao, told the traveling press pool.
“Our prime minister said it requires developing trust, close engagement and a lot of patience.”
Japan has just weathered a fierce war of words with China over its detention of a Chinese captain whose vessel collided with two Japanese patrol boats near the Senkaku islands.
India has watched nervously as China has started building ports in Sri Lanka and Pakistan, extending rail lines toward the border of Nepal, and otherwise seeking to expand its footprint in South Asia.
Mr. Singh’s trip was part of his “Look East” policy, intended to broaden trade between India and the rest of Asia.
He has repeatedly said it is not related to any frictions with China, but China is concerned.
On Thursday, People’s Daily, the Communist Party newspaper, ran an opinion article asking, “Does India’s ‘Look East’ Policy Mean ‘Look to Encircle China’?”
India’s Defense Ministry has sought military contacts with a host of Asian nations while steadily expanding contacts and weapons procurements from the United States.
The United States, American officials said, has conducted more exercises in recent years with India than with any other nation.
Inside China, some analysts say that the strengthening of American alliances around the Pacific rim need not come at the cost of its relationship with the United States.
But they add that it will depend on how the Obama administration presents the strategy to China.
“What we have seen did raise the concern of many Chinese,” said Da Wei, deputy director of the Institute of American Studies at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations.
“When people believe the Obama administration is going to make efforts to contain China, to act against China, this change of perspective could have a negative effect.”
Other analysts say that China has reason to question American motives, given the intense surveillance of China conducted by the United States and the vast American military presence in Asia.
On Friday, Mrs. Clinton stopped at an Air Force base in Guam, where she praised the troops.
“To a lot of Chinese, to P.L.A. people, it’s very hard to understand why the United States moved half its military forces to the Asia-Pacific region,” said Sun Zhe, director of the Center for U.S.-China Relations at Tsinghua University, using the acronym for the Chinese People’s Liberation Army.
“It’s a serious threat and a potential threat.”
Some Chinese analysts say the Western view of Beijing’s aggression has been exaggerated by the news media in the United States, Japan and South Korea.
China’s policies toward its neighbors are basically unchanged, they say.
To the extent that China’s behavior is seen as more menacing, it reflects the insecurity and uncertainty of these smaller countries, they say.
“The Chinese perceived the Hanoi meeting as a gang attack on them,” said Charles Freeman, director of China policy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
“There’s no question that they have miscalculated their own standing in the region.”
Prime Minister Wen Jiabao of China, left, with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India on Friday in Hanoi, Vietnam. India is promoting itself in the region as a counterweight to China.
HANOI, Vietnam — China’s military expansion and assertive trade policies have set off jitters across Asia, prompting many of its neighbors to rekindle old alliances and cultivate new ones to better defend their interests against the rising superpower.
A whirl of deal-making and diplomacy, from Tokyo to New Delhi, is giving the United States an opportunity to reassert itself in a region where its eclipse by China has been viewed as inevitable.
President Obama’s trip to the region this week, his most extensive as president, will take him to the area’s big democracies, India, Indonesia, South Korea and Japan, skirting authoritarian China.
Those countries and other neighbors, though with varying degrees of candor, have taken steps to blunt China’s assertiveness in the region.
Mr. Obama and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India are expected to sign a landmark deal for American military transport aircraft and are discussing the possible sale of jet fighters, which would make the Pentagon a major defense partner of India for the first time.
Japan and India are courting Southeast Asian nations with trade agreements and talk of a “circle of democracy.”
Vietnam has a rapidly warming rapport with its old foe, the United States, in large part because its old friend, China, makes broad territorial claims in the South China Sea.
The deals and alliances are not intended to contain China.
But they suggest a palpable shift in the diplomatic landscape, on vivid display as leaders from 18 countries gathered this weekend in Hanoi’s sleek glass-and-steel convention center, not far from Ho Chi Minh’s mausoleum, for a meeting suffused by tensions between China and its neighbors.
Most Asian countries, even as they argue that China will inevitably replace the United States as the top regional power, have grown concerned at how quickly that shift is occurring, and what China the superpower may look like.
China’s big trading partners are complaining more loudly that it intervenes too aggressively to keep its currency undervalued.
Its recent restrictions on exports of crucial rare earths minerals, first to Japan and then to the United States and Europe, raised the prospect that it may use its dominant positions in some industries as a diplomatic and political weapon.
And its rapid naval expansion, combined with a more strident defense of its claims to disputed territories far off its shores, has persuaded Japan, South Korea, Vietnam and Singapore to reaffirm their enthusiasm for the American security umbrella.
“The most common thing that Asian leaders have said to me in my travels over this last 20 months is, ‘Thank you, we’re so glad that you’re playing an active role in Asia again,’ ” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in Hawaii, opening a seven-country tour of Asia that includes a last-minute stop in China.
Few of China’s neighbors voice their concerns about the country publicly, but analysts and diplomats say they express wariness about the pace of China’s military expansion and the stridency of its trade policies in private.
“Most of these countries have come to us and said, ‘We’re really worried about China,’ ” said Kenneth G. Lieberthal, a China adviser in the administration of President Bill Clinton who is now at the Brookings Institution.
The Obama administration has been quick to capitalize on China’s missteps.
Where officials used to speak of China as the Asian economic giant, they now speak of India and China as twin giants.
And they make clear which one they believe has a closer affinity to the United States.
“India and the United States have never mattered more to each other,” Mrs. Clinton said.
“As the world’s two largest democracies, we are united by common interests and common values.”
As Mr. Obama prepares to visits India in his first stop on his tour of Asian democracies, Mr. Singh, India’s prime minister, will have just returned from his own grand tour — with both of them somewhat conspicuously, if at least partly coincidentally, circling China.
None of this seems likely to lead to a cold war-style standoff.
China is fully integrated into the global economy, and all of its neighbors are eager to deepen their ties with it. China has fought no wars since a border skirmish with Vietnam three decades ago, and it often emphasizes that it has no intention of projecting power through the use of force.
At the same time, fears that China has become more assertive as it has become richer are having real consequences around the region.
India is promoting itself throughout the region as a counterweight to China; Japan is settling a dispute with the United States over a Marine air base; the Vietnamese are negotiating a deal to obtain civilian nuclear technology from the United States; and the Americans, who had largely ignored Asia as they waged wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, see an opportunity to come back in a big way.
In July, for example, Mrs. Clinton reassured Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines and other countries by announcing that the United States would be willing to help resolve disputes between China and its neighbors over a string of strategically-important islands in the South China Sea.
China’s foreign minister, Yang Jiechi, reacted furiously, accusing the United States of plotting against it, according to people briefed on the meeting.
Mr. Yang went on to note that China was a big country, while staring pointedly at the foreign minister of tiny Singapore.
Undaunted, Mrs. Clinton repeated the American pledge on the South China Sea in Hanoi on Saturday.
China’s rise as an authoritarian power has also revived a sense that democracies should stick together.
K. Subrahmanyam, an influential strategic analyst in India, noted that half the world’s people now live in democracies and that of the world’s six biggest powers, only China has not accepted democracy.
“Today the problem is a rising China that is not democratic and is challenging for the No. 1 position in the world,” he said.
Indeed, how to deal with China seems to be an abiding preoccupation of Asia’s leaders these days.
In Japan, Prime Minister Naoto Kan and Mr. Singh discussed China’s booming economy, military expansion and increased assertiveness on territorial disputes.
“Prime Minister Kan was keen to understand how India engages China,” India’s foreign secretary, Nirupama Rao, told the traveling press pool.
“Our prime minister said it requires developing trust, close engagement and a lot of patience.”
Japan has just weathered a fierce war of words with China over its detention of a Chinese captain whose vessel collided with two Japanese patrol boats near the Senkaku islands.
India has watched nervously as China has started building ports in Sri Lanka and Pakistan, extending rail lines toward the border of Nepal, and otherwise seeking to expand its footprint in South Asia.
Mr. Singh’s trip was part of his “Look East” policy, intended to broaden trade between India and the rest of Asia.
He has repeatedly said it is not related to any frictions with China, but China is concerned.
On Thursday, People’s Daily, the Communist Party newspaper, ran an opinion article asking, “Does India’s ‘Look East’ Policy Mean ‘Look to Encircle China’?”
India’s Defense Ministry has sought military contacts with a host of Asian nations while steadily expanding contacts and weapons procurements from the United States.
The United States, American officials said, has conducted more exercises in recent years with India than with any other nation.
Inside China, some analysts say that the strengthening of American alliances around the Pacific rim need not come at the cost of its relationship with the United States.
But they add that it will depend on how the Obama administration presents the strategy to China.
“What we have seen did raise the concern of many Chinese,” said Da Wei, deputy director of the Institute of American Studies at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations.
“When people believe the Obama administration is going to make efforts to contain China, to act against China, this change of perspective could have a negative effect.”
Other analysts say that China has reason to question American motives, given the intense surveillance of China conducted by the United States and the vast American military presence in Asia.
On Friday, Mrs. Clinton stopped at an Air Force base in Guam, where she praised the troops.
“To a lot of Chinese, to P.L.A. people, it’s very hard to understand why the United States moved half its military forces to the Asia-Pacific region,” said Sun Zhe, director of the Center for U.S.-China Relations at Tsinghua University, using the acronym for the Chinese People’s Liberation Army.
“It’s a serious threat and a potential threat.”
Some Chinese analysts say the Western view of Beijing’s aggression has been exaggerated by the news media in the United States, Japan and South Korea.
China’s policies toward its neighbors are basically unchanged, they say.
To the extent that China’s behavior is seen as more menacing, it reflects the insecurity and uncertainty of these smaller countries, they say.
“The Chinese perceived the Hanoi meeting as a gang attack on them,” said Charles Freeman, director of China policy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
“There’s no question that they have miscalculated their own standing in the region.”
Bickering Political Parties Share China as Target
US ties with China might grow more complicated because of election rhetoric on lost jobs
By TOM RAUM
WASHINGTON -- In these angry political times, Democrats and Republicans agree on next to nothing. China is an exception.
Democrats and Republicans are accusing each other of cozying up to Beijing and backing policies that send U.S. jobs and IOUs to the world's second-largest economy.
Hot rhetoric in the closing days of the election has helped to fan protectionism sentiment in the U.S., casting doubt on the fate of free-trade agreements and complicating U.S. dealings with a muscle-flexing China.
This America-first sentiment against a background of continued high unemployment, a snail's pace recovery and heated political attack ads seems likely to carry over to the next Congress, no matter who wins control of the House and Senate in Tuesday's voting.
That anti-trade message is not good news for President Barack Obama as he heads to Asia in early November.
His trip includes a 20-nation summit in South Korea of the world's largest and fastest-growing economies.
That gathering had been seen as an opportunity to ease global trade tensions and to recent flare-ups between the U.S. and China over currency, exchange rates, climate change and security.
Instead, it could end up emphasizing unresolved differences.
In this election season, foreign policy is seldom mentioned, yet China has become a prime economic target.
California Sen. Barbara Boxer upbraids Republican rival Carly Fiorina for sending jobs to "Shanghai instead of San Jose" as Hewlett Packard's former chief executive.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., calls tea-party backed Republican challenger Sharron Angle "a foreign worker's best friend" for supporting tax breaks for "outsourcing to China and India."
Connecticut Democratic Senate candidate Richard Blumenthal slams Republican Linda McMahon, former chief executive of World Wrestling Entertainment, because her company gets its action figure toys from China, not the U.S.
Democrat Lee Fisher of Ohio says his GOP rival for the Senate, Rob Portman, "knows how to grow the economy in China."
Portman was the top trade and budget official for President George W. Bush.
Democrats long have accused the GOP of policies that ship U.S. jobs overseas.
This season, Republicans are returning fire.
In West Virginia, Republican House candidate Elliott "Spike" Maynard aired an ad featuring Asian music and a photo of revolutionary leader Mao Zedong to reproach Democratic Rep. Nick Rahall for backing stimulus legislation that gave tax breaks to companies that bought wind turbines from China.
House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, blamed Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., for a "stimulus that shipped jobs overseas to China instead of creating jobs here at home."
He's expected to replace Pelosi as speaker if Republicans win control of the House.
Republicans generally have supported reducing barriers to free trade; Democrats have been more skeptical, due to opposition from labor unions and environmental groups.
But this year, everything is upended with the retirement or rejection of moderate Republicans, the rising tea party movement and public hostility toward trade in general and China in particular.
The House Republicans' "Pledge to America" doesn't mention free trade.
The House voted 348 to 79 last month to bolster the government's power to slap tariffs on Chinese imports. "Buy American" provisions in legislation are winning by wide bipartisan margins.
Polls suggest many in the U.S. blame China for the continued loss of U.S. jobs, particularly in Rust Belt states. Many also seem troubled that China remains the world's largest holder of U.S. debt and has bounced back so quickly from the global economic crisis.
It raised interest rates last week while most other major economies are keeping them low to keep its economy from overheating.
In a recent NBC-Wall Street Journal poll, 53 percent of those surveyed said free-trade agreements have hurt the U.S.
Among those who identified themselves as tea-party supporters, the proportion was 61 percent.
"Think of it. The ground troops for both parties tea party Republicans and union Democrats believe free trade is bad," suggests Robert Reich, who was labor secretary in the Clinton administration and is now a professor at the University of California, Berkeley.
Alan Tonelson, research fellow at the U.S. Business and Industry Council, which represents small and mid-sized manufacturers, said the jury's still out on how tea-party influence will shape trade decisions.
He notes a split between libertarian-leaning conservatives who may favor ending all government restrictions on trade and those who want to do more to protect home industries.
"The tea party certainly at its grass roots is an economic populist movement. And populist movements tend to take a very dim view of U.S. trade policy," he said.
"Tea party social conservatives are also very worked up about China."
Languishing free-trade pacts with South Korea, Colombia and Panama negotiated during the Bush administration may be casualties of the rise in protectionism sentiment.
Obama has pledged to revive these pacts, saying they're good ways to expand exports and increase American jobs.
But the trade measures have generated little enthusiasm or support on Capitol Hill.
That could be awkward for Obama since South Korea is the host of the Nov. 11-12 Group of 20 summit. Even if the U.S. and South Korea can announce a framework agreement, it's no sure bet in Congress.
The campaign-trail rhetoric against China "makes it a lot more awkward" for Obama to deal in Seoul with both South Korean and Chinese leaders, said Fariborz Ghadar, a senior adviser at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.
But he said he hoped "more reasonable" minds would prevail after the heat of the election dies down.
But Jeffrey Schott, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, says the "bigger problem for Obama is that unemployment still hovers just below 10 percent. And when you have rates of unemployment that high, you are going to see extensive protectionist pressure. It's just the nature of things when people are out of work."
By TOM RAUM
WASHINGTON -- In these angry political times, Democrats and Republicans agree on next to nothing. China is an exception.
Democrats and Republicans are accusing each other of cozying up to Beijing and backing policies that send U.S. jobs and IOUs to the world's second-largest economy.
Hot rhetoric in the closing days of the election has helped to fan protectionism sentiment in the U.S., casting doubt on the fate of free-trade agreements and complicating U.S. dealings with a muscle-flexing China.
This America-first sentiment against a background of continued high unemployment, a snail's pace recovery and heated political attack ads seems likely to carry over to the next Congress, no matter who wins control of the House and Senate in Tuesday's voting.
That anti-trade message is not good news for President Barack Obama as he heads to Asia in early November.
His trip includes a 20-nation summit in South Korea of the world's largest and fastest-growing economies.
That gathering had been seen as an opportunity to ease global trade tensions and to recent flare-ups between the U.S. and China over currency, exchange rates, climate change and security.
Instead, it could end up emphasizing unresolved differences.
In this election season, foreign policy is seldom mentioned, yet China has become a prime economic target.
California Sen. Barbara Boxer upbraids Republican rival Carly Fiorina for sending jobs to "Shanghai instead of San Jose" as Hewlett Packard's former chief executive.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., calls tea-party backed Republican challenger Sharron Angle "a foreign worker's best friend" for supporting tax breaks for "outsourcing to China and India."
Connecticut Democratic Senate candidate Richard Blumenthal slams Republican Linda McMahon, former chief executive of World Wrestling Entertainment, because her company gets its action figure toys from China, not the U.S.
Democrat Lee Fisher of Ohio says his GOP rival for the Senate, Rob Portman, "knows how to grow the economy in China."
Portman was the top trade and budget official for President George W. Bush.
Democrats long have accused the GOP of policies that ship U.S. jobs overseas.
This season, Republicans are returning fire.
In West Virginia, Republican House candidate Elliott "Spike" Maynard aired an ad featuring Asian music and a photo of revolutionary leader Mao Zedong to reproach Democratic Rep. Nick Rahall for backing stimulus legislation that gave tax breaks to companies that bought wind turbines from China.
House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, blamed Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., for a "stimulus that shipped jobs overseas to China instead of creating jobs here at home."
He's expected to replace Pelosi as speaker if Republicans win control of the House.
Republicans generally have supported reducing barriers to free trade; Democrats have been more skeptical, due to opposition from labor unions and environmental groups.
But this year, everything is upended with the retirement or rejection of moderate Republicans, the rising tea party movement and public hostility toward trade in general and China in particular.
The House Republicans' "Pledge to America" doesn't mention free trade.
The House voted 348 to 79 last month to bolster the government's power to slap tariffs on Chinese imports. "Buy American" provisions in legislation are winning by wide bipartisan margins.
Polls suggest many in the U.S. blame China for the continued loss of U.S. jobs, particularly in Rust Belt states. Many also seem troubled that China remains the world's largest holder of U.S. debt and has bounced back so quickly from the global economic crisis.
It raised interest rates last week while most other major economies are keeping them low to keep its economy from overheating.
In a recent NBC-Wall Street Journal poll, 53 percent of those surveyed said free-trade agreements have hurt the U.S.
Among those who identified themselves as tea-party supporters, the proportion was 61 percent.
"Think of it. The ground troops for both parties tea party Republicans and union Democrats believe free trade is bad," suggests Robert Reich, who was labor secretary in the Clinton administration and is now a professor at the University of California, Berkeley.
Alan Tonelson, research fellow at the U.S. Business and Industry Council, which represents small and mid-sized manufacturers, said the jury's still out on how tea-party influence will shape trade decisions.
He notes a split between libertarian-leaning conservatives who may favor ending all government restrictions on trade and those who want to do more to protect home industries.
"The tea party certainly at its grass roots is an economic populist movement. And populist movements tend to take a very dim view of U.S. trade policy," he said.
"Tea party social conservatives are also very worked up about China."
Languishing free-trade pacts with South Korea, Colombia and Panama negotiated during the Bush administration may be casualties of the rise in protectionism sentiment.
Obama has pledged to revive these pacts, saying they're good ways to expand exports and increase American jobs.
But the trade measures have generated little enthusiasm or support on Capitol Hill.
That could be awkward for Obama since South Korea is the host of the Nov. 11-12 Group of 20 summit. Even if the U.S. and South Korea can announce a framework agreement, it's no sure bet in Congress.
The campaign-trail rhetoric against China "makes it a lot more awkward" for Obama to deal in Seoul with both South Korean and Chinese leaders, said Fariborz Ghadar, a senior adviser at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.
But he said he hoped "more reasonable" minds would prevail after the heat of the election dies down.
But Jeffrey Schott, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, says the "bigger problem for Obama is that unemployment still hovers just below 10 percent. And when you have rates of unemployment that high, you are going to see extensive protectionist pressure. It's just the nature of things when people are out of work."
India v China
By David Pilling
Superpower?: The Amazing Race Between China’s Hare and India’s Tortoise, by Raghav Bahl, Portfolio Penguin, RRP£20, 242 pages
For thousands of years, China and India had surprisingly little contact.
Separated along a 3,500km border by the mighty Himalayas, they stared in opposite directions.
These days they tend to be mentioned in the same breath – often to their mutual annoyance – united in the west’s perception by their blistering economic growth and massive populations.
Together they constitute well over one-third of humanity.
Yet mutual ignorance, not to say mistrust, has persisted.
Until 2002, there was not a single direct flight between them.
Even today, with trade skyrocketing, surprisingly few Indian businessmen and academics have been to China. For their part, Chinese technocrats are prone to scoff at any comparison, pointing to India’s shambolic infrastructure and shocking levels of poverty.
Despite this – or perhaps because of it – a mini-cottage industry has sprung up comparing the two development models.
A sub-genre, in which Raghav Bahl’s book belongs, pushes the idea that, although India appears to be far behind, its democratic and legal traditions and its strong entrepreneurial foundation make its model more robust, giving it a chance of overhauling China in the long run.
Bahl’s arguments – steeped in wishful thinking, though not entirely implausible – are not new.
China embraced the market in 1978, gaining a 13-year head start on India.
Its investment-led growth model has paid early and spectacular dividends.
It has grown at nearly 10 per cent a year for 30 years, and its economy is now four times the size of India’s.
But China is vulnerable, argues Bahl.
Its lack of democracy leaves it open to social strife.
If the economy comes off the rails – distinctly possible, he says, given massive overinvestment – the entire system could lurch into crisis.
On the flip side, runs the argument, India has taken much longer to get going.
It could not simply bulldoze its way to modernity like the Chinese since it was constrained by the law, democracy and a market-driven requirement for a return on capital.
But these apparent weaknesses could yet pay dividends.
Democratic shock absorbers have performed admirably in times of want, and will continue to do so as living standards improve.
India is catching up.
This year it will grow at 8.5 per cent, within tantalising reach of China’s double digits.
Furthermore, India’s more chaotic development has produced savvier entrepreneurs with more chance of creating global brands.
Its economy is more balanced than China’s, with consumption playing a bigger role and exports a smaller one.
Best of all, demography will now begin to work in India’s favour.
By 2020 – partly thanks to a one-child policy that Bahl says could never have been imposed in India – China will be in the throes of ageing.
India’s dependency ratio is still declining and 136m people will join the workforce in the next 10 years.
Bahl tries to bring his catch-up theme to life with the fable of the plodding tortoise beating the flashy hare.
But the metaphor is stretched to ridiculous extremes.
Thus Indians’ proficiency in English is rendered: “A confident tortoise, humming a popular English tune rather loudly, breezed past a somewhat disarrayed hare who couldn’t figure out the lyrics of the song.”
Bahl seizes on all that is good about India and all that is bad about China.
There is not much evidence of original research and every indication that he has selectively culled newspaper clippings and brokerage reports to back his premise.
He is not blind to China’s strengths, nor to India’s problems of corruption, poverty and caste-bound social relations, but he tends to gloss these over.
For example, commenting on personal freedoms in India – ranked 41st against China’s ranking at 91, according to a favoured index – he concludes that India is “giving a much better deal to people”.
But that assumes people’s wants and needs can be satisfied with the occasional opportunity to vote and theoretical access to a lumbering legal system.
Indians must, it seems, sup on the country’s noble ideals.
If they want to fill their stomachs, stay healthy or learn to read, they have a statistically better chance of doing so in China, for all its deep inequalities and environmental catastrophes.
For an author who accuses westerners of “just not getting India”, Bahl also too readily trades in China clichés. Equally, his enthusiasm for India sometimes leads him into breathless hyperbole: “Fancy cars, mobile phones and private airlines took to the skies,” he swoons.
Indian flying cars and mobile phones must, indeed, be wondrous to behold.
As the book argues, it is possible – though by no means assured – that India will be growing faster than China within a few years.
But given how far India is behind, it would take decades of vastly superior growth for it to catch up.
“There is only one risk for India, and that’s the lack of confidence that India’s own leaders have in its ability and destiny,” Bahl writes.
But equally risky is Indian complacency, particularly when it still has so much to prove.
Superpower?: The Amazing Race Between China’s Hare and India’s Tortoise, by Raghav Bahl, Portfolio Penguin, RRP£20, 242 pages
For thousands of years, China and India had surprisingly little contact.
Separated along a 3,500km border by the mighty Himalayas, they stared in opposite directions.
These days they tend to be mentioned in the same breath – often to their mutual annoyance – united in the west’s perception by their blistering economic growth and massive populations.
Together they constitute well over one-third of humanity.
Yet mutual ignorance, not to say mistrust, has persisted.
Until 2002, there was not a single direct flight between them.
Even today, with trade skyrocketing, surprisingly few Indian businessmen and academics have been to China. For their part, Chinese technocrats are prone to scoff at any comparison, pointing to India’s shambolic infrastructure and shocking levels of poverty.
Despite this – or perhaps because of it – a mini-cottage industry has sprung up comparing the two development models.
A sub-genre, in which Raghav Bahl’s book belongs, pushes the idea that, although India appears to be far behind, its democratic and legal traditions and its strong entrepreneurial foundation make its model more robust, giving it a chance of overhauling China in the long run.
Bahl’s arguments – steeped in wishful thinking, though not entirely implausible – are not new.
China embraced the market in 1978, gaining a 13-year head start on India.
Its investment-led growth model has paid early and spectacular dividends.
It has grown at nearly 10 per cent a year for 30 years, and its economy is now four times the size of India’s.
But China is vulnerable, argues Bahl.
Its lack of democracy leaves it open to social strife.
If the economy comes off the rails – distinctly possible, he says, given massive overinvestment – the entire system could lurch into crisis.
On the flip side, runs the argument, India has taken much longer to get going.
It could not simply bulldoze its way to modernity like the Chinese since it was constrained by the law, democracy and a market-driven requirement for a return on capital.
But these apparent weaknesses could yet pay dividends.
Democratic shock absorbers have performed admirably in times of want, and will continue to do so as living standards improve.
India is catching up.
This year it will grow at 8.5 per cent, within tantalising reach of China’s double digits.
Furthermore, India’s more chaotic development has produced savvier entrepreneurs with more chance of creating global brands.
Its economy is more balanced than China’s, with consumption playing a bigger role and exports a smaller one.
Best of all, demography will now begin to work in India’s favour.
By 2020 – partly thanks to a one-child policy that Bahl says could never have been imposed in India – China will be in the throes of ageing.
India’s dependency ratio is still declining and 136m people will join the workforce in the next 10 years.
Bahl tries to bring his catch-up theme to life with the fable of the plodding tortoise beating the flashy hare.
But the metaphor is stretched to ridiculous extremes.
Thus Indians’ proficiency in English is rendered: “A confident tortoise, humming a popular English tune rather loudly, breezed past a somewhat disarrayed hare who couldn’t figure out the lyrics of the song.”
Bahl seizes on all that is good about India and all that is bad about China.
There is not much evidence of original research and every indication that he has selectively culled newspaper clippings and brokerage reports to back his premise.
He is not blind to China’s strengths, nor to India’s problems of corruption, poverty and caste-bound social relations, but he tends to gloss these over.
For example, commenting on personal freedoms in India – ranked 41st against China’s ranking at 91, according to a favoured index – he concludes that India is “giving a much better deal to people”.
But that assumes people’s wants and needs can be satisfied with the occasional opportunity to vote and theoretical access to a lumbering legal system.
Indians must, it seems, sup on the country’s noble ideals.
If they want to fill their stomachs, stay healthy or learn to read, they have a statistically better chance of doing so in China, for all its deep inequalities and environmental catastrophes.
For an author who accuses westerners of “just not getting India”, Bahl also too readily trades in China clichés. Equally, his enthusiasm for India sometimes leads him into breathless hyperbole: “Fancy cars, mobile phones and private airlines took to the skies,” he swoons.
Indian flying cars and mobile phones must, indeed, be wondrous to behold.
As the book argues, it is possible – though by no means assured – that India will be growing faster than China within a few years.
But given how far India is behind, it would take decades of vastly superior growth for it to catch up.
“There is only one risk for India, and that’s the lack of confidence that India’s own leaders have in its ability and destiny,” Bahl writes.
But equally risky is Indian complacency, particularly when it still has so much to prove.
Security Concerns Over China Stretch to ZTE
By SPENCER E. ANTE and SHAYNDI RAICE
U.S. security concerns about Chinese telecommunications suppliers don't stop with Huawei Technologies Co., which has so far taken much of the heat.
Some U.S. officials have accused smaller peer ZTE Corp. of being a security threat as well.
Four lawmakers sent a letter Oct. 19 urging the Federal Communications Commission to take a closer look at ZTE and Huawei, and to consider restrictions that would make it harder for them to do business in the U.S.
ZTE, hardly a household name, is now the world's sixth-largest seller of telecom gear, according to research firm IDC, and a frequent bidder for U.S. telecom work.
It was founded in 1985 by a group of Chinese state-owned companies, which still hold a 17% ownership stake.
But executives from ZTE's U.S. arm say their company isn't a security threat, and they are taking a series of measures designed to allay the fears of U.S. officials.
ZTE executives say they plan to set up a U.S. manufacturing facility within the next year or two, let third parties audit the company's hardware and software, and are willing to share the company's software code with U.S. officials.
ZTE said Friday it has taken an initial step toward receiving the validation required for federal civilian agencies seeking to use the company's technology.
To press its case, ZTE has also been meeting with Senate staffers and officials with the Departments of Treasury, Justice and Defense.
"We feel that we are unfairly criticized," said Lixin Cheng, president of ZTE's North American business.
"My biggest challenge in this marketplace is to make sure people understand who we are."
Mr. Cheng is a Chinese-born engineer who moved to the U.S. in 2001 to work for a unit of Ericsson.
He joined ZTE in June.
The Oct. 19 letter—signed by Sens. Joseph Lieberman, Susan Collins and Jon Kyl, and Rep. Sue Myrick—was sent to the FCC just weeks before Sprint Nextel Corp. is expected to choose suppliers for a multibillion-dollar network upgrade.
Huawei and ZTE were among six vendors bidding for the work.
The letter says Chinese telecom-gear makers are subject to "significant influence by the Chinese military which creates an opportunity for manipulation of switches, routers, or software embedded in American telecommunications network so that communications can be disrupted, intercepted, tampered with, or purposely misrouted."
In August, ZTE hired Bruce Reisenauer, a former executive with AT&T Wireless, to run a new subsidiary created to manage security issues with U.S. communications providers.
To help set up the unit and advise on regulatory and security matters, ZTE USA has retained law firm Bingham McCutchen LLP.
"There is a little bit of treating all Chinese enterprises with a broad brush stroke," said Mr. Reisenauer.
"The story is a bit more nuanced than that."
ZTE executives point to several differences with Huawei.
Unlike Huawei, ZTE is a publicly traded company.
It has been listed on the Hong Kong stock exchange since 2004.
In addition, ZTE officials say there are no military officials on its board or in senior management.
Huawei's chief executive, Ren Zhengfei, as well as its chairwoman, Sun Ya-Fund, are former officers in China's army.
ZTE was founded in 1985 by a state-owned companies affiliated with the Ministry of Aerospace Industry and got its start selling telecom gear to China's phone companies.
Today, those state-owned enterprises still own nearly 17% of the company, though the government has been paring down its stake.
ZTE also enjoys government subsidies and preferable tax rates, Mr. Cheng said.
ZTE isn't as large as Huawei, but it is growing faster.
In 2009, Huawei's revenue increased 19% to $21.8 billion, while ZTE's revenue rose 36% to around $9 billion.
"It's time to take notice of ZTE," said Godfrey Chua, an analyst with IDC, "because they are rising."
The company has gained traction by focusing on developing markets in Southeast Asia, the Middle East and Africa.
Like Huawei, it offers prices that can be a third to a half lower than its rivals.
Now, both ZTE and Huawei are making a big push in the U.S.
ZTE sells unbranded cellphones to Verizon Wireless and smaller operators Leap Wireless International Inc. and MetroPCS Communications Inc.
It also sells wireless networking gear to Aircell, which provides Internet service in airplanes, and Commnet Wireless, a wholesale wireless operator.
ZTE still faces considerable skepticism in Washington.
The company's partial government ownership is a concern.
Also, the company like Huawei hasn't been able to dispel suspicion about ties to the Chinese military.
U.S. security concerns about Chinese telecommunications suppliers don't stop with Huawei Technologies Co., which has so far taken much of the heat.
Some U.S. officials have accused smaller peer ZTE Corp. of being a security threat as well.
Four lawmakers sent a letter Oct. 19 urging the Federal Communications Commission to take a closer look at ZTE and Huawei, and to consider restrictions that would make it harder for them to do business in the U.S.
ZTE, hardly a household name, is now the world's sixth-largest seller of telecom gear, according to research firm IDC, and a frequent bidder for U.S. telecom work.
It was founded in 1985 by a group of Chinese state-owned companies, which still hold a 17% ownership stake.
But executives from ZTE's U.S. arm say their company isn't a security threat, and they are taking a series of measures designed to allay the fears of U.S. officials.
ZTE executives say they plan to set up a U.S. manufacturing facility within the next year or two, let third parties audit the company's hardware and software, and are willing to share the company's software code with U.S. officials.
ZTE said Friday it has taken an initial step toward receiving the validation required for federal civilian agencies seeking to use the company's technology.
To press its case, ZTE has also been meeting with Senate staffers and officials with the Departments of Treasury, Justice and Defense.
"We feel that we are unfairly criticized," said Lixin Cheng, president of ZTE's North American business.
"My biggest challenge in this marketplace is to make sure people understand who we are."
Mr. Cheng is a Chinese-born engineer who moved to the U.S. in 2001 to work for a unit of Ericsson.
He joined ZTE in June.
The Oct. 19 letter—signed by Sens. Joseph Lieberman, Susan Collins and Jon Kyl, and Rep. Sue Myrick—was sent to the FCC just weeks before Sprint Nextel Corp. is expected to choose suppliers for a multibillion-dollar network upgrade.
Huawei and ZTE were among six vendors bidding for the work.
The letter says Chinese telecom-gear makers are subject to "significant influence by the Chinese military which creates an opportunity for manipulation of switches, routers, or software embedded in American telecommunications network so that communications can be disrupted, intercepted, tampered with, or purposely misrouted."
In August, ZTE hired Bruce Reisenauer, a former executive with AT&T Wireless, to run a new subsidiary created to manage security issues with U.S. communications providers.
To help set up the unit and advise on regulatory and security matters, ZTE USA has retained law firm Bingham McCutchen LLP.
"There is a little bit of treating all Chinese enterprises with a broad brush stroke," said Mr. Reisenauer.
"The story is a bit more nuanced than that."
ZTE executives point to several differences with Huawei.
Unlike Huawei, ZTE is a publicly traded company.
It has been listed on the Hong Kong stock exchange since 2004.
In addition, ZTE officials say there are no military officials on its board or in senior management.
Huawei's chief executive, Ren Zhengfei, as well as its chairwoman, Sun Ya-Fund, are former officers in China's army.
ZTE was founded in 1985 by a state-owned companies affiliated with the Ministry of Aerospace Industry and got its start selling telecom gear to China's phone companies.
Today, those state-owned enterprises still own nearly 17% of the company, though the government has been paring down its stake.
ZTE also enjoys government subsidies and preferable tax rates, Mr. Cheng said.
ZTE isn't as large as Huawei, but it is growing faster.
In 2009, Huawei's revenue increased 19% to $21.8 billion, while ZTE's revenue rose 36% to around $9 billion.
"It's time to take notice of ZTE," said Godfrey Chua, an analyst with IDC, "because they are rising."
The company has gained traction by focusing on developing markets in Southeast Asia, the Middle East and Africa.
Like Huawei, it offers prices that can be a third to a half lower than its rivals.
Now, both ZTE and Huawei are making a big push in the U.S.
ZTE sells unbranded cellphones to Verizon Wireless and smaller operators Leap Wireless International Inc. and MetroPCS Communications Inc.
It also sells wireless networking gear to Aircell, which provides Internet service in airplanes, and Commnet Wireless, a wholesale wireless operator.
ZTE still faces considerable skepticism in Washington.
The company's partial government ownership is a concern.
Also, the company like Huawei hasn't been able to dispel suspicion about ties to the Chinese military.
After China’s Rare Earth Embargo, a New Calculus
By KEITH BRADSHER
This lake outside of Baotou, China, contains sludge laced with toxic chemical compounds from rare earth processing.
In Baotou, a smoggy city in China’s Inner Mongolia, the air this week has an acrid, faintly metallic taste. Half of the global supply of rare earths comes from the hills north of the town.
BAOTOU, China — When Japanese mineral traders learned in late September that China was blocking shipments of a vital commodity, the word came not from a government announcement but from dock workers in Shanghai.
And on Thursday, the traders began hearing that the unannounced embargo of so-called rare earth minerals was ending — again, not from any Chinese government communiqué, but though back-channel word from their distributors.
Throughout the five weeks of the embargo, even when China expanded the rare earth shipping halt to include the United States and Europe, Beijing denied there was a ban.
Whatever it was called, a shipping suspension that started amid China’s diplomatic dispute with Japan over a wayward fishing trawler escalated into a broader international trade issue.
The episode alarmed companies around the world that depend on rare earths, minerals that help make a wide range of high-tech products, including smartphones and smart bombs.
China currently controls almost all of the world’s supply of rare earths, for which demand is soaring.
To many outsiders, the undeclared embargo looked like a pure power play — a sign China would wield its growing economic might and apply its chokehold on an important industrial resource with little regard for the conventions of international trade.
The export quotas China continues to impose on rare earths, even when it does let ships leave the docks, are restricting global supplies and causing world market prices to soar far beyond what Chinese companies pay.
From the Chinese perspective, though, the issue looks very different.
China feels entitled to call the shots because of a brutally simple environmental reckoning: It currently controls most of the globe’s rare earths supply not just because of geologic good fortune, although there is some of that, but because the country has been willing to do dirty, toxic and often radioactive work that the rest of the world has long shunned.
Despite producing 95 percent of the world’s rare earths, China has only 37 percent of the world’s proven reserves.
Sizable deposits are known to exist in the United States, Canada, Australia, India and Brazil, among other places.
Many of those countries, responding to the rising demand for rare earths and alarmed by the recent embargo, are now scrambling to develop new mines or renovate ones long considered not to be worth the effort.
That includes an abandoned mine in California that the American company Molycorp is trying to refurbish.
But experts say that any meaningful new production from outside China is at least five years away, and that it will come with its own environmental cost calculus.
“China’s rare earth output cannot be raised fast enough to meet the entire world’s needs, as there are environmental factors to be taken into consideration with an increase in rare earth production,” said Zhang Peichen, the deputy director of the government-backed Baotou Research Institute of Rare Earths, the main research group for the Chinese industry.
Across China, rare earth mines have scarred valleys by stripping topsoil and pumping thousands of gallons of acid into streambeds.
The environmental costs are palpable here in Baotou, a smoggy mining and steel city in China’s Inner Mongolia, where the air this week had an acrid, faintly metallic taste.
Half of the global supply of rare earths comes from a single iron ore mine in the hills north of Baotou.
After the iron is removed, the ore is processed at weather-beaten refineries in Baotou’s western outskirts to extract the rare earths minerals.
The refineries and the iron ore processing mill pump their waste into an artificial lake here.
The reservoir, four square miles and surrounded by an earthen embankment four stories high, holds a dark gray, slightly radioactive sludge laced with toxic chemical compounds.
The deadly lake is not far from the Yellow River watershed that supplies drinking water to much of northern China.
The reservoir covers an area 100 times the size of the alumina factory waste pond that collapsed this month in Hungary, inundating villages there and killing at least nine people.
Even before the Hungary disaster, Baotou authorities had begun a program to reinforce the levee here.
Huge bulldozers are adding a thick surface layer of crushed stone to the embankments to protect them from the region’s harsh weather.
But the bottom of the reservoir was not properly lined when it was built decades ago, according to a rare earth engineer who insisted on anonymity because of the Chinese government’s sensitivity about the problem. The sludge, he said, has caused a slowly spreading stain of faint but detectable radioactivity in the groundwater that is spreading at a rate of 300 yards a year toward the Yellow River, seven miles to the south.
Much of the radioactivity associated with rare earths comes from the element thorium, which is not a rare earth but is typically found in the same ore.
With the exception of unusual clay formations in southern China that contain medium and heavy rare earths with virtually no thorium, every other known commercial-grade rare earth deposit in the world is laced with thorium.
In Australia, engineers and lawyers have been working for three decades to find a safe, legal way to produce rare earths from a very rich deposit in the center of the country at Mount Weld.
The mine’s current owner, Lynas Corporation, hopes to begin small-scale production there late next year, although technical challenges remain.
The only American rare earths mine, the Molycorp complex at Mountain Pass, Calif., was at one time the world’s leading producer.
That was before it leaked faintly radioactive fluid into the nearby desert in the late 1990s, causing a costly cleanup that contributed to the mine’s closing in 2002.
By then, very low Chinese prices had made the mine less economically viable.
Now Molycorp, which raised money in a public stock offering this past summer, is hoping to re-open the mine with higher safety and environmental standards.
And it is betting that new technologies can drive its operating costs lower than the level of Chinese mines. Large-scale production, though, may still be several years away.
The mines of southern China are essentially free of thorium and have rare earths that are easily separated from the clay by dumping the ore in acid.
But this relatively easy process, and soaring prices on the world market, has led to the development of many illegal mines, which sell to organized crime syndicates that pay for rare earth concentrate with sacks of cash.
Beijing officials have sent out police squads since May to shut down the outlaw mines, arrest their operators and destroy their equipment with blowtorches, rare earth industry officials said.
“The damage that has been done in south China is considerable,” said Judith Chegwidden, a managing director specializing in rare earths at the Roskill Consulting Group in London.
To point out China’s environmental and supply concerns is not to overlook the economic benefits the nation accrues by restricting exports.
The global shortage gives foreign companies a reason to move even more of their rare earth-dependent operations to China, to produce key components for a wide range of products.
A Chinese official has acknowledged as much.
“To use moderation in the control of the production of rare earth resources and reduce exports to an acceptable level is to attract more Chinese and foreign investors into the region,” Zhao Shuanglian, the vice chairman of Inner Mongolia, said last year, according to China’s official Xinhua news agency.
Meanwhile, China’s own fast-growing manufacturing industries now consume more rare earths than the rest of the world combined.
And Beijing has done nothing to curb that domestic demand.
That apparent double standard could prove important if, as some trade experts have predicted, the United States, Europe and Japan bring a World Trade Organization case accusing China of unfairly restricting exports through a system of quotas and duties.
Alan Wolff, a former American trade official who now heads the international trade practice at the law firm Dewey & LeBoeuf in Washington, said China might face a skeptical audience at the W.T.O.
“A panel would sympathize with a genuine environmental objective,” Mr. Wolff said.
“But I do not think it would sympathize with cutting off supply disproportionately to foreign users in the name of saving the environment.”
This lake outside of Baotou, China, contains sludge laced with toxic chemical compounds from rare earth processing.
In Baotou, a smoggy city in China’s Inner Mongolia, the air this week has an acrid, faintly metallic taste. Half of the global supply of rare earths comes from the hills north of the town.
BAOTOU, China — When Japanese mineral traders learned in late September that China was blocking shipments of a vital commodity, the word came not from a government announcement but from dock workers in Shanghai.
And on Thursday, the traders began hearing that the unannounced embargo of so-called rare earth minerals was ending — again, not from any Chinese government communiqué, but though back-channel word from their distributors.
Throughout the five weeks of the embargo, even when China expanded the rare earth shipping halt to include the United States and Europe, Beijing denied there was a ban.
Whatever it was called, a shipping suspension that started amid China’s diplomatic dispute with Japan over a wayward fishing trawler escalated into a broader international trade issue.
The episode alarmed companies around the world that depend on rare earths, minerals that help make a wide range of high-tech products, including smartphones and smart bombs.
China currently controls almost all of the world’s supply of rare earths, for which demand is soaring.
To many outsiders, the undeclared embargo looked like a pure power play — a sign China would wield its growing economic might and apply its chokehold on an important industrial resource with little regard for the conventions of international trade.
The export quotas China continues to impose on rare earths, even when it does let ships leave the docks, are restricting global supplies and causing world market prices to soar far beyond what Chinese companies pay.
From the Chinese perspective, though, the issue looks very different.
China feels entitled to call the shots because of a brutally simple environmental reckoning: It currently controls most of the globe’s rare earths supply not just because of geologic good fortune, although there is some of that, but because the country has been willing to do dirty, toxic and often radioactive work that the rest of the world has long shunned.
Despite producing 95 percent of the world’s rare earths, China has only 37 percent of the world’s proven reserves.
Sizable deposits are known to exist in the United States, Canada, Australia, India and Brazil, among other places.
Many of those countries, responding to the rising demand for rare earths and alarmed by the recent embargo, are now scrambling to develop new mines or renovate ones long considered not to be worth the effort.
That includes an abandoned mine in California that the American company Molycorp is trying to refurbish.
But experts say that any meaningful new production from outside China is at least five years away, and that it will come with its own environmental cost calculus.
“China’s rare earth output cannot be raised fast enough to meet the entire world’s needs, as there are environmental factors to be taken into consideration with an increase in rare earth production,” said Zhang Peichen, the deputy director of the government-backed Baotou Research Institute of Rare Earths, the main research group for the Chinese industry.
Across China, rare earth mines have scarred valleys by stripping topsoil and pumping thousands of gallons of acid into streambeds.
The environmental costs are palpable here in Baotou, a smoggy mining and steel city in China’s Inner Mongolia, where the air this week had an acrid, faintly metallic taste.
Half of the global supply of rare earths comes from a single iron ore mine in the hills north of Baotou.
After the iron is removed, the ore is processed at weather-beaten refineries in Baotou’s western outskirts to extract the rare earths minerals.
The refineries and the iron ore processing mill pump their waste into an artificial lake here.
The reservoir, four square miles and surrounded by an earthen embankment four stories high, holds a dark gray, slightly radioactive sludge laced with toxic chemical compounds.
The deadly lake is not far from the Yellow River watershed that supplies drinking water to much of northern China.
The reservoir covers an area 100 times the size of the alumina factory waste pond that collapsed this month in Hungary, inundating villages there and killing at least nine people.
Even before the Hungary disaster, Baotou authorities had begun a program to reinforce the levee here.
Huge bulldozers are adding a thick surface layer of crushed stone to the embankments to protect them from the region’s harsh weather.
But the bottom of the reservoir was not properly lined when it was built decades ago, according to a rare earth engineer who insisted on anonymity because of the Chinese government’s sensitivity about the problem. The sludge, he said, has caused a slowly spreading stain of faint but detectable radioactivity in the groundwater that is spreading at a rate of 300 yards a year toward the Yellow River, seven miles to the south.
Much of the radioactivity associated with rare earths comes from the element thorium, which is not a rare earth but is typically found in the same ore.
With the exception of unusual clay formations in southern China that contain medium and heavy rare earths with virtually no thorium, every other known commercial-grade rare earth deposit in the world is laced with thorium.
In Australia, engineers and lawyers have been working for three decades to find a safe, legal way to produce rare earths from a very rich deposit in the center of the country at Mount Weld.
The mine’s current owner, Lynas Corporation, hopes to begin small-scale production there late next year, although technical challenges remain.
The only American rare earths mine, the Molycorp complex at Mountain Pass, Calif., was at one time the world’s leading producer.
That was before it leaked faintly radioactive fluid into the nearby desert in the late 1990s, causing a costly cleanup that contributed to the mine’s closing in 2002.
By then, very low Chinese prices had made the mine less economically viable.
Now Molycorp, which raised money in a public stock offering this past summer, is hoping to re-open the mine with higher safety and environmental standards.
And it is betting that new technologies can drive its operating costs lower than the level of Chinese mines. Large-scale production, though, may still be several years away.
The mines of southern China are essentially free of thorium and have rare earths that are easily separated from the clay by dumping the ore in acid.
But this relatively easy process, and soaring prices on the world market, has led to the development of many illegal mines, which sell to organized crime syndicates that pay for rare earth concentrate with sacks of cash.
Beijing officials have sent out police squads since May to shut down the outlaw mines, arrest their operators and destroy their equipment with blowtorches, rare earth industry officials said.
“The damage that has been done in south China is considerable,” said Judith Chegwidden, a managing director specializing in rare earths at the Roskill Consulting Group in London.
To point out China’s environmental and supply concerns is not to overlook the economic benefits the nation accrues by restricting exports.
The global shortage gives foreign companies a reason to move even more of their rare earth-dependent operations to China, to produce key components for a wide range of products.
A Chinese official has acknowledged as much.
“To use moderation in the control of the production of rare earth resources and reduce exports to an acceptable level is to attract more Chinese and foreign investors into the region,” Zhao Shuanglian, the vice chairman of Inner Mongolia, said last year, according to China’s official Xinhua news agency.
Meanwhile, China’s own fast-growing manufacturing industries now consume more rare earths than the rest of the world combined.
And Beijing has done nothing to curb that domestic demand.
That apparent double standard could prove important if, as some trade experts have predicted, the United States, Europe and Japan bring a World Trade Organization case accusing China of unfairly restricting exports through a system of quotas and duties.
Alan Wolff, a former American trade official who now heads the international trade practice at the law firm Dewey & LeBoeuf in Washington, said China might face a skeptical audience at the W.T.O.
“A panel would sympathize with a genuine environmental objective,” Mr. Wolff said.
“But I do not think it would sympathize with cutting off supply disproportionately to foreign users in the name of saving the environment.”
Chinese dissidents forcibly interned in psychiatric hospitals
Report reveals scandalous cases of dissidents subjected to years forced of hospitalization, systemic shock treatments and chains.
Asia News
Xu Lindong remained interned for 6 ½ years, was locked up 50 times, tortured with electric batons 55 times.
Hong Kong -- A "campaign" to denounce the numerous abuses against those who protest or present petitions in China and because of this have been detained in psychiatric hospitals, beaten, subjected to electric shocks and sedatives.
The activist Liu Feiyue explains that the campaign "SOS Mental Hospitals" wants to make public the many victims of this "system".
Xiao Yong, an activist of the Civil Rights and Livelihood Watch, speaking to Radio Free Asia about Gu Xianghong, who protested the abuses imposed by family planning authorities, the office in charge of enforcing the general prohibition on having more than one child.
"Since 1992 -- explains Xiao -- [Gu] has attempted to protest the abuse through official channels", in short by presenting petitions higher authorities for justice.
As a result, Gu has on many occasion been interned in Hospital No. 5 of Xiangtan (Hunan).
Xiao and another activist Zheng Chuangtian filmed a video of Gu, who speaking with some difficulty, denounces being subjected to electric shocks and repeated injections against her will and that she has been interned in the hospital 9 times.
"My entire family was ruined by the village authorities -- she says -- because I have made petitions... I have been interned here for revenge and forced to undergo injections."
"They won’t let me go... I can not get clear answers from them."
"They have applied electrodes to my temples and turned them on" – she says.
"They have covered my head and chained my feet."
Xiao and Zheng managed to enter the Hospital No. 5 in secret, by outwitting surveillance, then they were caught and locked up for a while.
Gu’s mother, Xu Meijiao, is held by the authorities.
Huang Xuetao, a human rights lawyer, wrote in a report released Oct. 10 that many psychiatric hospitals accept patients without mental illness, at the request of public authorities, because they are well paid.
"The level of implied consent [in these practices] in the psychiatric profession -- Huang reports – is growing at a terrifying rate."
The hope is that these complaints will bring some results: the authorities have given great prominence in recent months to punishments imposed on 5 Henan officials for having sent Xu Lindong, a petitioner, to Luohe City Mental Hospital, on false documents.
Xu remained interned for 6 ½ years, was locked up 50 times, tortured with electric batons 55 times.
In a 2002 report, "Dangerous Minds", Human Rights Watch complained that the Chinese Communist Party has always considered "political dissidents, believers, the authors of protests and other dissidents" a major social threat".
These people are often "forcibly interned in psychiatric institutions of various kinds."
But experts note that coercive methods are still applied by the authorities, even at high levels.
They observe that after the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to the democratic dissident Liu Xiaobo, the authorities have dozens of dissidents and activists put under close surveillance or house arrest, they have cut their phone lines or follow them everywhere and many have been ordered to leave Beijing and return to their city of origin.
His wife, Liu Xia is under house arrest and her connection to Twitter cut off, after she posted an open letter on the Internet to 143 Chinese celebrities and activists asking them to go in her place to Oslo to receive the award for her husband, sentenced to 11 years in prison for crimes of opinion.
The Christian writer Yu Jie has been under house arrest for 12 days.
The South China Morning Post said authorities "are afraid" that Liu's friends "will go to the ceremony to receive the award”.
Asia News
Xu Lindong remained interned for 6 ½ years, was locked up 50 times, tortured with electric batons 55 times.
Hong Kong -- A "campaign" to denounce the numerous abuses against those who protest or present petitions in China and because of this have been detained in psychiatric hospitals, beaten, subjected to electric shocks and sedatives.
The activist Liu Feiyue explains that the campaign "SOS Mental Hospitals" wants to make public the many victims of this "system".
Xiao Yong, an activist of the Civil Rights and Livelihood Watch, speaking to Radio Free Asia about Gu Xianghong, who protested the abuses imposed by family planning authorities, the office in charge of enforcing the general prohibition on having more than one child.
"Since 1992 -- explains Xiao -- [Gu] has attempted to protest the abuse through official channels", in short by presenting petitions higher authorities for justice.
As a result, Gu has on many occasion been interned in Hospital No. 5 of Xiangtan (Hunan).
Xiao and another activist Zheng Chuangtian filmed a video of Gu, who speaking with some difficulty, denounces being subjected to electric shocks and repeated injections against her will and that she has been interned in the hospital 9 times.
"My entire family was ruined by the village authorities -- she says -- because I have made petitions... I have been interned here for revenge and forced to undergo injections."
"They won’t let me go... I can not get clear answers from them."
"They have applied electrodes to my temples and turned them on" – she says.
"They have covered my head and chained my feet."
Xiao and Zheng managed to enter the Hospital No. 5 in secret, by outwitting surveillance, then they were caught and locked up for a while.
Gu’s mother, Xu Meijiao, is held by the authorities.
Huang Xuetao, a human rights lawyer, wrote in a report released Oct. 10 that many psychiatric hospitals accept patients without mental illness, at the request of public authorities, because they are well paid.
"The level of implied consent [in these practices] in the psychiatric profession -- Huang reports – is growing at a terrifying rate."
The hope is that these complaints will bring some results: the authorities have given great prominence in recent months to punishments imposed on 5 Henan officials for having sent Xu Lindong, a petitioner, to Luohe City Mental Hospital, on false documents.
Xu remained interned for 6 ½ years, was locked up 50 times, tortured with electric batons 55 times.
In a 2002 report, "Dangerous Minds", Human Rights Watch complained that the Chinese Communist Party has always considered "political dissidents, believers, the authors of protests and other dissidents" a major social threat".
These people are often "forcibly interned in psychiatric institutions of various kinds."
But experts note that coercive methods are still applied by the authorities, even at high levels.
They observe that after the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to the democratic dissident Liu Xiaobo, the authorities have dozens of dissidents and activists put under close surveillance or house arrest, they have cut their phone lines or follow them everywhere and many have been ordered to leave Beijing and return to their city of origin.
His wife, Liu Xia is under house arrest and her connection to Twitter cut off, after she posted an open letter on the Internet to 143 Chinese celebrities and activists asking them to go in her place to Oslo to receive the award for her husband, sentenced to 11 years in prison for crimes of opinion.
The Christian writer Yu Jie has been under house arrest for 12 days.
The South China Morning Post said authorities "are afraid" that Liu's friends "will go to the ceremony to receive the award”.
US takes firm line with China over rows with neighbors
By Lachlan Carmichael
Hillary Clinton attends a news conference in Hanoi.
HANOI — The United States on Saturday fired a broadside at China over the maritime rows roiling Asia and secured assurances over its exports of rare earth minerals, which have become another regional irritant.
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton waded into the disputes over South China Sea and East China Sea islands as she took part in the 16-nation East Asia Summit, which the United States is attending for the first time.
"The United States has a national interest in the freedom of navigation and unimpeded lawful commerce," the chief US diplomat said in a speech to the EAS, repeating the US position in the presence of China in Vietnam's capital.
"And when disputes arise over maritime territory, we are committed to resolving them peacefully based on customary international law," Clinton said.
But she also sounded a softer note, saying "with regard to the South China Sea, we are encouraged by China's recent steps to enter discussions with ASEAN about a more formal binding code of conduct."
The Philippines said China on Friday made such assurances in response to concerns from leaders of the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) who met with China's premier Wen Jiabao Friday.
ASEAN, which is part of EAS, hopes that a "declaration" on a mooted code of conduct could lead to a mechanism to govern actions in the disputed waterway -- a resource-rich region which is a vital conduit for trade in goods and energy.
Diplomatic sources say that a working group from ASEAN and China will meet in December to prepare the groundwork and establish technical details on how a code could be formulated.
The United States has said it is willing to help craft the code to end disputes that threaten regional stability.
But Beijing insists on bilateral discussions with those nations that have territorial claims -- a forum where it has more clout -- and has warned the US not to interfere.
Analysts said the United States is re-engaging with Southeast Asia as it tries to counter-balance China's growing assertiveness in the region.
To the north, a row still simmers between China and Japan after Tokyo on September 8 arrested a Chinese trawler captain near Japanese Senkaku islands.
In a press conference, Clinton repeated remarks she made in Hawaii this week that the islands fall under chapter five of the 1960 US-Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security.
Under the treaty, the United States is obliged to defend Japan against any attack on a territory under Tokyo's administration.
China's Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi responded Saturday by telling Clinton to be "cautious" when discussing the maritime issue.
According to comments posted on the Chinese foreign ministry's website, he urged her to "respect China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, and to not make irresponsible remarks."
Meanwhile Clinton said she had won "assurances" from Yang on China's policy toward exports of rare earth minerals, which Beijing has been accused of restricting in the aftermath of the row with Japan.
"Foreign Minister Yang clarified that China has no intention of withholding these minerals from the market. He said he wanted to make that very clear," she said.
In Washington, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Tuesday that the United States was checking to see if China was cutting off rare earths exports to US companies, but had not reached a conclusion on the matter yet.
China recently denied a report in The New York Times that it had halted some rare earth shipments to the United States in response to a US probe into alleged Chinese subsidies for its green technology sector.
Rare earths -- a group of 17 elements -- are used in high-tech products ranging from flat-screen televisions to lasers to hybrid cars, and China controls more than 95 percent of the global market.
Tokyo has accused China of restricting rare earths shipments to Japanese firms after the bitter spat between Asia's top two economies that has spiralled into protests, scrapped meetings and angry outbursts.
Hillary Clinton attends a news conference in Hanoi.
HANOI — The United States on Saturday fired a broadside at China over the maritime rows roiling Asia and secured assurances over its exports of rare earth minerals, which have become another regional irritant.
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton waded into the disputes over South China Sea and East China Sea islands as she took part in the 16-nation East Asia Summit, which the United States is attending for the first time.
"The United States has a national interest in the freedom of navigation and unimpeded lawful commerce," the chief US diplomat said in a speech to the EAS, repeating the US position in the presence of China in Vietnam's capital.
"And when disputes arise over maritime territory, we are committed to resolving them peacefully based on customary international law," Clinton said.
But she also sounded a softer note, saying "with regard to the South China Sea, we are encouraged by China's recent steps to enter discussions with ASEAN about a more formal binding code of conduct."
The Philippines said China on Friday made such assurances in response to concerns from leaders of the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) who met with China's premier Wen Jiabao Friday.
ASEAN, which is part of EAS, hopes that a "declaration" on a mooted code of conduct could lead to a mechanism to govern actions in the disputed waterway -- a resource-rich region which is a vital conduit for trade in goods and energy.
Diplomatic sources say that a working group from ASEAN and China will meet in December to prepare the groundwork and establish technical details on how a code could be formulated.
The United States has said it is willing to help craft the code to end disputes that threaten regional stability.
But Beijing insists on bilateral discussions with those nations that have territorial claims -- a forum where it has more clout -- and has warned the US not to interfere.
Analysts said the United States is re-engaging with Southeast Asia as it tries to counter-balance China's growing assertiveness in the region.
To the north, a row still simmers between China and Japan after Tokyo on September 8 arrested a Chinese trawler captain near Japanese Senkaku islands.
In a press conference, Clinton repeated remarks she made in Hawaii this week that the islands fall under chapter five of the 1960 US-Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security.
Under the treaty, the United States is obliged to defend Japan against any attack on a territory under Tokyo's administration.
China's Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi responded Saturday by telling Clinton to be "cautious" when discussing the maritime issue.
According to comments posted on the Chinese foreign ministry's website, he urged her to "respect China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, and to not make irresponsible remarks."
Meanwhile Clinton said she had won "assurances" from Yang on China's policy toward exports of rare earth minerals, which Beijing has been accused of restricting in the aftermath of the row with Japan.
"Foreign Minister Yang clarified that China has no intention of withholding these minerals from the market. He said he wanted to make that very clear," she said.
In Washington, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Tuesday that the United States was checking to see if China was cutting off rare earths exports to US companies, but had not reached a conclusion on the matter yet.
China recently denied a report in The New York Times that it had halted some rare earth shipments to the United States in response to a US probe into alleged Chinese subsidies for its green technology sector.
Rare earths -- a group of 17 elements -- are used in high-tech products ranging from flat-screen televisions to lasers to hybrid cars, and China controls more than 95 percent of the global market.
Tokyo has accused China of restricting rare earths shipments to Japanese firms after the bitter spat between Asia's top two economies that has spiralled into protests, scrapped meetings and angry outbursts.
Clinton Renews Asia Dispute Push
By JAY SOLOMON
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton waves as she enters the Association of Southeast Asian Nations summit in Hanoi on Saturday.
HANOI—U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pressed Asian leaders gathered in Hanoi to resolve their maritime disputes through international legal channels, repeating a U.S. position that has raised China's ire in recent months.
Mrs. Clinton spoke at the fifth East Asia Summit, which brings together South East Asia's 10 nations and other regional powers such as Japan, China and South Korea.
The U.S. was formally invited for the first time this year to join the regional trade and security body.
The two-day summit has already been dominated by rising tensions between China and other Asian states over festering maritime disputes.
On Friday, Chinese officials criticized Japan for again claiming sovereignty over East China Sea islands that are in dispute between Tokyo and Beijing.
The comments made unlikely a meeting between Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan and China Premier Wen Jiabao on the sidelines of the summit to resolve tensions.
Japan's arrest of a Chinese fishing captain in September near the islands set off a full-blown diplomatic row that Asian nations hoped could be resolved at the Hanoi summit.
The U.S. has sought to reduce tensions between China and Japan, even while stating that the disputed islands lie under the purview of the 50-year-old U.S.-Japan Defense Treaty.
In her speech before the East Asia Summit Saturday, Mrs. Clinton again pressed the U.S. position that disputes in Asian waters should be resolved through international legal channels.
A similar comment made by Mrs. Clinton in July at another Asian regional conference in Hanoi sparked outrage in Beijing and led to Chinese charges that the U.S. was intervening in Beijing's internal affairs.
China claims sovereignty over all of the South China Sea.
"The United States has a national interest in the freedom of navigation and unimpeded lawful commerce," Mrs. Clinton said during her scheduled speech at the conference.
"And when disputes arise over maritime territory, we are committed to resolving them peacefully based on customary international law."
Mrs. Clinton then praised Beijing for entering into discussions with the 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or Asean, on a "binding code of conduct" for their activities in the South China Sea. She didn't comment on China's dispute with Japan in the East China Sea.
China offered no immediate response to Mrs. Clinton's comments.
On Friday, China's Foreign Ministry said it was "strongly dissatisfied" with her comments Wednesday in Honolulu concerning U.S. treaty obligations to defends Japan's claims on the East China Sea Senkaku islands.
The U.S. is walking a fine diplomatic line on the East China Sea islands dispute.
While Washington says it is committed to defend the islands, it has also stated that the U.S. takes no position on who ultimately controls them.
Mrs. Clinton met with her Chinese counterpart, Yang Jiechi, earlier Saturday in Hanoi.
She will fly later Saturday to the Chinese island of Hainan to meet State Councilor Dai Bingguo.
A U.S. official said Mr. Yang assured Mrs. Clinton during their meeting that Beijing wouldn't use its monopoly over rare-earth minerals as a political and strategic weapon against its competitors.
Mrs. Clinton and Japan leaders have voiced concerns over the past week that China was drastically cutting its exports of rare-earth minerals, used to produce computers and other electronic items, as political leverage. China controls 97% of the world's supply of the commodity, and Mrs. Clinton has urged other Asian nations to develop alternative sources for the minerals.
China curtailed rare-earth quotas earlier this year, citing environmental concerns and efforts to quell smuggling.
The Obama administration is seeking to significantly increase its diplomatic presence in Asia, as a number of U.S. allies in the region voice concerns about China's increasingly assertive positions on territorial, security and economic issues.
The U.S. is specifically seeking to use the offices of Asean as a mechanism through which to press U.S. interest and to galvanize the Southeast Asian states in the face of China's growing military power.
The U.S. has also taken steps in recent months to deepen its military alliances with Japan, South Korea, Thailand and the Philippines.
"As the [East Asia Summit] evolves, we believe Asean should continue to play a central role," Mrs. Clinton said in her speech.
"As I said earlier this week, we view Asean as a fulcrum for the region's emerging regional architecture."
Beijing has expressed wariness about the U.S. build up of Asean and its growing diplomatic activities in the region.
Some Chinese officials have said Washington is seeking to use Asean and its military alliances to encircle China —a charge the Obama administration denies.
Mrs. Clinton said as a member of the East Asia Summit, the U.S. would promote economic liberalization in the region and efforts to combat the spread of nuclear weapons.
She also said Asean and the East Asia Summit should be forms through which to promote human rights and political reform.
"We look forward to working with the [East Asia Summit] on an affirmative agenda for strengthening democratic institutions and advancing human rights," Mrs. Clinton said.
On the sidelines of the conference Saturday, Washington's chief diplomat is also meeting with South Korean President Lee Myung-bak, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, and Vietnamese Foreign Minister Pham Gia Khiem.
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton waves as she enters the Association of Southeast Asian Nations summit in Hanoi on Saturday.
HANOI—U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pressed Asian leaders gathered in Hanoi to resolve their maritime disputes through international legal channels, repeating a U.S. position that has raised China's ire in recent months.
Mrs. Clinton spoke at the fifth East Asia Summit, which brings together South East Asia's 10 nations and other regional powers such as Japan, China and South Korea.
The U.S. was formally invited for the first time this year to join the regional trade and security body.
The two-day summit has already been dominated by rising tensions between China and other Asian states over festering maritime disputes.
On Friday, Chinese officials criticized Japan for again claiming sovereignty over East China Sea islands that are in dispute between Tokyo and Beijing.
The comments made unlikely a meeting between Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan and China Premier Wen Jiabao on the sidelines of the summit to resolve tensions.
Japan's arrest of a Chinese fishing captain in September near the islands set off a full-blown diplomatic row that Asian nations hoped could be resolved at the Hanoi summit.
The U.S. has sought to reduce tensions between China and Japan, even while stating that the disputed islands lie under the purview of the 50-year-old U.S.-Japan Defense Treaty.
In her speech before the East Asia Summit Saturday, Mrs. Clinton again pressed the U.S. position that disputes in Asian waters should be resolved through international legal channels.
A similar comment made by Mrs. Clinton in July at another Asian regional conference in Hanoi sparked outrage in Beijing and led to Chinese charges that the U.S. was intervening in Beijing's internal affairs.
China claims sovereignty over all of the South China Sea.
"The United States has a national interest in the freedom of navigation and unimpeded lawful commerce," Mrs. Clinton said during her scheduled speech at the conference.
"And when disputes arise over maritime territory, we are committed to resolving them peacefully based on customary international law."
Mrs. Clinton then praised Beijing for entering into discussions with the 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or Asean, on a "binding code of conduct" for their activities in the South China Sea. She didn't comment on China's dispute with Japan in the East China Sea.
China offered no immediate response to Mrs. Clinton's comments.
On Friday, China's Foreign Ministry said it was "strongly dissatisfied" with her comments Wednesday in Honolulu concerning U.S. treaty obligations to defends Japan's claims on the East China Sea Senkaku islands.
The U.S. is walking a fine diplomatic line on the East China Sea islands dispute.
While Washington says it is committed to defend the islands, it has also stated that the U.S. takes no position on who ultimately controls them.
Mrs. Clinton met with her Chinese counterpart, Yang Jiechi, earlier Saturday in Hanoi.
She will fly later Saturday to the Chinese island of Hainan to meet State Councilor Dai Bingguo.
A U.S. official said Mr. Yang assured Mrs. Clinton during their meeting that Beijing wouldn't use its monopoly over rare-earth minerals as a political and strategic weapon against its competitors.
Mrs. Clinton and Japan leaders have voiced concerns over the past week that China was drastically cutting its exports of rare-earth minerals, used to produce computers and other electronic items, as political leverage. China controls 97% of the world's supply of the commodity, and Mrs. Clinton has urged other Asian nations to develop alternative sources for the minerals.
China curtailed rare-earth quotas earlier this year, citing environmental concerns and efforts to quell smuggling.
The Obama administration is seeking to significantly increase its diplomatic presence in Asia, as a number of U.S. allies in the region voice concerns about China's increasingly assertive positions on territorial, security and economic issues.
The U.S. is specifically seeking to use the offices of Asean as a mechanism through which to press U.S. interest and to galvanize the Southeast Asian states in the face of China's growing military power.
The U.S. has also taken steps in recent months to deepen its military alliances with Japan, South Korea, Thailand and the Philippines.
"As the [East Asia Summit] evolves, we believe Asean should continue to play a central role," Mrs. Clinton said in her speech.
"As I said earlier this week, we view Asean as a fulcrum for the region's emerging regional architecture."
Beijing has expressed wariness about the U.S. build up of Asean and its growing diplomatic activities in the region.
Some Chinese officials have said Washington is seeking to use Asean and its military alliances to encircle China —a charge the Obama administration denies.
Mrs. Clinton said as a member of the East Asia Summit, the U.S. would promote economic liberalization in the region and efforts to combat the spread of nuclear weapons.
She also said Asean and the East Asia Summit should be forms through which to promote human rights and political reform.
"We look forward to working with the [East Asia Summit] on an affirmative agenda for strengthening democratic institutions and advancing human rights," Mrs. Clinton said.
On the sidelines of the conference Saturday, Washington's chief diplomat is also meeting with South Korean President Lee Myung-bak, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, and Vietnamese Foreign Minister Pham Gia Khiem.
ASEAN to bring in US as counterbalance to China
By TINI TRAN
HANOI, VIETNAM -- Southeast Asian nations prepared to welcome the United States into their club, a move seen as bringing a counterweight to China following a series of aggressive maritime moves by Beijing.
The 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN, will formally invite the U.S. and Russia to join their annual East Asian Summit on Saturday in the Vietnamese capital.
During a stop in Hawaii en route to Hanoi, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton stressed that the U.S. would remain a major power in the Asia-Pacific region and called on China to expand cooperation with the U.S.
Southeast Asian nations have become increasingly rattled in recent months, accusing China of being a bully following a series of territorial spats on the high seas, including run-ins with Vietnam and a nasty row with Japan.
On Friday, China met with Japan on the sidelines of the summit, seeking to repair relations soured by a maritime dispute.
As the two sides called for improved ties, Japan appealed for the lifting of a block on exports of rare earth metals crucial for its high-tech manufacturing.
China has strongly pushed to keep territorial disputes over islands in the South China Sea out of talks held by ASEAN, preferring instead to deal with clashes one on one.
But the smaller countries have refused to back down.
"ASEAN should have one voice before we venture (into) talking to other claimants," Philippine President Benigno Aquino III said, adding that he and other Southeast Asian leaders aired concerns during a dinner Thursday centered around maintaining peace and keeping busy shipping lanes open in the South China Sea.
At another meeting in Hanoi this summer, Clinton enraged China by announcing that the U.S. has a national interest in seeing territorial disputes in the South China Sea resolved, ensuring vital shipping lanes remain open for everyone.
China has laid claim to strategically placed and potentially oil-rich islands in the South China Sea, but parts of the territory are also claimed by several Southeast Asian countries.
The U.S. has urged China to work with its neighbors to ease tensions over territorial disputes in the East and South China Seas.
Clinton is to meet Saturday on China's Hainan Island with State Councilor Dai Bingguo -- a last-minute addition to her itinerary to press that message.
The invitation to the U.S. to join what had been an Asian-only event comes at an anxious time for the region. The East Asian grouping comprises the Southeast Asian countries along with six others including India, Australia, and Japan.
With many nations unnerved by China's accruing power and its more assertive behavior, they are turning to the U.S. to moderate, but not squeeze out, China.
"If the U.S. and China maintain stable relations, then everyone wins. But if the two have tensions, then everyone loses. It's the balance of power that creates the peace," said Huang Jing, a Chinese politics expert at the National University of Singapore.
Bringing the United States and Russia into the regional grouping engages them constructively, said Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa.
"It's a fact of life they have a presence in the region. It's best that their presence in the region is undertaken within the ASEAN framework," he said.
"The gain of one is not at the loss of other. It's not meant to be containing anyone."
Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi and his Japanese counterpart, Seiji Maehara, met on the sidelines of the summit, hoping to lay the foundation for talks between Premier Wen Jiabao and Prime Minister Naoto Kan aimed at repairing their diplomatic rift over a boat collision near the Senkaku islands.
Japanese companies have said China froze exports of rare earth metals after the dispute flared in September, though the Beijing government has denied that.
"The discussion took place in a good atmosphere. It was held calmly while both sides said what we should say. I believe it is likely that the leaders of China and Japan will hold a meeting here in Hanoi," Maehara told reporters after the hour-plus talks.
Japan also asked China to reopen talks on the joint development of gas fields in the East China Sea, Maehara said.
Beijing suspended the gas field talks during the spat.
A day earlier, Maehara met with Clinton in Hawaii, where she said the restrictions served as a "wake-up call" for the global high-tech industry to diversify its suppliers.
China currently produces 97 percent of the world's rare earth metals, used in everything from laptops to cell phones.
China said Thursday it will not use the metals as a "bargaining tool."
Tokyo recently said it planned to mine rare earths in Vietnam as a way to reduce its dependence on China.
Maehara also said that Japan "repeated its position firmly" regarding the territorial issue over the East China Sea Senkaku islands.
HANOI, VIETNAM -- Southeast Asian nations prepared to welcome the United States into their club, a move seen as bringing a counterweight to China following a series of aggressive maritime moves by Beijing.
The 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN, will formally invite the U.S. and Russia to join their annual East Asian Summit on Saturday in the Vietnamese capital.
During a stop in Hawaii en route to Hanoi, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton stressed that the U.S. would remain a major power in the Asia-Pacific region and called on China to expand cooperation with the U.S.
Southeast Asian nations have become increasingly rattled in recent months, accusing China of being a bully following a series of territorial spats on the high seas, including run-ins with Vietnam and a nasty row with Japan.
On Friday, China met with Japan on the sidelines of the summit, seeking to repair relations soured by a maritime dispute.
As the two sides called for improved ties, Japan appealed for the lifting of a block on exports of rare earth metals crucial for its high-tech manufacturing.
China has strongly pushed to keep territorial disputes over islands in the South China Sea out of talks held by ASEAN, preferring instead to deal with clashes one on one.
But the smaller countries have refused to back down.
"ASEAN should have one voice before we venture (into) talking to other claimants," Philippine President Benigno Aquino III said, adding that he and other Southeast Asian leaders aired concerns during a dinner Thursday centered around maintaining peace and keeping busy shipping lanes open in the South China Sea.
At another meeting in Hanoi this summer, Clinton enraged China by announcing that the U.S. has a national interest in seeing territorial disputes in the South China Sea resolved, ensuring vital shipping lanes remain open for everyone.
China has laid claim to strategically placed and potentially oil-rich islands in the South China Sea, but parts of the territory are also claimed by several Southeast Asian countries.
The U.S. has urged China to work with its neighbors to ease tensions over territorial disputes in the East and South China Seas.
Clinton is to meet Saturday on China's Hainan Island with State Councilor Dai Bingguo -- a last-minute addition to her itinerary to press that message.
The invitation to the U.S. to join what had been an Asian-only event comes at an anxious time for the region. The East Asian grouping comprises the Southeast Asian countries along with six others including India, Australia, and Japan.
With many nations unnerved by China's accruing power and its more assertive behavior, they are turning to the U.S. to moderate, but not squeeze out, China.
"If the U.S. and China maintain stable relations, then everyone wins. But if the two have tensions, then everyone loses. It's the balance of power that creates the peace," said Huang Jing, a Chinese politics expert at the National University of Singapore.
Bringing the United States and Russia into the regional grouping engages them constructively, said Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa.
"It's a fact of life they have a presence in the region. It's best that their presence in the region is undertaken within the ASEAN framework," he said.
"The gain of one is not at the loss of other. It's not meant to be containing anyone."
Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi and his Japanese counterpart, Seiji Maehara, met on the sidelines of the summit, hoping to lay the foundation for talks between Premier Wen Jiabao and Prime Minister Naoto Kan aimed at repairing their diplomatic rift over a boat collision near the Senkaku islands.
Japanese companies have said China froze exports of rare earth metals after the dispute flared in September, though the Beijing government has denied that.
"The discussion took place in a good atmosphere. It was held calmly while both sides said what we should say. I believe it is likely that the leaders of China and Japan will hold a meeting here in Hanoi," Maehara told reporters after the hour-plus talks.
Japan also asked China to reopen talks on the joint development of gas fields in the East China Sea, Maehara said.
Beijing suspended the gas field talks during the spat.
A day earlier, Maehara met with Clinton in Hawaii, where she said the restrictions served as a "wake-up call" for the global high-tech industry to diversify its suppliers.
China currently produces 97 percent of the world's rare earth metals, used in everything from laptops to cell phones.
China said Thursday it will not use the metals as a "bargaining tool."
Tokyo recently said it planned to mine rare earths in Vietnam as a way to reduce its dependence on China.
Maehara also said that Japan "repeated its position firmly" regarding the territorial issue over the East China Sea Senkaku islands.
US pledges to raise rights with China, Vietnam
By Shaun Tandon
A policeman keeps a close eye on protesters
WASHINGTON — The United States said Friday it would raise human rights concerns with China and Vietnam, including the case of Nobel laureate Liu Xiaobo, as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visits the two countries.
US lawmakers and activists have repeatedly urged Clinton to speak more forcefully about human rights as President Barack Obama's administration tries to nurture an emerging friendship with Vietnam and smooth out ties with China.
State Department spokesman Philip Crowley said that Clinton, who arrived Friday in Vietnam for a regional summit, was raising a range of issues with her hosts including human rights.
"There have been some recent instances where journalists, bloggers, other activists have been arrested. This is contrary to Vietnam's own commitment to internationally accepted standards of human rights, including the freedom of speech," Crowley told reporters.
Clinton plans later to head to China's Hainan island for talks to prepare for President Hu Jintao's visit to the United States next year.
Crowley would not say if Clinton would raise human rights in Hainan but said that such concerns were sure to come up during Hu's visit.
"We have and will continue to express to China our concern about the restrictive treatment of civil society actors and political dissidents in China," Crowley said.
"We have indicated our support for the award of the Nobel Prize, and I'm sure this will come up in these discussions," Crowley said.
The Nobel committee earlier this month awarded the Peace Prize to jailed dissident Liu Xiaobo, the co-author of the Charter 08 petition calling for democratic reforms in the communist nation.
Crowley said that Michael Posner, the assistant secretary of state in charge of human rights, was visiting China this week.
He declined to elaborate on his schedule but said he was discussing labor issues.
Clinton raised Liu's case in a speech Thursday in Hawaii, saying: "We are saddened that Asia remains the only place in the world where three iconic Nobel laureates -- Aung San Suu Kyi, the Dalai Lama, and Liu Xiaobo -- are either under house arrest, in prison or in exile."
The Dalai Lama, Tibet's spiritual leader, fled into exile in India in 1959 as China crushed an abortive uprising against its rule in the Himalayan territory.
Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of the democratic opposition in Myanmar, has spent 15 years under house arrest since winning 1990 elections.
The military regime in Myanmar, also known as Burma, plans new elections on November 7 which opposition groups and Western governments have criticized as a sham.
Clinton upset activists early in her tenure by saying that human rights would not "interfere" with areas of US-China cooperation, such as trying to revive the global economy or fighting climate change.
In a joint letter, eight pressure groups including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch said Clinton now had a "unique opportunity" to raise concerns in the wake of Liu's Nobel and ahead of Hu's visit.
"Rather than smoothing the path for cooperation, the United States undermines its interests and compromises its ability to secure progress on other issues when it subordinates human rights concerns," the letter said.
"The Chinese side notes the soft-pedaling of human rights principles and perceives it as weakness," it said.
Leonard Leo, chair of the US Commission on International Religious Freedom, said that China's repression of religious practice "breeds distrust among its neighbors, hurts its international image, and damages US-China relations."
A policeman keeps a close eye on protesters
WASHINGTON — The United States said Friday it would raise human rights concerns with China and Vietnam, including the case of Nobel laureate Liu Xiaobo, as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visits the two countries.
US lawmakers and activists have repeatedly urged Clinton to speak more forcefully about human rights as President Barack Obama's administration tries to nurture an emerging friendship with Vietnam and smooth out ties with China.
State Department spokesman Philip Crowley said that Clinton, who arrived Friday in Vietnam for a regional summit, was raising a range of issues with her hosts including human rights.
"There have been some recent instances where journalists, bloggers, other activists have been arrested. This is contrary to Vietnam's own commitment to internationally accepted standards of human rights, including the freedom of speech," Crowley told reporters.
Clinton plans later to head to China's Hainan island for talks to prepare for President Hu Jintao's visit to the United States next year.
Crowley would not say if Clinton would raise human rights in Hainan but said that such concerns were sure to come up during Hu's visit.
"We have and will continue to express to China our concern about the restrictive treatment of civil society actors and political dissidents in China," Crowley said.
"We have indicated our support for the award of the Nobel Prize, and I'm sure this will come up in these discussions," Crowley said.
The Nobel committee earlier this month awarded the Peace Prize to jailed dissident Liu Xiaobo, the co-author of the Charter 08 petition calling for democratic reforms in the communist nation.
Crowley said that Michael Posner, the assistant secretary of state in charge of human rights, was visiting China this week.
He declined to elaborate on his schedule but said he was discussing labor issues.
Clinton raised Liu's case in a speech Thursday in Hawaii, saying: "We are saddened that Asia remains the only place in the world where three iconic Nobel laureates -- Aung San Suu Kyi, the Dalai Lama, and Liu Xiaobo -- are either under house arrest, in prison or in exile."
The Dalai Lama, Tibet's spiritual leader, fled into exile in India in 1959 as China crushed an abortive uprising against its rule in the Himalayan territory.
Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of the democratic opposition in Myanmar, has spent 15 years under house arrest since winning 1990 elections.
The military regime in Myanmar, also known as Burma, plans new elections on November 7 which opposition groups and Western governments have criticized as a sham.
Clinton upset activists early in her tenure by saying that human rights would not "interfere" with areas of US-China cooperation, such as trying to revive the global economy or fighting climate change.
In a joint letter, eight pressure groups including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch said Clinton now had a "unique opportunity" to raise concerns in the wake of Liu's Nobel and ahead of Hu's visit.
"Rather than smoothing the path for cooperation, the United States undermines its interests and compromises its ability to secure progress on other issues when it subordinates human rights concerns," the letter said.
"The Chinese side notes the soft-pedaling of human rights principles and perceives it as weakness," it said.
Leonard Leo, chair of the US Commission on International Religious Freedom, said that China's repression of religious practice "breeds distrust among its neighbors, hurts its international image, and damages US-China relations."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
