What you will be getting and missing reading western media

This is what David Pilling wrote in his article, Japan, China and their ‘history problem’ in the Today paper, ‘The argument over Senkaku goes back to the start of Japanese colonialism. Japan surveyed Senkaku in 1885, … Saying that there was no sign of the islands being under anyone’s influence, it incorporated the into Japanese territory in 1895. Beijing says the islands have appeared on Chinese maps since the 16th Century. From its perspective, Japan seized the islands when it was setting off on its Western inspired colonial rampage. The islands were controlled by the Americans after the war, but returned to Tokyo in 1972 as part of the reversion of Okinawa to Japan. Beijing says the US had no right to return them since they were not Washington’s to give.’

Anyone reading this piece will think nothing is wrong with the Japanese version and the return of the islands to Japan. What was missing was the acknowledgement by the Japanese Imperial govt even much earlier of Diaoyu Islands as the territorial limits of the Qing Dynasty. What was left out was the ceding of the islands in an unequal treaty after China lost a war with Japan in the 1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki. It was not an innocent act of simply incorporating other countries’ land into another country like the Western powers did during their colonization of the world. Columbus went to American and found no one owned it, so claimed that he found it. Raffles founded Singapore because no one else found it.

It also brushes aside the fact that the islands were held in trust by the Americans only and America was not the rightful owners. It also did not say anything about the post WW2 treaties for all land grabbed by Japan to be returned to China, including these islands. It also turned a blind eye to the American agenda of the Cold War conflict with China and Russia and thus conveniently ignored China’s rights to these islands.

The western media often deliberately ignored the truth and the relevant facts to show a different truth. Unwary and innocent readers would easily be made to see only their side of half truth, and lies as truth. And may daft Asians and Africans would believe these western truths and yell and cheer and embrace them like the gospel truth. Unthinking and not thinking and making an ass of themselves to serve western interests and agenda without knowing it.


Anonymous said...

Cold War over, but vigilance still necessary
Global Times | 2012-8-24 0:25:03
By Global Times

E-mail [Click to print] Print
The Cold War era is long over, but the cold war mentality hasn't disappeared. Scholars in both China and the US often accuse the other country of having a cold war mentality. Others think the concept is outdated.

The US and Soviet camps confronted each other militarily, ideologically, and economically during the Cold War. With the end of the conflict, the political foundations for the confrontation disappeared.

But the competition between countries didn't end with it. While Cold War memories still linger, there are real worries that a new cold war may break out between China and the US. Many countries feel the urge to strengthen their efforts to secure national interests in a changing global strategic grid. Mistrust is expanding among major powers and in many regions.

As the world's largest power, the US has the greediest pursuit of security. It often guards against other countries in an aggressive way, including adopting policies of containment. This is the real reason that post-Cold War global politics haven't settled down strategically.

The history of the Cold War may not be repeated between China and the US. But tensions or confrontation may not be completely avoided between Beijing and Washington.

There is a theory that if China and the US see each other as enemies, they may become so. This kind of thinking adds to China's strategic dilemma.

China has to stay alert. This is the bottom line of securing its safety. This should also be the bottom line as Chinese society judges and assesses the world security situation. It will only jeopardize itself if it unilaterally abandons this principle.

Have the US and the West gone too far in guarding against China and formed a kind of military and political containment of China? There are clear signs that suggest so. The actions may not be a result of deep deliberation, but rather natural reaction to China's rise. And such a reaction is shared by both the officials and the public in the West, complementing each other.

A few people among the Chinese elites are advocating universal interests. These idealistic slogans, ignorant of world realities, can only delude the Chinese public.

China's guarding against the West is defensive, to protect its rights of peaceful development. This is a minimum level of vigilance. If the West cannot even accept this and intensifies containment against China, the consequences have to be shared by both sides, or the entire world.

Mistrust between countries remains stubborn. China has to stick to realistic thinking and restrained behavior.


Anonymous said...

China must be ready for further conflict with Japan
Global Times | 2012-8-23 0:45:04
By Global Times
Share on twitter Share on facebook Share on sinaweibo Share on google_plusone
More Sharing Services 8
E-mail [Click to print] Print
Chinese activists who were illegally detained by Japan are welcomed at Tsim Sha Tsui Ferry Pier after returning to south China's Hong Kong, Aug. 22, 2012. The seven Chinese activists illegally detained by Japan for landing on the Diaoyu Islands returned to Hong Kong on Wednesday afternoon. Photo: Xinhua
Chinese activists who were illegally detained by Japan are welcomed at Tsim Sha Tsui Ferry Pier after returning to south China's Hong Kong, Aug. 22, 2012. The seven Chinese activists illegally detained by Japan for landing on the Diaoyu Islands returned to Hong Kong on Wednesday afternoon. Photo: Xinhua

Japan's National Police Agency said Tuesday that if Chinese activists land on the Diaoyu Islands again, it will prosecute them. Chinese activists are planning new trips to the Diaoyu Islands, and will not be stopped because of Japan's warning. Japan's threat in fact signifies another round of escalation in the Diaoyu crisis.

The Chinese government should make full preparations for conflict over Diaoyu. The Diaoyu crisis has become irreconcilable after being pushed by Japan's right-wing forces. The tacit consensus between China and Japan that they won't expand the conflict has been broken. Confrontation has dominated the situation. It's impossible for the Chinese government to make a one-sided compromise, as that would deal a catastrophic blow to its credibility.

The Chinese government has to follow public opinion and contend with Japan for control of the Diaoyu Islands. Strategically, that's risky for China, but that's what it has to take.

The Chinese public isn't looking to get back the Diaoyu Islands immediately. But they cannot endure the arrogance and aggressiveness shown by Japan in the Diaoyu Islands conflict. It's the public wish and demand that the government decisively fight against Japan's provocations and make progress in safeguarding the sovereignty of Diaoyu.

Some analysts will argue such a demand lacks strategic wisdom. They suggest that China be restrained and further increase its strength. But it's impossible to ask the public to be as rational as strategists.

China should have the courage to create a new situation when battling Japan. China's law enforcement forces should sail into the so-called Japanese maritime belt within 12 nautical miles of the Diaoyu Islands. They should have the ability to apprehend these Japanese visitors. This should be the aim of the government in protecting Diaoyu in the future.

It may lead to intensified maritime tensions between China and Japan. China shouldn't be afraid of this. China and Japan should share equal and joint responsibility for maintaining maritime peace. If military clashes happen as a result of the Diaoyu dispute, China shouldn't be nervous. As long as neither wants to get involved in a real war, the clashes will be kept within certain parameters.

It's not a good choice for China. But when making tough decisions, the government should pay more attention to the expectations of the mainstream of the society and not foreign countries' reactions. This should be the principle when China makes decisions in territorial disputes.

The article is an editorial published in the Chinese edition of the Global Times Wednesday.


Matilah_Singapura said...

Everything written is parsed through cultural filters.

Everything read is also parsed through cultural filters.

Got objective reality?

Anonymous said...

I always say that the Straits times is taking The People's Daily as its model,it is my hope that it shifts before The People's Daily does.Singapore lumber satu!

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

I don't think so. The model for the ST is likely to be Washington Post. The political agenda and economic ideology are similar.