International ties

China's new face in the global arena

Updated: 2012-09-04 16:20

By Aaron Jed Rabena ( chinadaily.com.cn)

Comments(1) Print Mail Large Medium  Small 0

China has changed a lot since its opening-up policy in 1978. China is now the world's second economic and military powerhouse. As China continues to rise, so does the wrong misconceptions and deceitful stigma about how it will continue to waltz out and evaporate.
China's approach now is with a strong emphasis on economic diplomacy, stern professionalism, and cultural exchanges. In the common parlance, it is known as "business is business" or "strictly business." Political liberalization is gradually following economic liberalization. An American scholar, Michael Roskin, once said "You have freedom here (China)."
What makes China different from other rising or emerging powers is that is has peppered itself with a strong emphasis on bilateral and multilateral diplomacy and international commitments. This is evidenced by their strong participation in international governmental organizations. No other emerging power in history has done what China is doing in terms of a very wide reach of economic linkages and activism in international affairs and global responsibilities which actually signals to the world they have no ulterior motive.
China has also committed to engaging the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, and the East Asia Summit among others.
Key to this success is the profession of the leaders and bureaucrats. In China, the most popular professions are engineering, business, architecture, IT, and the like. All these point to the fact that the leaders orientation will be reflected on the things that they do in society. This has been evident in the grand implementation of the national high-speed railway system, towering and magnificent mega-infrastructures, stretching flyovers, and booming high rise residential buildings – which are all aimed to provide for the needs and comforts of the people.
Leaders in China do not like to talk as much as leaders in "democratic countries." But rather, they devote their time for talking about the creation of material and tangible outputs for the benefit of the public. Most of the statesmen in China do not belong to the law profession, but what they have done for their country to achieve perpetual success is truly praiseworthy and has already been palpably embedded to improve people's lives. In China, their actions not their words are what achieves democracy -- which is done by a strong and overdriven government.
It is by the provision of efficient public services at a fast pace in which other democratic countries are not able to deliver due to much political bickering, partisanship, and squabbling. "Democracy" is just a nomenclature, what is important is a strong government that can effectively cater to the needs of its people in a swift and willful manner. There is no demagoguery in China, only productivity and non-stop activity managed by leaders that possess wisdom.
This goes to show that there is no best political form of government or political system. Every country has its own reception and perception towards its own constituency and nation-building. All nations must discover for itself what is good for it. This is what makes China flag their "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" which bespeak that everything shall be adapted and dealt with on a case to case basis.
The Chinese are now becoming the top source of tourists and foreign students abroad especially in many Western countries, bringing along money that can contribute to the economy of the country where they are going.
Football player Nicolas Anelka and NBA idol Stephon Marbury among others have come to China to grab the opportunities that can be realized. So, from the US version of an "American Dream," there is now seemingly an emerging "Chinese Sensation" where more and more people are starting to join the bandwagon. The world is changing, where Asian states are rising, and on the forefront of that comes China's new face to the world.

The author is an overseas student from Philippines mastering in International Relations with a Holistic Law Background and Service Experience at Shandong University in China.

The opinions expressed do not represent the views of the China Daily website

China cancelled meeting with Hillary

I was expecting this to happen for a very long time. There is no reason why the host of a country would want to discuss his neighbourhood problems with his guests, and definitely not one from the other side of the Pacific Ocean. Why should Hillary or the Americans be dictating the agenda, on what to discuss and what not to discuss, and what more, the disputes between neighbours? Who do the US think they are to tell the neighbours how to behave and what to do? Oh, I forget, the Empire.

It is about time that Asian and Southeast Asian countries decide what they should talk to their guests and not be dragged along by the guests. And this is what happened in Beijing today.

‘BEIJING (AP) — U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton sat down Wednesday with Chinese President Hu Jintao to press Beijing to agree to peacefully resolve territorial disputes with its smaller neighbors over the South China Sea. But as she began her meetings here, China questioned the stated neutrality of the United States.

At the start of the talks with Hu, Clinton said the U.S.-China relationship is strong. "We are able to explore areas of agreement and disagreement in a very open manner, which I think demonstrates the maturity of the relationship and the chance to take it further in the future," she said.

There was no immediate comment on the talks, but a scheduled meeting with Vice President Xi Jinping for later Wednesday morning had been canceled by China "for unexpected scheduling reasons," said a senior State Department official, speaking on condition of anonymity.’

The next time China may not even want to see her, or maybe no next time unless Obama is reelected. The host country should determine the agenda of the visit and not about meddling with other countries’ affairs.

Send her home.

Social media versus commercial media

I would like to use the term professional media to describe the main media but that would have given them far too much credit than they deserved. The only thing professional is probably its recognition as a profession. Today, many professional journalists or even academics are far from neutral, objective, and many try to pursue their private agenda for personal or financial gains. This is particularly widespread among the much hyped and considered respectable big names in the western media. Many have proven to be writing fictions created to suit their personal motive.

Cherian George wrote a hefty piece of material in his article, ‘Press Controls and the Myth of Online Bypass’ in Journalism.sg. The title itself suggested where he is coming from and he did not hide much to be seen as being neutral. The main media or commercial media is the still the cornerstone in the collection and dissemination of news. This I cannot disagree as long as it keeps to these roles. Once it strays towards opinion and commentaries, to set an agenda, the horns are raised. The main media will play its part to serve its master’s interests and agenda. Period. How many professional journalists could touch their hearts and say, I am saying this, writing this, strictly from a neutral, professional and objective point of view? Not that bloggers and social media are clean and objective either. There is a contest, a war, by both sides trying to tell their truths or version of truths.

The intrinsic biases in Cherian George’s position to favour main media are understandable. This can be reflected in his comments here,

‘Professional journalism

There is, however, a third role that newspapers play that online media show no signs of taking on. As much as our blogs claim to be monitoring the powerful, the reality is that their capacity is extremely limited. One limitation is their lack of training and experience, in making ethical judgment calls and in separating reliable information from gossip. This gap may be overstated. Journalism is not rocket science and I think it is possible for bloggers to develop professional journalism skills.

However, there is a bigger – and so far unbridgeable – gap that we need to take far more seriously. This is the gap between what can be accomplished by large teams of professional, full-time journalists versus small collectives of part-time amateurs. No matter how intelligent, talented and sincere the latter are, there are simply practical limits to what they can accomplish without sufficient time and the organisational back-up.’

His assumption is that the main media and professionals would do the necessary, to accomplish that idealism, that aspirations, that the media as the Fourth Estate should do or expected to do. The expectation and hope by the public are very high, but often in vain when the professionals failed them. If bloggers are assumed to lack the skills and intellect to make ethical judgements, so professionals will have the skills and the will to do so? The assumption is too naïve and simplistic. How many professionals are strutting their stuff and bulldozing their ways under a power halo over their heads? And in so doing, totally ignore the ethical calling of their professions and their conscience?

Cherian assumed that by virtue of their training, their numbers and organization resources, the professionals will do good for the sake of good and ethics, to say the right stuff. Really?

How many would agree to this assertion?

USA,Japan, Vietnam & Philippines have divergent agenda and motive against China

USA, Japan, Vietnam and Philippines have divergent agenda and motive against China.



The Evil  Empire, USA, Japan, Vietnam and the Philippines all have different agendas, interest and motive in pushing against China.  For some unsound moronic reasons US tries to stop China's peaceful development by various ways and means because it fears of losing its number one position to China. What better way to achieve its evil agenda then by pitting Japan, Vietnam, the Philippines and India against China. America will be happy to see Asia in turmoil with Asians fighting Asians. In this way with China tie down in perennial wars with her neighbours the Evil Empire thinks it will thus be able to preserve its number one position forever.

Japan has a different agenda and motive in hoping to involve America in a war with China. Japan believes that when USA and China fight it will result in mutual nuclear destruction and thus serve her secret agenda and motive of proxy revenge against USA nuclear bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima in the Second World War while at the same time prevent China from her peaceful development.

The Asian parasites of Vietnamese rats and Philippine vermins hope to nib at Chinese territorial lands and seas when China is busy fighting the Evil Empire, USA.

America will be smart enough not to involve in a long war with China especially both can annihilate each other with nuclear weapons. America's sinister agenda and motive is to stir shit and let Japan, India, Vietnam and the Pinoys fight its proxy wars against China. Hope these stupid Asian countries will see through the evil agenda and motive of the Satanic Empire, USA  and stop  being make use of as sacrificial pawns by that Evil Empire.

Southernglory1

Tuesday, 4th September, 2012.

Homes-for-Hongkongers plan will extend to their resale

Homes-for-Hongkongers plan will extend to their resale

“Policy to help local homebuyers by barring non-residents from buying some flats will also extend to their resale, housing minister says

Tuesday, 04 September, 2012, 12:00am

Joyce Ng

A much-awaited scheme to restrict sales of some new homes to Hong Kong buyers will be extended to the resale of those flats, the housing minister said yesterday.

In an interview with the South China Morning Post, Secretary for Transport and Housing Professor Anthony Cheung Bing-leung said the sales ban would be extended to safeguard the policy dubbed "Hong Kong property for Hong Kong residents". Otherwise buyers could quickly defeat its purpose by immediately reselling the flats to mainlanders.

Cheung was elaborating on Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying's announcement last week of 10 measures to cool the property market. Leung said the sales ban would be launched after legal drafting was completed and the new restrictions were added to land leases of new sites for sale to private developers.

"The purpose is to cater to Hong Kong residents' aspirations for home ownership," Cheung said….”

At the rate property prices are spiralling out of control with a shrinking world and money being printed like toilet papers, the whole paradigm of home ownership for citizens would need to be seriously looked at, especially in little countries or cities like Hongkong and Sinkieland. They just have not enough for sale, and there are just too much money looking for a good buy. And where else to put money into properties than in land scarce little cities? The only risk is for the little cities to sink due to the weight and overbuilding. Other than this, the prices of properties can only go one way, up and up. And anyone who sold will only see the prices going higher and higher, like the Tower of Babel.

Given the new set of parameters, what should the govt of a people do to protect the interest of its citizens? Selling out is a very attractive option and everyone hanging to a piece of property would only wait for his turn to cash out to the next richer buyer. It is a nice monopoly game to play and to exit very rich as long as one does not bother about remaining in an ever pricier little city.

The Hongkie govt has realised that the property game cannot be played under the same old rules or Hongkong will be sold to the highest buyers in no time. The curbs will come down real hard, and the game will be changed. Properties will no longer be traded freely, or some at least, and be determined by market forces alone. Govt intervention is a must to keep the ship from hitting an iceberg of Titanic proportion.

Maybe the Hongkie govt are just plain silly. It would be better to sell everything on a willing buyer willing seller basis, and everyone will be smiling to the banks. Why is Hongkong losing touch with its free spirit and free enterprise philosophy?