China #2

321 posts / 0 new
Last post
swallow swallow's picture

That's really interesting. Might a DPP government move towards a truth commission? 

(Sorry for the thread drift to Taiwan, but I'm intrigued!) 

ilha formosa

swallow wrote:

Ilha, any thoughts on the new KMT candidate's chances? I understood that the DPP was pretty much a shoo-in this time, but I did like the image of both parties offering women as their presidential candidates.

Eric Chu's chances are marginally better. As for both main parties running female candidates, I have a more cynical view. First, after the KMT got soundly beaten in municipal elections on the heels of the Sunflower Movement, I surmise that no male KMT member wanted to face the prospect of being set up to get trounced by a woman, Tsai Ing-wen of the DPP. Taiwan is still a fairly sexist, small-c conservative, traditional, Confucian society (although it continues to make huge strides in human rights - same-sex marriage down the road?). A corollary of this is that the KMT would steal some of the thunder away from a likely Tsai victory by being able to say the election featured a woman defeating another "mere" woman.

At the same time, the KMT could eke something out of this situation of poor victory prospects by availing themselves of the opportunity to run a female candidate, who otherwise would not have risen through the KMT ranks if real power were in sight, but who by virtue of her gender would presumably help the party appear progressive and non-sexist to both the electorate and the world. (If this was indeed their thinking, it was totally sexist.)

That the KMT's initial candidate - Hung Hsiu-chu, who must have been the top female contender within the party - performed so poorly that she had to be replaced, I think adds credence to these arguments. She was never presidential material, and was making the KMT look like it was going from bad to worse. Chu, a real presidential prospect, will step up and at least try to save the party's image even as it goes down to defeat.

swallow wrote:

A few years back in Beijing I happened across a "Chinese Taipei" cultural and economic dispaly going on. It sure looked like an attempt to peddle Taiwan's model in a friendly fashion. 

Yeah, promoting its "soft power" is Taiwan's strategy. It's not going to win a shooting war against China, and in any case business ties across the strait are substantial.

ilha formosa

swallow wrote:

That's really interesting. Might a DPP government move towards a truth commission? 

(Sorry for the thread drift to Taiwan, but I'm intrigued!) 

To avoid thread drift, I'll respond to this branch of discussion at: http://rabble.ca/babble/international-news-and-politics/taiwan-china-rel...

ilha formosa

On Xi's motivations:

Quote:
Beijing is casting itself as the peacemaker in this weekend's historic summit with Taiwan, but experts say it is at least partly aiming to draw attention away from its aggressive expansionism in the South China Sea...But as it has pursued reconciliation with Taipei, Beijing has adopted a more aggressive posture towards its other maritime neighbours, heightening tensions over territorial disputes with everyone from historical enemy Japan to its fellow Communist country Vietnam.

And not a whole lot has happened to change Taiwan relations. The best that can be said is that this meeting was a ceremony to mark the previous picking of the "low-hanging fruit", ie the least contentious points in cross-strait relations, referred to below, that Ma 'Ling'-jeou has overseen.

Quote:
Cross-strait relations have improved dramatically since Ma Ying-jeou's election as Taiwanese president in 2008, with the launch of direct flights, trade deals and a tourism boom that have smoothed ties between the once bitter rivals.

[...]

"People in Taiwan might be asking...if Beijing is really sincere about sending a message of peace, then remove the missiles and stop these war games." -Willy Lam of the Chinese University of Hong Kong.

http://news.yahoo.com/beijing-using-historic-taiwan-meet-decoy-analysts-...

ilha formosa

I'd like to re-emphasize that the Ma-Xi meeting was UNOFFICIAL.

They met as "Mister Ma" and "Mister Xi", not in their capacities as the presidents of Taiwan and China. While Xi can use the meeting as he wishes to boost his image domestically and internationally, Ma "Ling-jeou" ("zero-nine", a nickname after his 9% popular support) had zero authority to negotiate a thing on behalf of the people of Taiwan.

ilha formosa

Example of a domestic problem: Airpocalypse now: China pollution reaching record levels (The Guardian, Nov. 9)  "In some areas level of harmful particles in the air were 56 times the levels considered safe by the World Health Organisation"

And an international problem: China is also due to look bad at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague.  Philippines versus China: Might, Right, and International Law in the South China Sea.

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

ilha formosa wrote:

Example of a domestic problem: Airpocalypse now: China pollution reaching record levels (The Guardian, Nov. 9)  "In some areas level of harmful particles in the air were 56 times the levels considered safe by the World Health Organisation"

China is not the worst country just one of the worst. Apparently this is more of a developing nation problem than a China problem. Of course the Imperial press only covers problems in its enemies countries not its allies who are far worse.

Quote:

Nearly half of Delhi's (the greater metropolitan area of which New Delhi is a part) 4.4 million schoolchildren already have irreversible lung damage from air pollution, a recent study found.

The city's air is more than twice as polluted as the air in Beijing, according to the World Health Organization.

In fact, India has 13 of the world's 25 most-polluted cities.

By contrast, Lanzhou is the only Chinese city among the worst 50, while Beijing is ranked 79th.

In some parts of Delhi, levels of PM2.5 particulate matter--which is considered to cause the most lung damage--routinely exceed 1,000 in winter, when small fires become more common.

In Beijing PM2.5 levels that exceed 500 make international headlines, but in Delhi, levels twice that high are "hardly noticed," Harris says.

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1098567_chinas-air-pollution-is-bad-...

 

NDPP

Xinjiang Problems - Made in USA

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.ca/2015/11/chinas-xinjiang-problem-made-in...

"Uyghurs will continue to suffer collectively because of a small minority of violent, loud, well-funded and well-organized proxies propped up by the West..."

ilha formosa

Just a short note for now to say that anti-CCP ≠ pro-western imperialism.

Nor does anti-CCP = anti-everything-CCP, from the past and into the future; and anti-western-imperialism ≠ anti-everything western.

Babblers know well enough that nothing is monolithic/pure black and white.

Taiwanese in favor of independence are generally not western imperialists, but they could be driven into the arms of imperialists by a belligerent or conniving China. I doubt that ethnic Tibetan self-immolators in China were western proxies.

NDPP

Will Chess, Not Battleship, Be the Game of the Future in Eurasia?  -  by Pepe Escobar

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/will_chess_not_battleship_be_the_gam...

"Neither Beijing nor Washington should be caught in the Thucydides trap, the belief that a rising power and the ruling imperial power of the planet are condemned to go to war with each other sooner or later..."

Sean in Ottawa

kropotkin1951 wrote:

ilha formosa wrote:

Example of a domestic problem: Airpocalypse now: China pollution reaching record levels (The Guardian, Nov. 9)  "In some areas level of harmful particles in the air were 56 times the levels considered safe by the World Health Organisation"

China is not the worst country just one of the worst. Apparently this is more of a developing nation problem than a China problem. Of course the Imperial press only covers problems in its enemies countries not its allies who are far worse.

Quote:

Nearly half of Delhi's (the greater metropolitan area of which New Delhi is a part) 4.4 million schoolchildren already have irreversible lung damage from air pollution, a recent study found.

The city's air is more than twice as polluted as the air in Beijing, according to the World Health Organization.

In fact, India has 13 of the world's 25 most-polluted cities.

By contrast, Lanzhou is the only Chinese city among the worst 50, while Beijing is ranked 79th.

In some parts of Delhi, levels of PM2.5 particulate matter--which is considered to cause the most lung damage--routinely exceed 1,000 in winter, when small fires become more common.

In Beijing PM2.5 levels that exceed 500 make international headlines, but in Delhi, levels twice that high are "hardly noticed," Harris says.

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1098567_chinas-air-pollution-is-bad-...

 

As we see stories of extreme smog in Beijing, we should remember that this city has long been target of sandstorms going back over 3500 years ago.

This has left the city extremely vulnerable to human-made pollution as when the two mix together the result is especially toxic.

There are good reasons to presume that China with this most immediate vulnerability may be more motivated than some to address the problem.

China is of course a developping country with a huge reliance on manufacturing and low-cost polluting practices. China is investing a great deal in alternatives but is held back for a number of reasons including competition, cost, size of the problem etc. as well as issues relating to its socio-economic and political circumstances.

China is at the front line of environmental catastrophe and it faces enourmous challenges in scale and it does so from a position of having a proportionately lower level of wealth.

This is one reason it is so important to have realistic international treaties that employ the wealth of the world to create change.

NDPP

China Rising

https://youtu.be/0yIcRIefZj0

"China's military in Syria?"

ilha formosa

China must end its intimidation and detention of human rights lawyers, The Guardian, 18 Jan. 2016

Quote:
Most of those under arrest are suspected of “subversion of state power” or “inciting subversion of state power”. None of them have so far been allowed access to counsel, friends or family, and they are effectively disappeared. In some cases there is good reason to fear that they were put under pressure to “dismiss” their previously appointed lawyers. Some are not known to be suspected of any crime at all...

...the persons above are at high risk of torture or other cruel and inhuman treatment. Our concern is heightened by the findings of the UN Committee Against Torture, which stated on 9 December 2015 that it “remains seriously concerned over consistent reports indicating that the practice of torture and ill-treatment is still deeply entrenched in [China's] criminal justice system...

China’s Top 1% Own One Third Of All Property In China, Says Report Bottom 25 percent owns just one percent , Jan 15.,2016

Quote:
According to a report released by the China Family Panel Studies (CFPS) of Peking University, China’s top one percent own one-third of all property in China, while the bottom 25 percent owns just one percent.

Why Beijing’s [Economic] Troubles Could Get a Lot Worse, Barron's Asia, Dec. 2014

Quote:
...People are crazy if they believe any government statistics, which, of course, are largely fabricated. In China, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle of physics holds sway, whereby the mere observation of economic numbers changes their behavior...

...As for Xi’s much-ballyhooed anticorruption campaign inside China, it offends me that international media depict it as a good-governance effort. What’s really going on is an old-style party purge reminiscent of the 1950s and 1960s with quota-driven arrests, summary trials, mysterious disappearances, and suicides, which has already entrapped, by our calculations, 100,000 party operatives and others. The intent is not moral purification by the Xi administration but instead the elimination of political enemies and other claimants to the economy’s spoils.

ilha formosa

Quote:
The day Zhao Wei disappeared: how a young law graduate was caught in China's human rights dragnet  ‘They must be torturing her,’ says Zhao’s mother as she desperately searches for the daughter who vanished seven months ago

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/25/zhao-wei-mothers-search-for...

“We want to appeal but I don’t know who to appeal to. The Communist party is in charge. Whether you have committed a crime or not all depends on what the Communist party decides,” she says. “Even if you didn’t commit a crime, if [the party] says you did, then you did. End of story.”

Quote:
Swedish NGO worker released from detention
Three EU citizens, including Dahlin and Hong Kong book publishers Gui Minhai and Lee Bo, have been detained by the mainland authorities in recent months. The missing booksellers case has raised concern among the European Union, Swedish and British governments, who have called upon China to disclose more information.

ilha formosa

Why critics of China aren’t safe anywhere

Quote:
...Li Xin’s disappearance would fit into a pattern of increasingly brazen Chinese lawlessness overseas, as agents of the Communist regime track down critics, kidnap them, bring them home and dump them in prison…The kidnappings may be a natural foreign policy for a regime that is increasingly cracking down at home — and facing no consequences from abroad for the repression...

…nor has China had to pay any price for its lawlessness. It expels foreign reporters, but the agents of its propaganda machine are welcomed in the West; it denies visas to scholars of whom it disapproves, but party mouthpieces travel wherever they choose outside China…

...business, apparently, come first. As long as that remains true, it appears that no critic of China, of any nationality, in any nation, will be safe.

If any simpletons want to stick the epithet “China-basher” on me, first let them stick the label “CCP-washer” on themselves.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

The Washington Post is about as reliable on China as Press TV is on the US. There is likely some truth in the article but its hard to shift through the propaganda.

The part quoted below I found to be particularly hilarious. An organization founded by Hilary Clinton is shut down in China. I wonder how long a sharia law centre would be allowed in the US that was founded by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Imagine the Chinese government thinking an organization with her as a patron might not be appropriate.

I liked the Kerry quote but given my biases I thought he must have been talking about Saudi Arabia or Israel.

Quote:

As if to punctuate that assessment, on Friday authorities shuttered, without explanation, an organization that had emerged from the famous conference on women’s rights held in Beijing in 1995, the Beijing Zhongze Women’s Legal Counseling and Service Center. The center’s founder and director, Guo Jianmei, is on the advisory council of Vital Voices, a women’s rights organization that grew out of Hillary Clinton’s advocacy during her time as first lady.

...

“No government, whatever its pretensions and whatever its accomplishments, can fairly call itself great if its citizens are not allowed to say what they believe or are denied the right to learn about events and decisions that affect their lives,” Kerry said.

ilha formosa

That there are outside interests (not referring to Clinton's in particular) ready to take advantage of any weakness in China doesn't simplify matters.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

ilha formosa wrote:

That there are outside interests (not referring to Clinton's in particular) ready to take advantage of any weakness in China doesn't simplify matters.

Indeed the last thing that China needs is Western support for terrorists. Oh sorry they are called freedom fighters in our press. From what I see from afar it seems the Chinese government likely has at least 40% support among its population and therefore by our standards are a legitimate government. The question is how far do their police force go in suppressing dissent and what kind of dissent are they suppressing. Like all sovereign nations they have the right to suppress foreign backed dissidents who are trying to implement regime change to a government that is controlled by Western interests. IMO the vast majority of Chinese citizens do not want their government to become a puppet regime of Wall Street. Given the West's record of backing terrorists in many countries why would the central government not be concerned about groups linked to the likes of Hilary Clinton.

NDPP

American Aggression Against China

http://journal-neo.org/2016/02/07/american-aggression-against-china/

"While the Americans blow hard about complying with international law, it is they who once again vigorously violate it."

swallow swallow's picture

That one is just silly. China's just as imperialist as America in the South China Sea. They should both get out and stop their dangerous macho posturing games. 

ilha formosa

How is the PRC’s placing of surface-to-air missiles on a South China Sea island any different from western imperial powers establishing their presence on, for example, Diego Garcia, South Georgia, or French Polynesia?

Quote:
Time to see the PRC for what it is: China’s militarization of its claimed maritime territories has been ongoing for years, as have the bullying tactics against neighbors who have their own claims. The installation of anti-aircraft missiles was an inevitable step in the PRC process of fortifying Woody Island, along with creating artificial islands from sand shoals, and constructing on them airstrips and naval docks capable of handling military deployments.

Yes, the Paracels (the island group in which Woody Island is situated) are close to another sovereign state, Vietnam. But they are also closer to China than the western possessions, mentioned above, are to their respective “mother” countries. The Paracels are in the midst of shipping lanes that supply China, closer to China’s vital interests. The western possessions mentioned above have been used to project military power far from the mother country, or to conduct nuclear tests.

One thing clearly differs: the PRC’s “takeover” of various SCS islands occurs in the era of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. In spite of being a party to this convention, the PRC seems intent on turning back the clock to the 19th century way of staking out territory. It is playing under the rule that might makes right. It can point this out to the US, which has not ratified the convention.

Is UNCLOS just a western “lawfare” instrument, invented post-WWII, to put a freeze on imperial takeovers of little islands around the globe, while western powers were ahead in the game? Thus is China trying to play catch-up now?

There is also a high potential for oil and gas field finds in the SCS. Some goodies in the sandbox to fight over.

In a more utopian world, disputed maritime territories, along with western possessions such as those mentioned, and all associated maritime resource rights, and aviation rights, would be under international, multilateral control.

NDPP

American Aggression Against China: A World Crisis Looms   -   by Christopher Black

http://journal-neo.org/2016/05/17/american-aggression-against-china-a-wo...

"...In other words, the United States, that is, the military-industrial complex that has the real power in the country, is pushing both China and its own people to the brink of something whose consequences will be unexpected and which can only lead to a common disaster. They are pushing everywhere, from North Korea, to Syria, from Ukraine to the Baltic, from Afghanistan to South America, but especially Russia and China.

The clock to Armageddon will keep counting down as a world crisis looms."

ilha formosa

Claims of "American Aggression Against China" would be more credible if there were not 5 other Asian countries that dispute the territory that China is claiming. The article ignores how the Philippines and Vietnam have also been recipients of recent Chinese aggression, and how China's bold "9-dash line" claim (inherited from the surrender of imperial Japan at the end of WW2) remains disputed internationally, not just by the US.

 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

ilha formosa wrote:

Claims of "American Aggression Against China" would be more credible if there were not 5 other Asian countries that dispute the territory that China is claiming. The article ignores how the Philippines and Vietnam have also been recipients of recent Chinese aggression, and how China's bold "9-dash line" claim (inherited from the surrender of imperial Japan at the end of WW2) remains disputed internationally, not just by the US.

It just seems that some people prefer to live in a Manichaean reality, where every conflict is Good vs. Evil, rather than the result of a complex rat's nest of historical causes.

Unionist

I have no opinion on whose territory is whose in that region. But when the U.S. has an opinion, I smell gunpowder and blood. This is the country whose president couldn't bring himself to say "sorry" for liquidating hundreds of thousands of innocent noncombatants 70 years ago. The U.S. has been chased, screaming, out of many countries since World War II. One day, the sovereign peoples of the world will finish the job. I plan to celebrate and invite all my babble friends that day, even if it's not in my lifetime.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Yes, but just because the U.S. is bad, doesn't mean any of the others are good. The U.S. empire has a dominant economic and military position in the world today. If any of the other great powers held this position, I have no idea whether they would be more or less bad than the Americans.

Unionist

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Yes, but just because the U.S. is bad, doesn't mean any of the others are good.

Not sure what you mean. It's not about whether anyone is bad or good. It's about whether they send armies and drones around the world to murder people and interfere in sovereign nations' affairs.

Quote:
The U.S. empire has a dominant economic and military position in the world today. If any of the other great powers held this position, I have no idea whether they would be more or less bad than the Americans.

I entirely agree. Whether it's Russia, China, or anyone else, they should stick to their own boundaries and affairs. Otherwise, there's no reason to distinguish their crimes from those of the U.S. So far, I'm not convinced China has committed aggression anywhere - haven't seen any evidence yet. Russia? Clearly they did so in the days of the Soviet Union (Afghanistan, Czechoslovakia, etc.) - and they were rightly condemned for those brutal violations of international law.

I'm not sure why you're raising this distinction about who would be more or less bad than the Americans. The Americans are evil aggressors, as was Britain in its day, as was the Soviet Union in its day... They should be condemned and brought to heel.

Agree?

swallow swallow's picture

I suspect the issue is raised because there's a kneejerk reaction to rally to China's "defence" when in fact China the aggressor in the Western Philippine Sea (or what the imperialist American and Chinese governments call the South China Sea). 

NDPP

Eurasia: China & Russia is Where Its Happening  - by William Engdahl

http://journal-neo.org/2016/05/25/eurasia-china-and-russia-is-where-its-...

"While NATO planes and warships increasingly saber-rattle both Russia and Chinese territories, the two giants of Eurasia are forging relations closer than ever in their history. Energy alliances are at the heart of the process..."

ilha formosa

Unionist wrote:
It's not about whether anyone is bad or good. It's about whether they send armies and drones around the world to murder people and interfere in sovereign nations' affairs.

Or kidnap booksellers on vacation.

Michael Moriarity wrote:
Yes, but just because the U.S. is bad, doesn't mean any of the others are good. The U.S. empire has a dominant economic and military position in the world today. If any of the other great powers held this position, I have no idea whether they would be more or less bad than the Americans.

I’d say something structural makes hegemons behave as hegemons. Awfully circular, I know - but can the rise of a hegemon be prevented by some kind of global civility?

I expect the CCP -- as distinct from 'China' -- will play the "we suffered 150 years of western imperialism" card at least until they gain an upper hand, which they hope will happen as the PLA builds up and as more US debt is held in yuan. What a wonderful prospect, having Putin, Xi and Trumpler at the heads of their respective states in a few months time. They have proven tendencies to believe more in 'might makes right,’ while international law is nice when it can be twisted to make themselves look good, or others less than good.

Unionist wrote:
So far, I'm not convinced China has committed aggression anywhere - haven't seen any evidence yet.

Other than the Tibet invasion, Chinese leadership tends to play the long game, and patiently cultivates overseas interests to their favour. They avoid getting blood on their hands, at least not directly. China's Involvement in Sudan: Arms and Oil

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Unionist wrote:

I'm not sure why you're raising this distinction about who would be more or less bad than the Americans. The Americans are evil aggressors, as was Britain in its day, as was the Soviet Union in its day... They should be condemned and brought to heel.

Agree?

Yes, I agree that we should all oppose aggression by any country, and that the U.S. is the biggest aggressor around these days. I am no expert, but what I am reading indicates that China is attempting to lay claim to large areas of the sea which were formerly considered international waters. In this case, therefore, it seems to me that China is acting in an aggressive way towards its neighbours, thus it must shoulder some of the blame for any conflicts that result.

ilha formosa

What’s worse: being a party (China) to an international convention (UNCLOS) and blatantly violating it, or a non-party (US) and demanding everyone else adhere to it?

NDPP

Target Russia. Target China. Target Iran   -  by Pepe Escobar

http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/05/28/target-russia-target-ch...

"So it's all hands on deck all over Exceptionalistan to counter Russia, China and prevent any real normalization with Iran. These localized offensives - practical and rhetorical - on all fronts always mean one thing and one thing only, splitting and fracturing, by all means necessary, the OBOR Eurasian integration.

Bets can be made that Moscow, Beijing and Tehran simply won't be fooled."

ilha formosa

Europeans Push Back Against Beijing in the South China Sea

Quote:
“If the law of the sea is not respected today in the China seas, it will be threatened tomorrow in the Arctic, in the Mediterranean, or elsewhere,” Le Drian told the security conference, known as the Shangri-La Dialogue and hosted by the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

...[also,] India has become increasingly vocal about the challenge China poses to free navigation in the Western Pacific.

ilha formosa
NDPP

Beijing Goes Mobile in the South China Sea  -  by Pepe Escobar

http://thesaker.is/beijing-goes-mobile-in-the-south-china-sea/

"...China will continue to go mobile - in search of all that oil and gas. And count on the Pentagon to continue its meddling."

ilha formosa

Full transcript of Lam Wing-kee’s opening statement at his Hong Kong press conference: Bookseller Lam Wing-kee talks to the media about his ordeal in mainland China.

ilha formosa

Beijing’s Claims of South China Sea Support May Not Hold Water June 17, 2016 Wall Street Journal

Quote:
Polish officials were taken aback in April when Beijing suddenly issued a statement that hadn’t been approved by both sides following a meeting between their foreign ministers. It said Poland supported China’s policy of resolving the dispute “through dialogues and consultations,” making no mention of arbitration. The statement “did not accurately reflect Poland’s position on the issue of the South China Sea, which has been communicated to the Chinese side,” Poland’s Foreign Ministry said.

Russia disappoints China, sides with Vietnam and the Philippines (Nov. 9, 2015)

ilha formosa

Quote:
More important to understanding Beijing’s mind-set on the matter is the fact that even if the court had had the authority to rule in the case and the powers to enforce its decision, it is highly unlikely that Beijing would have been any more inclined to accede. The reason behind this is directly related to the historical narrative of “national humiliation” and the belief that as a product of Western imperialism, global institutions and the legal architecture of international law are little more than mechanisms to maintain a skewed distribution of power. In other words, a ruling by an international court against Beijing would have provided more “evidence” that the West, along with its allies in East Asia, are conspiring to keep China in a  state of subjugation.

As Zheng Wang demonstrates in his book Never Forget National Humiliation, the victimization narrative wields a powerful influence on decisionmaking in Beijing and public support for its dogged response to the perceived affront. A survey conducted in 2013 by Andrew Chubb also shows that 83 percent of Chinese respondents regarded the South China Sea dispute as a continuation of the so-called “century of humiliation.”

Having staked its legitimacy domestically by reinforcing the meme of national humiliation and by positioning the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) as the sole agent capable of restoring China to its rightful place near the pinnacle of the international community, the party has painted itself into a corner...

[...]

As a regional power aspiring to near-great power status, China now also seems to believe it has obtained the “right” to ignore the strictures of international law when its national interests are perceived to be threatened, and it will not hesitate to resort to moral equivalence by reminding its detractors of the many precedents that were set by other great powers over the years, the United States chief among them.

ilha formosa

South China Sea babble thread here.

NorthReport

China’s Global Reputation Hinges on Upcoming South China Sea Court Decision

http://time.com/4400671/philippines-south-china-sea-arbitration-case/

NorthReport
ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Christ, ilha formosa:  I can only assume that if you are approvingly quoting The Wall Street Journal and The National Interest that you also share the barbaric conservative, predatory and war-loving views of those publications.

Can't you find any genuinely progressive publications or links? Or don't you care?

ilha formosa

One has to look at all points of view, plus one's own sense of facts on the ground. I judge according to the information and the sense it makes, not going merely on the reputation of the publication or writer. I respect Pepe Escobar (if that's what this is about, I know you admire him) but that doesn't make him deeply knowledgeable on all fronts.

You yourself are cherry-picking from the sources I've posted. And you forgot to rag on North Report for linking Time Magazine.

Or, are you Pepe Escobar???

NorthReport

China illegally cordoned off a huge part of the South China Sea for military drills—and will likely do so again

Its warning to stay away from the area was short and to the point. After giving the geographic coordinates and dates of the drill, the brief statement read simply: “No entry.” One problem: China had no authority to block off that part of the sea. It’s just the latest example of Beijing’s disregard for the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea(UNCLOS), which is the basis for international maritime law and which China signed in 1996.

http://qz.com/728289/china-illegally-cordoned-off-a-huge-part-of-the-sou...

NorthReport
ilha formosa

Quote:
China’s aggressive claims to sovereignty in the South China Sea have angered its Asian neighbours and raised fears of a showdown with the US. By Jonathan Fenby

Fenby must be a pro-Yanqui imperial running dog to call China's moves "aggressive"!!! There is only one aggressor in the world, the US, and everyone else is on the other, the only other possible, side!!!

[/end dripping sarcasm]

NorthReport

Good analysis

China prepares to ignore a binding decision on territorial dispute

Growing military muscle is making its claims in the South China Sea more dangerous

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/south-china-sea-philippines-1.3670851

NorthReport

ilha,

Are you familiar with the author Gordon Chang?

China vs. Philippines: What's at Stake as the Verdict in the Hague Looms

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/china-vs-philippines-whats-stake-the...

NorthReport

Why does China want to control the South China Sea?

http://aparc.fsi.stanford.edu/news/why-does-china-want-control-south-chi...

Pages