Global Times points out that Chinese aircraft aren't up to scratch
I think the following article from the Global Times demonstrates my point that the Sichuan earthquake has revealed the technological deficiencies of the PLA. The article quotes my favourite military expert Dai Xu in the last two paragraphs.
Foreign military aircraft participate in Chinese disaster relief
By Zhang Jiaqi and Liu Bin. Published on page 8 of the Global Times on 29 May 2008.
Apart from the comprehensive deployment of the PLA, military aircraft from the US, Russia and Pakistan have also delivered goods to the earthquake disaster zone as part of relief operations for the Wenchuan earthquake. A Russian MiG-26 is currently working with Chinese soldiers during the Tangjiashan quake lake crisis. The military aircraft from each country are together acting out a major rescue in the earthquake zone.
China welcomes assistance from foreign militaries
Following the earthquake, many foreign aircraft offered to help. On May 24, the Chinese Ministry of Defence publicly thanked the humanitarian assistance that the Russian and US defence departments gave the Sichuan disaster zone. The Ministry also welcomed foreign militaries to provide rescue goods in any form to the zone. In actual fact, the US Pacific Command sent two C-17 Globemaster-III transport planes to Chengdu on May 18 to deliver disaster relief supplies. The US Embassy in China revealed on May 28 that a total of three C-17s had delivered goods to Chengdu.
Russian military aircraft were even quicker to provide assistance in the wake of China’s earthquake. Within a week of the Wenchuan earthquake, Russia had dispatched seven IL-76 transport planes to the earthquake zone, delivering 150 tons of humanitarian aid, including tents and blankets. Following the directions of Russian President Medvedev, the Russian defence department sent another eight IL-76 military-use transport planes on May 24, delivering a total of more than 250 tons of disaster relief supplies, including 300 tents and approximately 3000 pieces of cold-resistant clothing. Two of the IL-76 transport planes then flew to the Sichuan earthquake zone on May 25. In support of the Chinese rescue effort, a Russian MiG-26 heavy-duty transport helicopter flew to Sichuan’s Deyang at 3pm on May 25. The helicopter is currently working with China’s only MiG-26 to transport heavy digging machines to the Tangjiashan quake lake.
Pakistan sent two C-130 transport planes on May 16, delivering blankets and tents to Chengdu. Another two Pakistani transport planes sent disaster relief supplies to Lanzhou on May 21. The Japanese Self-Defence Force is also considering whether to send disaster relief supplies to China’s earthquake disaster zone.
Majority of disaster relief aircraft are foreign made
During this earthquake, the PLA have taken up their obligations and been the main military force. Following the earthquake, IL-76 and Yun-8 transport planes from the PLA Air Force immediately flew equipment and goods to the disaster zone. For the disaster relief operations, the PLA deployed more than 100 MiG-17 and Black Hawk helicopters from the army aviation regiments of every military region. Meanwhile, the Navy’s aviation wing deployed eight medium-sized Z-8 helicopters that were made in China. These helicopters, laden with communication personnel, relief supplies and food, were the first to land in the earthquake zone. The helicopters created the communication between the earthquake zone and the outside world, and they also evacuated a large number of injured people. Military aircraft were also chiefly responsible for reconnaissance missions. According to reports, the PLA General Staff Department deployed a remote-sensing aircraft from a navy flight regiment to film the earthquake zone.
However, the majority of both foreign and PLA military aircraft were developed and built overseas. The PLA Air Force’s main strategic transport aircraft was the IL-76, which was built in Russia. The aircraft has a maximum commercial capacity of 40 tons and a maximum range of 7500km (4400km when carrying a full load). It has the highest capacity and the longest range of any PLA transport aircraft. The 15 paratroopers who parachuted into Wenchuan jumped from one of these airplanes.
The first helicopter to land in Wenchuan was an S-70 Black Hawk helicopter which was developed in the US. The very well-publicised MiG-17 helicopter is actually the main product of Russia’s MiG Design Bureau. The MiG-26 transport helicopter is a multi-role helicopter developed by the same bureau. The remote sensing aircraft was also built overseas.
Indigenous military aircraft are still behind the eight ball
The major role played by foreign aircraft demonstrates that indigenous aircraft are still behind the eight ball. Large transport aircraft are a good example. The biggest indigenous transport aircraft is currently the Yun-8. It has a maximum capacity of only 20 tons, so it has difficulty satisfying the requirements of strategic transport and heavy-duty airdrops. China also does not have any large helicopters that are suited to mountainous areas. This rescue campaign placed a premium on the highland capabilities of helicopters. The US Black Hawk helicopter and the modified version of the Russian MiG-17 helicopter were able to satisfy this requirement.
During an interview with the Global Times, Military expert Dai Xu said that looking at the PLA’s equipment and rapid response capabilities from the perspective of modern warfare, there is still a great gap between the PLA and advanced militaries. The gap is most noticeable when it comes to the number and quality of aircraft. Although 100 aircraft were deployed during the rescue effort, this was not enough to cover a massive area of 100,000 square kilometres and the large number of people who needed help. The large number of rescue workers who arrived in Chengdu via train and aircraft were unable to travel directly to the central region of the disaster zone because there weren’t enough helicopters. Instead they relied on their legs to form a ‘marching military’, thus restricting the development of rescue operations. All of the major air transport platforms used by the Chinese Military are US and Russian built. Therefore, Chinese are eagerly awaiting the birth of China’s own large aircraft.
Dai Xu believes that the Chinese Army already has the experience of establishing an aviation force. The question is how to ‘aviationalise’ the Army based on this experience. The Chinese helicopter industry is one of China’s weakest industries. However, this rescue effort demonstrates that more and better helicopters are needed for economic development, social support and the future development of defence.
During the cold weather disaster that engulfed southern China around the Spring Festival this year, an academic from the Chinese Air Force likened the disaster to being in a war. Vital infrastructure such as power lines and railways were down and the PLA was called to the rescue. The academic, Dai Xu, called for hardier infrastructure and a better response from the Military.
Following the tragedy that is the Sichuan earthquake, the PLA has once again been confronted with battle-like conditions – dealing with a large number of casualties and broken infrastructure. For sure, the earthquake has proven the undisputable strength of the PLA – it can deploy an incredibly large number of soldiers to a battlefield. Last time I looked, the PLA and People’s Armed Police had deployed a total of 100,000 to participate in emergency relief, which is a staggering figure considering the entire Australian Defence Force only has a total of 51,000 full-time personnel. However, the earthquake has also highlighted the weakness of the PLA – a lot of those soldiers are poorly equipped and it took over two days to access the epicenter of the earthquake. A lot of people will argue that no Military or emergency service could have accessed the rocky terrain of the epicenter, but I wonder whether the US, with its hi-tech helicopters and satellite-imaging technology, could have done better.
As I have discussed on this blog, an attempt to parachute into the area seems to have been a disaster. If I was Guo Boxiong (the Vice Chairman of the PLA’s Central Military Commission), I would have the entire paratrooper force disbanded immediately. If they cannot successfully parachute into a disaster area on home turf, then I think it would be highly unlikely that they would be successful during a war on enemy turf (i.e. the rocky terrain of Taiwan’s western coast).
Despite the slogans of modernisation and informationalisation having been the catch cries of the PLA for the last ten years, the Military is still characterised by its huge personnel rather than its cutting-edge technology. The fact that the PLA was reduced to marching its way to the quake epicenter is a sobering thought for those who are worried that the PLA will soon challenge the US Military. Certainly Dai Xu was right – natural disasters are preparation for war, and China and the PLA are still very much unprepared.
I have translated the following article from the Global Times because I think it demonstrates the depth of thinking that some Chinese people have when it comes to Western calls for democracy. It is not that I am saying the following article is right, but it shows that democracy is not a black and white issue in China. Translating this article also demonstrated that the Chinese language really struggles to differentiate the concepts of nationality and ethnicity, which ensures that Chinese people have a very different understanding of the two concepts. The article below has three main points: The concepts of race, nation and sovereignty are inseparable, that Western nations have double standards when dealing with the issue of national (ethnic?) separatism, and that the Western media should not criticise the Chinese people’s support for the games.
Who is practising irrational nationalism?
Wang Dasan (Beijing academic), published in the Global Times on 24 April 2008
In response to the Western media’s untrue reports about the Tibet March 14 incident and the discussions that have insulted China, Chinese people at home and abroad have recently organised a series of activities, including the MSN red heart petition that supports the Olympics and criticises CNN. Faced with the anger of the Chinese people, instead of some Western media organisations analysing their own ‘pride and prejudice’, they believe that the Chinese people cannot understand and accept the common values of ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’. Therefore, the only way of solving China’s ‘international image crisis’ is by appealing to ‘irrational nationalistic urges’. The Western media organisations are using the ethical superiority complex contained in the ‘common values’ to constantly warn Chinese people to keep calm, analyse the ‘common values’ and solve the problem.
Let me ask you – which citizens of a country can remain ignorant when their motherland has been insulted? Chinese people hope that the world, through the confusion of the above discussion, can recognise the following simple facts and logic:
Firstly, the awareness of nationality is the naturally inherited and deeply-rooted political ideology of a modern nationality-centred nation. Its basic premise is that in support of sovereignty, the inseparable nature of race, nation and territory needs to be guaranteed. In regards to this, even the ethnic melting pot of the US, which has ‘no American ethnicity, but only American beliefs’ (quote from George W Bush) is no exception. Due to this, the President needs to pray that ‘God protects America’ at his inauguration, students need to assemble and recite their allegiance every morning, and the national flag is hoisted above every street and alley. If this is not resolute US nationalism, then what is it? In order to please Mexican consumers, a Swedish wine company recently used a picture of the US-Mexican border prior to the 1848 US-Mexico War as the background of an advertisement. This aroused the anger and protests of many US netizens and even some politicians, thus demonstrating Americans’ awareness of nationality and their sensitivity to territory and sovereignty.
Secondly, when some Western countries deal with their own problems of national separatism, they focus on their own national interests. However, they see the national separatism problems of developing countries as political problems of ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’. This clearly demonstrates double standards. The Chinese people’s resolute opposition to Tibetan Independence is not because they lack knowledge and interest in freedom and democracy, but because they resolutely oppose any country using ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ to interfere with domestic Chinese politics, break up China’s territory, and damage China’s national interests. In regards to this point, ensnared with the honeyed words of ‘freedom’ and democracy’, the indignant actions of the Chinese people are also being framed as Boxer Rebellion-style immaturity.
Thirdly, every political value has its own conditions and limitations. As soon as the political value moves towards the extreme, it will become contrary to its original meaning, especially if it requires violent promotion. Even if you acknowledge that ‘common values’ exist in the world, you need to accept that different nationalities and cultures have different understandings of these ‘common values.’ This then is the true meaning of freedom and democracy. Western people usually view Western media reports and discussions, protests by Tibetan Independence separatists, and even discussions about boycotting the Olympics as ‘freedom of speech’ and as a ‘basic right’. According to this theory, isn’t the Chinese people’s opposition to Tibetan Independence and support of the Olympics also ‘freedom of speech’ and a ‘basic right’? Shouldn’t there also be understanding and respect for this? Why does the Western media change this ‘basic right’ into an irrational nationalistic urge, and even a Boxer Rebellion-style reaction?
Facts demonstrate that when those Western people that do not care about the basic rights of the Chinese people take their own nationalism and take it to the extreme, they are actually wanting to take ‘One World One Dream’ and split it into ‘Two Worlds Two Dreams’. This is something that the world cannot accept.
After living in Beijing for nearly five years, I recently welcomed some special foreign guests – my family. Their trip was a real eye-opener for me because after living in China for such a long time, there are a lot of things that I have become used to. Their trip also alerted me to the fact that the Chinese way of handling foreign tourists can often give a bad impression of China. For starters, some of the hotel staff treated my parents terribly. My parents stayed at the Howard Johnson Paragon Hotel near Beijing Station. Through their travel agent, my parents had booked a three-bed room (my sister also came to China). However, the hotel staff had yet to add the extra bed before my parents arrived. Due to tiredness after a long trip and poor communication, the bed was taken away and the three-bed room was cancelled. This meant that my sister lost her free breakfast for the following two days. I think that this problem was mostly caused by a rude and uncooperative staff member who seemed to hold a grudge against my parents for protesting about the inconvenience of having an extra bed brought to their room at 10pm at night.
The Howard Johnson Paragon Hotel.
Another problem was the stinginess encountered by my parents at the restaurants that their tour guide took them to. Not only was some of the food terrible, but the waiting staff were very quick to take away beer and coke bottles, thus preventing my parents and sister from having a second glass. This gives a bad and false impression of China. Chinese people are actually very generous hosts, and are always willing to give as much food and drink as the guest’s stomach is able to handle.
Perhaps the biggest problem was the pushiness that my parents encountered at the Silk Market and other places that sell stuff to foreign tourists. My parents were actually surprised when I took them to Xinjiekou and they discovered that not everyone is so pushy. At the Pearl Market, I actually had to prise the hand of one shop assistant off my mother’s wrist. This kind of pushiness did not give my parents a good impression of China.
I also do not think that it is a good idea to put foreign tourists in a room full of domestic tourists to watch an acrobatic show. Yes, I know that 80 per cent of Chinese people are peasants, but for the sake of foreigners not thinking that Chinese are savages, it is probably not a good idea for domestic and foreign tourists to mix. My mum was shocked that she and my sister were forced to squeeze past the unmoved legs of Chinese tourists to get to their seats in the middle of the aisle. My parents also noticed the juvenile fascination that the domestic tourists gave the acrobatic show.
In this post, I have suggested ways of improving foreign impressions of China. That is not to suggest that these impressions are completely false. Bad service, stinginess, pushiness and lack of manners abound in China, so perhaps it is good that foreign tourists are getting these impressions. However, I would not be surprised if some sections of the Chinese population have no awareness of such impressions, and if they did, they would work quickly to make tourism better.
For those who don’t yet know, Lù Kèwén is the Chinese name of Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. It has been astounding to watch the speed at which the Chinese media have adapted to the first Mandarin-speaking Western leader. Leaders of other countries are usually referred to by their last name, e.g. George W Bush is known as Bù shí, Vladimir Putin is known as Pŭ jīng, and John Howard was known as Huò huá dé. However, within days of Labor winning the federal election, the Chinese media were using Rudd’s Chinese name. This change of naming system was just the first sign that Kevin Rudd would be a totally different type of leader when it comes to China.
Last Wednesday, Kevin Rudd became the first leader of a Western government to deliver a speech entirely in Mandarin at Peking University. Rudd’s level of fluency impresses everyone and no one knows how he can maintain such a high level while being an influential politician. The speech was originally written in English by one of Rudd’s political advisors, but the translation contained some uniquely Chinese concepts, especially the world zheng you, which greatly impressed the Chinese media. According to my Chinese dictionary, the word zheng you is a formal reference to a friend who will give forthright admonition. Quite obviously, there is no simple way to describe this concept in English, especially in a way that the Chinese can quickly understand. I am not sure whether it was Rudd himself, his speechwriter or the speech translator who thought of using the word zheng you, but it was quite simply a masterstroke.
The beauty of Rudd is that he has given the Chinese government and media some very complex fat to chew. For the Chinese media, zheng you is a very worthwhile concept. Rudd’s dismissal of calls to boycott the Olympics was also welcomed. However, Rudd’s speech at Peking University was a case of sugar and spice – Rudd may well be the first person to speak Mandarin at the university and call for the Chinese government to stage open dialogue with the Dalai Lama. Usually Western leaders who call for such things are usually dismissed as being unable to understand China. In the case of Rudd, however, this stock-standard criticism cannot be used because Rudd is a fluent Mandarin speaker who understands a concept like zheng you, therefore he must understand China. When questioned about Rudd’s Tibet remarks, the Spokeswoman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Jiang Yu could only say that Rudd had no right to interfere with China’s internal affairs. The report about the Peking University speech on Xinhua’s English website chose to ignore his Tibet remarks and focused on his dismissal of possible Olympic boycotts. I think that this is an indication that the Chinese government is unsure of how to deal with Rudd.
In fact, Rudd’s Mandarin and his balanced position may be the tonic that China needs. The Chinese government may begin to feel confident enough to engage in real dialogue and do away with the tired rhetoric. In future years, Rudd may become an emissary between China and the West, especially if the Sino-US relationship becomes heated. At the moment, Rudd’s popularity is approaching rock star status, especially among Chinese people who always love a laowai who speaks Mandarin and understands China. Through China and Rudd, Australia may have a chance of becoming a constructive ‘middle power’ that understands Asia.
Rudd meets Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao in Beijing. Picture taken from Huaxia.
In late December 2007, the Chinese and Indian armies held their first joint training in Kunming. I have already shown you the Chinese side of the training - a soldier smashing bricks on his head. Now it is time to show you the Indian side - soldiers stripped down to their underpants and performing yoga moves with a pole. After seeing both sides, I am very much looking forward to seeing the next joint exercise that will be held in India in 2009. The photos were published in the March A edition of Military Digest.
I have recently been thinking about the problems that are happening in Tibet, and comparing them with the situation in Taiwan. Of course, I am not the only one who is comparing the two – the Kuomintang presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou has said that Taiwan is different from Tibet because it is a sovereign nation. This may be true, but I don’t think that’s where the core difference lies. I think the core problem with Tibet is a cultural one – Tibet has its own culture and language, and when two cultures are in close-proximity, they tend to butt heads. Of course, there are political dimensions to the Tibetan problem, but they aren’t the core problem.
The core problem at the heart of the Taiwan issue, however, is political. Taiwan is a product of the Cold War, when two different political ideologies butted heads against each. Taiwan and China have the same language and culture, but they have different political systems. I think the good thing about politics is that a lot of it is bullshit – leaders can compromise and renege, which means conflict can be avoided. Cultural differences though, are a different kettle of fish. You can’t compromise on what you believe in.
It is for this reason that Tibet is a problem that will never go away. Imagethief recently wrote a good post about how the Chinese government has been getting its message across in regards to the Tibetan riots, pointing out that recent Chinese media coverage has actually inflamed ethnic tensions. The gap in cultures is there, and it is not going to be solved by vilifying the Dalai Lama, who is a spiritual leader to a large number of Tibetans. A more understanding and conciliatory tone may have been better, e.g. we know you are angry, but we are working together to make a more prosperous China and Tibet.
A similar thing happened with the attempted Xinjiang plane hijacking – the Chinese media clearly pointed the finger at the Uyghur ethnicity and a few days later I received a text message that warned of Uyghur people having bombs strapped to their bodies. This is a clear case of fear mongering against a particular ethnicity and reminded me of the Cronulla riots in Sydney, where text messages played a major part.
Ethnic tension is something that is not easy to solve – ask Israel and Palestine. It also might be worth asking East Timor what it thinks about the Tibetan issue. Like China in Tibet, Indonesia was heavy-handed in East Timor and the East Timorese were very keen to realise independence. However, where is East Timor now? It is one of the poorest countries in the world and its President was nearly assassinated. The world must think about whether Tibet is really better off without China. China though, must find a way to treat its ethnic groups better. It needs to stop being so superficial and dressing minority groups in traditional clothing and sending them off to the CPPCC. It needs to engage, understand and then engage some more.
Today I attended a talk that was part of the Bookworm’s Festival of Writing, or whatever it is called. The speakers were four foreign journalists, including Jonathan Watts from The Guardian and Melinda Liu from Newsweek. I thought that the topics discussed were wide-ranging and interesting, but it was hard to avoid the flawed nature of journalism. Journalists say they strive for objectivity, but it is impossible to deliver because every media organisation has its own messages to deliver. People talk about self-censorship in the Chinese media, but who really believes that Western journalists do not self-censor? News Limited journalists cannot write negative stories about Rupert Murdoch, and certain newspapers probably cannot write negative stories about Israel. It is almost impossible to criticise China without sounding like a hypocrite.
When the journalists were talking about how difficult it is to interview people in China, it made me think about something new – about how China reminds me of a giant company or organisation. When you are employed by an organisation, it is extremely bad sport to air criticisms about your own organisation to the media. In China, it is extremely bad sport for Chinese citizens to speak to journalists and criticise the media. In fact, the Chinese government prefers that all foreign journalistic inquiries be handled by its public relations arm, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The whole set-up is similar to a well-run organisation – employees will be punished for speaking out to the media, instead they are encouraged to refer enquires to their company’s public relations office.
The situation in China is different when compared to the situation in Australia. I think a lot of Australians would be quite happy to complain about the government, but they would be more cautious when criticising their own company. This is because companies own their employees – you work for your company and not the other way around. Of course, unions and unfair dismissal laws can even up the balance, so that companies have to do some work for their employees. However, you do not work for your country, i.e. your country cannot fire you for criticising it. A resident belongs to their country FOREVER.
Using this logic, it seems that Chinese people belong to the Chinese government. The Chinese government can punish its citizens for criticising the government, and it can even fire them. This is what effectively happens to Chinese dissidents, they are told to leave China and never come back. This must be what freedom of speech really means. In a company, employees are not usually afforded freedom of speech, but in a country-citizen relationship, freedom of speech should be allowed. Taxes are the government’s salary, so the people paying the taxes should have the right to dismiss the government if it is not performing. Unfortunately, the reverse seems to be happening in China.
I really can't be bothered writing anymore, but here's a funny photo:
The photo was taken at the opening ceremony of the joint counter-terrorism training between China and India on 21 December 2007. The accompanying article can be found here.
I have always wanted to post this scene from The Painted Veil. I reckon that it is China in a nutshell. The Chinese actor is Anthony Wong (Huang Qiusheng) from Hong Kong and the other actor is Edward Norton of Fight Club fame.
Last year I upgraded my Philips electric shaver with a newer model from the same brand. Subsequently, my old shaver has been sitting in my bedroom for over a year. Like a convicted prisoner on death row, my old shaver has been waiting to be disposed of. I could have tossed the shaver out with the rubbish, but the manual clearly stated that the shaver’s battery was toxic and needed to be disposed of properly. Unfortunately, I have no idea about the location of used battery depots in Beijing, so I procrastinated for over a year.
I finally gave the Philips Service Centre a call yesterday to inquire about the safe disposal of batteries sold by the company. The service centre offered an English-speaking service, which I thought would be more convenient. However, after waiting for five minutes, no one answered my call. I then rang back and chose the Chinese-speaking service, and my call was answered within seconds. The xiaojie who answered gave me the number of a Philips battery repair centre that was near my apartment in Beijing. I then rang that centre and they told me that they could not safely dispose of my shaver.
Considering that China cops a lot of flak over the environment, I believe that this issue is worth writing about. Here is a multinational company that apart from not helping customers safely dispose of used batteries, doesn’t even give advice about the nearest used battery depot. If a company clearly writes on its product’s manual that customers cannot carelessly dispose of batteries, then it should ensure that customers know where to safely dispose the batteries.
I am sure that China has used battery depots – I can remember that my old Chinese university used to collect used batteries on the first level of the foreign students dormitory. However, people shouldn’t need to work hard to be environmentally friendly. When I searched for Beijing’s used battery depots on Google, I couldn’t find any useful information. Eventually, I was forced to give my old shaver to the local rubbish collector. Hopefully he will safely dispose of the shaver, but this unfortunately is riding on a whim and a prayer. Philips should ensure that the toxic batteries used in their products are disposed of properly, thus providing an example to the Chinese companies that are often criticised in the Western media.
Two of the most important words that I have learnt during my Chinese studies have been píngjĭng (bottleneck) and tûpò (breakthrough). In the stuff that I have translated, it seems that the Chinese are always trying to break through bottleneck situations. For example, if I do a search on Google for the words píngjĭng, tûpò and jiéfàngjûn (PLA), then I can find this article, which has the headline ‘The Shenyang Military Region strives to break through the bottleneck that restricts the growth of its battle capability.’
Personally, I have never really understood the concept of breaking through bottlenecks. In my opinion, a bottleneck indicates that a large quantity of something is trying to pass through a small opening. In this context, I do not know why technological development needs to pass through a bottleneck. Surely, technological development is more like building a house – you build a good foundation and go from there. If there is something restricting the Shenyang Military Region from developing its battle capability, then isn’t that an obstacle rather than a bottleneck?
I am beginning to suspect that China’s obsession with bottlenecks is derived from it being such a populous country. In fact, I am sure that Chinese are very good at creating bottlenecks. My local subway station recently erected metal rails that are designed to shepherd people single-file into the station’s entrance. I am pretty sure that something bad must have happened for this kind of action to occur, i.e. someone was crushed when the subway became very crowded. The new metal rails may be an effective form of crowd control, but they have also created a severe bottleneck situation. Many people are now forced to line up to enter the subway station, thus wasting valuable commuting time. The subway platforms are even worse – hundreds of commuters have to exit via a single escalator.
It seems strange that in a country so conscious of breaking through bottlenecks, severe bottlenecks are occurring in Beijing’s new subway line. Perhaps it’s an unavoidable consequence of Beijing’s huge population, but I suspect that it’s a cultural thing as well. For example, traffic jams on the Third Ring Road are often worsened when cars scoot down the emergency lane and then attempt to merge back into the main lanes, thus causing another bottleneck. The bottlenecks at the subway stations could be improved if people lined up in an orderly fashion, rather than congealing into a huge mass before the small entrances that check for electronic transport cards. Chinese society as a whole seems to be a bottleneck – a huge population fighting for scarce money and resources.
French President gives China a much-welcomed compliment
During his recent visit to China, French President Nicholas Sarkozy paid China a compliment that was enthusiastically latched onto by the media. According to Sarkozy, Chinese people are very good at saving energy. Yesterday’s Global Times had a feature story on the topic and listed several examples of Chinese people saving energy. These included turning off lights and taxi drivers pushing their cars when lining up in a taxi rank. As nice as Sarkozy’s compliment is, I think he is having trouble telling the difference between being environmentally conscious and being tight-fisted. In fact, Chinese people save money because their salaries are so low and they need to save every penny that they get.
Although the Global Times article seemed to wholeheartedly agree with Sarkozy, it did quote a Brazilian professor who somehow has an innate understanding of China. He said that the main reason why Chinese people save money is because they want to spend more on food. I reckon he is 100 per cent correct, with the quote being a nice addition to an article that was very critical about Brazilian energy saving. The article was also critical of Russia overheating houses during winter; something that sounds very familiar to my own experience in Beijing of sweating in bed because my apartment’s heating cannot be adjusted.
Despite the article coming across as another manifestation of China’s inferiority complex, writing about the environment is important and Global Times should be congratulated for their article. Just one complaint though – the headline is ‘Chinese commoners understand saving energy more than laowai (foreigners).’ I know that laowai is the language of commoners, but it makes my blood curdle to see that word in the media. A better heading would have been ‘French President says Chinese are one of the world’s best energy savers’. I just hope that the Chinese media will one day refrain from using race-based terminology.
Democracy with Chinese characteristics (150th post)
On October 17, The Global Times published an article called 'Don’t use Western values to assess Chinese democracy' by Zhang Weiwei, an academic from Geneva University. Now, I generally agree that Western democracy can’t be cut and pasted into different societies at will – I think Iraq is a good example of this. However, there were a few things in Zhang’s article that I disagreed with.
Firstly, Zhang pointed out that developing countries with Western styles of democracy are still quite backwards, e.g. India and Botswana. In regards to Botswana, Zhang says that it is still a very poor country, with an average life expectancy of less than 40. It is unfair to link democracy with Botswana’s poor life expectancy without mentioning that 37.3 per cent of the population is infected with HIV/AIDS. The CIA World Fact Book also lists Botswana’s average life expectancy as 50, not less than 40 as suggested by Zhang.
Secondly, I disagree with Zhang’s assertion that developed nations such as the US did not hold general elections before they became modernised. As an example, Zhang says that black people in the US weren’t allowed to vote until 1965 and universal suffrage didn’t come into effect in Switzerland until 1971. I agree with Zhang’s notion that democracy is a process that needs to gradually develop, but I think there is a big difference between limited suffrage and no suffrage at all.
Thirdly, I disagree with Zhang’s idea that if China was to hold a general election, a peasant government would be elected and would be unable to cope with the complexities of running the government. Zhang even quotes Mao Zedong: “A peasant government cannot lead the great cause for modernisation.” I disagree with this because a government elected by peasants won’t necessarily be run by peasants.
Political parties usually represent a particular body of people, for example the Labor party traditionally represents the workers and the National Party represents farmers. However, this doesn’t mean that everyone in the Labor party is a worker and everyone in the National Party is a farmer. Likewise, if a general election is held in China, not everyone in a peasant government will be a peasant. In most countries, the people who run for office need powerful backers, so the elite are still very much in control, although they may have to run some populist policies to get enough votes.
Despite the above quibbles, this article is a good indication that democracy is the flavour of the month in China. At the 17th National Congress, politicians talked about ‘democracy inside the Party’. Of course that doesn’t sound like democracy at all, but some experts such as Li Datong seem optimistic.
While watching the ‘exciting’ TV coverage about the 17th National Congress, I noticed a familiar face on the screen. I am accustomed to seeing Chinese table tennis star Zhang Yining on CCTV5 thrashing her opponents, but the woman with the nickname ‘cold-faced assassin’ has been on a wider variety of channels this week because she is the youngest member of Beijing’s congress delegation. I know she must be a smart cookie to beat her opponents day in and day out, but what effective input does she offer the world of Chinese politics?
Zhang Yining’s token inclusion into the National Congress, as well as many other stars can be interpreted as a sign that the National Congress is nothing but a political snooze fest, with no real meaning because all the decisions have been made beforehand. For example, Chinese analysts already seem to know the make-up of the next politburo standing committee, even though it hasn’t been officially announced.
Zhang Yining, a member of the Beijing delegation at the 17th National Congress
Soldiers strip to the waist at Taiwan's 'Double Ten' celebrations
If you haven't seen the footage of the military parade at Taiwan's National Day celebrations on October 10, the following photo is not from the Sydney Gay Mardi Gras. It is in fact, a photo of Taiwanese Navy marines who are trying to show that they are ready to kick mainland butt. Chinese websites describe the marines as chì bó shàng zhèn, which my favourite dictionary describes as ‘going into battle stripped to the waist’. Enjoy:
The Humanaught recently linked to the horrific footage that is shown below. A 71-year-old man rode his bike through a red light and was killed by a car that seemed to be speeding.
It has come to my attention recently that the Chinese police need more guns. In fact, they are in desperate need of more authority. Of course, a traffic policeman is not the most glamorous of jobs at the best of times, but being a Chinese traffic policeman seems to be especially tough. I have often been bemused at the sight of a bedraggled cop trying to mediate between two parties who have been involved in a traffic accident. The unfortunate cop is usually reduced to a hapless listener as the two parties continue their argument unabated. I don’t want to sound too right-wing, but I think police (like school teachers) need to give off an air of authority. Freedom can inspire creativity and happiness, but absolute freedom will probably result in anarchy. Governments create laws to keep societies in check and they need police to enforce the laws. I often have the sneaking suspicion that the laws aren’t very well enforced in China because the police don’t have enough authority.
I find the cops in Australia quite intimidating. When they strut around the streets on patrol, they look authoritarian – their backs are ramrod straight, they’re well-dressed and their pistols are firmly holstered. Of course, Australian cops are no angels and each state police force has been caught up in corruption. However, due to their intimidating presence, most law-abiding citizens know not to mess with the cops. The Chinese police on the other hand, are poorly dressed and seem pretty much useless. A lot of people talk about how China has security guards posted outside nearly every building, but unfortunately these guards have not one iota of power. They can’t even stop a thief from stealing a bicycle – they actually need to give a call to the police and let them handle it. After forgetting about the guards, visitors to China will discover that there isn’t much of a police presence on the streets. Often the only time you can see a police vehicle is when a policeman is dropping his kid off at school. When the police are required to do something, they’re often useless anyway. Most Chinese police do not carry weapons, so they usually cannot apprehend armed criminals and are forced to stand-by as someone gets hurt.
So why don’t Chinese cops have guns? I believe the answer to this lies with a three-letter acronym – the PLA. The People’s Liberation Army is the most powerful organisation in China and enjoys its monopoly on armed law enforcement. Unfortunately, the PLA isn’t very good at dealing with things that should be dealt with by the civilian authorities. Things such as mass civilian protests for example. However, the majority of police still don’t carry guns because the PLA doesn’t want anybody chipping away at their power. Even the creation of the People’s Armed Police (PAP) seems like a huge compromise. It is a force ‘shared’ between the PLA and the Ministry of Public Security, but according to Sino Defence, the Central Military Commission increased its control over the PAP in 1993. The result is that China is still a country unable to enforce the law. The police have little power and are easily corrupted. The PLA on the other hand, has too much power, but is not required to enforce day-to-day laws.
On Friday night, I had the good fortune of staying at an expensive hotel and enjoying satellite television. One of my observations was that CCTV’s Spanish and French channel is much better than its English one. The Spanish and French channel has had the good sense to show some mainstream Chinese television shows and provide French or Spanish subtitles. Not only do TV shows provide entertainment, but you can also learn about Chinese pop culture. These are two things that the English channel is severely lacking.
A Chinese minority group dresses up in traditional costume (source)
I also watched the first hour of the film Money Train before check-out time on Saturday morning. This is a film that was often on Australian TV, but I never bothered to watch it. However, my recollection of the film having a young and sexy Jennifer Lopez was a good motivation to watch it, especially when considering how famous J Lo is now.
The film is actually pretty good. It is about three ethnically-diverse cops patrolling New York’s subway. Wesley Snipes plays the black bloke, Woody Harrelson plays a crazy white guy and Lopez plays an up and coming Latina. There is some really funny dialogue between Snipes and Harrelson.
The different ethnicities of the main characters made me think about Chinese minority groups. I have often been critical of the way minority groups are handled in China. The way that minority groups are required to sing and dance on television and in parks smacks of tokenism and condescension. It seems that the role of minority groups in China is to provide entertainment to the masses without playing a meaningful role. This definitely includes foreigners in China as well.
However, I also wonder whether this phenomenon is any different from overseas. Aren’t the minority groups in the US providing plenty of entertainment as well? Black and Hispanic music are both marketable commodities. In Australia, Aboriginal culture is only appreciated when providing entertainment on the football field. Why should China be any different when it comes to handling its minority groups?
According to an article published by China Court, armed thugs attacked a group of striking workers in Guangdong on June 29. One worker was killed and six were severely injured. Two workers are missing after being forced to jump into the nearby river. The workers, who all hailed from Chongqing, were striking because they had not been paid for more than four months. They were working at the Lankou Hydroelectric Power Station in Heyuan City, northern Guangdong province.
The original source of the article is the Chongqing Morning Post, so this may be an interesting example of a newspaper trying to stick up for the rights of its ‘constituents’. In writing the report, the journalist seemed to be working with officials from the hometown of the workers. One of the biggest complaints contained in the report is the ineffectiveness of the police, who were unable to prevent the thugs from beating the workers. According to the report, 35-year-old engineer Xiang Xiquan said that his leg was broken after the police arrived.
If this report is true, then it demonstrates that the Chinese government needs to do a lot more to protect the rights of workers. If the company in question can hire over 200 thugs to beat up the workers, then isn't this evidence that the company has been cheating the workers? If it really did have a cashflow problem, then it wouldn't be able to pay the armed thugs or the criminal gang that controls them.
UPDATE: Mary-Ann Toy from The Age has written a comprehensive report about the bashings, including an interview with one of the injured workers.
The Howard Johnson Paragon Hotel. 
Rudd meets Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao in Beijing. Picture taken from 
Zhang Yining, a member of the Beijing delegation at the 17th National Congress
A Chinese minority group dresses up in traditional costume (