Clinton’s comments last week “are ignorant of facts,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said yesterday in comments posted on the ministry’s website. The U.S. can’t be “held hostage” by Japan in the conflict, a commentary in China’s People’s Daily newspaper today said. Three Chinese marine surveillance ships entered Japanese-administered waters today, the Coast Guard said in a statement.

…

China expresses “firm discontent,” Qin said. “We urge the U.S. side to adopt a responsible attitude in regard to the issue of the Diaoyu islands.” While Japan won’t make any concessions on the issue, it will “respond calmly” so as not to provoke China, Kishida told reporters after meeting Clinton.

In an unsigned commentary today, the Xinhua News Agency said it was “exceedingly wrong” for Clinton to make the comments about Japan’s administration of the islands.

Jane Perlez of The New York Times reported that the Chinese military also took a hawkish tone with indirect warnings in its media mouthpieces:

The reports did not refer directly to Japan, but more broadly echoed a recent declaration by the new Communist Party leader, Xi Jinping, that the Chinese military could not rest on its laurels after a long period of peace.

The People’s Liberation Army Daily, a military newspaper, said Sunday in a front-page article that a “long period without battle has encouraged the fixed habits of peace in some of the military so that their preparedness for battle is dulled.”

The newspaper said that some troops had recently conducted exercises in the Beijing military region.

Read more about the Diaoyu Islands dispute via CDT.

© Scott Greene for China Digital Times (CDT), 2013. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: diaoyu islands, Hillary Clinton, Japan relations, maritime security, People's Liberation Army, territorial disputes, U.S. relations, XInhua News
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

Chen shocked the world in April when he made a daring, next-to-impossible escape, climbing over the wall surrounding his house (breaking his foot in the process) and catching a ride some 350 miles to Beijing, where he took refuge in the U.S. Embassy. After a tense, days-long diplomatic standoff closely involving Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (No. 3), a deal was struck under which Chen would be allowed to travel to the United States to study. Now at New York University, Chen has embraced his new role as an evangelist for human rights, making the case that incremental change — one village or even one person at a time — can eventually transform a superpower. Against all odds, he remains optimistic, believing that China, taking a cue from Japan and South Korea, must “learn Eastern democracy.” He even thinks it’s inevitable: “Nobody can stop the progress of history,” he says.

An interview with Chen Guangcheng by Isaac Stone Fish accompanies the list. In it, Chen discusses how the central government allows abuses by local authorities—see Guizhou journalist Li Yuanlong’s detention last week for a recent example—and the chances of change or even revolution in China’s near future.

The central government definitely knew I was illegally detained at home. As for how the local authorities invented lies to frame me to put me in prison, as for how they persecuted my entire family, [the central government] didn’t necessarily know about the details. Yet now, six months later, I still haven’t seen the central government follow the country’s laws and keep its promise and investigate and deal with those officials who recklessly and illegally committed crimes.

Throughout Chinese history, has any emperor said they want to hand over power? Every emperor wants his power to last generation after generation. But can they? The Communist Party cannot monopolize all of the power in the country forever. This is a reality they must accept.

The possibility of China facing a revolution in 2013 is pretty big. This is something that the powers that be in China understand more than anyone else. It’s a pity that international society still does not understand this and has still not prepared. America should immediately start moving from dealing with China’s powers that be to dealing with the Chinese people. It definitely won’t be like 1989.

Chen does not appear to view the possibility of revolution with any great relish: when asked what the worst idea of the year is, he answered “violence”.

Controversial artist Ai Weiwei, still unable to leave China over a year after his 81-day detention in 2011, is ranked 26th:

[…] Ai has found ways to occupy his time. When one of his Twitter followers asked in May whether he was working on any new artwork, Ai tweeted back, “I am the artwork.” In April, he set up cameras throughout his house, providing a live feed on his website and to his 170,000 followers. (“Twitter is my city, my favorite city,” he told FP this year.) The authorities soon pressured him into removing the cameras, evidently preferring that they be the only ones to watch the rotund 55-year-old work on his computer and play with his cats.

But make no mistake — this performance art is deeply political. Throughout his career Ai has insisted that artists have a duty to humanity that outweighs the obligations of nationalism. Even declaring one’s opposition to “trafficking children, selling HIV-infected blood, [and] operating slave labor coal pits” is enough to get branded as “anti-China” in today’s political climate, Ai once noted on his blog, asking, “If we aren’t anti-China, are we still human?”

Foreign Policy also published a slideshow from Ai’s first North American retrospective at the Hirshhorn Museum in Washington, D.C., noting that “the artist was not in attendance.”

British singer Elton John added a concert dedication to Ai’s list of recent accolades on Sunday. While dismissing this “disrespectful” gesture, Global Times took the opportunity to critique Chen and Ai’s inclusion in the Foreign Policy list:

Western society is seriously biased against China. When US magazine Foreign Policy compiled a list of 100 global thinkers from around the world, the first Chinese on that list was blind activist Chen Guangcheng, and the second was Ai Weiwei. Even to Chinese people who have sympathy for these two people, this list may seem ridiculous.

In a diverse era, we don’t hold that the existence of people like Chen and Ai is unexpected in China. Also, we don’t believe that the impact they have brought should be denied completely.

The selection of Chen and Ai makes people wonder whether the word “thinker” in Chinese and English have different meanings. We can just say that some Westerners are increasingly unable to contain themselves over China’s rise. They cannot control China through normal means and they are more likely to rush their fences.

A more nuanced piece of Aiconoclasm came last week from Paul Gladston at Randian:

There are […] significant dangers in the upholding of Ai as our sole representative/mediator of artistic resistance to authority within China. While Ai’s bluntly confrontational and often bombastic stance can be readily digested within Western liberal-democratic contexts where romantic notions of heroic dissent in the face of overwhelming power still persist, it is by no means representative of the critical positioning of most other Chinese artists. Ai may have situated himself admirably behind enlightened westernized ideals of freedom and openness, but the sheer bluntness and reductive simplicity of his critical approach to authority have effectively foreclosed a more searching discussion of contemporary art within China as well as the complex, web of localized cultural, social, political and economic forces that surround its production and reception.

[…] Ai Weiwei is right in drawing our repeated attention to the debilitating injustices of totalitarian power within China. He is also right to upbraid western viewers for their inability to see past what are for them the pleasurable ambiguities of contemporary Chinese art. Less convincing, however, is Ai’s wholly reductive view of the critical possibilities of contemporary art in China. By insisting on his own stridently oppositional approach towards power as the only legitimate game in town, and because we are already highly familiar with that approach, [he] has misrepresented the contemporary Chinese artworld. One might add that Ai is also romanticizing the conditions of criticality in the West.

At 54 in the Foreign Policy list is Yu Jianrong, for his concise but detailed roadmap for reform.

In April, he released a succinct, two-phase plan he called a “10-Year Outline of China’s Social and Political Development.” Despite its bland title, Yu’s blueprint offers a timetable for Chinese reform that for once is as credible as it is ambitious. The plan puts dates and specifics to the task, advocating, for example, a stronger law on private property, the revealing of “information pertaining to government affairs” and “officials’ property,” and the abolition of “speech crimes,” after which China should “open up” the media and political parties. Yu’s short manifesto immediately caused a splash when he released it to his nearly 1.5 million followers on the popular microblogging site Sina Weibo (though the government has maintained a deafening silence). “We’ve already decided to change,” Yu explained in an interview. “The question is: In which direction do we change, and from where do we start?” Sweeping reform in this authoritarian land of 1.3 billion won’t be easy, but Yu’s plan is as good a place to begin as any. The era, he said, of crossing the river “by feeling the stones” is over.

China Media Project’s David Bandurski translated Yu’s plan in March. Soon afterwards, Didi Kirsten Tatlow described it at The International Herald Tribune, together with some criticism from Tsinghua University political scientist Liu Yu:

Master plans like Mr. Kang [Youwei]’s, or Mr. Yu’s are “unrealistic,” she said.

“All Chinese intellectuals, especially the men, they tend to blur the line with being an official and then they’re thinking, ‘How should I design a system for the country?’ and ‘How to make progress?’

“In the West there are intellectuals who make proposals on specific things, but in general they don’t make plans for the whole country,” she said.

What is needed instead, she believes, is a broad debate, among ordinary people.

“A good plan should involve the whole society,” she said. “There should be a big debate on where the country should be going.”

Yu’s nomination for best idea of 2012 is Mo Yan’s controversial selection for the Nobel Prize for Literature. Mo’s chief rival for the award, Japanese novelist Haruki Murakami, took 49th place on the Foreign Policy list as a consolation prize.

At 69 is environmentalist Ma Jun:

[…] A journalist turned environmentalist who founded the Beijing-based Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs, Ma applies scientific rigor to exposing such corporate violations (more than 90,000 to date), flagging everything from a small coal-tar factory improperly storing its dangerous waste to Apple suppliers poisoning workers with a toxic chemical used on touch screens — as well as local governments that flout environmental regulations across China. Dozens of major multinationals now consult Ma’s pollution readings when working with suppliers in China. And by documenting environmental violations that had long been obvious but were never compiled in a way the public could easily understand, Ma has given statistical ammunition to Chinese citizens trying to nudge the Communist Party into cleaning up its act.

Wang Jisi, “China’s most respected expert on the United States”, came in at 73:

[…] What does Wang want us to know? That the feel-good stories U.S. officials tell themselves about China’s global ascent are an elaborate form of denial. In an influential monograph co-authored by Brookings Institution senior fellow Kenneth Lieberthal, Wang this year described China’s actions on the world stage as rooted in the conclusion that “America will seek to constrain or even upset China’s rise.” Beijing’s view, he says, is that the United States is “heading for decline” and that China’s development model provides an “alternative to Western democracy and market economies.” The result? “[T]hese views make many Chinese political elites suspect that it is the United States,” Wang says, “that is ‘on the wrong side of history.’”

And at 83 is the Taiwanese-American former head of Google China, venture capitalist Kai-fu Lee:

In an article he published on his LinkedIn page in October, Lee named China’s narrowly focused school curriculum and the risk-averse nature of Chinese students, as well as the country’s chaotic Internet environment, among the reasons China hasn’t yet produced its own Mark Zuckerberg. That may be why he has also started a popular education website encouraging Chinese students to think more creatively. Although none of his companies has exploded yet, Lee’s ultimate contribution may be more fundamental: laying both the intellectual and financial groundwork for a revolution in the world’s largest online community.

Perhaps more significant to China for now than any of the above are Aung San Suu Kyi and Thein Sein, who top the list having begun to pilot the formerly reliable Chinese satellite of Myanmar (also known as Burma) into a more open and international orbit:

Aung San Suu Kyi, the soft-spoken, iconic political activist whom devotees call simply “the Lady,” may not seem like an obvious partner for Thein Sein, but she has become one by doing what few legends of her stature can: embracing the messy pragmatism of politics. Although Burma’s struggles are far from over — she has warned that international investment has been too rapid, and ethnic violence is escalating — the willingness of both the Lady and the general to embrace short-term compromise and foster long-term reconciliation in what was only recently one of the world’s most isolated countries is something to celebrate.

Fittingly, Aung San Suu Kyi finally was able to accept her 1991 Nobel Peace Prize in June. She used the occasion to remind the world of those like her, who struggle in the most forlorn places: “To be forgotten too is to die a little. It is to lose some of the links that anchor us to the rest of humanity.” It is a sentiment still felt from Aleppo to Havana, Pyongyang to Tehran, but also, as Aung San Suu Kyi and Thein Sein have shown, one that doesn’t need to be permanent.

See more on Chen Guangcheng, Ai Weiwei, Yu Jianrong, Ma Jun, Wang Jisi, Kai-fu Lee and Myanmar/Burma at CDT.

© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Ai Weiwei, Apple, artistic freedom, artists, Burma, central government, Chen Guangcheng, contemporary art, contemporary artists, education, Global Times, Google, Haruki Murakami, Hillary Clinton, HIV, house arrest, IPE, Kaifu Lee, kenneth lieberthal, Li Yuanlong, local government, Ma Jun, mo yan, Myanmar, Nobel Peace Prize, Nobel Prize, pollution, private property, reform, reformers, revolution, slave labor, surveillance, trafficking, transparency, wang jisi, year end lists 2012, Yu Jianrong
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

Beijing has met these developments with a muted but clear lack of enthusiasm. From Evan Osnos at The New Yorker, citing a CDT Ministry of Truth Directive on Obama’s visit:

The clearest measure of the symbolic significance of President Obama’s visit to Burma on Monday came not in his surprising speech, or in the sight of him towering over the Nobel laureate and former political prisoner Aung San Suu Kyi. It came from a less likely source: the Chinese Propaganda Department.

In the past year, as Burmese leaders released wave after wave of political prisoners, ended its censorship of the press, and welcomed former dissidents into government, China and its fellow-autocrats, have looked on with bewilderment and no small degree of concern that the infection of openness could spread beyond Burma’s borders. So in an internal notice to national media last week, China’s Orwellian agency, which oversees the world’s largest censorship apparatus, made clear just how it feels about witnessing an American President welcomed by once-hostile generals in Burma, a nation that was, just two years ago, one of China’s most avid partners in authoritarianism: “Downplay Obama’s visit,” the Chinese Propaganda Department ordered.

The propaganda officials are not the only ones with reservations about the occasion. At Foreign Policy, Joshua Kurlantzick of the Council on Foreign Relations argued at length that the presidential presence in Myanmar was “too much, too soon”. In short:

Myanmar’s political and economic changes, though substantial, are not as secure as many Burmese reformers and outside observers think. The economic reforms that have been put in place are tenuous, and if they do not lead to broad-based growth, they could only fuel greater unrest. Civil wars still rage in parts of the country, and the end of the authoritarian era seems to have unleashed dormant ethnic tensions in places like Arakan State in the west. Meanwhile, though the former senior generals really do seem to have retired, that does not mean the army has simply vanished from power.

Obama acknowledged such concerns in a speech to the University of Yangon on Monday but, as The Economist explained last week, they were ultimately outweighed by the need to press an unexpected strategic advantage:

Trumping the concerns […] is America’s “pivot” towards Asia and the geopolitical contest for friends and influence in the face of a rising China. Myanmar, which shares a 2,000-kilometre (1,250-mile) border with China, is viewed as a crucial prize in this contest. Mr Obama hotfooting it to Myanmar throws out an unequivocal message of American intent.

[…] Meanwhile, foreign-policy experts in China refuse to be taken in by all the American rhetoric about democracy and human rights. America, complains Zhu Feng, an international-relations specialist at Peking University, always had a strategic concern with China in the region, assuming that it wants to use “Myanmar as a springboard to the Indian Ocean”. (That is a not unreasonable assumption.)

And so the Obama visit is likely only to deepen the Chinese feeling of creeping encirclement. Chinese experts also point to last month’s extraordinary announcement that next year the Burmese army will, as observers, probably attend America’s annual regional military exercises with its friends, known as Cobra Gold. This year’s event, in Thailand, included contingents from South Korea, Indonesia, Japan and Singapore. If the Burmese join this lot, then expect the more conspiratorial readings of the “pivot” to get a really good airing in the Chinese capital.

At The Wall Street Journal, Deborah Kan and Patrick Barta discussed these geopolitical manoeuvres and the prospects for expanded American commercial investment. Barta stressed, however, that “Burma cannot afford to upset China in the long run”.

Thein Sein’s chief political advisor Ko Ko Hlaing recently visited China and stressed the breadth and depth of ties between the two countries. From Qin Zhongwei at China Daily:

Myanmar was one of the first countries to establish diplomatic ties with New China in 1950. But the two countries’ close relationship dates to centuries ago, Hlaing said. He said the ancestors of people now living in both countries had referred to each other at one time as “paukphaw”, a Myanmar word meaning brothers and sisters.

The countries’ relationship has remained strong in recent decades, especially during Myanmar’s isolation, a time that it received much assistance from China. China is now the country’s largest investor and trade partner, he said.

[…] “We need to keep cordial relations with all nations,” Hlaing said. “But the truth is, China is our most important neighbor. We will never forget that.”

This very importance has been a major force behind Myanmar’s recent shift, however. China’s stance towards its much smaller neighbour has at times been predatory. One example is the voracious logging carried out there by Chinese companies dodging environmental restrictions at home. “Soon the trees will be all cut,” a manager at one Chinese logging firm told The Globe and Mail last year. “Without the trees, there will be only mountains. So we will look into mining them.”

The key case, however, is the Myitsone Dam, whose suspension by Thein Sein’s government was a pivotal moment in its rejection of total dependence on China. The dam’s impact assessment found that it would cause “serious social and environmental problems” in Myanmar, but all of the electricity it produced was intended to be transmitted to China. At YaleGlobal earlier this month Bertil Lintner saw trouble brewing for China in Myanmar as this unbalanced relationship bred resentment:

Even within the ruling military, anti-Chinese feelings run high. Already in 2004, a document was compiled by Lieutenant Colonel Aung Kyaw Hla, a researcher at Burma’s Defence Services Academy located in Pyin Oo Lwin, an old hill station in the highlands northeast of Mandalay.

[…] The thesis bluntly states that having China as a diplomatic ally and economic patron has created a “national emergency” that threatens the country’s independence. Aung Kyaw Hla, probably a committee of army strategists rather than a single person, goes on to argue that although human rights are a concern in the West, the US would be willing to modify its policy to suit “strategic interests.” Although the author does not specify those interests, the thesis makes it clear that includes common ground with the US vis-à-vis China. The author cites Vietnam and Indonesia under former dictator Suharto as examples of US foreign-policy flexibility in weighing strategic interests against democratization.

If bilateral relations with the US were improved, the master plan suggests, Burma would also gain access to badly needed funds from the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and other global financial institutions. The country would then emerge from “regionalism,” where it currently depends on the goodwill and trade of immediate neighbors, including China, and “enter a new era of globalization.”

But Chinese officials have suggested that they, too, see advantages in a more open Myanmar, provided that core Chinese interests are protected. Yunnan Party chief Qin Guanrong commented on the issue during the 18th Party Congress in Beijing this month. From Ben Blanchard at Reuters:

“We understand and support the wish of the Myanmar authorities wanting to open up and become part of the world,” he told reporters on the sidelines of a Communist Party congress, in rare comments on a sensitive relationship.

“We believe that Myanmar’s leaders will exercise their wisdom to lead their country’s opening up. They know that the people of China will always be true friends of Myanmar’s.”

[…] Still, concern persists over some vital Chinese projects in the country, notably a twin oil and gas pipeline being built across Myanmar into Yunnan.

[…] “We hope that Myanmar will protect the safety of China’s investments and personnel there,” Qin said. “Because the cooperation on these projects accord with the interests of both sides, and are mutually beneficially and win-win.”

A Global Times editorial on Tuesday, meanwhile, urged readers not to read too much into Obama’s visit, and repeatedly insisted that China’s relationship with Myanmar remains secure.

Myanmar’s opening-up was unavoidable. Sino-Myanmese relations must undergo some changes to adapt to this. But the changes will be limited.

There is no possibility that bilateral relations will be overturned entirely. China is the biggest neighboring country of Myanmar and has irreplaceable influences on it. More importantly, such influences are based on equality.

Myanmar is becoming open to the West in order to maximize its national interests. But it’s unwise to replace China with the West. Both the current leadership of Myanmar and opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi well know this.

That said, Obama’s visit may still have an eye toward challenging China’s influence. But the actual effect will be difficult to tell. Obama likes to be applauded for his efforts in promoting democracy in Myanmar and this merits some reward. However, the US can’t squeeze China out of Myanmar.

The newspaper has been equally insistent on the question of whether China might follow its neighbour towards elections and a freer press. “Myanmar’s reforms,” it claimed in August, “are still flower buds that haven’t been exposed to wind and rain yet. We sincerely hope Myanmar’s reforms will prove successful. But it’s naïve if we doubt the road we have taken, just because these buds look different from China’s prosperous tree of reform.” At China File, Bi Cheng argued that this condescending attitude betrays complacency:

One weibo user called Dengba invoked the One Hundred Days Reform of the late Qing Dynasty (1644-1911), when China’s emperor rolled out a series of policies—modeled on Japan’s earlier Meiji Restoration—to modernize Chinese society, only to see the powerful conservative faction in his court shut them down a few months later.

“The Great Qing has made and will make significant progress in its reform,” Dengba wrote, likening the voice of the Global Times editorial to those of the hardline Qing aristocrats. “We mustn’t make an idol of Japan, a backward country that has completed the Meiji Restoration.”

[…] It is against the brightening backdrop held up by China’s neighbors that Beijing’s suspicion and wariness of basic freedoms and rights seems anachronistic. The Global Times editorial is oddly reminiscent of Emperor Qianlong’s reaction to the Macartney Mission in 1793. The British aimed to expand trade with the Qing Empire, but Lord Macartney’s entreaties famously ended in failure because Qianlong found engagement with the rest of the world unnecessary. China, believed the emperor, possessed everything it needed in abundance, and, as such, it was unnecessary to “import the manufactures of outside barbarians.” “Strange and costly objects do not interest me,” Qianlong wrote in the letter he sent back to King George III.

[…] As “strange and costly” as press freedom seems to China’s censors, it may be unstoppable in the Middle Kingdom. […]

See also Sim Chi Yin’s photographic exploration of the Chinese presence in Myanmar at China File; the full text of Obama’s speech in Yangon; Max Fisher at The Washington Post on the significance of the president’s use of the name ‘Myanmar’; Scott A. Snyder of the Council on Foreign Relations on the visit’s message to Kim Jong Un; coverage of the country’s ongoing sectarian violence from Human Rights Watch and The Economist; more on Myanmar via CDT; and a video from The New York Times last week summarising various aspects of Myanmar’s apparent transition:

© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Barack Obama, Burma, civil war, dams, ethnic conflict, Global Times, Hillary Clinton, hydroelectric power, Indian Ocean, logging, Ministry of Truth, Myanmar, Nobel Peace Prize, oil pipeline, press freedom, qing dynasty, United States, Yunnan, Zhu Feng
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

China said Japan must meet it halfway in a longstanding territorial spat in the East China Sea as concerns grow at a key Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit here about whether the showdown could hurt economic ties between the two countries.

“The Japanese side should take concrete actions and meet the Chinese side halfway, and jointly manage the crisis so as to reduce tensions and promote China-Japan strategic and mutually beneficial relations,” said Qin Gang, the spokesman for China’s Foreign Ministry said at a news briefing Saturday.

The tough-worded remarks came as Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda met with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, also on the sidelines of the APEC summit. Their talks lasted for about an hour and covered a broad range of security and economic issues, including China.

Despite the territorial spat and frequent eruptions of anti-Japanese sentiment in China, Japan has tried to keep tensions under control, as the country depends on China for much of its economic growth. In November, China, South Korea and Japan will begin formal talks on a trilateral free-trade agreement, according to Chinese officials.

The Voice of America previously reported that Noda said he will not likely meet China’s president, Hu Jintao, at the APEC summit. Despite this statement, the two leaders met for 15 minutes on the sidelines of the summit. Reuters adds:

Chinese President Hu Jintao said on Sunday Japan should not make a “wrong decision” over a territorial dispute when he met Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda after weeks of tension between the neighbors, media reported.

Noda said Japan hoped to develop a mutually beneficial, strategic relationship with China and that he planned to deal with current relations from a “comprehensive perspective”, Japan’s Jiji news agency reported.

China’s state television broadcaster, CCTV, reported that Hu told Noda a “severe situation” had developed over the islands which are controlled by Japan and owned by a Japanese family.

“It is illegal and invalid for Japan to buy the island via any means. China firmly opposes it,” CCTV quoted Hu as saying.

Amid the territorial dispute between the two countries, US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has softened the rhetoric on China. The Washington Post reports Clinton is urging neighboring Asian countries to ease tensions:

“Whether we’re talking about the South China Sea or the East China Sea, my message has been the same to everyone,” Clinton told reporters. “Now is the time for everyone to make efforts to reduce the tensions and strengthen diplomatic involvement toward resolving these tensions.”

Given the weakness of the global recovery, any confrontation that might raise doubts over stability and peace in the region would not be in anyone’s interest, said Clinton, who was attending the summit of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum on behalf of President Barack Obama.

Clinton said she would work closely with the various Asian countries to help ensure the disputes do not balloon into more serious problems.

“We can’t let anything happen. It’s not in the interests of any of the Asian countries and it’s certainly not in the interests of the United States or the rest of the world to raise doubts and uncertainties about the stability and peace in the region,” she said.

Following anti-Japanese protests, Japanese carmakers in China have been told to lie low. This report comes as more carmakers, such as Nissan, are trying to expand into China’s auto market. AsiaOne reports:

The economic fallout from territorial disputes involving Japan, China and South Korea continues to spread, with the latest manifestation being a request from the Chinese authorities for Japanese carmakers to slow sales campaigns in China in order to avoid becoming targets of anti-Japanese demonstrations.

The diplomatic row between Japan and China is having “some impact” on Japanese car sales in China, Reuters quoted a Nissan executive as saying in the south-western Chinese city of Chengdu.

Nissan chief operating officer Toshiyuki Shiga said Japanese car manufacturers were having difficulty in holding big, outdoor sales promotion campaigns, which may have hurt August sales.

Nissan and other Japanese manufacturers were advised by local government officials to tone down their sales campaigns and slow other sales activities to avoid becoming targets, Mr Shiga added. “I heard that local authorities requested (some stores) not to do big campaigns.”

 

© Melissa M. Chan for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | One comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: apec, auto industry, diaoyu islands, diplomacy, Hillary Clinton, Japan, Japan relations, territorial disputes
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

“China has sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea and their adjacent waters,” Foreign Minister Yang Jeichi told her bluntly. “There is plentiful historical and jurisprudential evidence for that.”

And as for competing claims to the islands and waters by the likes of Vietnam, the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia Taiwan and others, Yang had this to say:

“As for the dispute over the sovereignty of some islands and reefs of the Nansha (Spratly) Islands and the overlapping rights, interests, and claims over some waters of the South China Sea, these should be discussed by the directly concerned countries on the basis of the fact – of historical fact and international law, and handled and settled through direct negotiations and friendly consultation.”

Although Clinton may not have made progress on two key issues on her agenda – tensions in the South China Sea and China’s role in the Syria conflict – The Washington Post reports that she said the talks were useful. A New York Times editorial on Wednesday called her visit “disappointing” but supported Clinton’s approach:

Still, Mrs. Clinton was right to press for common ground. Bounded by some of Asia’s most vibrant economies — China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan and Malaysia — the South China Sea has become a virtual free-for-all as nations assert claims to islands and even specks of rock. China has been the most aggressive, but other counties share blame. Confrontations over territorial control and undersea resources could easily get out of hand.

China should see the value in looking for ways to ensure regional stability. But it, too, has worries, particularly about the Obama administration’s more assertive presence in Asia, which includes strengthening military ties with Australia and the Philippines. That is one reason the United States must balance firmness toward China with a willingness to work together. China’s refusal to support tough U.N. Security Council sanctions against Mr. Assad is unconscionable. Chinese officials say they adhere to the principle of not interfering in the affairs of other countries, ignoring that their stubbornness has helped prolong the conflict in which more than 20,000 Syrians have been killed.

© Scott Greene for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Hillary Clinton, South China Sea, Syria, U.S. relations, Yang Jiechi
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

“We believe the U.S.-China relationship is on a strong and solid base,” Clinton told Chinese President Hu Jintao at the start of talks, where pool reporters were given brief access.

“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 in opening remarks echoed by President Hu.

The overseas edition of state mouthpiece the People’s Daily, however, laid out Chinese concerns ahead of Clinton’s meetings with Chinese leaders, and suggested the United States is seeking to gain leverage from China’s tensions with Japan and Southeast Asian countries.

“The United States’ recent conduct concerning the Diaoyu islands and South China Sea issues cannot but create the suspicion that it is attempting to sow discord in order to fish for advantage,” said a front-page commentary in the paper, which broadly reflects official thinking.

China has been locked in dispute with a number of its neighbors over possession of territory in the South China Sea. During her tenure in Washington, Clinton has emphasized the importance the U.S. places on its role in the region. On her current tour of Asia, she has softened her rhetoric but is still calling on China to take action to resolve the issue. From the AP:

She urged all parties to make ‘‘meaningful progress’’ by a November summit of East Asian leaders that President Barack Obama plans to attend in Cambodia.

In Jakarta, Indonesia’s capital, Clinton offered strong U.S. support for a regionally endorsed plan to ease rising tensions by implementing the code of conduct. Jakarta is the headquarters of ASEAN, and Clinton pressed the group to insist that China agree to deal with them as a bloc.

© Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Hillary Clinton, South China Sea, U.S. relations, Xi Jinping
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Friday pledged renewed American commitment to security in the Asia-Pacific, where tensions are rising between China and its smaller neighbors over territorial disputes and many nations face threats from climate change.

Speaking at a meeting of leaders of South Pacific island nations, Clinton said the United States would not abandon its long history of protecting maritime commerce in the region and serving as a counterbalance to domination by any particular world power.

“We have underwritten the security that has made it possible for the people of this region to trade and travel freely,” she said, noting nearly a century of American military presence in the Asia-Pacific.

Clinton is the first US Secretary of State to attend the Pacific Islands Forum, and prior to the meeting China Daily expressed concern with her presence. However, the words that Clinton offered today were much softer on China than may have been expected, as Reuters reports:

Clinton’s trip to the South Pacific has spurred some criticism in China, where some commentators accused the United States of seeking to stir up trouble as Beijing’s economic and political influence expands.

[...]Despite what is increasingly being portrayed as a great power rivalry, Clinton said the United States welcomed the chance to work with China and other Pacific development partners including Japan and the European Union.

“We all have important contributions and stakes in this region’s success, to advance your security, your prosperity and your opportunity. And I think the Pacific is big enough for all of us,” she said.

AFP has more on Clinton’s decision to stress commitment and common ground instead of more sensitive topics:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton vowed Friday the United States would remain active in the South Pacific for the “long haul” but said the region was big enough for a rising China.

[...]Clinton, who will visit Beijing next week for talks on the often fractious relationship between the world’s two largest economies, played down rivalries in the South Pacific.

[...]“We all have important contributions and stakes in the region’s success to advance your security, your opportunity and your prosperity,” she said.

[...]“Our countries are bound by shared interests, and more importantly, by shared values, a shared history, and shared goals for the future,” Clinton said.

“We are increasing our investments,” she said. “And we will be here with you for the long haul.”

Also see prior CDT coverage of US-China relations and Secretary Clinton.

© josh rudolph for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Asia Pacific Policy, diplomacy, Hillary Clinton, maritime disputes, South China Sea, U.S. relations
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

The Chinese Foreign Ministry says Clinton will be in China Sept. 4-5.

The United States said two weeks ago that China should not use bilateral talks to attempt to “divide and conquer” nations with competing territorial claims. That was after Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi visited Malaysia and Brunei, two such countries.

For more on US attitudes over the South China Sea dispute, see US Voices Concern Over South China Sea Rows, via CDT.

© Mengyu Dong for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: diplomacy, foreign policy, Hillary Clinton, South China Sea, U.S. relations
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

She will start the tour in Senegal, where U.S. officials say she will give a speech warning African states about the potential perils of Chinese investment, which many development experts claim enriches China at Africa’s expense. She will say that proper development will blunt the appeal of extremist groups that are gaining power in Nigeria and Mali and still threaten Somalia.

Without mentioning China by name, Clinton will urge African leaders to carefully consider projects proposed by foreign countries that do not demand complete accountability and may encourage corruption to the detriment of the people of some of the world’s most impoverished nations, according to the officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to preview the speech.

The United States is increasingly concerned about China’s growing interest in Africa, the result of its massive demand for energy and natural resources to fuel its exploding economy. U.S. officials, including Clinton, have in the past expressed deep reservations about China’s practice of setting up huge infrastructure or other building projects, employing only Chinese workers and ignoring human rights and democratic principles.

In line with AP’s forecast, remarks in Clinton’s speech did indeed seem to address China without mentioning the country by name. The Guardian reports:

Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, has launched an 11-day tour of Africa by contrasting America’s commitment to democracy and human rights with rival powers’ focus on exploiting resources.

During her first stop on Wednesday in Senegal, Clinton told a university audience that the US was committed to “a model of sustainable partnership that adds value, rather than extracts it” from Africa.

Unlike other countries, she continued, “America will stand up for democracy and universal human rights even when it might be easier to look the other way and keep the resources flowing.”

As secretary of state, Clinton has consistently criticized China on a number of issues: its role in the South China Sea, the need for China to take more international responsibility, the country’s human rights record, and more recently China’s veto of a UN resolution on Syria. China has also annually been on Clinton’s list of “Countries of Particular Concern“, a designation of countries that “face challenges in protecting religious freedom” (though this is not unique to Clinton’s career as secretary of state, China has been on the list since its beginnings in 1999). Earlier this week, Clinton gave her report on this year’s list, prompting China’s state media to attack the very existence of the annual report. From China Daily:

A Xinhua News Agency commentary published on Tuesday accused the report of being “nothing but a political tool used by the US government to exert pressure on other countries, mostly deemed as its rivals”.

The report is largely based on unconfirmed media reports and groundless allegations fromoutlawed groups and organizations with an ulterior motive, the Xinhua commentary said.

By blaming China for “marked deterioration” in religious freedom, the report apparently ignoredthe basic facts and realities in China, which has made utmost efforts to defend religious freedom and the right to express religious belief on condition that laws are respected, it said.

Also see prior CDT coverage of Hillary Clinton and Chinese investment in Africa.

© josh rudolph for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Africa investment, Africa relations, diplomacy, Hillary Clinton, U.S. relations
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

Making a broad case for democracy and good governance in Asia, Clinton cited reforms in nations including Myanmar, where the generals that ruled for nearly half a century have given way to a quasi-civilian government that has freed political prisoners and permitted the formation of political parties.

“They stand in stark contrast to those governments that continue to resist reforms – that work around the clock to restrict people’s access to ideas and information, to imprison them for expressing their views, to usurp the rights of citizens to choose their leaders, to govern without accountability, to corrupt the economic progress of the country and take the riches unto themselves,” Clinton said.

Without citing it by name, Clinton’s comments appeared aimed partly at China.

“Countries that want to be open for business but closed to free expression will find the approach comes with a cost: it kills innovation (and) discourages entrepreneurship, which are vital for sustainable growth,” she said.

“You cannot, over the long run, have economic liberalization without political liberalization.”

Clinton’s visit to Mongolia comes on the second day of an Asia tour that will see her visit Vietnam and Laos before attending the ASEAN Regional Forum in Cambodia, where The Financial Times reports that attendees will discuss the principal topic of tensions in the South China Sea. As the United States continues to reinforce its pivot towards Asia, Bloomberg reports that the ASEAN nations stand to reap rewards from the ongoing brinksmanship between the U.S. and China in the Asia-Pacific region:

U.S. allies Japan and South Korea are also pursuing closer ties in Southeast Asia to counter China’s influence in a region where economic growth rates are among the world’s highest. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced in May that the U.S. will deploy 60 percent of its naval power to the Pacific by 2020 as China’s growing economic and military might causes friction with its neighbors.

“Southeast Asian countries actually like a bit of creative tension between the U.S. and China because they can play one off against the other and derive benefits,” said Ian Storey, a visiting research fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore. Greater economic integration means “a major conflict is out of the question because it’s in no one’s interest and the stakes are too high,” he said.

See also comments made last week by Clinton about Syria, in which she urged China and Russia to “get off the sidelines” and stop supporting the Assad regime.

© Scott Greene for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | 2 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: ASEAN, China's rise, democracy, economic growth, Hillary Clinton, mongolia, political reform, U.S. relations
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall