|
Angry Chinese Blogger (Mirror)
http://20six.co.uk/angrychineseblogger
powered by
20six.co.uk
|
101 Ways To Insult China
Up
until now, if you had wanted simultaneously enrage and insult 1.3
billion people, the person to ask for advice would have been Japan's
foreign Minister, 麻生太郎 (Aso Taro);
a man to whom accusing, insulting or offending China and the Chinese
people, whether by accident or intent, seems not only to be second
nature, but also to be something that he is full capable of doing while
sitting quietly in the corner of a darkened room.
However, it would now appear that a new champion has arrived to knock 麻生 (Aso)
off of his throne. One who makes the irascible politician look like a
rank armature when it comes to upsetting and insulting Chinese.
King of the Insult
Sure, 麻生 (Aso) called
China a military threat. He might have referred to one of its outlying
islands as being a separate country with a democratic government, and
he even told the unthinkable truth, that said island's education system
owes a lot to the fact that it was originally Japan's education system,
but this has nothing compared to the verbal faux pas recently made by
Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi.
The Insult
While
standing before a meeting of the Forza Italia political party, last
Sunday, Berlusconi cheerfully accused Mao era Chinese of rendering down
their children in cooking vats so that their bodies could be used as
fertilizer.
|
"I
have been accused many times of saying communists eat babies. Go and
read 'The Black Book of Communism' and you'll find that under Mao's
China they didn't eat babies but they boiled them to fertilize the
fields."
Silvio Berlusconi, Prime Minister, Italy |
|
The Rebuke
As was to be expected, Beijing swiftly moved to express it 'extreme dissatisfaction' at Berlusconi's words, which the Foreign Ministry described as being 'groundless accusations', that could have potentially damaging ramifications for the two countries.
In
addition to criticizing Berlusconi, Beijing also called on both the
Italian leader, and the wider leadership, to refrain from making any
further comments that could damage the development of peaceful
sino-Italian relations.
|
"Italian
leaders should use words and actions that are beneficial to stable and
developing friendly relations between China and Italy"
Foreign Ministry, China |
|
The Reprimand
On
top of criticizm from Beijing, Berlusconi's remarks also drew ire from
within Italy, with Italy's opposition describing Berlusconi words as
being "unthinkable", and voicing that they were an insult to the
Chinese people that has the potential to seriously impact on Italy's
diplomatic relations with China.
|
"The damage caused to Italy by an insult to 1.3 billion people is by all means a considerable one"
Romano Prodi, Opposition Leader, Italy |
|
Anti-Chinese, or Anti-Communist?
While
Berlusconi's remarks have proven to be deeply offensive to China, and
have thusly been decried, some observers have moved to point out that
they were aimed at Communism rather than directly at the Chinese.
A
fact that some observers have equally voiced, does not excuse their
being made, or do anything to diminish the hurt that they have caused
to the Chinese people.
As such, Berlusconi is well known for
making anti-communist remarks and has often been accused of being
fixated with the idea that communism poses a threat to Italian
democracy.
Berlusconi has previously made a number of similar
statements in the past, aimed at communism, including those made prior
to his 2001 election victory, in which accused Communists, though not
specifically Chinese communists, of eating babies.
|
"I can organise a conference in which I will prove communists have really eaten babies and done even worse things".
Silvio Berlusconi |
|
The Black Book of Communism?
Originally
titled Le Livre noir du communisme : Crimes, terreur, répression, and
compiled by a group of French Achademics in 1997, the Black Book of
Communism was an attempt to document the crimes committed, and
suffering caused, by communism. To which the book's writers attribute
the deaths of some 85 Million people, including 65 million Chinese.
Although
having received a high welcome from both the New York Times and the
Wall Street Journal, "The Black Book of Communism" received a less than
glowing report from other sources, with some observers accusing it of 'labeling any regime with socialist tenancies as being Communist' and of 'denouncing
any crime or abuse committed in relation to communism, or under the
watch of a so-called communist government, as being a crime committed
by communism itself'.
Similarly, "The Black Book of Communism" has been criticized for 'failing to put history into context';
A phrases which largely refers to the fact that it accuses Communism of
a multitude of crimes against humanity, while failing to take into
account that many of 'Communism's crimes' mirror those committed by capitalist countries, or are the 'moral equivalent' of capitalist crimes. meaning that they may be different in form, but carry the same weight in human suffering and impact.
In response to its publication, the "Livre Noir du Capitalisme" (“The Black Book of Capitalism”) was written in 1998.
It
was aimed to provide a counterbalance to "The Black Book of Communism"
by highlighting the excesses and crimes against humanity accredited to
Capitalism, including, imperialism, colonialism and the abuse of the
workers and the lower social classes.
The “The Black Book of Capitalism” has attracted similar praise and criticizm to its opposite number.
Original Article: 101 Ways To Insult China
|
1.4.06 18:29
|
|
Fact or Fiasco: Are Chinese electronics spying on you?
For
quite some time now, conservative groups in Washington have been
growing increasingly concerned about the flow of US technology to
China, and about how this technology might be put to 'bad uses', that
could potentially impact on America's ability to influence events in
the Asia Pacific region.
As such, the export of any material or
technology to China that could potentially have military uses, or which
might otherwise impinge on the balance of power between east and west,
has been carefully scrutinized for decades.
|
“The
risk of transferring US commercial technology has been a staple of the
larger US debate over China policy for many years. Trade with China is
routinely viewed through the prism of Chinese military capabilities”
James A. Lewis, Center for Strategic and International Studies |
|
However, it now appears that things
have turned on their heals, with congress now expressing concern over
the import of technology into the US, rather its export.
As a
symptom of these concerns, it has been announced that the US-China
Economic and Security Review Commission has launched an investigation
into the purchase of Chinese computer equipment by the US Department of
State.
|
"Members of Congress, I think, will react very strongly when they see a deal like this come through."
Larry Wortzel, Chairman, USCC |
|
The investigation has two primary aims, a to preform a 'standard' probe';
to ensure that the deal was ethical, and to forestall the possibility
that the equipment might contain intelligence gathering 'bobby traps'
that could capture confidential information from within the halls of
western power, and transmit it back to Beijing.
The Problem?
At
the heart of the issues are 16,000 personal computers which were
ordered from 聯想 (Lenovo), -previously known as Legend, in a deal that
is estimated to be worth $US13 Million which was formally announced on
20 March of this year.
Although the deal was made through
standard state purchasing channels, and went forward without a hitch,
the fact that it involved company with strong ties to the Chinese
State, suppling computers to the federal government, quickly rang alarm
bells in the corridors of power, and rousing members of the USCC
sufficiently for them to call for an immediate investigation.
|
"The opportunities for intelligence gains by the Chinese are phenomenal"
Michael Wessel, Commissioner, USCC |
|
Although the commission is to investigate a number of different angles, two key fears have been raised in regards to the deal.
- That Beijing might instruct
Lenovo to include digital eavesdropping devices in their computers,
capable of monitoring internal documents stored on them and
communications made through them, by the Department of State, with the
intent that this information be transmitted back to China. - That
Lenovo might install spying technology on its own initiative, and sell
the information on. Either to Beijing, as state intelligence, or to
private companies within China, the US, or another competitor nation.
|
"If
you're a foreign intelligence service and you know that a federal
agency is buying 15,000 computers from your company, wouldn't you look
into the possibility that you could do something about that?"
Larry Wortzel, USCC |
|
The Response? – Lenovo
In
response to the news that it was being scrutinized for possible
espionage activities, Jeffrey Carlisle, Lenovo's vice president of
government relations, expressed disappointment that officials
considered the matter to be worth investigating and dismissed the
commissions actions as being a result of paranoia rather than an
indication of there being a genuine issue.
|
"We would rather not have to go through these issues every time we win a government contract"
Jeffrey Carlisle, Vice President of Government Relations, Lenovo |
|
Referring to insinuations against
Lenovo as being "completely fantastic", Carlisle voiced that it would
make little commercial sense for the company to risk damaging its
reputation by engaging in unethical data monitoring or recording, and
expressed frustration at the fact that the Commission was pressing
ahead with the review despite the fact that Lenovo's products had
already been 'fully certified' as being 'safe for government
use' under the compulsory security vetting systems that all federal
technology suppliers are required to go though.
|
"Lenovo products sold to US government customers all have been
certified for security and integrity as required to qualify for
government procurement"
Spokesperson, Lenovo |
|
Despite reservations, officials within Lenovo promised that they would co-operate fully with the commission.
|
"While we think another exhaustive investigation is unnecessary, we very much want to make sure the facts are understood"
Spokesperson, Lenovo |
|
The Response? – Department of State
Upon the announcement of the investigation, the Department of State also moved to defended the deal.
Stating
that its contract with Lenovo represented 'good value for money' for US
taxpayers, the Department offered its reassurances that the use of
Chinee computers by the Federal Government in now way not endanger
national security. Firstly, because Lenovo had complied met with all of
the existing safeguards that were built into the purchasing system, and
secondly, because the computers were for 'general use' and would not be
installed in highly confidential areas of the State Department. Thus
ensuring that they didn't contain any 'nasty surprises', and
additionally limiting their depth of access to classified materia.
|
"The
United States takes its responsibilities seriously in terms of getting
the best value for the dollar whenever we spend American taxpayer
dollars"
Sean McCormack, Spokesman, Department of State, US |
|
Prudent, or Paranoid?
Although
conservative elements within Washington have voiced their concerns over
the deal, and have been backed up by member of the USCC who described
it as being a matter the “needs to be investigated”, other's have
dismissed the idea of Lenovo computers being used to spy on the State
Department as being the result of anti-Chinese bias and basic ignorance.
As
such, some observers have accused Congress of 'harboring a cold war
mentality' that causes it to see any China related development as being
a potential threat, while other's have voiced that state officials
'have been watching too many spy movies' which have fooled them into
thinking that electronic espionage is easy.
The Mechanics of Espionage?
Despite there having been numerous recorded incidents of electronic espionage against the US, most have revolved around 'human intelligence gathering'
and the interception of communications, rather than the use of
intelligence gathering devices hidden within personal computers by the
manufacturers.
Indeed, a number of influential conservative
think tanks have already dismissing fears that companies, such as
Lenovo, could successfully infiltrate the Federal Government using
personal computers, as being 'unjustified'.
When called
to discuss the issue with the USCC, expert witnesses voiced that it
would be almost futile for a company to purposefully engineer their
products for espionage, on the grounds that the risk of discovery is
high because of the level of scrutiny that government hardware is put
under as part of the purchasing and quality assurance process.
More over, it was voiced that the risk of economic damage, upon discovery, largely outweighs the potential benefits of spying.
|
“Intentionally
building flaws into hardware or software for later exploitation is a
high risk strategy with uncertain payoff. If discovered, the supplier
company could be forced from the market.”
James A. Lewis, Center
for Strategic and International Studies (Effect of U.S.-China Trade on
the Defense Industrial Base), speaking before the USCC, 23 June 2005 |
|
Similarly,
the risk of intelligence gathering chips and circuit board, installed
in commercial PCs, failing due to incompatibility with other hardware
or software components, was also quoted as being 'high'.
|
“the
malicious component may not work as planned once it is integrated with
components from other sources. Even if it works when it leaves the
factory, it may fail later when it is integrated into a larger
network.”
James A. Lewis, (Effect of U.S.-China Trade on the Defense Industrial Base), 23 June 2005 |
|
Far from worrying about 'rigged hardware',
experts have stated that the security issues that the US should be most
concerned with are 'Trojan horse' programs; software that has been
hidden on a computer in order to perform deviant functions, such as the
gathering and transmission of passwords and other confidential
information.
|
“A
cursory assessment suggests that the current threat lies in the use of
viruses and spyware that exploit software vulnerabilities rather than
in malicious changes to hardware or software. “
James A. Lewis, (Effect of U.S.-China Trade on the Defense Industrial Base), 23 June 2005 |
|
However,
experts have also voiced that, even if Lenovo were to attempt to plant
deviant software on State Department PCs, it would unlikely to pose a
threat to US security because US agencies routinely erase all
information on newly purchased computer. Deleting the Operating System
and all factory installed software, and replacing it with a standard -
pre configured - suit that has been built to government specifications.
This
operation is known as "ghosting", and is designed to assist in computer
servicing and maintenance by ensures that all government computers have
identical settings and contain identical software packages. However, it
is also a key security measure as it results in the destruction of any
covert intelligence gathering software that may have been installed.
In this line, observers have voiced that the largest threat to internal security probably comes from 'commercial spyware';
programs written by civilians and designed to harvest passwords and
other personal information for sale to Spamming companies and Identity
Thieves, or from intelligence gathering software installed on computers
after their installation within the State Department.
The former
of which would be a threat regardless of whom the computers were
purchased from, and the latter of which is minimized by the fact that
the only people who would be able to install software after
installation would be employees of the State Department itself, or
certified Lenovo Engineers, most of whom are America technical staff
retained from when Lenvo took over IBM.
Anti-Chinese Sentiment?
In
light of these dismissals of concerns, some observers have leveled
accusations that the only reason that the Lenovo purchase is being
scrutinized is because those seeking an investigation harbor strong
anti-Chinese sentiment.
As such, observers have voicing that
some of those displaying concern over Lenovo are seeing a fictitious
“China Threat”, rather than a real threat.
|
"[Some US leaders] have an excessively heightened view of China as a national security threat"
Joseph Massey, Assistant US Trade Representative for Japan and China (1985-92) |
|
Observers
have also accused some of those calling for Lenovo to come under
increased of trying to interfere with the purchase in order to 'keep China down' and voicing that US officials are trying to put up 'unofficial trade barriers' in an effort to prevent Chinese companies from gaining ground on their US rivals.
Even
before the current incident, Lenovo has complained about discrimination
against its products in the US, and has gone on record to publicly
denounce what it sees as being 'Anti-Chinese sentiment' from US purchasers, particularly those working for the State.
|
“Dell
has many clients in the Chinese government, yet you see how difficult
it is for us to develop clients in the US government"
Spokesperson, Lenovo (2005) |
|
Claims of 'anti-Chinese sentiment'
being used against Lenovo were brought to the world's attention in
2005, after a salesperson working for US computer giant Dell was
alleged to have sent an letter to corporate clients, warning that
purchasing 'post takeover' IBM computers was tantamount to supporting
China's communist regime.
|
“As
you know Lenovo is a Chinese government owned company that recently
purchased IBM's desktop business. While the US government has given its
stamp of approval to continue to purchase these units, people must
understand that every dollar clients spent on these IBM systems is
directly supporting/funding the Chinese government.
Salesperson, Dell |
|
Dell was
later forced to confirm that the incident had taken place, and that it
had disciplined a staff member for breaching internal police over the
email.
|
"We
have a code of conduct that we uphold here for Dell in the US and
worldwide, specific guidelines for not commenting on competitors
Lionel Menchaca, Spokesperson, Dell
Dell refused to name the individual involved. |
|
Genuine Concerns?
Despite
the apparent dismissal of security concerns by both observers and
conservative think tanks, there remains an air of worry of the issue,
particularly as it is being personally pressed forward by Larry
Wortzel, the current Chairman of the US-China Economic and Security
Review Commission.
Although not a household name, Wortzel is a
former Director of the Strategic Studies Institute of the US Army War
College, and US Army Attache to China, with a resume that includes
monitoring Chinese military communications in Vietnam and Laos, during
the 1970s, and working “[to develop] counterintelligence programs to
protect emerging defense technologies from foreign espionage” for the
Under Secretary of Defense for Policy.
As such, Wortzel is
considered to be one of the US's foremost exports on “The China
threat”, and a man who would quickly dismiss any Sino-US intelligence
issues, such as this, that he considered to be utterly baseless.
Other Concerns?
Although
the security implication of a Federal group using Chinese computers has
created concerns over security, the issue of the Lenovo purchase goes
much deeper than the possibility that State Department computers might
pass on information to foreign agencies.
Indeed, there are also
strong concerns over Lenovo's relationship with 中国科学院 (the Chinese
Academy of Sciences), which currently owns 27% of the PC manufacturer.
Being
a state owned body, 中国科学院 (CAS) is not only controlled by Beijing, but
it is also funded by the Chinese government. A fact which has lead to
claims that Lenovo is in receipt of unfair state subsidies that acted
to put the US companies bidding for the Department of State contract as
a disadvantage.
|
“if you have these state-owned enterprises that don't have to make any money, they can underbid to gain market share”
Donald Manzullo Republican (Illinois) |
|
Manzullo,
who served on the Small Business Committee, previously urged the
Government to extend the time allotted to reviewing the takeover of IBM
by Lenovo.
|
"Given
the relationship between so-called private companies in communist
states and their government, we believe that it is manifestly in the
public interest to extend the time for review by those agencies in the
federal government responsible for defense, foreign policy and
intelligence in order to ensure that there are no adverse national
security ramifications of the sale," the congressmen wrote in the
letter.
Donald Manzullo Republican (2005) |
|
Such issues are also likely to be investigated by the USCC
Overseas-Chinese?
Ironically,
although the disputed computer equipments will carry the Chinese Lenovo
brand name, there will be very little about them that has anything to
do with Mainland China.
According to Lenovo, all of the machines
destined for the Department of State are to be constructed in Monterrey
- Mexico and Raleigh - North Carolina, and are to largely use
components manufactured in Chinese-Taiwan.
|
"the sourcing of the units were all disclosed and discussed with the State Department"
Spokesperson, Lenovo |
|
Additionally,
they will be internally identical to the standard IBM machines that
would have been sold to the State Department had Lenovo not brought out
the company, and will be serviced by IBM engineers, not Chinese staff.
These
details were disclosed to Washington as a pre condition of government
security vetting procedures prior to the signing of the PC deal, and
are known to the USCC.
The Delivery?
According to public records, the delivery from Lenovo to the Department of state is to consist of:
- 15,000 Lenovo ThinkCenter M51 desktop PCs with high resolution monitors flat panel LCD monitors - $11.7 million.
- 1,000 ThinkCenter M51 'mini-tower' PCs with support with LCD monitors and removable 'caddy' hard drives. - $1.4 million.
The units are to be installed in batches of 500 PCs, over a period of approximately 6 Months.
Preliminary information suggest that a November date was set for the first installations.
Original Article: Fact or Fiasco: Are Chinese electronics spying on you?
|
4.4.06 14:57
|
|
Entertaining or Subverting?: Chinese Television Tries to go Global
In a move that is sure to please
Canada's sizable Overseas-Chinese community, the country's largest
basic cable provider, Rogers Cable, has announced that it is to push
forward with a deal that could bring some of China's best known
television stations to North American cable for the first time.
The
deal, which will see Rogers working in association with the China
International Television Corporation in order to bring 9 Cantonese and
Mandarin language stations (known as 'The Great Wall' package) into
Canadian markets, was reach after Rogers received 'substantial demand'
from Canada's 1+ million strong ethnic Chinese population for
additional Chinese language services.
|
"We've had literally hundreds, if not thousands, of e-mails from people supporting and asking for these channels"
David Purdy, General Manager of Television Services, Rogers, Canada |
|
The Rogers- CITVC tie-up, which was
formalized late in 2005, is currently awaiting approval by the Canadian
Radio-Television and telecommunications commission.
It was due to have been cleared earlier this year, but has been was delayed by public consultations being re-opened.
|
The
Commission has received a request dated 8 September 2005 from the
Canadian Cable Telecommunications Association (CCTA) for the addition
of nine non-Canadian general interest Chinese-language programming
services to the lists of eligible satellite services for distribution
on a digital basis (the digital lists). The nine services originate in
mainland China and are operated by China International Television
Corporation (CITVC). The CCTA noted that CITVC is a state-owned
corporation and is a wholly-owned subsidiary of China Central
Television (CCTV).
Broadcasting Public Notice CRTC 2005-124, Canada |
|
The channels currently being sponsored for approval by Rogers are:
- CCTV-4 (CCTV International) (Mandarin)
- The Satellite Channel of Southern Television Guandong (Cantonese)
- Southeast TV Station (Fujianese)
- Jiangsu International TV Channel (Mandarin and English)
- Beijing TV (Mandarin)
- CCTV Entertainment Channel (Mandarin)
- Dragon TV (Mandarin and English)
- China Yellow River Television Station (Mandarin)
- Hunan Satellite TV (Mandarin)
|
CCTV-4
is a general interest service offering programming in Mandarin. It is a
satellite channel mainly serving audiences from Hong Kong, Macao,
Taiwan and overseas. It offers Chinese domestic news programs, drama,
documentaries and talk shows.
The Satellite Channel of
Southern Television Guandong is a general interest service offering
programming in Cantonese. Its programming includes lifestyle, fashion,
entertainment and drama, as well as news and information.
Southeast TV Station is a general interest service offering programming
in the Fujianese dialect. Its programming includes news, entertainment,
sports and financial information. Approximately 2.87 % of the overall
weekly schedule is news programming in the English language.
Jiangsu International TV Channel is a general interest service offering
programming in Mandarin. Its programming showcases the Wuyue culture
along the southern Yangtse River and includes news and financial
information, entertainment, education, TV dramas, cultural and travel
programs. Approximately 2.87% of the service’s weekly schedule is news
programming in the English language.
Beijing TV is a general
interest service offering programming in Mandarin, and has a domestic
audience of more than 200 million. Its programming includes culture,
history, fashion, lifestyle, travel, sports, technology, entertainment
and children’s programming.
CCTV Entertainment Channel is a
general interest service offering programming in Mandarin. Its
programming includes TV dramas, music including Chinese opera, folk
arts, Chinese acrobatic shows and gala presentations.
Dragon
TV is a general interest service offering programming in Mandarin. The
service operates 24 hours a day, with more than 6 hours of news
programming per day including some English-language news (approximately
0.5% of the overall weekly programming schedule). Its Mandarin
programming also includes entertainment, sports, documentaries and
drama.
China Yellow River Television Station is a general
interest service offering programming in 100% Mandarin. It primarily
features programs related to teaching and training, including
Chinese-language learning, Chinese chess, painting, poetry, operas,
local dancing, music, Chinese antiques, Chinese cuisine and cooking,
Chinese Kung Fu and traditional Chinese medicine.
Hunan
Satellite TV is a general interest service offering programming in
Mandarin. Its programming includes mainly entertainment and
informational programs which capture the pulse and essence of city
living in China.
Broadcasting Public Notice CRTC 2005-124 |
|
Monopoly?
In
addition to enriching the cultural makeup of Canadian television and
providing valuable native language material to Canada's Chinese
community, it is hoped that the Rogers-CITVC tie up will act to
stimulate Canada's stagnating Chinese language broadcasting sector,
which is currently dominated by 新時代電視 (Fairchild TV), Canada's only
nationwide Chinese language broadcaster.
|
“Rogers believes Canadians should have as much choice as possible”
Nancy Cottenden, Spokesperson, Rogers, Canada |
|
新時代電視 (Fairchild TV)?
新
時代電視 (Fairchild TV) currently produced three Chinese language stations.
FTV and Fairchild TV News, which broadcasts in Cantonese and 城市電
(Talentvision), which broadcasts in Mandarin.
Although 新時代電視
(Fairchild TV) runs in association with Hong Kong's TVB, and also
includes programming from Chinese-Taiwan and Mainland Chin. However a
substantial proportion of its news services are produced within Canada
and cover only Domestic Canadian issues.
According to census results, 68% of Canada's Chinese speakers speak Cantonese, while 32% speak Mandarin.
Criticism?
While
broadly welcomed by Chinese speaking Canadians, and those seeking to
open up Canadian media to overseas programing, the sponsorship of 9
Mainland Chinese television stations, for entry into Canadian markets,
has not been without its detractors.
After having initially
closed the deal to public consultation, regulators were forced to
postpone the decision making process in March of this year after a
number of special interest groups interjected against it on the grounds
that the initial consultation period had both been unfair because it
crossed a period in which domestic issues were distracting potential
campaigners, and because the Chinese media interests had acted
unethically in their bid for entry into the market.
|
“Accordingly,
and given the nature of the concerns expressed, the Commission finds it
appropriate to re-open the record of the proceeding initiated by Public
Notice 2005-124for the purpose of permitting the filing of concrete
evidence in relation to the concerns expressed.“
Broadcasting Public Notice CRTC 2005-124-1 |
|
Among complainants against the
Rogers-CITVC tie-up were Canadians Against Propaganda, a civil
liberties umbrella group that has been picketing Rogers since the
Sino-Canadian media tie-up was announced.
Describing the
sponsored channels as being 'tools for the prorogation of CCP
ideologies' CAP representatives called on Canadian regulators not to
approve the deal on the grounds that the channels in question commonly
broadcast content that acted to justify or deny crimes against
humanity, and that they broadcast content which vilified selected
political, religious and social groups so as to legitimize acts of
repression or retaliation against them by the Chinese State.
|
"many
of these programs airing in China would be in blatant contravention of
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Broadcasting Act and
sections 318 and 319 of the Criminal Code prohibiting the advocacy of
genocide as well as the public incitement of hatred and the wilful
promotion of hate propaganda with intent to destroy in whole or in part
any identifiable group."
Canadians Against Propaganda |
|
Additional representations were made by
the China Insight Research Society; which called for a public inquiry
to be held to address concerns that the CITVC had 'mislead' regulators
by concealing the fact that it commonly include “hate-inciting
language“ in its programs, and by the New Democratic Party
Representative Bill Siksay, a member of Canada's lower house; who
voiced strong concerns that the channels would include news broadcasts
by Xinhua, China's state controlled media agency - which is well know
for 'breaching the norms of integrity' in news reporting by
'systematically distorting news stories and events' in order to fit the
official Chinese state line on historical, political and social issues.
|
"These
channels will jeopardize the integrity of our country and we call on
our new government to stop them and call on Rogers to drop their
sponsorship"
Elaine Xie, Co-chair, Canadians Against Propaganda, Canada |
|
No Done Deals
Although
the CRTC has agreed to re-open the case for public comment, it did make
clear that did would not tollerate 'China Bashing' and, as such,
request that complainants raise the standard of their complaints and
include solid evidence to back up their claims.
|
“Most
of these parties, however, provided little or no evidence to
substantiate their positions. Similarly, the parties requesting that
the Commission conduct further process provided little or no evidence
to substantiate their concerns.........
..........evidence
might consist, for example, of transcripts or tapes of actual programs
aired on any of these nine services, along with details as to the name
of the specific service broadcasting the program or program segment and
the date or dates on which it aired.
Broadcasting Public Notice CRTC 2005-124-1 |
|
Protest groups, however, feel confident
that they have sufficient evidence to press their case for refusal of
permission to broadcast.
|
"We
have tapes from those nine TV channels and how they incite hatred. We
will file enough evidence for the CRTC to make a good decision,"
Elaine Xie, Canadians Against Propaganda |
|
Complainants have until 3 May to file evidence that the approving the 9 channels is not in the best interest of the people.
Irony?
While
there are genuine concerns over content broadcast on the 9 Channels,
including material that incites hatred or denies Chinese crimes against
humanity, some observers have pointedly noted statements in which
groups, including CAP, have publicly voiced that the Rogers-CITVC deal
should be shut down on the grounds that it would be used to spread
'Mainland political ideologies' and the official state view on new and
events.
|
"They claim themselves as cultural or entertainment channels, but they
really just infiltrate propaganda in their programming."
Elaine Xie, Co-chair, Canadians Against Propaganda, Canada |
|
As such, some observers have voiced
that this bares a remarkable similarity to the kind of censorship
employed by Beijing; under which international television stations are
jammed unless they comply with local policies, and where foreign media
groups are refused permission to operate in China unless they present
only images that are compatible with Beijing's position of society,
culture and history.
|
"Although
you are helping to facilitate this regime to spread its message of
communism and hatred here in Canada, this same regime does not allow
one single, uncensored Western media from entering its own borders"
Elaine Xie, Co-chair, Canadians Against Propaganda, Canada |
|
Leading to the awkward question “Should
Chinese-Canadians be allowed to watch both western and Chinese
television, so that they can make up their own minds?”
Nothing New?
While
Rogers is currently seeking approval to bring the 9 channels to Canada
legally, many Chinese stations are already available illegally in
Canada through unapproved satellite installations.
CCTV-4
broadcasts internationally without encryption; meaning that it can be
picked up, free of charge, around the world, by anybody with a suitable
satellite dish, and is available as part of many subscription cable
packages. It also buys airtime for its programs with independent
Chinese language broadcasters, including New York based Sinovision, and
provides them with news feeds.
Similarly,
Mainland Chinese stations are currently being carried by a number of
national and international carries outside of the US, including Rupert
Murdock's News Corp; which carries CCTV 4; the Chinese language
'international' channel, CCTV 9; The Official Chinese government
'English language' station, and Phoenix; a general purpose Chinese
language entertainment channel.
Original Article: Entertaining or Subverting?: Chinese Television Tries to go Global
|
22.4.06 08:24
|
|
No Solidarity from China over 'lost' Japanese artifacts
In a move that observers have described as
'Disappointing, but not surprising', Beijing has, this week, announced
that it will not honor any requests for the return of artifacts
originating from one of Japan's ethnic groups, which are currently
housed in Chinese museums and private collections.
According to
Chinese officials, artifacts in Chinese hands which originate from the
琉球民族 (The Ryukyu people) of the ancient South western 琉球王国 (The Ryukyu
Kingdom) should not be returned on the grounds that they were freely
given to China as tribute to past Emperors during the 明朝 (Ming Dynasty)
and 清朝 (Qing Dynasty), and thus cannot be considered to be anything
else but the legitimate property of the Chinese people.
While
not entirely unexpected, Beijing's response comes at a time during
which China itself has increasingly been seeking the return of Chinese
cultural artifacts which have been lost to overseas museums and
collectors. A situation which, no doubt, some had hoped would lead
China so show some form of solidarity with ethnic-Ryukyu.
Preemptive Action?
Although
no formal state-state request has yet been made for the return of
artifacts, this latest announcement is though to have been made in
order to preempt any actions from Japan, and is believed to be in
response to media reports that Okinawan officials had asked Japan's new
ambassador to China, 宮本雄二 (Miyamoto Yuji), to raise the issue issue of
the return of artifact with Chinese authorities after his investiture.
Future Possibilities?
Though
stating that it would not consider returning artifacts that were
offered to it as tribute, Chinese officials did however affirm that
Beijing might be willing to loan some of the artifacts to Japan on a
temporary basis. However, no further details were given on this
possibility at the time.
|
"We would like to be of assistance if the people of Okinawa wish to borrow these treasures for exhibition"
Zheng Xinmiao, Vice-Minister of Culture, China |
|
It is not clear what impact, if any,
China's announcement will have on Tokyo's willingness to return Chinese
artifacts currently in Japanese museums.
琉球王国 (The Ryukyu Kingdom)?
Although split between modern day 沖縄県 and 鹿児島県 (Okinawa
and Kagoshima Prefecture), 琉球王国 (The Ryukyu Kingdom) is a chain of
islands that was once an sovereign state with strong historical ties to
China.
琉球王国 (The Ryukyu Kingdom) established formal ties with
the Chinese 明朝 (Ming dynasty) in 1372, at which time Japan was not a
regional power. The kingdom recognized the dominion of the Chinese
Emperor soon afterwards, and began to offer treaures and craft items as
tribute.
In 1609, 琉球王国 (The Ryukyu Kingdom) was brought under
the influence of the Japan, when it was invaded by the warlord of 薩摩国
(Satusma) as a punishment for refusing to join 徳川幕府 (The Tokugawa
shogunate) in a shambolic military campaign against what is now the
Korean Peninsular.
In 1611, 琉球王国 (the Ryukyu Kingdom) regained
much of its autonomy and went on to maintain relations with both 明朝
(The Ming Dynasty) in China and 徳川幕府 (The Tokugawa Shogunate) on the
Japanese Home Islands, offering both state fine gifts in tribute.
During
this time, Chinese Imperial law forbid Chinese merchants from trading
with Japan. However exceptions were made for 琉球王国 (the Ryukyu Kingdom),
allowing it to act as an intermediary between Ming China and 薩摩国
(Satusma). 琉球王国 (Ryukyu Kingdom) trade was further opened up during the
1850s it was forced to open its economy to the west by the intervention
of US Commodore Matthew Perry, who later went on to force trade
relations with the rest of Japan.
Despite being a part of Japan
琉球王国 (The Ryukyu Kingdom) continued to maintain its tributary
allegiance to China for many years; receiving its last formal mission
in 1866 and sending its last final offering of tribute in 1874.
The
Kingdom was formally abolished in 1879, during 明治時代 (The Meiji-period),
as a program of modernization and industrialization began to allow
Japan to eclipse China as a regional power.
The islands that
made up 琉球王国 (The Ryukyu Kingdom), before its abolition, were sized as
bounty by US forces after WWII, and occupied for 27 years, before being
handed over to the Home Islands.
At the time of their handover,
US forces made no provisions for returning the island's independence,
or for granting them autonomy from Japan.
Original Article: No Solidarity from China over 'lost' Japanese artifacts
|
22.4.06 08:26
|
|
Maozilla: It's big, it's ugly, and it's coming to Tibet.
It's big, its grey, and it's just arrived in Tibet.
This
month has seen the arrival of something new and exciting in the
isolated mountain kingdom of Tibet; a giant statue of China's late
Chairman Mao which is to be erected in 贡嘎县 (Gonggar County), 山南地区
(Shannan Prefecture), close to the Tibetan capital of 拉薩(Lhasa/Lasa),
where it is to stand pride of place as part of efforts to commemorate
the 30th anniversary the Chairman's death
According to Xinhua,
China's state controlled news agency, the statue has been carved from
granite and, when erected, will stand 7m meters tall and be mounted on
a 5 meter pedestal; making it the largest carved representation of Mao
anywhere in China.
The statue, which weighs in excess of 30 tons
and took 9 months to carve, is to be the centerpiece of a newly
constructed public square, which itself will measure an impressive
40,000*2 meter, and is scheduled for completion this summer.
It's base is said to have been been hardened sufficiently to withstand both earthquake and bomb attacks.
Sponsorship?
Part
of the cost of the statue and the square is being born by sponsorship,
with 6.5 Million Yuan coming from the people of 長沙市 (Changsha City) 湖南省
(Hunan Province).
|
"[The statue] is a gift from Changsha
Official, 長沙市 (Changsha City), 湖南省 (Hunan Province) |
|
長沙 (Changsha) was Chairman Mao's home
during his teenage years and it is claimed that he developed his ideas
on 'collective action' while studying there.
A New Look?
Although
the statue depicts Mao wearing his customary 'Mao Suit' it differ
slightly from most previous statues of the Chairman in that its
features have been adjusted to better suit the present day mood, and
the region it which it will be based.
According to Zhu Weijing, the President of the Changsha Sculpture Institute, and the statue's creator, Mao's image has been give a rounder face in order to better fit with Tibetan cultural preferences.
|
“I
tried to understand how Tibetans feel towards Mao. Because they have
deep feelings about Buddha, I tried to make Mao more like that, with a
plumper face.'”
Zhu Weijing, President, Changsha Sculpture Institute. |
Zhu also stated that he tried to make
Mao look more at ease, by giving the statue a more 'intimate' posture,
that was designed to meet the needs of the present day, rather than to
reflect those of the past.
|
"I
noticed that [Mao] liked standing with both hands behind his back. It
made him look more intimate and more easygoing. [In earlier statues]
Chairman Mao either waved his hand to lead us forward or stood to
receive the Red Guards. But now the times are different and this statue
is especially for Tibet."
Zhu Weijing, Designer, Mao's Statue |
Hail the Conquering Hero
Officially,
Mao's statue is being built with the full support and cooperation of
the local people, who showed a great eagerness to host a tribute to the
former Chinese leader.
|
"Many Tibetan people suggested we should have a statue of Chairman Mao to show our gratitude,"
Communist Party Official speaking though Xinhua |
Unofficially though, news of the
statue's construction has received a far colder welcome from some
group, who have pointedly noted that Chairman Mao was the Chinese
leader who ordered the invasion of Tibet during the 1950s, and the
destruction of many of its temples during the Cultural Revolution.
Meaning that many Tibetans see him as a Conqueror, rather than a liberator.
As such some China watchers have decryed the statue as being 'a blatant piece of Han triumphalism', designed to 'remind Tibetans that they are a conquered people living under foreign rule'.
Such
has been the feeling that some have even gone further; describing the
raising of a statue of Mao, within a stone's throw of the Tibetan
capital, as being ' an insult on a par to erecting a statue of a 東条英機 (Tojo Hideki) over the mass grave of Nanking'.
State of Play
At
the official level, Tibet is guaranteed a high level of independence
under Section 6 of Chinese constitution; which provides the sub state
with the legal right to maintain its own cultural and religious
identity.
|
“In
the past 40 years or so, Tibet has inherited and developed its cultural
heritage, Tibetan customs and religions have been fully respected, and
people have enjoyed full freedom of religious faith”
Xinhua
|
|
In reality though, Beijing commonly encourages native Tibetans to
take on Han traits, under the claim that they are advancing by
discarding their own 'outdated cultural epitaphs' in favor of 'more
advanced' Chinese practices, and routinely bans any aspects of Tibet’s
indigenous culture that separates Tibetan and Chinese identities, or
which Beijing fears could be used to encourage Tibetan nationalism.
These
cultural restrictions include a blanket prohibition on the possession
of images of the Dalai Lama, or a recording of his voice.
|
"The
Dalai Lama is not a simple or a pure religious figure. He is a
political exile who undertakes secessionist activities abroad"
Liu Jianchao, Spokesperson, Foreign Ministry, China (2005) |
|
Often, the only aspects of traditional Tibetan culture which are
allowed to be practiced freely are those practiced in remote rural
areas that remain outside of direct Han control, and those in Han areas
which hold little bearing on modern day life and thus can be used both
to promote tourism or to spread the idea that Tibetan traditions are
‘relics of the past’ that is maintained only out of respect.
On
top of the erosion and prohibition of Tibetan culture, it is currently
Chinese policy to encourage Han Chinese to migrate to Tibet, where they
are often offered jobs that are unobtainable to Tibetans, and to
provide 'sweeteners' to Han industries, including land confiscated from
Tibetans, if they relocate to Tibet.
Even though a substantial
amount of industry has relocated to Tibet, few jobs have been created
for Tibetans, with many jobs going to Han migrants, and senior
positions only being offered to Tibetans collaborators who are seen as
being 'sufficiently Han-like'.
Current statistics do however
indicate that there are now over 7.5 million Han Chinese in Tibet, and
that they now outnumber the native Tibetans population by at least so
500,000 people.
Such figures exclude the 'floating population';
Han who are resident in Tibet, but who have not officially registered
as being residents.
Head Count
In total,
over 1 Million Tibetans are said to have died as a result of
'maltreatment' Since the PLA takeover of the region in 1951. However,
these figures are disputed, and accurate statistics are almost
impossible to obtain.
Original Article: Maozilla: It's big, it's ugly, and it's coming to Tibet
|
22.4.06 08:27
|
|
Forgotten Victims
Although the dust has long settled from the violent anti-Japanese
riots that rocked China during 2005, and much of the physical damage
that was caused has now been repaired, it would appear the diplomatic
repercussions are set to drag on well into 2006. Particularly where
issues of responsibility and compensation are concerned.
A fact
that was highlighted earlier this month, with the release of a report
by the Asian and Oceanian Affairs Bureau of the Japanese Foreign
Ministry, detailing the direct physical costs of the riots to Japanese
interests.
According to the report, made to the House of
Councilors Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee this Thursday, Japan
suffered 77 Million Yen in damages during riots across China; Including
damage to store, vehicles, consular facilities and businesses.
An official breakdown of these cost lists approximately 60 Million Yen as being damage to three diplomatic buildings:
- The Japanese Embassy - Beijing
- The Japanese Consular Building - Shanghai
- The Japanese Ambassador's residence - Shanghai
With the remaining 17 Million being attributed to damage to 40 Japanese
businesses that were targeted by rioters during the disturbances.
The costs however exclude the economic impact brought on by lost business and increased running costs since the riots.
As
yet, neither full compensation nor a state level apology for the damage
has been forthcoming from China. Beijing has also declined to accept
responsibility for the damage.
Blame Game
Officially,
China holds Japan responsible for the riots, and associated damage,
based on the premise that Tokyo 'provoked Chinese citizens into action'
through its own irrisponsible behaviour.
As such, Beijing has cited the 'root causes' of the riot as being public anger caused by;
- Tokyo's highlighting of China's poor record on Human Rights
- The continuation of Sino-Japanese territorial and maritime boundary disputes
- Tokyo's stance towards Chinese-Taiwan, including its refusal to bar pro-independence leaders from entering Japan
- Tokyo's attitude towards disputed areas of Sino-Japanese history
|
"The
main problem now is the Japanese government has done a series of things
that have hurt the feelings of the Chinese people, on the Taiwan issue,
some international issues including human rights and especially in its
treatment of history,"
Li Zhaoxing, Foreign Minister, China (2004) |
|
Unofficially though, the two primary causes of the riots are though
to be Tokyo's refusal to ban a controversial school textbook -
published by Japan's discredited nationalist minority, and used by a
humiliatingly low 0.39 percent of schools - which refuses to accept the
full extent of Japan's wartime crimes against China, and an aborted
attempt by Tokyo to gain a permanent seat on the United Nations
Security Council; a move which would have put Japan on an equal footing
to China within the governing body.
Vienna Convention (Consular Relations)?
Under
international law, China is treaty bound to protect consular facilities
and residences on its territory, and is liable for any damage caused to
them. A commitment that remains in place regardless of regardless of
provocation.
|
"the
receiving State is under a special duty to take all appropriate steps
to protect the consular premises against any intrusion or damage and to
prevent any disturbance of the peace of the consular post or impairment
of its dignity.
Clause 2, Article 31, Vienna Convention on Consular Relations |
|
Forgotten Victims?
While many Japanese
business were badly damaged by protesters during the 2005 riots, they
were not the only enterprises to suffer. Indeed, many Chinese owned
stores and restaurants were also ransacked. Some of which were attacked
in the mistaken belief that they were Japanese businesses, while others
were targeted specifically because they stocked Japanese goods.
Several
Chinese businesses, including restaurants in Shanghai's fashionable
Huaihai Road, were also targeted for destruction by rioters because
they were popular with Japanese businessmen and consular staff.
Additionally, signs bearing Japanese character or advertising Japanese
goods were targeted in Beijing and Shanghai, regardless of their actual
connections to Japan.
Currently, there are no accurate figures
available for the total damage caused to Chinese owned business during
the riots, and reports of such damage have been strongly suppressed by
the state owned media making estimates of the costs, and extent of
damage, difficult. Similarly, reports of injuries to Chinese staff has
also been suppressed.
Unlike Japanese victims, most Chinese
victims cannot claim full compensation, and are largely unable to have
their cases publicly heard.
Suffering in Pictures
(Please Note: Images may be blocked in China)
(Click to Enlarge)
A Chinese owned 鉄板焼き (Teppanyaki) restaurant
in Shanghai that was attacked because it sold Japanese food.
The Dragon Court; A Chinese owned Hot Pot Restaurant in Shanghai
that was targeted because it had Japanese characters on its hoarding
For these images and more, please visit this site.
Original Article: The Unpleasant Side of an Unpleasant Business
|
22.4.06 08:31
|
|
Congratulations and Controversy as AOL launch its new China Portal
After
months of speculation, anticipation, and a few false starts, AOL has
this month announced the finalization of a multi-million dollar
partnership deal with SMG Broadband, the internet wing of the Shanghai
Media and Entertainment Group; one of China's largest and most
successful media groups.
Under the deal, SMGBB will provide a wide range of Chinese language news, sports and entertainment services to AOL's China web portal. (http://www.aol.com/chinese).
|
"We are going to cooperate with AOL, mainly providing them with programs in Chinese language"
Wang Xiaotang, Spokesperson, SMG Broadband, China |
|
Although AOL has long provided limited
Chinese language services, this deal is considered to be a crucial step
for the Virginia based company in its quest to break Americas into the
growing Chinese language market, and it will allow AOL to include a
much broader range of foreign language material than ever before,
including over 200 minutes of Chinese language video footage per day, that has been specially selected to cover both Mainland Chinese and Overseas Chinese issues.
Future Plans?
Initially,
all of the content provided through the AOL-SMGBB tie-up will be
available free of charge through AOL's public access Chinese language
portal. However, if this service proves successfully, it will be
expanded to include additional premium rate pay-per-view and
subscription services; including enhanced sports coverage and financial
news.
It has also been speculated that the portal may soon
expand again to provide video on demand episodes of some of China's
most popular soap operas and dramas.
|
"This partnership is just a beginning, with the major fruits still to come in the future"
Zhang Dazhong, Vice President, Shanghai Media Group, China. |
|
SMG recently signed a similar deal to provide Chinese language financial news to CNBC Asia-Pacific.
Second Time Around?
While
the AOL-SMGBB tie-up is an important expansion for AOL, is not the
company's first foray into the Chinese language market.
In
2001, AOL (then AOL-Time Warner) entered into a partnership deal with
the Chinese electronics group Legend, now known as Lenovo.
Under
the deal, AOL was to pre-install its software on PCs manufactured by
Legend, and to provide internet access and online community services to
Mainland Chinese consumers through the FM365 broadband portal; a joint
AOL-Legend venture in which both companies had agreed to invest $US100
Million.
The deal however broke down in 2003 and the partnership
was formally dissolved in January 2004, by which time the two companies
had only investing $US50 Million, $US25 Million each, half of the
agreed amount.
The Breakdown?
At the
time of the breakdown, it was announced that Legend had ended the
partnership; with Chinese officials blaming 'market dynamics' for the
failure of the deal, and going on to state that changes in the ADSL
broadband price structure and the introduction of new wireless
distribution technology meant | |
