Zone of Initial Dilution
Through our class on security politics in East Asia, we have discussed and studied various security issues. We revisited an issue prevalent in China by viewing a foreign documentary on the points of destruction, displacement of persons, and pollution caused by the building of the "Three Gorges Dam" and other dams on the Yangzte River. The movie was, in fact, slow and only grazed the surface of the problem. However, it did put some visuals to the pages of articles we read throughout the class.
The thing I took away from the film was that there is a huge environmental crisis occurring as a result of the bridge's construction. However, two images served to show that even those sick and in danger of dying from the pollution and displacement see the benefit of the dams.
The first image was a billboard with a shining display of the words "Three Gorges Dam." The billboard was striking because of its placement among gray and decaying buildings and landscape. The sign was not vandalized, dirty, or anything of the like. This can be taken as the people living near the dam support the dam for what it can mean to China: more energy, renewable resources, and a boost to their expanding economy and place in the world. For them, it's a worthwhile sacrifice of their personal security for the security of China as a state and Chinese as a people. Or maybe it's cultural submission. The movie did not address this, but I believe it is one way to see the issue.
The second image was the still image of a rock and then the visitors center for the "TGD" (Three Gorges Dam). This shows that the government and the wealthier population of China also sees the benefits of the dams. This is a huge achievement and investment for China's future with regards to economy, an expanding population, and future environmental security issues. I think the movie shows that the dam can go either way. It can be a huge loss of human life that is unacceptable and China should find another way to provide clean energy for billions of people. Or.... the dam makes a big mess now to allow for a clean, happy tomorrow.
I think this is a horrible way to pave the way for future Chinese. The images of the documentary are destruction, poverty, and disregard for the peasant population of China. I think the upper class regards those displaced by the dams as disposable and stupid, as supported by many of the comments in a previously viewed film, China Blue. There are social, economic, and cultural forces at play here with regards to security and they are on the wrong side of human rights and moral issues.
Showing posts with label China. Show all posts
Showing posts with label China. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Environmental Concerns Threaten Security in East Asia
Current Context
Overall, it seems Asia's broad and deep environmental problems are in fact threatening the security of its people. Issues stemming from poor practices are flooding, water scarcity, loss of crops, death, and homelessness. These issues threaten species, health, and the economy so they should be considered security issues.
So why are they not security issues?
Several factors have been cited as to why the environment doesn't fall under the traditional, realist vision of security in East Asian nations. Among them are historical tensions from wars and general mistrust between nations, military and arms build-up, and the view that security is a state issue where nations protect their own from foreign entities. There are little to no multilateral alliances among nations and bilateral agreements are prominent. This means that the regional issue of the environment has no hope of being resolved in such a nationalist area of the world. Also, the presence of the U.S., another military-security focused nations, lends to the increasing view that the environment is not a concern of security.
What needs to occur
In my opinion, East Asian nations need to give more support to the regional organizations they have already established for environmental issues. They need to give up some national power to the overreaching entities so they can deal with the environment as the state-line crossing problem it is. These organizations need to make the regulations they agree upon legally binding rather than just guidelines. The health, economy, and security of East Asia depends upon taking a new stance to the issue and putting aside military suspicions and rivalries. They must also address the issue of an ever-expanding economy and use of resources. They need to stop focusing on miltary spending and instead give these resources to its people so they can stop over-cultivating the land just to survive.
Overall, it seems Asia's broad and deep environmental problems are in fact threatening the security of its people. Issues stemming from poor practices are flooding, water scarcity, loss of crops, death, and homelessness. These issues threaten species, health, and the economy so they should be considered security issues.
So why are they not security issues?
Several factors have been cited as to why the environment doesn't fall under the traditional, realist vision of security in East Asian nations. Among them are historical tensions from wars and general mistrust between nations, military and arms build-up, and the view that security is a state issue where nations protect their own from foreign entities. There are little to no multilateral alliances among nations and bilateral agreements are prominent. This means that the regional issue of the environment has no hope of being resolved in such a nationalist area of the world. Also, the presence of the U.S., another military-security focused nations, lends to the increasing view that the environment is not a concern of security.
What needs to occur
In my opinion, East Asian nations need to give more support to the regional organizations they have already established for environmental issues. They need to give up some national power to the overreaching entities so they can deal with the environment as the state-line crossing problem it is. These organizations need to make the regulations they agree upon legally binding rather than just guidelines. The health, economy, and security of East Asia depends upon taking a new stance to the issue and putting aside military suspicions and rivalries. They must also address the issue of an ever-expanding economy and use of resources. They need to stop focusing on miltary spending and instead give these resources to its people so they can stop over-cultivating the land just to survive.
Saturday, March 1, 2008
Toxic Toys Topple Tiny Tots and Trendy Teens
China: Lead Toxins Take a Global Round Trip
The article by Fairclough takes over from last weeks readings sighting poor conditions and laws in China as part of the blame for toxic materials in Chinese exports. However, Fairclough sights another problem as even more cause for concern. That problem is e-waste recycling from the U.S.
There is a global issue at hand in which a cycle causes China to manufacture items with lead, the U.S. to send the recycled remnants of such products back to China, and China to reuse their materials in new items destined to be shipped back to the U.S. all over again.
Jewelry is a huge export from China, making up 70% of the $4.5 billion industry and 6.7 billion pieces of such exports were recalled in 2007. This is huge both for China and the U.S. This means a great deal of U.S. imports are toxic and China is paying the price for recalling them.
Another item caught in this mess is e-waste, such as computers and cell phones. 50 millions tons of the stuff is tossed every year in the U.S. and sent back to China to be reused. Much of the materials are put into new electronics, the jewelry mentioned above, and toys while much of it is simply dumped in various places in China. This means more poisoning in exports and poisoning of the Chinese environment. None of this cycle is regulated by the U.S. or Chinese environmental protection bureaus. Both China and the U.S. stand to lose health and environment battles in this case.
Why is lead so bad? It causes brain damage and death from exposure or, more harmfully, from ingestion. This harms U.S. children, teens, and others who use the goods and also harms the workers that make them. The lack of labor laws in China allow workers to touch and inhale toxins from the materials as they manufacture them into products. Again, China and U.S. citizens are putting their health at risk and increasing medicals costs when resulting conditions need to be treated.
Ok, another question. Why is this being allowed to happen? The answer is, as usual, money. Lead alloy is way cheaper than other materials, more abundant, and more pliable. U.S. and other major customers of China want the lowest cost.
Is there another way? Yes. Many companies claim to offer their customers the choice of lead-free products but most decline because of the cost. Then, companies fight back saying they are not aware of the lead content in the products they contract from Chinese factories. Who's right and who's not?
So, the last question for now... What can and is being done about it? The U.S. has decided to begin researching the global scope of the lead poisoning problem but this is no easy task. For now, consumers simply need to be informed that, while recycling is good in most cases, it may be putting more chemicals back into both China and the U.S. than once thought. Oh bother.
The article by Fairclough takes over from last weeks readings sighting poor conditions and laws in China as part of the blame for toxic materials in Chinese exports. However, Fairclough sights another problem as even more cause for concern. That problem is e-waste recycling from the U.S.
There is a global issue at hand in which a cycle causes China to manufacture items with lead, the U.S. to send the recycled remnants of such products back to China, and China to reuse their materials in new items destined to be shipped back to the U.S. all over again.
Jewelry is a huge export from China, making up 70% of the $4.5 billion industry and 6.7 billion pieces of such exports were recalled in 2007. This is huge both for China and the U.S. This means a great deal of U.S. imports are toxic and China is paying the price for recalling them.
Another item caught in this mess is e-waste, such as computers and cell phones. 50 millions tons of the stuff is tossed every year in the U.S. and sent back to China to be reused. Much of the materials are put into new electronics, the jewelry mentioned above, and toys while much of it is simply dumped in various places in China. This means more poisoning in exports and poisoning of the Chinese environment. None of this cycle is regulated by the U.S. or Chinese environmental protection bureaus. Both China and the U.S. stand to lose health and environment battles in this case.
Why is lead so bad? It causes brain damage and death from exposure or, more harmfully, from ingestion. This harms U.S. children, teens, and others who use the goods and also harms the workers that make them. The lack of labor laws in China allow workers to touch and inhale toxins from the materials as they manufacture them into products. Again, China and U.S. citizens are putting their health at risk and increasing medicals costs when resulting conditions need to be treated.
Ok, another question. Why is this being allowed to happen? The answer is, as usual, money. Lead alloy is way cheaper than other materials, more abundant, and more pliable. U.S. and other major customers of China want the lowest cost.
'It's too costly to make lead-free products,' says owner Wang Quijuan. 'Chinese products have to be sold cheaply in foreign markets, or they are not competitve.'It's clear, here, that the blame is to, like labor issues, be blamed on foreign companies for pressuring China to be too cheap. I can see it that way but China should also be taking care of its products and its people.
Is there another way? Yes. Many companies claim to offer their customers the choice of lead-free products but most decline because of the cost. Then, companies fight back saying they are not aware of the lead content in the products they contract from Chinese factories. Who's right and who's not?
So, the last question for now... What can and is being done about it? The U.S. has decided to begin researching the global scope of the lead poisoning problem but this is no easy task. For now, consumers simply need to be informed that, while recycling is good in most cases, it may be putting more chemicals back into both China and the U.S. than once thought. Oh bother.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Is it possible that the U.S. is actually more to blame than China for labor abuse???
U.S. Senate testimony regarding commerce, science, and transportation
We read the testimony by Charles Kernaghan, the Director of National Labor Committee. This plea to the Senate essentially reinforces the hardships and lack of justice we observed in the documentary on Lifeng.
Violating Workers' Rights
Laborers are forced into temporary contracts so that they do not have any rights with the company. They are paid hundreds of percentages below China's legal minimum wage and work hundreds of percentages of hours more than legally allowed in the nation. Workers are docked pay for unfair reasons and shortchanged their earned pay for absolutely no reason. The labor board director emphasizes over and over again that factories all over China are guilty of the exact same violations, just on greater or lesser scales.
The Apparent Solution
The hugest injustice is that at least the problem of pay could be resolved with little effect felt throughout major corporations. Kernaghan states that,
All of this, it can be argued, is magnified, if not caused by U.S. corporations. Like the doc. showed, Kernaghan is serious about placing a lot of blame on American and European brands for pressuring China to lower prices and increase outputs at the cost of Chinese workers' rights.
Another example of how we can sense that foreign investors are to blame for the labor crisis is the fact that most corporations refuse to publish the names and addresses of the factories they obtain supplies from in China. Clearly, something is being hidden here or the companies are simply ashamed.
The injustices are mounting here, they are real, and there seems to be no way out unless this testimony is well-received and governments start to take action. This is interesting, however, because the documentary seems to try and blame both the consumer and business for such harmful actions and this memo blames U.S. and European companies way more.
Relating to Health of U.S. Citizens May Spark Support
Keranghan also pulls the issue of toy and sporting goods safety into the issue. He states that the same actions of increasing what foreign companies pay Chinese factories per good and giving workers rights will also help to lessen the occurrence of poisoning in toys because conditions in factories will be much better. In the instance, it seems he is trying to make giving help to China's workers a win-win situation for the U.S. My only wish is that he proved how the two correlated better.
Labor Rights in China
It comes of no surprise that Tim Costello, Brenden Smith, and Jeremy Brecher have all come to understand the same point that Kernanghan was trying to make. There are Chinese laws for workers' rights and corporations are outright refusing to follow them citing economic interests as the reason.
Oh, Wal-Mart
Ok, so it's not just Wal-Mart but it figures they would be a part of this, too. Many companies, like Mattel, are not allowing China to pass more strict labor laws that would significantly help the treatment, health, safety, and renumeration of workers because such laws would "reduce employment opportunities for PRC workers," (I'm sorry, is that a threat? I thought these laws would significantly increase human welfare for PRC workers!) and also reduce China's competitive edge against other sweatshop nations, such as Mexico, with slightly higher wages for workers.
How can corporations make such threats? Easy, they are the number one reason China is even where it is in the world economy today.
Again, Relating the Problem Back to the U.S. Will Draw Support
If only U.S workers knew that the wages and state of labor in China indirectly created the wages and conditions in the U.S. and other labor markets throughout the whole world. The crazy thing is, they do. Because companies can get cheaper wages from Chinese workers, they are either moving their business to Asia or using this as leverage to get U.S. workers to accept lower pay as well.
The logic behind the phenomenon is this: China has increased the world labor market by 50% without contributing as must in capital. There are more workers in need of employment and wages than there is living-wage equivalent capital to go around. Thus, when one loses so does the other.
The point is, again, it's up to U.S. and European governments to make good on their commitments. They have all said their MNCs would stand to protect labor and so far they have done the exact opposite. This hurts China's workers and the U.S.'s workers and places economic values about ethical and moral values. In what world does this make sense?
We read the testimony by Charles Kernaghan, the Director of National Labor Committee. This plea to the Senate essentially reinforces the hardships and lack of justice we observed in the documentary on Lifeng.
Violating Workers' Rights
Laborers are forced into temporary contracts so that they do not have any rights with the company. They are paid hundreds of percentages below China's legal minimum wage and work hundreds of percentages of hours more than legally allowed in the nation. Workers are docked pay for unfair reasons and shortchanged their earned pay for absolutely no reason. The labor board director emphasizes over and over again that factories all over China are guilty of the exact same violations, just on greater or lesser scales.
The Apparent Solution
The hugest injustice is that at least the problem of pay could be resolved with little effect felt throughout major corporations. Kernaghan states that,
Mattel's 'Barbie Hug N' Heal Pet Doctor' set costs just $9.00 to make in China, yet- even on sale- it retails for $29.99 in the U.S. This means that the price of the Mattel toy is being marked up an astonishing $20.99- or 233 percent... Mattel spends $3.45 to advertise the Barbie Pet Doctor toy- more than 18 times the 19 cents they pay the workers in China to make it... It is clear that Mattel could afford to assure respect for workers rights in China and pay the workers a fair wage so they could climb out of misery and at least into poverty.This is an astonishing perspective to finally see and I hope that it is true. However, one must also think that if Mattel did not advertise with such fervor and pay its leaders so well, would it be competitive and profitable enough to even stay in business nationally? Is the economic price worth the moral price?
All of this, it can be argued, is magnified, if not caused by U.S. corporations. Like the doc. showed, Kernaghan is serious about placing a lot of blame on American and European brands for pressuring China to lower prices and increase outputs at the cost of Chinese workers' rights.
As late as 2005, Mattel sought ands won special 'waivers' so they could pay their workers less than the already-below-subsistence legal minimum wage.Clearly, the Chinese government is seeking to offer its own people some form of protection but Mattel, fearing a loss in revenue, has pressed them to make an exception in their case.
Another example of how we can sense that foreign investors are to blame for the labor crisis is the fact that most corporations refuse to publish the names and addresses of the factories they obtain supplies from in China. Clearly, something is being hidden here or the companies are simply ashamed.
The injustices are mounting here, they are real, and there seems to be no way out unless this testimony is well-received and governments start to take action. This is interesting, however, because the documentary seems to try and blame both the consumer and business for such harmful actions and this memo blames U.S. and European companies way more.
Relating to Health of U.S. Citizens May Spark Support
Keranghan also pulls the issue of toy and sporting goods safety into the issue. He states that the same actions of increasing what foreign companies pay Chinese factories per good and giving workers rights will also help to lessen the occurrence of poisoning in toys because conditions in factories will be much better. In the instance, it seems he is trying to make giving help to China's workers a win-win situation for the U.S. My only wish is that he proved how the two correlated better.
Labor Rights in China
It comes of no surprise that Tim Costello, Brenden Smith, and Jeremy Brecher have all come to understand the same point that Kernanghan was trying to make. There are Chinese laws for workers' rights and corporations are outright refusing to follow them citing economic interests as the reason.
Oh, Wal-Mart
Ok, so it's not just Wal-Mart but it figures they would be a part of this, too. Many companies, like Mattel, are not allowing China to pass more strict labor laws that would significantly help the treatment, health, safety, and renumeration of workers because such laws would "reduce employment opportunities for PRC workers," (I'm sorry, is that a threat? I thought these laws would significantly increase human welfare for PRC workers!) and also reduce China's competitive edge against other sweatshop nations, such as Mexico, with slightly higher wages for workers.
How can corporations make such threats? Easy, they are the number one reason China is even where it is in the world economy today.
65% of the tripling of Chinese exports... is traceable to outsourcing by Chinese subsidiaries of multinational corporations (MNCs) and joint ventures.Essentially, do what we say or we will ruin your entire economy and you'll be even worse off than you are now.
Again, Relating the Problem Back to the U.S. Will Draw Support
If only U.S workers knew that the wages and state of labor in China indirectly created the wages and conditions in the U.S. and other labor markets throughout the whole world. The crazy thing is, they do. Because companies can get cheaper wages from Chinese workers, they are either moving their business to Asia or using this as leverage to get U.S. workers to accept lower pay as well.
The logic behind the phenomenon is this: China has increased the world labor market by 50% without contributing as must in capital. There are more workers in need of employment and wages than there is living-wage equivalent capital to go around. Thus, when one loses so does the other.
The point is, again, it's up to U.S. and European governments to make good on their commitments. They have all said their MNCs would stand to protect labor and so far they have done the exact opposite. This hurts China's workers and the U.S.'s workers and places economic values about ethical and moral values. In what world does this make sense?
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Labor in China
Elite, Middle Class, and the Poor
In his article regarding the distinct classes in China, T. Cheek explores the characteristics and problems of each and why the government will never be able to satisfy everyone under the current system.
The Elite
This group is the wealthiest and has little to worry about. They drive luxury cars and live for money. This group fears an upprising from the poor and seek to keep the government and economy working in their favor. This is also the group that China shows off to the world to prove they are doing very well and their people are happy. It's good PR for them but unethical behavior at its greatest.
The Middle Class
People in this group gain the most from being conservative and maintaining the status quo. Middle class work hard and pay no attention to government workings (this is also the case in other Asian nations, such as the people I talked with while in Singapore). Middle class people live in a basic nuclear family and pride themselves on living without grandparents and extended family while nuturing their children to become productive members of society.
The Working Class
Here is the most dangerous group for communism, surprisingly since communism was founded to ensure the working class was happy and equal. These people work hard but do not have job stability. The problem with working class is they can easily be replaced at work and are often deprived of basic rights. However, they can fight back and often do. Those who protest on a local scale are given concessions to keep their movement local. Those that try to organize regionally and nationally, considered the greatest threat to communism, are stopped, brutally. This class is the one with the most problems that also has the greatest chance to change their situations.
The Underclass
Chinese people in this class have it worst. They must travel always to find jobs and rarely are paid or treated well when they can find work. Here, no one enjoys any rights and must work in sweatshops. Even though they have the hardest lives, their lack of shelter and identity in China stops them from every trying to protest for more rights.
Essentially, China can never stop fearing unrest because it can never satisfy all the competing interests of these groups.
Lipeng Blue Jeans Factory Documentary
This documentary made me cry, but I still don't think I'm going to be up in arms tomorrow when I wake up. It's terrifying and completely unjust but the documentary, while it paints a vivid picture of conditions for both workers and factory owners in China, does not outline ways for people or even international groups to fight to change the situation.
From a worker's point of view
The story of Jasmine, the 17 year old who left her family at home in order to support her family, really taps into the heart of the lower class plight. She first must find work on her own in a big city that she could never even have begun to imagine. Her motivation for sacrificing her own life is repaying her family for being born female. She says that she knows her family was disappointed when they gave birth to her, a daughter, and hopes her earnings will make them happy to have had her. Her situation is a bleak one in which everyone she works with is as young as or younger than her and a girl. This seems to be what happens to the females in China. This is an example of gender and human rights violations. The security of China's young girls is being threatened. They do not have the freedom to listen to music and go to school like other young girls and to grow. They are, however, aware of the corruption and harm being done to them. They discuss it but just say there's nothing they can do. It's a sad situation where only external forces can help them.
Looking at it from industry's point of view
Even factory owners see their situation as being taken advantage of. They praise Deng Xiopeng for his economic reforms that allowed them to move up in social class, but this is such a small percentage of the population. These elite class believe that the lower class are where they are because they are uneducated and incapable of learning work ethics. The factory owner in the story even says that he needs to control these lower people and they deserve to be told what to do. Then he goes on to complain that even his life is hard. He must work hard and gets taken advantage of by international labels who get paid way more than even he does. However, this does not excuse his behavior towards his workers.
Some factory workers from another factory spoke on camera, something they can be fined and jailed for, about their conditions and how factory owners manipulate them to appease U.S. labor inspectors. One even claims,
It seems like we can hate the factory owners, then. But it's hard to when you think about the U.S. labels that order from them. The price international companies demand from factories is so low that even if the owners did want to treat and pay workers more fairly, they could not afford do. Thus, one might see fit to blame U.S. companies even more than the Chinese government for encouraging the abuse of these workers. One could even go as far to say that U.S. labels are in fact even more to blame than the Chinese government because all the government does is allow it but, unlike the companies, does not actively encourage and desire it. So, when the Lipeng factory owner says,
Either way, this situation is a bleak one. It's so sad and so alarming that I have no idea where I could even begin to help. How can one start when an end seems impossible to achieve? How can we bring security and peace to these young girls who are so far away physically and culturally from us? Like Cheek's article outlines, this is the most troubled class of all but the one posing the least threat because they can have no voice. So, if we have no voice and they have no voice, then there is no hope for them, is there?
In his article regarding the distinct classes in China, T. Cheek explores the characteristics and problems of each and why the government will never be able to satisfy everyone under the current system.
The Elite
This group is the wealthiest and has little to worry about. They drive luxury cars and live for money. This group fears an upprising from the poor and seek to keep the government and economy working in their favor. This is also the group that China shows off to the world to prove they are doing very well and their people are happy. It's good PR for them but unethical behavior at its greatest.
The Middle Class
People in this group gain the most from being conservative and maintaining the status quo. Middle class work hard and pay no attention to government workings (this is also the case in other Asian nations, such as the people I talked with while in Singapore). Middle class people live in a basic nuclear family and pride themselves on living without grandparents and extended family while nuturing their children to become productive members of society.
The Working Class
Here is the most dangerous group for communism, surprisingly since communism was founded to ensure the working class was happy and equal. These people work hard but do not have job stability. The problem with working class is they can easily be replaced at work and are often deprived of basic rights. However, they can fight back and often do. Those who protest on a local scale are given concessions to keep their movement local. Those that try to organize regionally and nationally, considered the greatest threat to communism, are stopped, brutally. This class is the one with the most problems that also has the greatest chance to change their situations.
The Underclass
Chinese people in this class have it worst. They must travel always to find jobs and rarely are paid or treated well when they can find work. Here, no one enjoys any rights and must work in sweatshops. Even though they have the hardest lives, their lack of shelter and identity in China stops them from every trying to protest for more rights.
Essentially, China can never stop fearing unrest because it can never satisfy all the competing interests of these groups.
Lipeng Blue Jeans Factory Documentary
This documentary made me cry, but I still don't think I'm going to be up in arms tomorrow when I wake up. It's terrifying and completely unjust but the documentary, while it paints a vivid picture of conditions for both workers and factory owners in China, does not outline ways for people or even international groups to fight to change the situation.
From a worker's point of view
The story of Jasmine, the 17 year old who left her family at home in order to support her family, really taps into the heart of the lower class plight. She first must find work on her own in a big city that she could never even have begun to imagine. Her motivation for sacrificing her own life is repaying her family for being born female. She says that she knows her family was disappointed when they gave birth to her, a daughter, and hopes her earnings will make them happy to have had her. Her situation is a bleak one in which everyone she works with is as young as or younger than her and a girl. This seems to be what happens to the females in China. This is an example of gender and human rights violations. The security of China's young girls is being threatened. They do not have the freedom to listen to music and go to school like other young girls and to grow. They are, however, aware of the corruption and harm being done to them. They discuss it but just say there's nothing they can do. It's a sad situation where only external forces can help them.
Looking at it from industry's point of view
Even factory owners see their situation as being taken advantage of. They praise Deng Xiopeng for his economic reforms that allowed them to move up in social class, but this is such a small percentage of the population. These elite class believe that the lower class are where they are because they are uneducated and incapable of learning work ethics. The factory owner in the story even says that he needs to control these lower people and they deserve to be told what to do. Then he goes on to complain that even his life is hard. He must work hard and gets taken advantage of by international labels who get paid way more than even he does. However, this does not excuse his behavior towards his workers.
Some factory workers from another factory spoke on camera, something they can be fined and jailed for, about their conditions and how factory owners manipulate them to appease U.S. labor inspectors. One even claims,
He gave us a memo to teach the workers what to say.Thus, the lower class continues to be exploited, the U.S. thinks the workers are happy, and the factory gets to operate at its usual efficiency.
It seems like we can hate the factory owners, then. But it's hard to when you think about the U.S. labels that order from them. The price international companies demand from factories is so low that even if the owners did want to treat and pay workers more fairly, they could not afford do. Thus, one might see fit to blame U.S. companies even more than the Chinese government for encouraging the abuse of these workers. One could even go as far to say that U.S. labels are in fact even more to blame than the Chinese government because all the government does is allow it but, unlike the companies, does not actively encourage and desire it. So, when the Lipeng factory owner says,
Meeting shipping deadlines is our number one concern,instead of listing "our workers" as such, it's easy to hate him. But, we need to remember that he is under close scrutiny from the companies that purchase from him and he needs to do whatever it takes to make it for his own well-being just as much as the workers must.
Either way, this situation is a bleak one. It's so sad and so alarming that I have no idea where I could even begin to help. How can one start when an end seems impossible to achieve? How can we bring security and peace to these young girls who are so far away physically and culturally from us? Like Cheek's article outlines, this is the most troubled class of all but the one posing the least threat because they can have no voice. So, if we have no voice and they have no voice, then there is no hope for them, is there?
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Killing Democracy Softly in China
The Communists' New Strategy
The article by Kurlantzick brings up a lot of very disturbing events occuring in China right now. He writes about how the Communists are still appeasing its people by providing economic freedom while simultaneously taking away their political freedoms. The real problem is that the Chinese people do not fully grasp this because the government is using subtle tactics to repress people and is extensively censoring the media that happens to catch on to their plans.
The situation in China was not always this way. In the 1990s, political activism was openly and severely punished. However, because the new leadership was afraid of repressing free speech and dealing with more dissent, the media was not censored. This allowed domestic and internation news groups to disseminate the information about human rights abuse throughout the world and hurt foreign investment in China's manufacturing industry. The Chinese knew it had to change this or risk falling behind in the the world economy. This is why their current tactics are so bad. They are continuing to fight against the most extremely political dissident groups but allowing more docile ones to flourish, giving China a good reputation without consequences to its current political and human rights situation. China is still just a repressive but no one knows the full extent of it.
Another really harmful issue is using minorities against each other. The government has been using spies in Muslim and evangelical groups in certain regions to report any dissident activities. This keeps the groups in check while increasing the number of watchdogs. Essentially, this is a horrible situation because these minorities could be working together in order to gain more rights and freedoms in China, but instead they are working to thwart each other and essentially helping the govenment to continue to repress them.
Censoring the Media
The Internet has proven to be a big headache for Communists in China. Since this medium allows people to obtain information regarding new ways of thinking and have access to news from all over the world, it has hurt the Chinese Communists' ability to use propaganda on its people. That is, until it was able to censor its nation's Internet and close down cafes where the Internet can be accessed. Thousands of Internet Cafes have been closed recently by the government throughout all of China, so now the Chinese cannot even access it.
Those priviledged enough to have access do not even have full access. The government, working in conjunction with U.S. Intenet search engines and security companies, has devised a way to censor what websites Chinese people can access and what images they are exposed to.
This creates a really volatile environment in China where the people are anything but stable:
1)At least 150 million peasants in China have lost their job in the past decade
2)Per capita annual income is only $266 in rural areas
3)Farmlands are being confiscated for housing
4)Labor disputes have been on the rise since 1992
Problems are likely to increase as protests are more frequent and intense. The government, again, is employing a subtle way of taking care of this. Leave the small protests alone and make an example of long-term protests.
West is Key to Repression
The worst part of all is that the outside world knows about these abuses but either have not or cannot do anything about it. Several U.S. companies have been cited to support the government's repression in exchange for business contracts and immunities in China. This is incredibly effective in obtaining foreign investment while allowing the government to continue its corrupt practices. China now has no reason to even try to change its human rights violations because it can have its cake (repression) and eat it too (money).
I honestly think China has moved backwards since Tiananmen. Like we saw in the documentary, any progress made in the past has been erased by the government's censure of media. They are cracking down harder on dissent but portraying themselves as more democratic by covering up with support for state-controlled minority groups that they have under control. China is in trouble and many do not even know it.
The article by Kurlantzick brings up a lot of very disturbing events occuring in China right now. He writes about how the Communists are still appeasing its people by providing economic freedom while simultaneously taking away their political freedoms. The real problem is that the Chinese people do not fully grasp this because the government is using subtle tactics to repress people and is extensively censoring the media that happens to catch on to their plans.
Instead of publicly suppressing all religious organizations, political dissidents, or ethnic minorities, Beijing has begun playing groups off each other, sanctioning a few mainstream organizations while quietly but harshly repressing those that challenge the state authority.Subtle Repression
The situation in China was not always this way. In the 1990s, political activism was openly and severely punished. However, because the new leadership was afraid of repressing free speech and dealing with more dissent, the media was not censored. This allowed domestic and internation news groups to disseminate the information about human rights abuse throughout the world and hurt foreign investment in China's manufacturing industry. The Chinese knew it had to change this or risk falling behind in the the world economy. This is why their current tactics are so bad. They are continuing to fight against the most extremely political dissident groups but allowing more docile ones to flourish, giving China a good reputation without consequences to its current political and human rights situation. China is still just a repressive but no one knows the full extent of it.
Another really harmful issue is using minorities against each other. The government has been using spies in Muslim and evangelical groups in certain regions to report any dissident activities. This keeps the groups in check while increasing the number of watchdogs. Essentially, this is a horrible situation because these minorities could be working together in order to gain more rights and freedoms in China, but instead they are working to thwart each other and essentially helping the govenment to continue to repress them.
Censoring the Media
The Internet has proven to be a big headache for Communists in China. Since this medium allows people to obtain information regarding new ways of thinking and have access to news from all over the world, it has hurt the Chinese Communists' ability to use propaganda on its people. That is, until it was able to censor its nation's Internet and close down cafes where the Internet can be accessed. Thousands of Internet Cafes have been closed recently by the government throughout all of China, so now the Chinese cannot even access it.
Those priviledged enough to have access do not even have full access. The government, working in conjunction with U.S. Intenet search engines and security companies, has devised a way to censor what websites Chinese people can access and what images they are exposed to.
China has the most extensive Internet censorship in the world, with the government regularly denying access to over 19,000 websites.But the problems continue
This creates a really volatile environment in China where the people are anything but stable:
1)At least 150 million peasants in China have lost their job in the past decade
2)Per capita annual income is only $266 in rural areas
3)Farmlands are being confiscated for housing
4)Labor disputes have been on the rise since 1992
Problems are likely to increase as protests are more frequent and intense. The government, again, is employing a subtle way of taking care of this. Leave the small protests alone and make an example of long-term protests.
West is Key to Repression
The worst part of all is that the outside world knows about these abuses but either have not or cannot do anything about it. Several U.S. companies have been cited to support the government's repression in exchange for business contracts and immunities in China. This is incredibly effective in obtaining foreign investment while allowing the government to continue its corrupt practices. China now has no reason to even try to change its human rights violations because it can have its cake (repression) and eat it too (money).
I honestly think China has moved backwards since Tiananmen. Like we saw in the documentary, any progress made in the past has been erased by the government's censure of media. They are cracking down harder on dissent but portraying themselves as more democratic by covering up with support for state-controlled minority groups that they have under control. China is in trouble and many do not even know it.
Saturday, February 16, 2008
I'm a Tank Man, I'm a Tank Tank Man, Yes I'm a Tank Man.....
The Tank Man
This is one of the coolest and most powerful stories from China's post-Mao protest era. An unidentified, common man threw himself in front of Chinese tanks in order to stop them from coming into the city of Beijing. Witnesses and historians speculated that all he wanted was peace for the people of the city. He has never been officially identified and no one knows what became of him after that day.
The 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre was filled with other stories of heroism similar to this one. Students protested for days, often running right into open fire and losing life and limb for their beliefs. The real threat the government felt, however, from the protests was not in Tiananmen Square but in areas surrounding the city where the ordinary person had joined in the fight. Up until this point, only students and college communities were protesting from political freedom but this particular movement inspired and motivated working class citizens to join in. This aspect opened the resistance to communism to millions and millions more people. The government realized this day that they had a real situation on their hands and the only way to kill it would be to censor the rest of China and the world from the events and photos from 1989's massacre. They all but wiped out every image and story about Tank Man and others and the movement was squashed. Life went about as normal for the unblissfully ignorant Chinese population as Deng's economic progress continued to move forward.
The Two Chinas
Deng Xioping's economic reform vision continued to be carried out and China grew more quickly than any other industrialized nation in the world. They are a superpower with a rising economy in the world. But that's only one China.
China A- Big Business
Modern, urbanized, rise of criminalization, health system overload, poor education
China B- Underdeveloped, rural
Poor, no growth (growth is in the city), poor water resources, no education
There is a huge inequality here. China B's young people are moving into China A in order to be able to feed and educate theird children, leaving behind parents, their kids, and their China just to survive. It's a difficult situation in which they must surrender or fall behind China A's progress.
I think even China's inequality is wider than the U.S.'s. It's true our top 10% make more than the bottom 50% of the nation, but everyone still pretty much lives in the same world in the U.S. In China, the China A lives in space age while China B appears to live in ancient China with farms and fires everywhere. These people are still not satisfied with life because they are either dirt poor or overworked in dirty factories in China A. It's no wonder they are still uneasy even with ecnomic freedom.
The crazy thing is that protests still happen in China. But, the story of the Tank Man is not one passed on from revolutionary to revolutionary. No one is old enough to have been there or have heard of it. So, the inspiration that could be drawn from it and used as fuel is gone from today's protesters. It was evident from an interview featured in PBS's Frontline presentation on the Tank Man where four young people could not even identify what the picture of the Tank Man was from. It's sad. Even Google and Yahoo have wiped the photos from their Chinese search engines but not their U.S. databases. Clearly, there is a system at work here where economic interests top the rights of the people.
This is one of the coolest and most powerful stories from China's post-Mao protest era. An unidentified, common man threw himself in front of Chinese tanks in order to stop them from coming into the city of Beijing. Witnesses and historians speculated that all he wanted was peace for the people of the city. He has never been officially identified and no one knows what became of him after that day.The 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre was filled with other stories of heroism similar to this one. Students protested for days, often running right into open fire and losing life and limb for their beliefs. The real threat the government felt, however, from the protests was not in Tiananmen Square but in areas surrounding the city where the ordinary person had joined in the fight. Up until this point, only students and college communities were protesting from political freedom but this particular movement inspired and motivated working class citizens to join in. This aspect opened the resistance to communism to millions and millions more people. The government realized this day that they had a real situation on their hands and the only way to kill it would be to censor the rest of China and the world from the events and photos from 1989's massacre. They all but wiped out every image and story about Tank Man and others and the movement was squashed. Life went about as normal for the unblissfully ignorant Chinese population as Deng's economic progress continued to move forward.
The Two Chinas
Deng Xioping's economic reform vision continued to be carried out and China grew more quickly than any other industrialized nation in the world. They are a superpower with a rising economy in the world. But that's only one China.
China A- Big Business
Modern, urbanized, rise of criminalization, health system overload, poor education
China B- Underdeveloped, rural
Poor, no growth (growth is in the city), poor water resources, no education
There is a huge inequality here. China B's young people are moving into China A in order to be able to feed and educate theird children, leaving behind parents, their kids, and their China just to survive. It's a difficult situation in which they must surrender or fall behind China A's progress.
I think even China's inequality is wider than the U.S.'s. It's true our top 10% make more than the bottom 50% of the nation, but everyone still pretty much lives in the same world in the U.S. In China, the China A lives in space age while China B appears to live in ancient China with farms and fires everywhere. These people are still not satisfied with life because they are either dirt poor or overworked in dirty factories in China A. It's no wonder they are still uneasy even with ecnomic freedom.
The crazy thing is that protests still happen in China. But, the story of the Tank Man is not one passed on from revolutionary to revolutionary. No one is old enough to have been there or have heard of it. So, the inspiration that could be drawn from it and used as fuel is gone from today's protesters. It was evident from an interview featured in PBS's Frontline presentation on the Tank Man where four young people could not even identify what the picture of the Tank Man was from. It's sad. Even Google and Yahoo have wiped the photos from their Chinese search engines but not their U.S. databases. Clearly, there is a system at work here where economic interests top the rights of the people.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Opening the floodgates of democracy in China
"Prospects for Democracy."
In reading the second excerpt from Guthrie, it really shows that communism in China is vulnerable to collapse. There are several forces from past and present situations that have lead to this unstable state of politics.
Guthrie continues to assert that Deng's push for economic reform and freedom in China is a huge reason that political freedom is increasingly being called for. With private enterprises forming in China, more jobs opened up for young people to take up. These jobs, unlike government jobs, would allow them to express their opinions without fear of losing their job, career, or freedom. Additionally, if college students decide to express support for democracy in their clubs and scholastic life, they still have numerous business-related companies willing and happy to hire them. This type of climate encourages young Chinese to think however they desire.
Then Tiananmen Square protests and subsequent military intervention occured in 1989. This movement seems important for democracy in China for a number of reasons. First of all, students opened the movement to ordinary, less educated citizens in a way it was never available to them before. All of a sudden, a different, much larger population felt power to change their status. Second, the violence taken against the students really showed how oppressive the government was. The pictures and stories spread by the international media also helped to show both internal and external parties that communist forces were using violence to squash something other societies in the world feel is a human right, freedom of expression.
After this pivotal event, free enterprise in China really took off. This lead to another group that erodes the communist hold in China: entrepreneurs and private business owners. These people have security in their businesses and money and this are not fearful of the starvation and loss of jobs that can occur when someone fights the government. Thus, this group is not afraid to fight for democratic practices that would further benefit economy and autonomy for their industries in China.
A final factor in creating an environment for democracy in China is the currently evolving free-flow of information evident not only in China but also the whole world. Journalists in China have more choice in opinion after Tiananmen allowed them to showcase the human rights issues. And now, the Internet has allowed internal journalists to communicate with the world and the world to communicate with China about political issues. Thus, with current technology, people in China are more aware of what other political systems exist in the world.
It makes sense that China is on a path to be more open and grass-roots centered. The people have more choice between communism and other ways and feel less fear that going against the grain will ruin the rest of their lives. The evidence is clear in the dissident blogs scattered all over the Internet.
One such site I visited is . The site is interesting because it not only lists current issues important to non-party members, but it also has a special section devoted to current political prisoners. This can be accessed through Beijing Olympics 2008 Take Action Now! link and selecting one of the photos listed. It provides a face to the human rights violation previously abstract to both the Chinese people and more importantly the rest of the world. A picture of the prisoner featured this month is above. He is one of the brave faces of the new, less cautious Chinese people.
In reading the second excerpt from Guthrie, it really shows that communism in China is vulnerable to collapse. There are several forces from past and present situations that have lead to this unstable state of politics.
Guthrie continues to assert that Deng's push for economic reform and freedom in China is a huge reason that political freedom is increasingly being called for. With private enterprises forming in China, more jobs opened up for young people to take up. These jobs, unlike government jobs, would allow them to express their opinions without fear of losing their job, career, or freedom. Additionally, if college students decide to express support for democracy in their clubs and scholastic life, they still have numerous business-related companies willing and happy to hire them. This type of climate encourages young Chinese to think however they desire.
Then Tiananmen Square protests and subsequent military intervention occured in 1989. This movement seems important for democracy in China for a number of reasons. First of all, students opened the movement to ordinary, less educated citizens in a way it was never available to them before. All of a sudden, a different, much larger population felt power to change their status. Second, the violence taken against the students really showed how oppressive the government was. The pictures and stories spread by the international media also helped to show both internal and external parties that communist forces were using violence to squash something other societies in the world feel is a human right, freedom of expression.
After this pivotal event, free enterprise in China really took off. This lead to another group that erodes the communist hold in China: entrepreneurs and private business owners. These people have security in their businesses and money and this are not fearful of the starvation and loss of jobs that can occur when someone fights the government. Thus, this group is not afraid to fight for democratic practices that would further benefit economy and autonomy for their industries in China.
A final factor in creating an environment for democracy in China is the currently evolving free-flow of information evident not only in China but also the whole world. Journalists in China have more choice in opinion after Tiananmen allowed them to showcase the human rights issues. And now, the Internet has allowed internal journalists to communicate with the world and the world to communicate with China about political issues. Thus, with current technology, people in China are more aware of what other political systems exist in the world.
It makes sense that China is on a path to be more open and grass-roots centered. The people have more choice between communism and other ways and feel less fear that going against the grain will ruin the rest of their lives. The evidence is clear in the dissident blogs scattered all over the Internet.
One such site I visited is . The site is interesting because it not only lists current issues important to non-party members, but it also has a special section devoted to current political prisoners. This can be accessed through Beijing Olympics 2008 Take Action Now! link and selecting one of the photos listed. It provides a face to the human rights violation previously abstract to both the Chinese people and more importantly the rest of the world. A picture of the prisoner featured this month is above. He is one of the brave faces of the new, less cautious Chinese people.
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Deng Didn't Downright Democratize, Duh.
Balancing Development with Democracy
Shaohua Hu explored Deng's policies and politics in this article. Essentially Deng wanted a communist government, like Mao, but saw a lot wrong in the system. He wanted to lead the government and the people in a different way but not with a different way.
Deng's leadership differed in a number of ways:
1) He focused on economic reform. Unlike Mao, Deng thought that as long as people were fed, had jobs, had money, they would be happier than having, say, the right to vote
3)Deng rehabilitated Mao's counter-revolutionary opponents. Mao had failed to get riud of his opposition effectively. This was something Deng made sure to do.
4.) Deng made communists less ideological and more practical. He helped the party members realize that the design and structure of every system was not the most important facet as long as it did what it was supposed to.
5.) Deng opened China up to foreign investment and the world. He knew this would be necessary if China was to emerge as an economic world power. Mao feared this.
Essentially, Deng found a way to make communism meet people's needs the way Mao's communism didn't. Mao made everyone focus on an illusion communism as equaling everyone but Deng showed people that this was not reality. He combated this by making economic reforms that put more control in local and private hands where the individual and the market could make or break a person's prosperity. This allowed people to be happy with their own efforts in the economy while not worrying about their involvement and freedom in politics.
It should not be said that Deng made no political reforms. He did make elections more free locally and reformed the judicial system to be more fair. He knew stability of politics was necessary for the economy to maintain its stability. He did not believe that political reform was necessary in order to bring about social and human rights reforms. He famously stated
The result was that people unconditionally accepted Deng's communism as long as their economic interests continued to be protected. However, this was doomed to be a short-lived success. As political thinkers have studied in the past, once economic reforms take hold and people become stable with basic needs, they begin to look for more freedoms elsewhere. Because the poor were now fed, the has the energy to realize something else was missing.
This leads us to the protesting of human rights and other ideas happening in Pei's China. People have all the economic growth in the world but feel the government is still treating them bad. Deng may have worked his entire reign to make communist China stand with economic freedom but his intended efforts will lead to an unintended end.
Shaohua Hu explored Deng's policies and politics in this article. Essentially Deng wanted a communist government, like Mao, but saw a lot wrong in the system. He wanted to lead the government and the people in a different way but not with a different way.
Deng's leadership differed in a number of ways:
1) He focused on economic reform. Unlike Mao, Deng thought that as long as people were fed, had jobs, had money, they would be happier than having, say, the right to vote
“It does not take Marx of Maslow to understand why a piece of bread serves a hungry person better than a piece of ballot-paper.”2)Deng took the focus off of the class-based struggle Mao enhanced. This meant that people would no longer resent the rich but rather work for everyone's good
3)Deng rehabilitated Mao's counter-revolutionary opponents. Mao had failed to get riud of his opposition effectively. This was something Deng made sure to do.
4.) Deng made communists less ideological and more practical. He helped the party members realize that the design and structure of every system was not the most important facet as long as it did what it was supposed to.
5.) Deng opened China up to foreign investment and the world. He knew this would be necessary if China was to emerge as an economic world power. Mao feared this.
Essentially, Deng found a way to make communism meet people's needs the way Mao's communism didn't. Mao made everyone focus on an illusion communism as equaling everyone but Deng showed people that this was not reality. He combated this by making economic reforms that put more control in local and private hands where the individual and the market could make or break a person's prosperity. This allowed people to be happy with their own efforts in the economy while not worrying about their involvement and freedom in politics.
It should not be said that Deng made no political reforms. He did make elections more free locally and reformed the judicial system to be more fair. He knew stability of politics was necessary for the economy to maintain its stability. He did not believe that political reform was necessary in order to bring about social and human rights reforms. He famously stated
"Change in the system. Not change of the system."This worked for a while until Tiananmen Square happened in 1989. Students and intellectuals demanded rights for themselves and more rights within the current systems. Even still they were not demanding a change to democracy. This movement was squashed as they left peasants out of it and allowed Deng to show the rest of China how wrong the protesters were.
The result was that people unconditionally accepted Deng's communism as long as their economic interests continued to be protected. However, this was doomed to be a short-lived success. As political thinkers have studied in the past, once economic reforms take hold and people become stable with basic needs, they begin to look for more freedoms elsewhere. Because the poor were now fed, the has the energy to realize something else was missing.
This leads us to the protesting of human rights and other ideas happening in Pei's China. People have all the economic growth in the world but feel the government is still treating them bad. Deng may have worked his entire reign to make communist China stand with economic freedom but his intended efforts will lead to an unintended end.
Mao Money, Mao Problems
"Setting the Stage"
The article by Doug Guthrie outlines how Mao Zedong started the People's Republic of China (PRC) in 1949. The leader created a communist government where the state controls almost every facet of life and every person, industry, job, everything is organized, sorted, and distributed the way the government saw fit.
A few key factors defined Mao's China. First, the government encouraged its people to protest and challenge certain conditions existing in China. Mao told the Chinese people to fight against unfair employers, foreign invasion, and anti-communists. He informed them of what was good for them and then encouraged dissent against these institutions. Thus, Mao set the stage for social unrest.
Second, Mao's government controlled production and industry. Factories and agriculture were put under state control and forced to reach production quotas. This enabled Mao to exert control over the supply and demand of the country in 5 year plans.
Finally, China under Mao was organized into collective communities of 30-50 households. The people in each community produced goods and services for the whole to pool resources. However, the goods were distributed according to each home's contribution so the wealthy still received more than the poor. Another cause of social unrest.
Mao Zedong is the father of the conditions Pei stated in the article from my previous entry. He told the Chinese to protest and riot against employment, foreigners, and other evils. Essentially, the climate for social unrest was implanted into Chinese society. The lesson here for the Chinese was that if you don't like something, rise up and change it. We can see this today in China, except now the people are protesting for their own idea of acceptable life.
Guthrie goes on, in this article, to explain how the fall of Mao and his ideas spurred a new way under leader Deng. Deng's plan was to slowly change industry and agriculture from a state-controlled entity to locally owned and monitored one. He also encouraged more foreign investment, and a legal system to ensure corruption would always be stopped. The key here for Deng's success was slow changes. This transformed the environment in China greatly and their economy is the 6th largest in the world to date. However, some problems started under Mao continue to plague China and, again, this can be seen in the conditions of today's China under Jintao.
The article by Doug Guthrie outlines how Mao Zedong started the People's Republic of China (PRC) in 1949. The leader created a communist government where the state controls almost every facet of life and every person, industry, job, everything is organized, sorted, and distributed the way the government saw fit.
A few key factors defined Mao's China. First, the government encouraged its people to protest and challenge certain conditions existing in China. Mao told the Chinese people to fight against unfair employers, foreign invasion, and anti-communists. He informed them of what was good for them and then encouraged dissent against these institutions. Thus, Mao set the stage for social unrest.
Second, Mao's government controlled production and industry. Factories and agriculture were put under state control and forced to reach production quotas. This enabled Mao to exert control over the supply and demand of the country in 5 year plans.
Finally, China under Mao was organized into collective communities of 30-50 households. The people in each community produced goods and services for the whole to pool resources. However, the goods were distributed according to each home's contribution so the wealthy still received more than the poor. Another cause of social unrest.
Mao Zedong is the father of the conditions Pei stated in the article from my previous entry. He told the Chinese to protest and riot against employment, foreigners, and other evils. Essentially, the climate for social unrest was implanted into Chinese society. The lesson here for the Chinese was that if you don't like something, rise up and change it. We can see this today in China, except now the people are protesting for their own idea of acceptable life.
Deng Changes a Few Things
"But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao... you ain't gonna make it with anyone anyhow."
Guthrie goes on, in this article, to explain how the fall of Mao and his ideas spurred a new way under leader Deng. Deng's plan was to slowly change industry and agriculture from a state-controlled entity to locally owned and monitored one. He also encouraged more foreign investment, and a legal system to ensure corruption would always be stopped. The key here for Deng's success was slow changes. This transformed the environment in China greatly and their economy is the 6th largest in the world to date. However, some problems started under Mao continue to plague China and, again, this can be seen in the conditions of today's China under Jintao.
Saturday, February 9, 2008
China's Progressing while Regressing
"China is Paying the Price of Social Unrest"
The author of this article, Pei, brings up a very interesting and paradoxical point regarding China's transformation in recent decades. China, yes, has definitely grown economically, industrially, and technologically. However, I honestly believe this was something the state desired and instituted.
My basis for this assumption comes from Pei's article. He states that the number of social uprisings has shown staggering increases in recent years.
This could be avoided with social care of people but such a climate is not present. China does not care for its poor, aging, or other interest groups and so the Chinese people feel they are taken from without being given anything. It's no wonder they are acting out more and more each year.
China wants to fix this so they can have a good reputation with the rest of the world. However, this is not a good reason as this, too, is a corrupt endeavor. The government is corrupt and just wants band-aids for the problems that can easily save face but do not fix the problems (i.e. publicly punish a select few officials while letting other continue their corrupt ways). If this continues, then the protests will, too.
The author of this article, Pei, brings up a very interesting and paradoxical point regarding China's transformation in recent decades. China, yes, has definitely grown economically, industrially, and technologically. However, I honestly believe this was something the state desired and instituted.
My basis for this assumption comes from Pei's article. He states that the number of social uprisings has shown staggering increases in recent years.
The number of so-called "mass incidents" (sit-ins, riots, strikes, and demonstrations) reached 74,000 is 2004, an all-time high, and involved about 3.7m individuals. In 1994, by comparison, there were about 10,000 such incidents, with 730,000 participants.Pei also notes that the triggers for these incidents are social and economic policies, such as high tax and land seizures, that help to facilitate the economic and industrial growth of China. Chinese people may not agree with how their country is changing and be angry that they must pay the price regardless.
This could be avoided with social care of people but such a climate is not present. China does not care for its poor, aging, or other interest groups and so the Chinese people feel they are taken from without being given anything. It's no wonder they are acting out more and more each year.
China wants to fix this so they can have a good reputation with the rest of the world. However, this is not a good reason as this, too, is a corrupt endeavor. The government is corrupt and just wants band-aids for the problems that can easily save face but do not fix the problems (i.e. publicly punish a select few officials while letting other continue their corrupt ways). If this continues, then the protests will, too.
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
How China and the U.S. view the "China Threat"
Reving up the China Threat
In Klare's article regarding how the U.S. defines and is reacting to the rise of China as a superpower, he asks the great question of is China a threat just to the economy of the U.S. and its current position of dominance or does China threaten the security of the U.S. as a state? Also interesting to note is that he separates the two. This leads me to believe that the article focuses on the traditional and dominant discourse of security as solely focusing on military action. However, he also notes that the U.S. will react to economic threats with military force, thus alluding to the idea that security threats can now come from sources other than military action but cannot be resolved in such means yet.
Currently, the U.S. has a system for deciding if another nation-state is posing a threat to security. The criteria are whether the state is becoming a "new rival," is capable of world power, resembles the likes of the Soviet Union, during the Cold War, and is taking in resources and supplies to prepare for military action.
This leads Klare to believe that the U.S. is labeling the Chinese state as a threat to U.S. security. The basis for placing this label rests of a few key issues. First of all, China has been cited as building up its missile and weapon reserves and increasing the missile range around its state. A report filed annually by the government shows that China is growing its missile program. China has begun to purchase submarines, fighter planes, and destroyers. Also, the U.S. claims that the missiles are being aimed at the U.S.'s allies. China has recently been able to afford missiles from Russia capable of reaching Japan and Taiwan.
A good point, to which I agree, that officials in Beijing make for taking such action to build a military defense is just that. It's for China's defense. Klare notes that China is afraid it is being contained and threatened by the bases the U.S. has built around then and the missiles being constantly being pointed at them. This has caused China to be insecure in its own security and has naturally began to take measures to protect themselves. Of course, as Klare also notes,
Finally, the U.S. is worried because China has tried to buy out a small California-based oil company and is threatening to change the flow of oil distribution throughout the whole world. It is well-known that oil is not an infinite resource and is the most demanded raw material in the world. This makes the good a source of life and power in the world. Since China has grown, it has increased its oil consumption tremendously without the prospect of more oil being created in the world. Now, the U.S. is feeling threatened that China will take away the oil America needs and, thus, shift its position of power to below China. This shows that the actors remain the two states (China vs. U.S.) but the issue of security now moves into new, economic, territory. To the U.S., if China starts to ally with Saudi Arabia and other oil-rich, yet troubled nations, this will threaten the economic and military power the U.S. has had in the past.
However, it is interesting to note here that even though the security issue here is not over a military threat, the U.S.'s solution is still to use military force. Klare goes on to note that U.S. will kill the threat by placing more bases around China and maintain its superiority in military technology. The feeling I get from the article is that the U.S.'s notion of China as a threat still pits state against state and focuses on both military and economic threats. What the U.S. leaves out that should be prominent in the modern notion of security is including oil businesses, individuals, and MNCs as actors and using means other than military to react the the threat perceive from China.
Discourses of Security in China: Towards a critical turn?
After reviewing how the U.S. perceives security regarding China, I looked at how China views the notion of security of itself against others. Clearly, China's notion matches the U.S. in that it believes security lies solely in protecting one's state against the threat of another state, although this is not openly stated in Zhang;s article.
China is a very insecure nation for the reasons Klare states in his article. China is seen as a global threat by other nations for the fact that China is a rising power, and non-democratic at that. Thus, China's view on security is forced to be a reactionary one. China knows that the global economy and identity can impact their security but officials in Beijing have to focus on military because it seems to be the most immediate and dangerous threat at this time.
It's important to look at the history and environment of China to correctly understand their view on security. China was never a wealthy nation but is becoming one. Also, China knows we are in a post-Cold War era and its identity as a communist nation automatically labels it a threat to liberal, democratic nations of the world. So, the view from state actors is that China is being looked at even more closely that any other nation.
Chinese scholars have not put much work into the field of security yet, so all of their notions are based on security of past eras. However, new discourses are emerging and China is waiting to see where this leaves them. There is a possibility, as Zhang states, of superpowers falling to a level where multiple powers can emerge and be on a more level field. This multi-polarity will change the actors of security (perhaps make room for more individual and community actors) and also what security entails (protection of resources, economy, etc. will be included). Or, will security only expand to other areas but not other actors?
Security in China is very complex and still unknown. Currently, China is in reactionary mode to the rest of the world's disdain for non-democratic ideals. However, if China's economic power grows and it is able to become an even player on the global stage, this notion may change and security will then start to encompass ideas other than military and actors other than states.
In Klare's article regarding how the U.S. defines and is reacting to the rise of China as a superpower, he asks the great question of is China a threat just to the economy of the U.S. and its current position of dominance or does China threaten the security of the U.S. as a state? Also interesting to note is that he separates the two. This leads me to believe that the article focuses on the traditional and dominant discourse of security as solely focusing on military action. However, he also notes that the U.S. will react to economic threats with military force, thus alluding to the idea that security threats can now come from sources other than military action but cannot be resolved in such means yet.
Currently, the U.S. has a system for deciding if another nation-state is posing a threat to security. The criteria are whether the state is becoming a "new rival," is capable of world power, resembles the likes of the Soviet Union, during the Cold War, and is taking in resources and supplies to prepare for military action.
This leads Klare to believe that the U.S. is labeling the Chinese state as a threat to U.S. security. The basis for placing this label rests of a few key issues. First of all, China has been cited as building up its missile and weapon reserves and increasing the missile range around its state. A report filed annually by the government shows that China is growing its missile program. China has begun to purchase submarines, fighter planes, and destroyers. Also, the U.S. claims that the missiles are being aimed at the U.S.'s allies. China has recently been able to afford missiles from Russia capable of reaching Japan and Taiwan.
A good point, to which I agree, that officials in Beijing make for taking such action to build a military defense is just that. It's for China's defense. Klare notes that China is afraid it is being contained and threatened by the bases the U.S. has built around then and the missiles being constantly being pointed at them. This has caused China to be insecure in its own security and has naturally began to take measures to protect themselves. Of course, as Klare also notes,
But any nation, when confronted with a major military buildup by a potential adversary off its shores, is bound to feel threatened and will act accordingly.Simply put, the reason for China having a missile program is the U.S. started it and the Chinese are just reacting.
Finally, the U.S. is worried because China has tried to buy out a small California-based oil company and is threatening to change the flow of oil distribution throughout the whole world. It is well-known that oil is not an infinite resource and is the most demanded raw material in the world. This makes the good a source of life and power in the world. Since China has grown, it has increased its oil consumption tremendously without the prospect of more oil being created in the world. Now, the U.S. is feeling threatened that China will take away the oil America needs and, thus, shift its position of power to below China. This shows that the actors remain the two states (China vs. U.S.) but the issue of security now moves into new, economic, territory. To the U.S., if China starts to ally with Saudi Arabia and other oil-rich, yet troubled nations, this will threaten the economic and military power the U.S. has had in the past.
However, it is interesting to note here that even though the security issue here is not over a military threat, the U.S.'s solution is still to use military force. Klare goes on to note that U.S. will kill the threat by placing more bases around China and maintain its superiority in military technology. The feeling I get from the article is that the U.S.'s notion of China as a threat still pits state against state and focuses on both military and economic threats. What the U.S. leaves out that should be prominent in the modern notion of security is including oil businesses, individuals, and MNCs as actors and using means other than military to react the the threat perceive from China.
Discourses of Security in China: Towards a critical turn?
After reviewing how the U.S. perceives security regarding China, I looked at how China views the notion of security of itself against others. Clearly, China's notion matches the U.S. in that it believes security lies solely in protecting one's state against the threat of another state, although this is not openly stated in Zhang;s article.
China is a very insecure nation for the reasons Klare states in his article. China is seen as a global threat by other nations for the fact that China is a rising power, and non-democratic at that. Thus, China's view on security is forced to be a reactionary one. China knows that the global economy and identity can impact their security but officials in Beijing have to focus on military because it seems to be the most immediate and dangerous threat at this time.
It's important to look at the history and environment of China to correctly understand their view on security. China was never a wealthy nation but is becoming one. Also, China knows we are in a post-Cold War era and its identity as a communist nation automatically labels it a threat to liberal, democratic nations of the world. So, the view from state actors is that China is being looked at even more closely that any other nation.
Chinese scholars have not put much work into the field of security yet, so all of their notions are based on security of past eras. However, new discourses are emerging and China is waiting to see where this leaves them. There is a possibility, as Zhang states, of superpowers falling to a level where multiple powers can emerge and be on a more level field. This multi-polarity will change the actors of security (perhaps make room for more individual and community actors) and also what security entails (protection of resources, economy, etc. will be included). Or, will security only expand to other areas but not other actors?
Security in China is very complex and still unknown. Currently, China is in reactionary mode to the rest of the world's disdain for non-democratic ideals. However, if China's economic power grows and it is able to become an even player on the global stage, this notion may change and security will then start to encompass ideas other than military and actors other than states.
Sunday, February 3, 2008
The Weight of History
A nation's history helps to shape the way external forces impact it.
It is very bold to say that whether or not a nation can be conquered by another is the prey's own fault. However, this can be partly true. Many nations have been threatened and conquered by imperial forces while others have resisted. The same forces can be said to have been exerted on them and yet the product differs entirely from situation to situation. Beeson, the author of this article Regionalism and Globalization in East Asia, states that a nation's history, characteristics, and people impact their future contacts with outside parties tremendously. I believe I can agree with that.
China
"... Response to the European challenge was a consequence of internal degeneration, rather than simple European superiority" (pg. 31). This was the reason Beeson gives for China's submission to European dominance in the 1800s after the fall of the Ming Dynasty. China is historically ethnocentric, divided, and introverted. This made a very good environment for the Europeans to permeate and weaken from within. Yes, it can be said that European forces were very strong. But, China was so characteristically weak that they fell more quickly, than, say, Japan.
It's interesting that Beeson blames Confuscian thought and an air of superiority of the Chinese for their fall to a elite and self-superior power like Europe. Essentially the Chinese refused to give in a little of their customs and greatness in order to be spared total domination but thus subjected themselves more easily to such a fate. I do not think we can seprate China's history and Europe's history from placing blame for China's fall. I believe it was the interaction of the two that produced this result. China's superiority complex and resistance angered the Europeans moreso than any other nation simply because Europe thought itself and its ideas to also be superior. What I mean is, not only was China's weakness a cause of their downfall but also Europe's increased motivation to dominate China even more forcefully. China's weakness made Europe even stronger. Thus, European action played off of Chinese culture to create a shared outcome between the two actors.
Japan
Japan contrasts greatly to China and thus their fate in the imperial era reflects it. Europe did not see that Japan was just as literate as they were and believed Japan to be worthless to them. Also, Japan allowed Europe to trade and exchange ideas with them a little more openly. Thus, Europe attempts to dominate and threaten Japan's security were less because Japan was less susceptible to collapse with an open mind. Also, Europe was not challenged to work harder to secure Japan because this nation was not a elusive as China. Again, Beeson makes the point that a nation's history changes how its future will be controlled.
Not only does this allow Japan to hold its own against European domination. Japan also becomes a center of competition and rivalry with China. The nation, allowing itself to stay afloat by accepting some Western ideals, is free to dominate parts of Asia as well. This sets Japan up to be just like Europe in its quest to take over other lands rather than be taken over themselves. Japan begins to take on the same goals and means as European imperialists within the Asian region. Thus, the way Japan interacted with the rest of Asia then and now is reflected in their past reaction to potential European threats.
This historical resistance by Japan helped give the nation a reputation for asserting Asia's worth in many areas and also for going against Western influence. This helped them to stop external domination but also caused them to be resented by the rest of East Asia. China for trying to take over certain regions and Southeast Asia for exploiting its resources. Then and now, Japan can be noted as having a sense of superiority and higher value than other Asian nations. I think this is definetly the case as much of the world sees how greatly Japan differs from the rest of Asia in all areas of living.
I'm not sure how this article ties into the Olympics article yet. All I can note is that it shows how the Olympics can have a huge diplomatic effect on the region. The region is characterized by instability and poor regional relations. Thus, it makes sense that sports diplomacy could potentially improve their ties moreso than other, more stable regions. The fact that China has been a historically weak area for others to prey on makes it a hotbed for controversy during the Olympics as the nation tries to show the world it will no longer allow this.
It is very bold to say that whether or not a nation can be conquered by another is the prey's own fault. However, this can be partly true. Many nations have been threatened and conquered by imperial forces while others have resisted. The same forces can be said to have been exerted on them and yet the product differs entirely from situation to situation. Beeson, the author of this article Regionalism and Globalization in East Asia, states that a nation's history, characteristics, and people impact their future contacts with outside parties tremendously. I believe I can agree with that.
China
"... Response to the European challenge was a consequence of internal degeneration, rather than simple European superiority" (pg. 31). This was the reason Beeson gives for China's submission to European dominance in the 1800s after the fall of the Ming Dynasty. China is historically ethnocentric, divided, and introverted. This made a very good environment for the Europeans to permeate and weaken from within. Yes, it can be said that European forces were very strong. But, China was so characteristically weak that they fell more quickly, than, say, Japan.
It's interesting that Beeson blames Confuscian thought and an air of superiority of the Chinese for their fall to a elite and self-superior power like Europe. Essentially the Chinese refused to give in a little of their customs and greatness in order to be spared total domination but thus subjected themselves more easily to such a fate. I do not think we can seprate China's history and Europe's history from placing blame for China's fall. I believe it was the interaction of the two that produced this result. China's superiority complex and resistance angered the Europeans moreso than any other nation simply because Europe thought itself and its ideas to also be superior. What I mean is, not only was China's weakness a cause of their downfall but also Europe's increased motivation to dominate China even more forcefully. China's weakness made Europe even stronger. Thus, European action played off of Chinese culture to create a shared outcome between the two actors.
Japan
Japan contrasts greatly to China and thus their fate in the imperial era reflects it. Europe did not see that Japan was just as literate as they were and believed Japan to be worthless to them. Also, Japan allowed Europe to trade and exchange ideas with them a little more openly. Thus, Europe attempts to dominate and threaten Japan's security were less because Japan was less susceptible to collapse with an open mind. Also, Europe was not challenged to work harder to secure Japan because this nation was not a elusive as China. Again, Beeson makes the point that a nation's history changes how its future will be controlled.
Not only does this allow Japan to hold its own against European domination. Japan also becomes a center of competition and rivalry with China. The nation, allowing itself to stay afloat by accepting some Western ideals, is free to dominate parts of Asia as well. This sets Japan up to be just like Europe in its quest to take over other lands rather than be taken over themselves. Japan begins to take on the same goals and means as European imperialists within the Asian region. Thus, the way Japan interacted with the rest of Asia then and now is reflected in their past reaction to potential European threats.
This historical resistance by Japan helped give the nation a reputation for asserting Asia's worth in many areas and also for going against Western influence. This helped them to stop external domination but also caused them to be resented by the rest of East Asia. China for trying to take over certain regions and Southeast Asia for exploiting its resources. Then and now, Japan can be noted as having a sense of superiority and higher value than other Asian nations. I think this is definetly the case as much of the world sees how greatly Japan differs from the rest of Asia in all areas of living.
I'm not sure how this article ties into the Olympics article yet. All I can note is that it shows how the Olympics can have a huge diplomatic effect on the region. The region is characterized by instability and poor regional relations. Thus, it makes sense that sports diplomacy could potentially improve their ties moreso than other, more stable regions. The fact that China has been a historically weak area for others to prey on makes it a hotbed for controversy during the Olympics as the nation tries to show the world it will no longer allow this.
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Beijing Olympics 2008: Focus on China
Countdown to Beijing, The Choice for China: Propaganda or Positive Change?
Victor Cha, a professor at Georgetown University in Washington D.C., believes that the Olympics will be the crux of China's entrance into the modern, advanced world. It is not clear whether the China is actually working to resolve the human rights, environmental, and other violations it has made or the nation is simply placing a band-aid on issues to ensure a successful and more importantly profitable Olympics. One thing Cha makes clear is that the Olympics will continue to impact China and its neighbors long after the athletes leave from the brand new airport China built specifically for the 2007 games.
China's Issues
China has absolutely made immense progress in the past years regarding economics, manufacturing, international cooperation, free competition, and, most recently, the environment. Cha regards the Olympics as China's opportune moment to begin "showcasing its rapid economic growth and prosperity" on the world stage. However, I believe that the world is already aware that China has taken over many areas of clothing, electronic, and other types of manufacturing.
China's poor labor practices, domestic human rights violations, and lack of safety standards in the production of toys, plastics, and other exported goods is a negative issue overshadowing this progress. This issue impacts not only China but the entire world. The mistreatment of workers deters many from purchasing China's goods and the recent discovery of poisons in plastic toys harms people on the other side of the globe. This is the issue China must address and actively work to change if its foreign relations and trade are to improve.
Another negative issue regarding China is its oil and arms trade to and from Darfur, The Sudan. China, Cha notes, has received criticism from journalists and activist groups for continuing to supply arms to the Sudanese government and purchase oil from Sudanese companies in the face of the genocide occuring in Darfur. The world is very unhappy with China's disregard for the seriousness of ethnic cleansing by the government in the region and this has hurt China's reputation in regards to Olympic ideals. The world has every right to disrespect China in this respect because it shows that they are not up to the human rights standards set by many of the most influential nations in the world.
According to Cha, however, China is openly improving this. They have been supporting UN sanctions against The Sudan and have even sent envoys to the region of Darfur to bring aid. It is not a coincidence that these moves have come only in recent years as the Olympics have been approaching. While any progress in the Darfur crisis is welcome, it does not hide the fact that China is still aiding in the killings by supplying the weapons to the Janjaweed. Again, here it is obvious that China is simply placing a band-aid on the problem for the sake of public relations.
China has also been cited as one of the largest contributors of greenhouse gas emissions in the world. According to an article the International Herald Tribune, http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/06/20/business/emit.php, China surpassed the U.S. in greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, China releases the most of the gases known to cause global warming out of any other nation in the world. This is a major problem that, again, hurts not only the people and environment of China but of the entire world.
The solution to the problem outlined in Cha's article? Ban a million cars and plant 200 million trees. This is an amazing initiative to begin with. However, the only way to truly reverse this statistic is to continue with it for the long-haul. China must continue to plant more and more Carbon Dioxide consuming trees and implement a public transportation system to allow its people to continue living their normal lives with the absence of their banned cars. Again, Cha reports that China is working to fix their environmental impact but fails to highlight that it is only a temporary fix meant to appease the public eye.
Regional Issues
Cha makes an interesting point that Asia is a region where a historic "tradition of sports diplomacy is arguably more prominent than in other regions." Some examples he cites are ping-pong helping Sino-American relations (presumably during the Vietnam conflict) and the merging of North and South Korea as an Olympic team. Also, it can be said that the 1988 Olympic Games held in Seoul, South Korea spurred the creation of a democratic system in the nation. These are incredible stepping stones for improved world-relations in the region.
The reason that more progress has been noted in these regions is because they are so much further behind in democratic and other ideals than other regions where the games have been held. Asia is thought of in the world as backwards in many aspects so there is more room for improvement. While this seems worthy of praise, I'm not sure how accurate Cha's statement is.
From what basis to we compare China's current state to? Western ideals and western systems? If this is the case, then one can say Asia does benefit more from the politics of the Olympics than other areas because the Olympics promote such western ideals. However, this way of thinking is harmful because it simply places western thinking against eastern thinking as the correct way. Asia has more contrast to Olympic democratic ideals than any other nation, so it fits that many see it as the perfect place for improvement via sports diplomacy.
What I wonder is this: Will the impact of the olympic games make such a lasting and positive change in China as it did in South Korea or will these recent changes turn out to be band-aids ripped off as soon as the initial bleeding stops? Do the people of China want this? And finally, is taking on global ideals of democracy, conservation, and human rights protection the only route for a better life in China?
Victor Cha, a professor at Georgetown University in Washington D.C., believes that the Olympics will be the crux of China's entrance into the modern, advanced world. It is not clear whether the China is actually working to resolve the human rights, environmental, and other violations it has made or the nation is simply placing a band-aid on issues to ensure a successful and more importantly profitable Olympics. One thing Cha makes clear is that the Olympics will continue to impact China and its neighbors long after the athletes leave from the brand new airport China built specifically for the 2007 games.
China's Issues
China has absolutely made immense progress in the past years regarding economics, manufacturing, international cooperation, free competition, and, most recently, the environment. Cha regards the Olympics as China's opportune moment to begin "showcasing its rapid economic growth and prosperity" on the world stage. However, I believe that the world is already aware that China has taken over many areas of clothing, electronic, and other types of manufacturing.
China's poor labor practices, domestic human rights violations, and lack of safety standards in the production of toys, plastics, and other exported goods is a negative issue overshadowing this progress. This issue impacts not only China but the entire world. The mistreatment of workers deters many from purchasing China's goods and the recent discovery of poisons in plastic toys harms people on the other side of the globe. This is the issue China must address and actively work to change if its foreign relations and trade are to improve.
Another negative issue regarding China is its oil and arms trade to and from Darfur, The Sudan. China, Cha notes, has received criticism from journalists and activist groups for continuing to supply arms to the Sudanese government and purchase oil from Sudanese companies in the face of the genocide occuring in Darfur. The world is very unhappy with China's disregard for the seriousness of ethnic cleansing by the government in the region and this has hurt China's reputation in regards to Olympic ideals. The world has every right to disrespect China in this respect because it shows that they are not up to the human rights standards set by many of the most influential nations in the world.
According to Cha, however, China is openly improving this. They have been supporting UN sanctions against The Sudan and have even sent envoys to the region of Darfur to bring aid. It is not a coincidence that these moves have come only in recent years as the Olympics have been approaching. While any progress in the Darfur crisis is welcome, it does not hide the fact that China is still aiding in the killings by supplying the weapons to the Janjaweed. Again, here it is obvious that China is simply placing a band-aid on the problem for the sake of public relations.
China has also been cited as one of the largest contributors of greenhouse gas emissions in the world. According to an article the International Herald Tribune, http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/06/20/business/emit.php, China surpassed the U.S. in greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, China releases the most of the gases known to cause global warming out of any other nation in the world. This is a major problem that, again, hurts not only the people and environment of China but of the entire world.
The solution to the problem outlined in Cha's article? Ban a million cars and plant 200 million trees. This is an amazing initiative to begin with. However, the only way to truly reverse this statistic is to continue with it for the long-haul. China must continue to plant more and more Carbon Dioxide consuming trees and implement a public transportation system to allow its people to continue living their normal lives with the absence of their banned cars. Again, Cha reports that China is working to fix their environmental impact but fails to highlight that it is only a temporary fix meant to appease the public eye.
Regional Issues
Cha makes an interesting point that Asia is a region where a historic "tradition of sports diplomacy is arguably more prominent than in other regions." Some examples he cites are ping-pong helping Sino-American relations (presumably during the Vietnam conflict) and the merging of North and South Korea as an Olympic team. Also, it can be said that the 1988 Olympic Games held in Seoul, South Korea spurred the creation of a democratic system in the nation. These are incredible stepping stones for improved world-relations in the region.
The reason that more progress has been noted in these regions is because they are so much further behind in democratic and other ideals than other regions where the games have been held. Asia is thought of in the world as backwards in many aspects so there is more room for improvement. While this seems worthy of praise, I'm not sure how accurate Cha's statement is.
From what basis to we compare China's current state to? Western ideals and western systems? If this is the case, then one can say Asia does benefit more from the politics of the Olympics than other areas because the Olympics promote such western ideals. However, this way of thinking is harmful because it simply places western thinking against eastern thinking as the correct way. Asia has more contrast to Olympic democratic ideals than any other nation, so it fits that many see it as the perfect place for improvement via sports diplomacy.
What I wonder is this: Will the impact of the olympic games make such a lasting and positive change in China as it did in South Korea or will these recent changes turn out to be band-aids ripped off as soon as the initial bleeding stops? Do the people of China want this? And finally, is taking on global ideals of democracy, conservation, and human rights protection the only route for a better life in China?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
