china's diplomacy in Australia - TravelPUNK Backpacker College Student Budget Travel Message Boards!

**beergal** · 06-18-2005, 10:11 AM

so i just wondered what peoples thoughts were on the following extract from jane's defence news briefs

Quote:

China's diplomatic mishap

The attempted defection of one of China's diplomats in Australia has sparked off a media frenzy and Beijing is preparing for further embarrassing 'revelations' about its intelligence activities. Chen Yonglin, until recently a consular official at the Chinese consulate in Sydney, decided to go public with a claim that Beijing has \"up to 1,000 spies\" operating in Australia and has used its network of agents to \"kidnap\" Chinese dissidents in the country with the aim of returning them to China.

Unsurprisingly, China has moved quickly to rubbish its former diplomat's allegations, branding them \"fabricated stories\" and \"purely fictitious\" in a recent statement issued by the consulate where Chen formerly worked. The Chinese authorities are claiming that the diplomat's motive was a desire to stay on in Australia at the end of his four-year posting.

However, two factors make Chen's bid to defect particularly interesting. The first is that he is being described as a former dissident who participated in the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989 and was subsequently 're-educated' before becoming a diplomat. The second is that he is claiming to have been personally involved in the monitoring of Chinese dissidents and groups such as the Falun Gong movement, which is banned in China on the grounds that it is a subversive sect.

213 of 714 words

**Joker** · 06-18-2005, 11:45 AM

Okay, I'll bite.

Its not often I delve into politcal discussions on TPunk, since I don't think its typically the appropriate place, but since the world is a smaller place, and many of my fellow TPunks travel to Oz and SE Asia, here goes, and I am sorry if its long-winded...

Several points to ponder...

1. The Chinese Government, as much as we in the West may think, are not in any way, shape, or form, our friends. I will expound in a moment.

2. Communism, especially the Stalinist/Maoist form that is the basis for the PRC is a self-defeating form of government. Sit tight on that one for a moment as well.

3. The distrust of the Western powers by the Chinese govn't should be cause for alarm.

4. There is an undeniable reaction to exposure of the free-market economy and the benefits of liberty, which is the yearning for said liberties and opportunities to make money, IE capitalize. Communism as it is designed prevents those yearnings simply because of its very design.

Point One:

Because of the distrust of the West that is ingrained into many Asian cultures, compounded with the establishment of a totalitarian regime hell-bent on keeping its people in control, the PRC is NOT an ally. Sure, economically they may be, since the US gave them the "Most Favored Nation" trading status, but that is purely from a business standpoint. There are how many potential consumers in China, and what company, whether it makes nuts and bolts or automobiles does not want that potential customer base as a client?

Therefore, western countries and their respective corporate entities are willing to overlook gross violations of basic human rights for sake of making money. Capitalism at work, whether you agree or not.

Additionally, the PRC knows that given its violations of human rights, (forced abortions, mass executions, making citizens "disappear" into a gulag-type prison system for minor violations, ie petty theft) will be overlooked to a certain extent simply because of their economic power.

But there is a catch- China has a massive standing army, with nuclear weapons to back it. And to screw with them economically is to screw with them militarily- case in point, the ongoing issues with Taiwan. Taiwan struggled for its independance, and the Chinese repeatedly run missile tests down the Straights of Taiwan to flex its military muscle, and hopefully scare the Taiwanese into receding back into Bejing's control. This gross abuse of power on the PRC's end is akin to the class bully scaring you into giving up your milk money for fear of a pummeling. This is not the action of a diplomatically motivated country. Nor is it anything new, its occurred for MANY years.

Politcally speaking, the opposite of capitalism is communism, and the communist experiment has failed. See the former USSR for a very colorful example.

Furthermore, the example of the gross exploitation of its citizens is only further proof that their values as a country are not in line with the rest of Western thought. You simply cannot abuse your citizens in such a manner and suppress their freedoms and expect to be treated in a civilized manner.

Point Two:

I offer the example of the former Eastern Bloc countries as clear reason as to why Communism cannot exist on its own, especially in the true Marxist fashion.

Marx (and I've read him thoroughly) was not an advocate of totalitarianism. Rather, the proletariat was to rise up and take power from the ruling classes and thus distribute evenly amongst each other.

However, Marx's theory was short-sighted at best. In a small locale, it could potentially work (sub 100 people). Marx defines no ruling class or body to determine the fate of the proletariat as a whole, rather, responsibility of ruling is left to the whole entity of the proletariat.

This, however, is against human nature. Human nature demands that one or more people assume control for the herd. Whether they are elected or not, humans have a basic need for leadership. Without leadership, there is assumed anarchy. It sounds rediculous, but use the scene in Monty Python's Holy Grail involving Dennis the dirt farmer's interaction with King Arthur.

Quote:

Originally posted by MP&HG@ Scene 3
Dennis:* I told you. We're an anarcho-syndicalist commune. We take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week,...but all the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special bi-weekly meeting...by a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs,...but by a two-thirds majority in the case of more major--

Sounds rediculous, right? Thats the catch. True socialism or communism is not sustainable because there is no provision made for a ruling body to vote upon decisions for the masses. In fact, a TRUE democracy, in which every citizen votes upon each issue is illogical and impractical as well. This is why the US favors the Republic style, where leaders are voted for who in turn ideally vote upon the issues on behalf of their constituency.

Now, beyond the obvious flaws in lack of leadership, communism's most famous tenet was that of price control and state ownership. In a free market economy, the price is demanded by the market. Production is carried out by the individual or company. But the profits are that of the individual to keep. In the communist model, the products are doled out by the state, and the production is owned by the state.

This creates two massive problems:
1. Any incentive for excellence is hindered since there is a lack of pride in the product because the state owns it all. Human nature is prideful, and that isn't always a bad thing. Take that away, and the incentive is null.
2. The state is forced to create a massive bureauocracy that assumes responsibility of price controls, and warehousing goods. now there is a behemoth to run, and the amount of money taken in versus what is costs to operate makes the US deficit look like chump change.

Furthermore, the Maoist/Stalinist form of govn't requires allegiance to the cult of personality established by the leader. Any thought of personal spirituality is squashed solely on the fact that is counterproductive to the state religion of Maoism. Example beign the Falun Gong, the Tibetan version of Buddhism, the mistreatment and persecution of Christians, the list goes on. Religious persecution is a tenet of totalitarianism held most basic, since any diversion takes the citizen's eyes off the cult of personality of the leader. See other communist states, Franco's Spain, Hitler's Germany, Hussein's Iraq, the Taliban's Afghanistan, and the Fahd's Saudi Arabia. Again, Western thought does not account for the persecution of religions, rather it is greatly opposed to it. Any government that foments that sort of baseless persecution strictly to perpetuate its own existence is most definitely not a friend.

Point 3

the example is clearly Tianneman square and the endless persecution of Chinese thinkers that have been jailed or executed for espousing Western-tinged beliefs. this recent defection only proves the thought that this country distrusts Western thought and must then "re-educate its citizens" when they have too much free thought.

Point 4

Several reasons caused the USSR to fall.

1. Exposure to Western Culture, IE the Beatles, McDonalds, et al caused the Soviets to realize there was something greater than the Party Line, and this intrigued the people. They began to investigate Western Thought. And they liked what they saw.

2. Ronald Reagan's escalation of American military forces and bulking of the American Army caused the Soviets to do the same, but because of their type of market economy, or lack thereof, they could not keep up, and bankrupted themselves in the process.

3. Western Foreign Policy towards Eastern Bloc countries dramatically changed once Poland allowed the trade union Solidarity to exist. This radically Western organization introduced, egads, Worker's Rights! into the communist totalitarian regime and urged a new era of Western Thought, and the next thing you know, Romania is revolting, Germany is united again, and BAM, the Soviets are in arrears.

Once the folks in the smaller Communist countries got a taste of capitalism, and freedom, they could not be suppressed. No matter how hard their countries attempted to blend both ideas, they are diametrically opposed, and cannot work within each other's confines.

This modern era prevents the complete control of all media and information that a Communist state requires to keep its stranglehold on its people tight. Therfore, the fact that info flows so freely will continue to work against the Red Chinese until it eventually self-destructs, just like the Soviets before them.

And forget about the current boom of Western investment in China will only continue to increase the citizen's appetite for all things Western, and hopefully bring about the downfall of the government, peacefully.

----------------------------------

In closing, if you think that in this modern era of international trade and lack of a Cold War, that countries don't have spooks at work, even in their allied countries, then you live in a fantasy world. There are most definitely forces at work attempting to gather information for their bosses, even if we the public think that there is no threat present.

Hope this didn't put ya'll to sleep!

ch3cooh · 06-18-2005, 12:44 PM

Very well put Joker!

I agree that communism is a self-defeating ideology as are totalitarian regimes. You can only turn the screws so tight before something gives. It is for this reason that I feel the next big economic power is not China but India. As China clamps down on its population India is slowly building especially in the technology sector and breaking down the red tape that kept foreign investment out.

mjgeo · 06-19-2005, 03:40 AM

From an Australian perspective, it seems more focus is on the future of Chen Yonglin and not of what China is up to.

Yonglin spoke out against China, so there is no way he can be sent back there despite China's assurances that he will not be punished. But Australia is not exactly warm to the idea of this.

Australia and China are negotiating a free trade agreement, and no doubt China will be unhappy if Australia offers refuge to someone who is speaking out against them. So Australia doesn't want to offend China, but cannot exactly give Yonglin up (I hope).

Oh, and I think there is a second Chinese national who followed suit in Australia. Not sure, just going by memory there.

**worldwidemike** · 06-19-2005, 09:30 AM

Let me just add that the seed of the defeat of any totalarian regime is in the expansion of its middle class. As China's middle class continues to grow, its tottering, doddering Old Guard is in for a fall. But honestly, I think China is communist in name only, now. They ARE totalarian, but communist...heh, heh, wink, wink, "say no more" and let's make a buck...!

worldwidemike

**omisan** · 06-19-2005, 05:13 PM

Quote:

They ARE totalarian, but communist...heh, heh, wink, wink, \"say no more\" and let's make a buck...!

They have McDonald's and Starbucks there. That's how communist "Red" China is...

**Joker** · 06-19-2005, 07:17 PM

Omi-

Prior to the fall of Soviet Russia, McDonald's established a foothold in Moscow. I've seen the documentary, its incredible how one company came into a society that had no idea whatsoever about it, and changed so much.

McD's had to establish its own cattle, crops, and suppliers, as well as factories from which to source its product within Soviet Russia. All of the sudden, there was a private employer within the state-run system, and everything changed.

As for China being totalitarian but not communist, its clear that they retain certain aspects that work within the confines of Mao's ideal society, but are eager to participate in a global economy because of its economic advantages.

Additionally, the communist experiment has failed as WWM said because of the emergence of a Middle Class. And the middle class that exists now will only continue to grow until it topples the PRC from within.

The only advantage to the PRC toppling from within as opposed to Soviet Russia- there is an established middle class coming to the forefront, and the fact that they've allowed certain aspects of western society to gain footholds (Starbucks, McD's VW-Audi Group's factories, etc) and that so many Chinese have been exposed to Hong Kong's wealth, they may have an easier time of it transitioning to a free market economy/democracy/republic.

the scary part- the military still controls much of day-to-day life in Red China. They will not go down without a fight.

**beergal** · 06-20-2005, 01:14 AM

Quote:

McD's had to establish its own cattle, crops, and suppliers, as well as factories from which to source its product within Soviet Russia. All of the sudden, there was a private employer within the state-run system, and everything changed.

your making it sound like mcdonalds brought about the end of cmmunis in the S.U.

Capatilism can only be one of the causing factirs i believe that there was a domino effect of misguided errors by Gorbachev such as the failing of the government to act when newspapers reported how shoddy the nuclear power plant was at Chernobyl a month before the explosion. There was also mass corruption in the com party caused by the rush of capitalism in to the country. There was also the failed invasion of Afghanistan to consider

**worldwidemike** · 06-20-2005, 03:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by beergal1@Jun 20 2005, 08:13 AM
There was also the failed invasion of Afghanistan to consider

And for an excellent book on that topic, read "Charlie Wilson's War" by George Crile. Walks you through the U.S. funding of the Afghani muhadeen in incredible detail...how Senator Charlie Wilson from Texas basically steamrolled the CIA into a no-holds barred bankrolling of the resistance.

And it does it without the "oh but look what terrorists they turned out to be" secondguessing so popular among people with only a sprinkling of knowledge on top of a main dish of opinon.

worldwidemike

**beergal** · 06-20-2005, 03:59 AM

Quote:

sprinkling of knowledge on top of a main dish of opinon.

mike that quote is just fabulous!

**voyd** · 06-20-2005, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Joker@Jun 19 2005, 08:16 PM
Omi-

Prior to the fall of Soviet Russia, McDonald's established a foothold in Moscow. I've seen the documentary, its incredible how one company came into a society that had no idea whatsoever about it, and changed so much.

But, so how is Russia doing now?

Cold War comic bookish dichotomies are oversimplistic and outdated, IMO. I bought into these in my younger days, myself. But, have since "taken the red pill" with actual indie research and travelling. I wrote a few posts here on the modern real-politik complexities of China, in particular. To summarize, China IS moving towards a better future - and a more capitalistic democratic one - but at her own controlled pace so it does not collapse to pieces overnight like Russia and Eastern Europe did. Many of whose citizens are now unemployed, living in fear under mafia rule with women enjoying their "freedom" as hookers or mail-order brides in order to make livings. Funny how we never see this "glasnost" aftermath televised in the US anymore...GEE WONDER WHY???

And don't forget that freedom also comes in many forms on many levels and believe it or not, Chinese even enjoy some more personal freedoms than Puritanical Americans!

As far as international "friendship," well true, COUNTRIES DON'T HAVE FRIENDS, COUNTRIES HAVE INTERESTS. That's a well-known axiom along with its corollary, "politics makes strange bedfellows." If you look through history, you'll find that to be true with all countries - heck, maybe even between people too.

And I don't know about the alleged spying in this particular case, but generally-speaking, every country has spies everywhere. Even between official "allies." I would only be surprised if some didn't. So, I'm sure China has spies around everywhere, just like every other country. But, I also know that most of the "Chinese spy" cases in the US recently (Wen Ho-Lee, Daniel Yee, Katrina Leung, smuggled Chinese "terrorists", etc) have been ridiculously paranoid racist rushes to judgement that were later found to be false alarms. I'm a little more cautious at taking ANY espionage reports in the mass media at face value, now.

The US has a huge gov-funded military-industrial complex. To maintain justification for that and continued patriotism, the US must continually finger and build up foreign enemies and create self-fulfilling prophecies.

Now, CLEARLY, these rags have manipulated these images to make them look as sinister and threatening as possible. It's ridiculous, really. The very same thing TIME did to OJ Simpson in 1994 - which caused a major criticism in journalistic ethics. Apparently, they didn't learn a damn thing and "yellow journalism" is fully acceptable here, as ever.

Well, just my humble $.02, just thought I'd add a different POV!

**MeTurk** · 06-20-2005, 08:49 AM

Chinas moving towards a way of life the heads probably don't want but the thing is their not really selling to their own, most people in China can't afford food never mind mini-motos. So China is still depending on the rich west to buy all the crap it's manufacturing for us.

The whole thing could come tumbling down around their ears if they give the city folk freedoms then try and take them back a few years down the line.

I think I might be slightly commie I'm conviced smaller communitys that take care of whatever they can like communications and power are the way forward with the state just handling transport and other lofty goals.

The problem as I see it with our democracy is that people relie to heavily on the state to provide for them, not wanting to solve problems themselfs. That's Ireland though where you can't even put up a satelite dish without getting permission (depending on which side of your house the dish will be going on)

Quote:

Because of the distrust of the West that is ingrained into many Asian cultures,

Really?? The Japanese couldn't be acused of that they seem to love meshing east and west. I haven't ever tought that Chinese people didn't trust or like me (we get alot of chinese students in Galway collages) All though maybe they where just trying to get on my good side to squezze me for information on Irelands many trade secrets and developments.

China can buy just about any information they need, them kidnapping people and bringing them back to China is alarming, but....

..Whenever an American says we need to worrie about these people or that group I take it with a pinch of salt, you do have a reputation for asumming every other national is jelous and out to get you. I'm not directing that at you Joker, it's a general thing I have about Americans and I think given past experience it's a fair one.

**Joker** · 06-20-2005, 10:07 AM

Ahh, but MeTurk, they are all out to get me. And there's a pinko behind every bush! JK! :D

Okay, I'll address a couple points and make it quick, since i gotta finish my shit here and run some errands today.

Voyd

Keep in mind that the Soviet Union fell very rapidly without a good base of freemarket thought established. The state, which had provided everything for so long, fell practically overnight. A power vacuum was created and within that, the elements of the Russian criminal world that for so long had operated under the radar of the Party took to the forefront.

Nobody expected that the USSR could go from a totalitarian regime to a capitalist democratic free market overnight except damned fools. Hell, the US' experiment in it has not been without bumps along the way, and major bumps at that (See Lincoln establishing Martial Law during the Civil War.).

As for women selling themselves into white slavery, etc. what exactly would cause such problems? There is obviously a reason that is underlying...

MeTurk

Quote:

The problem as I see it with our democracy is that people relie to heavily on the state to provide for them, not wanting to solve problems themselfs.

Carefully choose your words. Democracy would entail that your neighbors would all vote upon that satellite dish. Socialism, and the more extreme cousin of Communism would allow the Government or State to provide for you. In all aspects, the cradle to grave.

As for the distrust of the West, the Japanese have adopted the American ideal of manufacturing but retain much of their culture. The US completely rebuilt the Japanese economy post WWII (we don't do everything with a heavy hand...) yet there is an underlying mistrust of foreigners that exists in SE Asia that as much as they may not admit to such. Look at history as an example, and the colonial armies of Britain, the establishment of trade through Commodore Perry, etc for examples. As a culture Asian peoples tend not to be trusting of foreigners. However, through some money in there, and it truly becomes the universal language.

beergal

No, McD's did not singlehandedly force the USSR to fall. But the introduction of that capitalist model, along with others introduced the proletariat to a new idea, and that new idea helped to foment the change that occurred from within.

As for Afghanistan, absolutely. That coupled with the race to keep up with Reagan's defense spending initiatives caused the USSR to bankrupt itself.

Chernobyl did not cause the country to fall, however. It showed the ineptitude of Russian technology, and the fact that they were more willing to cover something as massive as that up rather than save face and admit a mistake occured. How many millions in Europe were exposed to radiation as a result of their coverup? We in the West didn't even know it happened (the spy organizations did) until well after the cat was out of the bag!

As for corruption within the Party- it existed for many years. Remember that Marx's ideal did not allow for a ruling class... yet Stalin firmly established the military as the ruling class... and absolute power corrupts, absolutely!!

Ever wonder why the Soviets always felt it necessary to parade their tanks, missiles, etc through Red Square in front of huge banners of Lenin and Stalin? Perhaps it was to reassure those in power that they had power!