Comments on Maaike Okano-Heijmans and Daniel Lanting "Europe finds the China connection", 24/07/2015
This post seems completely European centric. It is quite one sided advocate for the European standards and I am not sure that is either the best way for all European countries to work with China or indeed for a better world.
First, are the European standards the best standards with no room to improve? I think those people who hold that view may be too arrogant and out of touch.
Secondly, if it is to work with China in a collaborative way, why should only the European standards need to be followed and why not also consider a compromise between the European standards and the presumably different Chinese or Asian standards?
Given the quite diverse situations among the European countries, the benefits and otherwise of working with China may be quite different. As a result, the member states of Europe are likely to seek more cooperative solutions as opposed to the authors' advocate of a consolidated approach to hold the European standards.
On China's part, it is likely to invest in countries where maximum benefits for both partners can be expected to achieve.
PS, what a title that is quite different from its content.
Showing posts with label foreign relations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label foreign relations. Show all posts
2015-07-04
China needs to learn to be a mature world leader
Comments on Dai Yonghong and Wang Jianping "Suu Kyi visit demonstrates changing China–Myanmar relations", 4/07/2015
China, as the world’s largest nation and the second (and soon to the) largest economy, should and must gradually learn to act as a skillful world leader. The visit by Aung San Suu Kyi at the invitation of the CCP reflects in a sense a significant move in that direction. This can also be viewed as a continuation of China’s move in its relationship with both the North and South Koreas, with the latter first being established in the early 1990s, when Deng Xiaoping was still influential.
Irrespective the one party rule in China, multi party politics is a reality in many countries. China and its leadership need to have working and constructive relationships with all major parties in other countries.
China, as the world’s largest nation and the second (and soon to the) largest economy, should and must gradually learn to act as a skillful world leader. The visit by Aung San Suu Kyi at the invitation of the CCP reflects in a sense a significant move in that direction. This can also be viewed as a continuation of China’s move in its relationship with both the North and South Koreas, with the latter first being established in the early 1990s, when Deng Xiaoping was still influential.
Irrespective the one party rule in China, multi party politics is a reality in many countries. China and its leadership need to have working and constructive relationships with all major parties in other countries.
2015-06-21
A welcome change in China's foreign policy
Comments on Jonas Parello-Plesner, Washington and Mathieu Duchâtel "How Chinese nationals abroad are transforming Beijing’s foreign policy" 16/06/2015
It has been a nice and welcome change of Chinese government policy, not only by overseas Chinese nationals but also likely by other countries, given that other nationals may also get assistance by Chinese evacuation operations. As the authors argued, it is also likely to lead to China's more willing adoption of multilateral intervention for the common goods of the international communities. This is an example of globalization leading to better behaviour and policy, and possibly a demonstration of China’s peaceful rise claim.
2011-08-18
Another disappointing piece from Sheridan
Comments on Greg Sheridan "Kowtowing to the Chinese on human rights won't earn their respect", 18/08/2011, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/kowtowing-to-the-chinese-on-human-rights-wont-earn-their-respect/story-e6frg6zo-1226116945864
This piece from Greg Sheridan is disappointing, as usually the case when he wrote about China or the US.
He does not appear to have moved a bit from his cold war era mentality and thinking. Nor does he appear to have recognised the rapidly changing strategic equation between the US and China.
More disappointingly is his black and white reasoning and comments on people in Australia in particular and in the west in general regarding to their analysis on China.
In his mind, any people who are a bit hawks to speak about China are the best mind in diplomatic field, and those who are more realistic are problematic.
It is disappointing of the Australian Newspaper to have not employ a better mind in its foreign affairs editor, although in the paper is generally very good in many fields it covers.
This piece from Greg Sheridan is disappointing, as usually the case when he wrote about China or the US.
He does not appear to have moved a bit from his cold war era mentality and thinking. Nor does he appear to have recognised the rapidly changing strategic equation between the US and China.
More disappointingly is his black and white reasoning and comments on people in Australia in particular and in the west in general regarding to their analysis on China.
In his mind, any people who are a bit hawks to speak about China are the best mind in diplomatic field, and those who are more realistic are problematic.
It is disappointing of the Australian Newspaper to have not employ a better mind in its foreign affairs editor, although in the paper is generally very good in many fields it covers.
2011-04-21
John Lee's fantasy on Gillard
Comments on John Lee “PM may trump Rudd in managing China”, 21/04/2011, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/commentary/pm-may-trump-rudd-in-managing-china/story-e6frgd0x-1226042443693
Is John Lee trying to argue that Gillard who couldn't do a good job in domestic affairs as the prime minister even she had before been perceived as a competent deputy minister, but somehow can do outstanding job in foreign affairs even though she has openly acknowledged that this area is not her interest of strength?
So what is the credible line of argument for John Lee's logic?
It is beyond anyone but John Lee's belief, because it defies common sense and simple logic!
People had hoped that Gillard could do a better job as PM than Rudd did. But many if not all have been highly disappointed and their expectations have been completely shattered.
We would or should be dead should our experts do their jobs as lousy as this piece!
2010-03-19
Balance or not balance
Comments on Ernest Bower “A durable, serious and balanced US strategy for ASEAN”, 16/03/2010, http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2010/03/16/a-durable-serious-and-balanced-us-strategy-for-asean/
While it is understandable why the author has argued what in this article, the author may be assisted if considering why the US has taken that approach.
Is it that the US has got the priority wrong?
Or it has been based on cost benefit analysis?
It may be the case that you need to foregone something to maximise your objective.
Everyone will ask for attention, but the matter of fact is that not everyone will get the same attention.
While it is understandable why the author has argued what in this article, the author may be assisted if considering why the US has taken that approach.
Is it that the US has got the priority wrong?
Or it has been based on cost benefit analysis?
It may be the case that you need to foregone something to maximise your objective.
Everyone will ask for attention, but the matter of fact is that not everyone will get the same attention.
2009-09-01
We perhaps need some sensitivity internationally
Comments on Robert Gottliebsen “Building bridges with China”, 1/09/2009, http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Fall-in-Chinese-stocks-pd20090901-VFSMS?OpenDocument&src=sph
While it is important to hold up our own values, we need to be a little more sensitive to other countries' views and their problems or potential problems. Unfortunately, Rudd appeared to have either underestimated China’s tolerance to some sensitive issues or overestimated the goodwill he has had with the Chinese.
In terms of human rights issues, we haven't got a correct understanding or a full picture of the situations in China. The attitudes of our politicians are superficial and shallow at the best. Fundamentally, it is highly unlikely to be a racial issue or a religious issue as we often thought, although it is easy for us to put it in that way.
China has many so called “mass incidents” each year, perhaps counted in hundreds or thousands, where either race or religions are featured or involved are tiny and negligible. So from that for reporters or journalists to isolate them as racial or religious problems is far-reaching to an unbelievable degree. But what we see the most are those so called racial or religious related events, in China for example.
While it is important to hold up our own values, we need to be a little more sensitive to other countries' views and their problems or potential problems. Unfortunately, Rudd appeared to have either underestimated China’s tolerance to some sensitive issues or overestimated the goodwill he has had with the Chinese.
In terms of human rights issues, we haven't got a correct understanding or a full picture of the situations in China. The attitudes of our politicians are superficial and shallow at the best. Fundamentally, it is highly unlikely to be a racial issue or a religious issue as we often thought, although it is easy for us to put it in that way.
China has many so called “mass incidents” each year, perhaps counted in hundreds or thousands, where either race or religions are featured or involved are tiny and negligible. So from that for reporters or journalists to isolate them as racial or religious problems is far-reaching to an unbelievable degree. But what we see the most are those so called racial or religious related events, in China for example.
2009-08-27
Sheridan is today on a show of ignorance, again
Comments on Greg Sheridan “Soulmate for Rudd on Tokyo horizon”, 27/08/2009, http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25986134-5013460,00.html
The end few paragraphs only show the true purposes and characters of the article’s author. They display his die hard mentality of the cold war era.
There is no question that we Australia should have a good relationship with Japan, given the historical links between the two countries and Japan’s importance in Asia in general and to Australia in particular. However, using the relationship with Japan as a tool to contain China is an extremely bad idea and has been proven to be bad abandoned even by the US.
For Sheridan to advocate such an outdated and ill-conceived and evil spirited idea is totally unhelpful to and against Australia’s national interest. It is even worse for such a person to argue for that bad idea in the guise of Australia’s national interest at a time when there are some temporary difficulties in the relations between Australia and China.
That idea, perhaps with its carrier, should and must be thrown into a historical rubbish bin. It has no place in Australia.
It is difficult to understand why that idea could have passed the editorial test of a national mass media such as The Australian. But it happened and happens fairly often, because Sheridan has been the foreign reporter or editor of the Australian. One can only imagine how many people have been misled by an outdated foreign reporter on foreign affairs issues.
Rudd should pay no attention to or take any comfort in Sheridan’s view on foreign affairs especially when they are related to China, otherwise, small errors in judgement can become disproportionately large blunders.
The end few paragraphs only show the true purposes and characters of the article’s author. They display his die hard mentality of the cold war era.
There is no question that we Australia should have a good relationship with Japan, given the historical links between the two countries and Japan’s importance in Asia in general and to Australia in particular. However, using the relationship with Japan as a tool to contain China is an extremely bad idea and has been proven to be bad abandoned even by the US.
For Sheridan to advocate such an outdated and ill-conceived and evil spirited idea is totally unhelpful to and against Australia’s national interest. It is even worse for such a person to argue for that bad idea in the guise of Australia’s national interest at a time when there are some temporary difficulties in the relations between Australia and China.
That idea, perhaps with its carrier, should and must be thrown into a historical rubbish bin. It has no place in Australia.
It is difficult to understand why that idea could have passed the editorial test of a national mass media such as The Australian. But it happened and happens fairly often, because Sheridan has been the foreign reporter or editor of the Australian. One can only imagine how many people have been misled by an outdated foreign reporter on foreign affairs issues.
Rudd should pay no attention to or take any comfort in Sheridan’s view on foreign affairs especially when they are related to China, otherwise, small errors in judgement can become disproportionately large blunders.
2009-08-14
An ignorant Aussie polly
Comments on Michael Danby “Let's not appease Beijing”, 14/08/2009, http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25925627-5015664,00.html
It is appalling to see an Australian Labor federal politician is so, arrogant, ignorant and biased on prejudice on issues related to China. It is surprising to see a person with such a view of China still exists more than thirty years after 30 years of reforms and opening in China. It seems that Mr Michael Danby has lived in a complete isolated and different world during this period.
It is true that China is a different country with quite a different system. But China has changed enormously compared to what it was more than 30 years ago. Its economy is a market economy. It is not too much different from the Australian one and certainly not too much different from most Western European ones.
Mr Danby says that China is not a normal country. What is his definition of a normal country? Is that definition normal or from a same mind? One would ask. An abnormal person may see normal things as abnormal. That appears to be the case here.
There are differences in economic structure, in the share of public enterprises and in government policies. Can Mr Danby say the Australian economy is the same as the US economy in every aspect? Every adult with a same mind would know that they are different.
Mr Danby said so many things about China, but none of them makes sense. He appears to be on the charge in leading the Rudd government's poor encounter with China, one of the most important bilateral relations to Australia.
It is appalling to see an Australian Labor federal politician is so, arrogant, ignorant and biased on prejudice on issues related to China. It is surprising to see a person with such a view of China still exists more than thirty years after 30 years of reforms and opening in China. It seems that Mr Michael Danby has lived in a complete isolated and different world during this period.
It is true that China is a different country with quite a different system. But China has changed enormously compared to what it was more than 30 years ago. Its economy is a market economy. It is not too much different from the Australian one and certainly not too much different from most Western European ones.
Mr Danby says that China is not a normal country. What is his definition of a normal country? Is that definition normal or from a same mind? One would ask. An abnormal person may see normal things as abnormal. That appears to be the case here.
There are differences in economic structure, in the share of public enterprises and in government policies. Can Mr Danby say the Australian economy is the same as the US economy in every aspect? Every adult with a same mind would know that they are different.
Mr Danby said so many things about China, but none of them makes sense. He appears to be on the charge in leading the Rudd government's poor encounter with China, one of the most important bilateral relations to Australia.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
