China

[Huxley]

I hope this is not too off topic- I believe it not to be but: How many of us who post here have been to China, or are really familiar enough with it to make heads or tails about what it going on?

The reason I ask is because, for me, all this info; however interesting, can only be looked at as gobbledygook for I have very poor references to modern China and as such have little ability to discern good voices in modern journalism about its state. My intuition tells me I'm not alone in this sentiment, which is why it's so easy to read 'experts' warning us of impending invasion on the very same day we may read that Beijing is about to collapse. They may as well be telling me about Eldorado, or SpiceWorld for all I know...

So, are there any personal ancedotes about China floating about in this forum; where are the good sources; can someone suggest something to me?

Quote from John Derbyshire, who describes himself as “something of an authority on China punditry—an Old “Old China Hand” Hand, as it were”:

Jasper Becker, in his book about the Mao famines, tells of a reporter in China in the 1920s responding to a request from his editor for "the bottom facts." His reply: "There is no bottom in China, and no facts." Anyone who has engaged with this vast, ancient nation will return a hearty "Amen" to that.

If you'd like a more up-to-date illustration of this central truth about understanding China, I refer you to Richard McGregor's fine book The Party, which came out last year. Page 199, quote:

In September 2005, CLSA, the emerging markets brokerage based in Hong Kong, produced a thick report about how entrepreneurs had taken over as the motor of economic growth in China. They said: "The private sector now contributes more than 70 percent of GDP and employs 75 percent of the workforce …" A week later, a rival and equally respected China research unit at UBS, the Swiss bank, put out a rejoinder, saying the private sector "accounts for no more than 30 percent of the economy, whichever indicator you use."

So does private enterprise account for 70 percent of China's economy, or 30 percent?

Someone's asking me?

"There is no bottom in China, and no facts."

Having engaged with China a bit over the years, I basically agree with that. Still, there is a vast amount of high-quality China scholarship, journalism and commentary out there to help the average befuddled Westerner get a rough idea of what's going on. My personal favorites:

-American writer Peter Hessler's fine trilogy of China books - River Town, Oracle Bones, and Country Driving - is practically required reading.

-The New Yorker's China correspondent, Evan Osnos, has a good blog (though it seems he's not posting much anymore, after leaving China) and his essays, many of which are available for free, are worthwhile.

-American sinologist Perry Link has a deeply informed perspective on Chinese politics and intellectual life.

-The Atlantic's China channel often has excellent stuff. You might also like The Economist's China blog Analects.

-The eminent Italian journalist Francesco Sicsi, who collaborated with Spenglerman on "US's road to recovery runs through Beijing" in 2008, is a cultured and insightful voice. You can search for his name on Asia Times Online - unfortunately his articles are not properly indexed.

This list is rather Anglo-centric, I know, but perhaps a good place to start. For a Chinese perspective, I suggest you begin with novelist Yu Hua's remarkable set of essays, China in Ten Words.

[Ibrahim]

Quote from John Derbyshire, who describes himself as “something of an authority on China punditry—an Old “Old China Hand” Hand, as it were”:

A quick lesson I learned is that any expat who refers to themselves as a "China hand" is full of $hit. Speaking of John Derbyshire, I usually describe him as "that guy who got fired from the National Review for posting a racist article on a white supremacists website."

Jasper Becker, in his book about the Mao famines, tells of a reporter in China in the 1920s responding to a request from his editor for "the bottom facts." His reply: "There is no bottom in China, and no facts." Anyone who has engaged with this vast, ancient nation will return a hearty "Amen" to that.

If you'd like a more up-to-date illustration of this central truth about understanding China, I refer you to Richard McGregor's fine book The Party, which came out last year. Page 199, quote:

In September 2005, CLSA, the emerging markets brokerage based in Hong Kong, produced a thick report about how entrepreneurs had taken over as the motor of economic growth in China. They said: "The private sector now contributes more than 70 percent of GDP and employs 75 percent of the workforce …" A week later, a rival and equally respected China research unit at UBS, the Swiss bank, put out a rejoinder, saying the private sector "accounts for no more than 30 percent of the economy, whichever indicator you use."

So does private enterprise account for 70 percent of China's economy, or 30 percent?

Someone's asking me?

"There is no bottom in China, and no facts."

Well one or both of those numbers are wrong. This isn't a problem with inscrutable asiatics and enigmatic celestials, is the problem if trying to figure out exactly what's going on in a massive and constantly changing society and economy. Moreover one that we're completely foreign to. You don't need to be an "old China hand" to realize this.

Having engaged with China a bit over the years, I basically agree with that. Still, there is a vast amount of high-quality China scholarship, journalism and commentary out there to help the average befuddled Westerner get a rough idea of what's going on. My personal favorites:

...

-American sinologist Perry Link has a deeply informed perspective on Chinese politics and intellectual life.

Link is useful because he's a literary critic, and he can say this or that about contemporary Chinese literature and thus society. Its not qualitative rather than quantitative, so there's less room for huge errors and the field is more subjective as a rule.

This list is rather Anglo-centric, I know, but perhaps a good place to start.

I don't think there is anything wrong with this per se. We're Westerners, we mostly read English. As long as the authors in question don't fall into the classic Orientalist traps then they are naturally going to be the most useful resource for us to use. A foreign observer will never see all the angles, but that's true of anywhere and its still a great start.

[Ibrahim]

the ugly reality is that war does solve alot of problems in an overpopulated and resource hungry world with increasing amounts of angry plebs looking for an outlet

I don't believe this to be true, or at least not in the present day.

[noddy]

the ugly reality is that war does solve alot of problems in an overpopulated and resource hungry world with increasing amounts of angry plebs looking for an outlet

I don't believe this to be true, or at least not in the present day.

im fairly sure their has been large group of sensible people saying this before every big war.

dont get me wrong, im certainly not in favour of it or even think its a garunteed outcome i just think its an awfully common response in history when power bases are shifting and countries are getting ugly internally due to angry masses and lack of vision for fixes.

[Ibrahim]

the ugly reality is that war does solve alot of problems in an overpopulated and resource hungry world with increasing amounts of angry plebs looking for an outlet

I don't believe this to be true, or at least not in the present day.

im fairly sure their has been large group of sensible people saying this before every big war.

dont get me wrong, im certainly not in favour of it or even think its a garunteed outcome i just think its an awfully common response in history when power bases are shifting and countries are getting ugly internally due to angry masses and lack of vision for fixes.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that there will never be another major war. I'm saying that it isn't an efficient way for a nation to acquire resources or occupy/cull "surplus" population. Though it is proving to be a good way for individuals to get rich, which almost guarantees more in the future.

There's no benefit to China in starting a real war, though the possibility of internal strife or even civil war is always there. This seems to be the theme for the near future: civil wars over ideology.

[noddy]

the ugly reality is that war does solve alot of problems in an overpopulated and resource hungry world with increasing amounts of angry plebs looking for an outlet

I don't believe this to be true, or at least not in the present day.

im fairly sure their has been large group of sensible people saying this before every big war.

dont get me wrong, im certainly not in favour of it or even think its a garunteed outcome i just think its an awfully common response in history when power bases are shifting and countries are getting ugly internally due to angry masses and lack of vision for fixes.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that there will never be another major war. I'm saying that it isn't an efficient way for a nation to acquire resources or occupy/cull "surplus" population. Though it is proving to be a good way for individuals to get rich, which almost guarantees more in the future.

There's no benefit to China in starting a real war, though the possibility of internal strife or even civil war is always there. This seems to be the theme for the near future: civil wars over ideology.

what about all the folks that fervently believe the west in general and america in specific have been riding easy on the control of the international system acquired from being the victors of ww2.

its not such a bad thing to own the international market and control its legal system so why wouldnt a more hawkish chinese xenophobe contemplate the benefits of such an outcome ?

[Ibrahim]

the ugly reality is that war does solve alot of problems in an overpopulated and resource hungry world with increasing amounts of angry plebs looking for an outlet

I don't believe this to be true, or at least not in the present day.

im fairly sure their has been large group of sensible people saying this before every big war.

dont get me wrong, im certainly not in favour of it or even think its a garunteed outcome i just think its an awfully common response in history when power bases are shifting and countries are getting ugly internally due to angry masses and lack of vision for fixes.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that there will never be another major war. I'm saying that it isn't an efficient way for a nation to acquire resources or occupy/cull "surplus" population. Though it is proving to be a good way for individuals to get rich, which almost guarantees more in the future.

There's no benefit to China in starting a real war, though the possibility of internal strife or even civil war is always there. This seems to be the theme for the near future: civil wars over ideology.

what about all the folks that fervently believe the west in general and america in specific have been riding easy on the control of the international system acquired from being the victors of ww2.

its not such a bad thing to own the international market and control its legal system so why wouldnt a more hawkish chinese xenophobe contemplate the benefits of such an outcome ?

The victors of WW2 were not the instigators, and I would hesitate to try it again in the age of the hydrogen bomb.

Plus, the benefits to the US as "hegemon" were largely based on domestic factors they could have achieved without all of the expense/hassle of running a half-assed empire. Do the Chinese want to build and sell each other cars, or invade Vietnam? I don't know what they'll pick, but I know what I'd choose. I guess they could try both...

[noddy]

heres hoping it does all stay sensible and rational (oh i love that word).

i dont think it will be any one thing per se, it will be an escalating chain of stoopid that is most likely triggered in the middle east that causes all sorts of factors to fall into place.

a dash of energy security, a few pinches of war machine profiteering, a teaspoon of civil war and then mix well with a bit o nationalism.

[Huxley]

Quote from John Derbyshire, who describes himself as “something of an authority on China punditry—an Old “Old China Hand” Hand, as it were”:

A quick lesson I learned is that any expat who refers to themselves as a "China hand" is full of $hit. Speaking of John Derbyshire, I usually describe him as "that guy who got fired from the National Review for posting a racist article on a white supremacists website."

Well, maybe that's why Derbyshire doesn't refer to himself as a "China hand." He refers to himself as an "Old 'Old China Hand' Hand." The difference is that the former is an authority on China - something Derbyshire specifically admits he is not - while the latter is an authority on China punditry, i.e. what other Westerners have written and said about China over the years. I think Derbyshire is probably justified in claiming that rather amusing title for himself.

Well one or both of those numbers are wrong. This isn't a problem with inscrutable asiatics and enigmatic celestials, is the problem if trying to figure out exactly what's going on in a massive and constantly changing society and economy. Moreover one that we're completely foreign to. You don't need to be an "old China hand" to realize this.

Nobody used those racist smears, although it's interesting that your statement of the problem, "trying to figure out exactly what's going on in a massive and constantly changing society and economy. Moreover one that we're completely foreign to," is a more or less precise expression of Derbyshire's point.

The difficulty with defining the private sector in China is that it remains unclear exactly who owns what. In the above-cited Richard McGregor book, Yasheng Huang, a Chinese-born professor of international management at MIT, says he still doesn't know how large the private sector is after years of studying the issue: "This lack of knowledge itself is telling, and due to the fact that the private sector is still considered somewhat illegitimate."

Having engaged with China a bit over the years, I basically agree with that. Still, there is a vast amount of high-quality China scholarship, journalism and commentary out there to help the average befuddled Westerner get a rough idea of what's going on. My personal favorites:

...

-American sinologist Perry Link has a deeply informed perspective on Chinese politics and intellectual life.

Link is useful because he's a literary critic, and he can say this or that about contemporary Chinese literature and thus society. Its not qualitative rather than quantitative, so there's less room for huge errors and the field is more subjective as a rule.

More than that, Link is erudite and well-acquainted with many of China's leading intellectuals. In 1989 he helped the astrophysicist and pro-democracy activist Fang Lizhi take refuge in the U.S. embassy in June 1989, which no doubt played a role in getting Link blacklisted from China since 1996.

This list is rather Anglo-centric, I know, but perhaps a good place to start.

I don't think there is anything wrong with this per se. We're Westerners, we mostly read English. As long as the authors in question don't fall into the classic Orientalist traps then they are naturally going to be the most useful resource for us to use. A foreign observer will never see all the angles, but that's true of anywhere and its still a great start.

Indeed, you use the tools you have.

[Endovelico]

the ugly reality is that war does solve alot of problems in an overpopulated and resource hungry world with increasing amounts of angry plebs looking for an outlet

I don't believe this to be true, or at least not in the present day.

im fairly sure their has been large group of sensible people saying this before every big war.

dont get me wrong, im certainly not in favour of it or even think its a garunteed outcome i just think its an awfully common response in history when power bases are shifting and countries are getting ugly internally due to angry masses and lack of vision for fixes.

A lot of our behaviour is instinctive, not rational. And we are subject to the same natural biological processes as any other species. Crowded rats in a cage will go berserk and kill each other. Those instincts and mechanisms may very well force another major war on us, to create a bit more living room for the survivors. The point is, how many Chinese, Americans and Europeans will have to go for a new balance to be reached? Half the present population? That would be in excess of one billion people. How would the US fare with 150 million people and its infrastructures destroyed? How would 250 million Europeans survive with their economy gone? Would 600 million Chinese be able to keep their country unified? Interesting times ahead, indeed...

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


Japan Ready to Counter China’s Power

.

In an exclusive, wide-ranging interview with The Journal, Mr. Abe also defended his program of economic reforms against growing criticism that the package lacks substance—though he offered few details of new programs, or a timetable, that anxious foreign investors have been seeking.

“I’ve realized that Japan is expected to exert leadership not just on the economic front, but also in the field of security in the Asia-Pacific,” Mr. Abe told The Wall Street Journal, referring to his meetings with the region’s leaders at a series of summits earlier this month.

“There are concerns that China is attempting to change the status quo by force, rather than by rule of law. But if China opts to take that path, then it won’t be able to emerge peacefully,” he added.

“So it shouldn’t take that path, and many nations expect Japan to strongly assert that. And they hope that as a result, China will take responsible action in the international community.”

.

.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.

Continuing on the same theme . . .

BBC | Hell hath no furry like a Chinese mistress scorned . . .

.

China's mistress culture - three different types of women are required

.

There is something I must tell you about China: It is rather morally creative in the usage of its women.

There isn't a hotel, massage parlor, ktv, or conference hall in town that isn't frequented by "little sisters" (xiaojie), escort personnel (baopo), hostesses (peinv), or other types of prostitutes (jinv). There's a name for any relationship a female plaything may fall into:

Here are the "second wives" (er laopo), women [who may have family or kids but] who indulge in extramarital affairs with men, married or not. Then we have "the thirds" (disanzhe) who are casual love affairs only.

The queen of all female roles, however - in direct competition with the faithful "wife" (laopo)- is the "mistress" (qingren). The mistress, a femme fatal, not only embodies adventure and carnal pleasures, but is also the surest status symbol a man can wish for: She shows you have money!

Technically, only married men can have mistresses; otherwise, if the gentleman is single, we would refer to his female company - however many of them- as simple "girlfriends" (nvpengyou). The Chinese tradition of maintaining mistresses is based on what good Christians would refer to as adultery - a sin; yet in China it is mere custom - a habit.

Consequently, when Westerners first come to China, they are utterly perplexed by the strict division here between marriage, romance, and sex - for which, in Chinese thinking, of course (at least) three different types of women are required.

Xu Qiya, a Jiangsu party official, had clearly set a local record with 140 mistresses; we know because he kept a sex diary; but he isn't an inventor: In fact, I have yet to meet a dulcet Chinese girl who has not been offered a gift from a married man at some time. At least, that's what they told me.

Accepting any gift from a married man, whether it being a handbag, jewelry, a car, a trip to the beaches of Hainan, is the unspoken agreement of becoming the mistress of that benefactor. It is the lure and excitement of an extraordinary life-style - luxurious, free, illicit, and irresponsible - that drives ever more 20-somethings not to marry, or at least to postpone it until their bodies become less marketable.

Those entrepreneurial women, of course, fill the pool of potential future mistresses in China to the brim. If a woman is not married by the age of 26, she "expired" and is usually stigmatized as "leftover woman" (shengnv).

Now let us talk about the situation of the Chinese married man. Post-marital infidelity is encouraged in China just as pre-marital sex is encouraged in Europe. In comparison to the West, only very few wives in China will file for divorce upon discovery of her husband's infidelity. It is rather sad.

In China, sex and power are a pair. State-run Xinhua News recently found that 95% of all corrupt officials in China also kept mistresses. And Tom Doctoroff, an economist, estimates that second wives probably account for one-third of China's entire consumption of luxury goods.

Let us talk about China's capital, Beijing. From top to bottom, it isn't a place for connubial happiness: It's a very patriarchal society (there is mistress culture, but no such things as mister culture), and some of the most powerful men, including the Communist Party of China, create and procreate here, trailed by legions of businessmen, scholars, diplomats, and entrepreneurs, who mostly see no problem in renting a maid for warming their pillows.

In fact, the magazine Business Insider quoted a vice-ministerial-level official who insisted that "there is no official at his level who doesn't have at least a few lovers" It is a must-have.

The victim is the young woman of China. As her feelings for any particular man dwindles (they are all cheaters, no?), she too becomes emotionally detached, and regards being a mistress as a form of business, or transactions of favors - a form of consumerism.

There are several grades of "maintaining" (baoyang) a mistress: The cheapest, of course, is to bed a university student. She is young, flexible, poor, and full of romantic ideas in her head. She will eventually marry a fellow classmate, but until then she may want to sneak out and bag a sugar daddy in Wudaokou, Zhongguancun, or Shaoyang district.

Next is the working woman. She is independent, has experience, and owns or rents her own place. (She might be even married, but, with her husband banging the next hostess at the local karaoke bar, she probably thinks what the heck.)

Perhaps the highest cost of maintenance goes to the trophy mistress (huaping, a "flower pot"). Her goal and profession is to conquer the most powerful man she can find at a time. It's a life-style - it's her religion. Enormous financial resources, and a good amount of drama, are necessary to snag such high-profile gold digger.

It has been observed that many Chinese women opt out of the Chinese tradition of cheating husbands and try to find a foreigner, preferably from a traditional monogamous society like Western Europe. Those "foreigners" (laowai) may also cheat on their spouse, of course, but for individual reasons, not, as is the case in China, as a social prescription or norm.

And so the mistress culture of China lives on, from vulgar to lustrous and glittering, and if the endless supply of young women for successful men does not ebb - and if women don't divorce - the husband and his lovers will happily drive the market for luxury goods, hotel rooms, and publications about mistresses, and, almost as an afterthought, minister to their ethical ruin.

.

.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


X8w0xNReBcw


Iranian People Of China (中国的伊朗人)

.

Western Part of Xinjiang was within Sassanid Empires borders, around 450 A.D. and the inhabitants of these regions were referred to as "Cina-deva-gotra" (from Sanskrit). The name literally means "descendant of Han and the sun-god"

The Tokharians (Yuezhi) and The Saka (Scythians) were the first group of People who settled Tarim-Basin. They were both indo-european people.
We know of the language of the Saka via the kingdoms of Khotan and Tumxuk in what is now Xinjiang, China. The language and dialects are classified as a part of the Middle Iranian family of languages.Other languages in this group are Khwarezmian(Chorasmian), Sogdian and Bactrian. Originally, these languages would have all derived from the language of the Zoroastrian scriptures, the Avesta. According to Litvinsky and Vorobyova-Desyatovskaya, both the Saka dialects share features with modern Wakhi and Pashto. Many Prakrit terms were borrowed from Khotanese into the Tocharian languages. The Sakan language is also known as Khotanese. Khotanese itself is linguistically divided into old and new Khotanese. The Tochrians and the Khotanese Saka would eventually mix and become one group. This happend due to the successive invasions by Turko Monglo groups such as Xiongnu, Uyghur, Kyrgyz. These Tukic Nations absorbed and integrated much of the original Iranic people of Xinjiang.

.

.

[Ibrahim]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranians_in_China

From the tenth to twelfth century, Persian women were to be found in Guangzhou (Canton), some of them in the tenth century like Mei Zhu in the harem of the Emperor Liu Chang, and in the twelfth century large numbers of Persian women lived there, noted for wearing multiple earrings and "quarrelsome dispositions".[1][2]

[Ibrahim]

Hmm. I didn't know about any of this.

http://world.time.com/2013/07/17/in-hon ... es-demise/

Each Oct. 12, Homyar Nasirabadwala, the gaunt, white-haired priest of Hong Kong’s Parsi community, pays a visit to the University of Hong Kong to conduct a brief ceremony of thanks on the birthday of its founding benefactor. Standing alone with his head bowed, in a crepuscular corridor next to a broad, stone staircase, he looks up at a bronze bust of Sir Hormusjee Nowrojee Mody, a Parsi who was the principal donor of funds for the university’s establishment in 1911. The priest raises his arms and hangs a garland around the bust, whispering a prayer as he does so.

A group of students walk by, chatting and giggling. On being asked if they know who the bust is of, they shake their heads and walk off. Nearby, a young woman gazing at her smartphone confesses to having no idea who founded the university. “The government?” she ventures.

Nasirabadwala is used to conducting his ceremony in the shadows. “Not a soul turns up because nobody is aware of it,” he shrugs. “People pass the staircase and I don’t think they even take a second look at the bust there.”

It isn’t just Mody’s contribution to Hong Kong that’s in danger of being forgotten, but the contributions of all the old Parsi families, like the Rutonjees, Shroffs, Parekhs, Powrees and many others. Together they helped forge the banking, ferry and academic systems of this Chinese city, but they are now slipping through the historical net — ignored by dominant historical narratives that either focus on British colonial rule or establish the city in a broader Chinese context, but gloss over the fact that then, as now, Hong Kong has not just been British or Han Chinese but a place of many cultures and ethnic groups.

[Typhoon]

The Law of Unintended Consequences in action:

China discovers that pollution makes it really hard to spy on people

[Azrael]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranians_in_China

From the tenth to twelfth century, Persian women were to be found in Guangzhou (Canton), some of them in the tenth century like Mei Zhu in the harem of the Emperor Liu Chang, and in the twelfth century large numbers of Persian women lived there, noted for wearing multiple earrings and "quarrelsome dispositions".[1][2]

Sounds like fun

[Typhoon]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranians_in_China

From the tenth to twelfth century, Persian women were to be found in Guangzhou (Canton), some of them in the tenth century like Mei Zhu in the harem of the Emperor Liu Chang, and in the twelfth century large numbers of Persian women lived there, noted for wearing multiple earrings and "quarrelsome dispositions".[1][2]

Sounds like fun

Sounds like my former Iranian girlfriend . . .

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


Chinese Investors Expect a Baby Boom


nice WSJ article


.

[Heracleum Persicum]

eHUD5U8LZko

[Taboo]

So the pattern for future Chinese action in its near-abroad is set: unilateral action based on aggressive military escalation. Japan will likely bitch and moan this time, but acquiesce the new de facto reality concerning Senkaku/Diaoyu. This will further embolden China, and lead to similar action in the South China Sea. Eventually, this must lead to a Danzig moment where the victim is no longer willing to back off.

The only people crazy enough to call China on it that I can think off offhand are the Vietnamese.

[Ibrahim]

So the pattern for future Chinese action in its near-abroad is set: unilateral action based on aggressive military escalation. Japan will likely bitch and moan this time, but acquiesce the new de facto reality concerning Senkaku/Diaoyu. This will further embolden China, and lead to similar action in the South China Sea. Eventually, this must lead to a Danzig moment where the victim is no longer willing to back off.

The only people crazy enough to call China on it that I can think off offhand are the Vietnamese.

Everybody sweats this old-school communist diplomacy too much.

[Doc]

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/20 ... ge-control

After Stingy Aid to Typhoon Victims, China Tries Damage Control
By Bruce Einhorn November 20, 2013
A 17-member disaster relief team from the China Red Cross prepares to depart for the Philippines, in Beijing, on Nov. 20

Photograph by Ng Han Guan/AP Photo

A 17-member disaster relief team from the China Red Cross prepares to depart for the Philippines, in Beijing, on Nov. 20

With a relief team finally on its way to the Philippines, China is trying to control the damage from its petty response to the Typhoon Haiyan tragedy.

The Chinese group is getting there late because of political differences between the two governments. The storm may have killed thousands of people and brought to a halt a large swath of China’s neighbor to the south, but since the world’s new economic giant is feuding with the Philippines about disputed islands in the South China Sea, the leadership in Beijing decided to take advantage of a humanitarian catastrophe to teach President Benigno Aquino who’s boss.

China initially offered a paltry $100,000 in aid and, after an international outcry, raised that figure to $1.6 million. It’s as if Dr. Evil decided to go into the disaster-relief business: “One point six million dollars!” Hence the headlines worldwide expressing outrage that China, the world’s second-largest economy, was offering less money than do-it-yourself furniture maker Ikea.

Not the ideal message for a country trying to persuade its neighbors of its trustworthiness. China’s ham-fisted response to Haiyan is a welcome gift for Japanese Premier Shinzo Abe, who has spent much of his first year in office touring countries in the region that have good reason to worry about China’s intentions.

That’s probably why China’s officials and media are trying to change the narrative. Chinese relief workers are on their way to the Philippines now, China’s Foreign Ministry announced today—a week and a half after Haiyan hit. But not to worry, some Chinese blankets and tents started arriving on Monday and Tuesday. “China will also send a medical boat Peace Ark, which belongs to the Chinese navy, to the Philippines,” the Xinhua news agency reported today. “The boat, which has good medical rescue capability and maneuverability, will depart soon.”

Even as the Chinese relief effort finally gets underway, there’s a new message: China is actually the victim here, hurt by Philippine bureaucrats. According to Xinhua, China was slow because the Philippine government hadn’t given its blessing. Indeed, the state-run news agency reported yesterday the emergency medical team was “ready to go” and would “depart for the disaster areas immediately, once China gets permission from the Philippines.”
Story: Japan's Abe Looks for Asian Allies to Say No to China

Turns out it’s not just the Philippines that undermined China: Americans and Japanese also proved all too eager to show up the Chinese in their own backyard. “Haiyan, the strongest typhoon to make landfall in recorded history, has killed over 3,976 people in the Philippines,” commentator Guan Yan wrote in yesterday’s Global Times, the tabloid affiliated with the People’s Daily. “But from the start, the size of the rescue package sent to Haiyan victims has been seen as a race.”

So yes, the Americans offered more than $20 million, and the Japanese were generous, too, but it’s not fair to say China’s response was miserly. “China’s aid to the Philippines was criticized as ‘meager’ and not matching its economic power,” Guan Yan continues. “In the future, China will face increasing pressure to take more responsibilities in regional affairs. For both the government and the public, there is a learning curve.”

In other words, China is new to the whole be-a-responsible-global-player business. Next typhoon, maybe the country will get it right.

[Taboo]

So the pattern for future Chinese action in its near-abroad is set: unilateral action based on aggressive military escalation. Japan will likely bitch and moan this time, but acquiesce the new de facto reality concerning Senkaku/Diaoyu. This will further embolden China, and lead to similar action in the South China Sea. Eventually, this must lead to a Danzig moment where the victim is no longer willing to back off.

The only people crazy enough to call China on it that I can think off offhand are the Vietnamese.

Everybody sweats this old-school communist diplomacy too much.

US responds by flying bombers through the "extended defense" area. Unexpectedly gutsy. I wonder if Barry approved this.
http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 041_1.html

[Ibrahim]

So the pattern for future Chinese action in its near-abroad is set: unilateral action based on aggressive military escalation. Japan will likely bitch and moan this time, but acquiesce the new de facto reality concerning Senkaku/Diaoyu. This will further embolden China, and lead to similar action in the South China Sea. Eventually, this must lead to a Danzig moment where the victim is no longer willing to back off.

The only people crazy enough to call China on it that I can think off offhand are the Vietnamese.

Everybody sweats this old-school communist diplomacy too much.

US responds by flying bombers through the "extended defense" area. Unexpectedly gutsy. I wonder if Barry approved this.
http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 041_1.html

Doesn't take much in the way of guts. Just another act in the world's most expensive sideshow.

This isn't even remotely scary. I'm refuse to be concerned until somebody sinks a warship. Even then, North Korea's done that a few times and so far nothing.