| What lies behind Beijing's reservations about an Obama Presidency |
|
|
| Written by Willy Lam | |
| Tuesday, 04 November 2008 | |
 photo by Keith Kamisugi
This goes beyond the Chinese leadership's wariness about the Democratic Party's traditional ties with big labor. This was manifested last week, when Senator Barack Obama accused China of unfair trade practices, which, he said, were "directly related to manipulation of its currency’s value." Before reaching the White House in 1992, Bill Clinton also tried to please labor unions by blasting China's huge trade surplus; similar charges were repeated by Hillary Clinton before her campaign fizzled out last June. Yet US-China relations went along very well during the eight-year Clinton presidency, to the point where the two countries were close to cementing a "constructive strategic partnership." And hiccups in bilateral ties occurred not over trade but diplomatic and geopolitical issues such as the US bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Yugoslavia during the 1999 Kosovo crisis. More significantly, the power equation has shifted in China's favor in the past decade, making it very unlikely that an Obama presidency, if it indeed comes off tomorrow, would create inordinate troubles for China over trade issues. For one thing, Washington has become more dependent on Beijing, which already holds close to $600 million worth of treasury bills, to buy more US government bonds. It seems clear that the Hu Jintao administration's misgivings about Obama are based on two factors: the African-American’s ability to break through racial barriers to seize the highest office in the US; and Obama’s probable abandonment of President George W Bush's "neoconservative" foreign and defense policy, which is seconded by Senator John McCain. An Obama victory would debunk decades of Chinese propaganda about white supremacy in the US and Washington’s alleged violations of the human rights of minorities in America. Much more significantly is the so-called mirror effect: in China, members of ethnic minorities, especially Tibetans and Uighurs, have been barred from top regional positions, let alone senior national slots. For example, it has been an unbroken tradition since 1949 that the party secretaries of Tibet and Xinjiang must be Han Chinese. It is perhaps for this reason that according to diplomatic sources in Beijing, the CCP’s Propaganda Department last month asked major media and websites to tone down reporting about Obama, who has a surprisingly large number of fans among the country’s estimated 220 million Netizens. More important, Beijing has been the major beneficiary of eight years of Bush-style unilateralism, which has resulted in American forces being bogged down in Afghanistan and Irag – and the depletion of Washington’s soft power. The Hu administration has deftly taken advantage of the decline of American clout – in regions ranging from Asean to Africa and Latin America – to boost its global reach. Needless to say, the CCP leadership stands to gain if McCain were to continue Bush’s security and foreign policy. This is despite the fact that a McCain presidency would probably mean an exacerbation of the so-called “anti-China encirclement policy,” a reference to Washington trying to “contain” China with the help of Asia-Pacific allies including Japan, Australia and, beginning last year, India. Thanks to the Illinois senator’s apparent popularity in Europe, Asia and even Latin America, an Obama White House could significantly improve relations with a number of countries that feel neglected or slighted by Bush’s unilateralism. And with Obama having spent part of his childhood in Indonesia, it is possible that his foreign policy would put more emphasis on restoring ties with Asean, an important bloc of countries that the Eurocentric Bush administration has largely ignored. Given the increasing competition between the world’s sole superpower and its fast-rising quasi-superpower, Beijing seems to have solid ground for its doubts, if not suspicions, about an Obama presidency. Comments
(7)
China is NOT an enemy
written by Ricky Ong , November 06, 2008
China is NOT an enemy. USA should treat China as a strategic partner. Although China is not perfect, and has a long way to go to be a free and democratic country,it has come a long way and is continuing to make progress. We should judge China by its journeyand not a spot point. It isnot easy to keep China in one piece as it is constantly being pulled apart by vested internal forces as well as by external interference. I don't think that the USA government would tolerate any of its states trying to declare independence.Would the USA allow Puerto Rico, Hawaii, Alaska, California or Texas to declare independence? Places like Tibet or Xinchiang has been part of China centuries before the USA was formed. What China needs to do is to allow for greater freedom for all their citizens of all their provinces and regions, but to keep the country intact and not allow any breakaway regions. On their own, the regions will be weak, but as a united country China can be strong.
Votes: +0
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Because China is the enemy of man
written by nanheyangrouchuan , November 06, 2008
And the shift in power will be away from the Goldman Sachs foreign policy re China and towards a more humanitarian policy. India will be added to the "special friends in Asia" list along with Japan, Taiwan and SK to keep China from infecting humanity with its poisoned version of leadership.
Votes: +1
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Reality sinks in
written by Ricky Ong , November 05, 2008
God have mercy on Obama! Immediately after the celebration party, Obama will have to grapple with the mountain of problems that he just inherited from Bush. And the people who voted for him, or didn't vote for him, are demanding for immediate solutions (and that is very American). As for the China equation, Obama will quickly learn that the powerful major corporations want to manufacture in China in order to survive as a global corporation, period. And these corporations call the shots. And the powerful arms manufacturers will continue to have sway over Washington. And Obama will continue to play the anti-China duo of Taiwan and Japan by selling arms to Taiwan and Japan. And in the Middle East, these arms suppliers will make sure Obama sell arms to the Arab brothers to let them shoot each other, and that America will continue to get its oil. Nothing much will change there. Africa will continue to starve and shoot each other, and America will not be interested there except in the oil producing countries where they suddenly have Chinese competition for the oil. And the USA will continue to bully Cuba, since there are not too many countries left to be the punching bag, just for the sake of bullying Cuba. And Obama will make noises about illegal immigrants, while closing an eye to Mexican and other illegal migrant workers,because America needs these workers, but don't want to grant them PR status. Ahhhh....and so life will go on. Full of hypocrisy, full of B.S., but that is politics, whatever the colours ans stripes.
Votes: +2
report abuse
vote down
vote up
human being
written by Robert Wang , November 05, 2008
Whatever the backgound of Osama, once he sits in the throne of US power, he will soon grapple with the fact that he has to act within limitations set by his circle of influence. The big US corporations will quickly impress upon Obama that they have to manufacture in China for their survival, whatever the noise that Obama wants to make about China. And as for the Middle East, Obama will quickly learn that Israel is the lone trusted outpost for American military power, and that the Saudis will make all the right noises to their neighours but will quietly snuggle up to the USA as their protector against potential neighourly aggressors after their oily wealth. All politicians change their stripes after they get into power, and becomes more pragmatic. Obama tomorrow will be diffrent from Obama today. You just watch, and two years down the road, you compare what he does and what he has been saying.
Votes: -1
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Another opinion, another world, another time
written by Dickie , November 04, 2008
Sometimes I wonder if this guy lives in a world of his own. The way he espouses his hypothesis makes one wonder if he and the Chinese leaders are one and the same thing. Opinions may be fashionable in a sense that it feels cool and chic with a western touch to it. But to talk garbage jumbled up with quasi-facts is really a bit too much. He is sooo soooo westernised in his thinkings, it makes another one wonder of he is qualified to delve into the Chinese mindset. Sad to say, China expert he is not. China critic, definitely yes. Feel free to do so, if it would make the westerners feel sooo sooo good about it in cuckooland. There, I feel much better, having expressed my version of masochistic opinion,
Votes: -1
 report abuse
vote down
vote up
|
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/Hide comments
Show/Hide comment form
The Risk of Travel in AsiaOur Correspondent A new report by International Risk says it's a jungle out there
Full Story |
| Other Articles |
Cyber-war With Chinese Characteristics Beijing nurtures the best IT talent to boost its Net-based warring capacities
Full Story |
| most read... |
Alice Poon
| Freedom of Expression Too Precious to Throw AwayThursday, 04 February 2010 | Alice Poon
In a free society, there will always be more than one single opinion. In a free society, it is accepted that everyone should have an equal right to express his/her opinion without fearing... Full Story |
| Previous posts: |
John Elliott: Riding the Elephant
| From vultures in Delhi, to coups in Pakistan, a journalist's un-edited take on current events |
Donate to Asia Sentinel
"We should judge China by its journeyand not a spot point. It isnot easy to keep China in one piece as it is constantly being pulled apart by vested internal forces as well as by external interference."
China's journey has been thousands of years of assumed ethnic and cultural superiority over the world as well as constant aggression against its neighbors.
"I don't think that the USA government would tolerate any of its states trying to declare independence.Would the USA allow Puerto Rico, Hawaii, Alaska, California or Texas to declare independence? Places like Tibet or Xinchiang has been part of China centuries before the USA was formed."
Actually the US gov't has no legal standing to stop a state from seceeding and there is a strong aboriginal movement in Hawaii for some of the islands to break off, so the US is negotiating a sort of "Puerto Rico-hood" or state level native territory for the Hawaii'an tribes.
As for Tibet, China has never had a political or military presence in Tibet, not until its invasion in the 1950s. Beijing gets Tibet's rental of past Chinese imperial army protection for loyalty to Xian/Nanjing/Beijing. The Tibetans were too weak to defend their territory against China and the Mongols and the central Asian tribes to the west, so it paid China to fight for them and since Tibet was to China as the Vatican and Jerusalem has long been to much of the Christian and Muslim worlds, protection was a given.
China's conquest of E. Turkestan started in its failed invasion of central Asia, where the Tang army was stopped at the Talas River by two Saudi princes/brothers fighting under the Persian banner.
Throw away that CCP history book, it is bad for your eyes and your brain.