Time Travel Plots to be Banned in Chinese TV Dramas

According to reports by the Huffington Post, CNN, and New York Times, China’s new censorship regulations have expanded into the domain of entertainment. The most recent censorship concerns the use of time travel themes in television programs. Some of the articles alluded to the fact that the Chinese authorities discourage “plot lines that contain elements of "fantasy, time-travel, random compilations of mythical stories, bizarre plots, absurd techniques, even propagating feudal superstitions, fatalism and reincarnation, ambiguous moral lessons, and a lack of positive thinking." When I first read some of the articles and watched a few video clips, I admittedly snorted too, because as some of the reports suggest, the new guidelines do seem rather ridiculous. Ridiculous or not (though for most of us it may hold true), is it really part of the media’s job to convey that particular sentiment in official news reports? With opening lines like “Just when you thought Chinese censors couldn’t get any more sensitive, authorities here have decided to ban time travel from all television programs…” media may continue the tradition of characterizing the CCP as wholly irrational and extreme. While a little bit of humor is never a bad thing, the implicit use of satire/sarcasm deviates from the universal(?) journalistic standard of objectivity. Furthermore, in contrast to the CNN broadcast report, which explains at least some of the motives behind the censorship, the New York Times article fails to even provide the context under which these new regulations are being implemented. Instead of offering further insight into the new series of censorship rules, the New York Times simply concludes by stating, “A spokesman for the State Administration declined Tuesday to elaborate on the reason behind the new guidelines. But the Chinese authorities are known for strictly censoring newspapers, film and TV programs that are deemed ‘unhealthy.’” By noting the Chinese authorities’ rejection to clarify the matter, the journalist too, conveniently opts out on providing a further look into the issue.

Religious Persecution?

The latest in the abuse of human rights, at least according to Western media, involves the Chinese government forbidding seemingly innocuous churchgoers from attending service. Members of the Shouwang Church have reported that nearly 200 worshippers have been arrested and/or detained over the past several months. Many of those who have been taken away are members of the educated class including lawyers, students, artists, etc. According to authorities, the Showuwang Church has yet to gain legitimacy due to its failure to register properly with “state-sanctioned operations” that require censorship of particular religious material. Because the government has not approved of the Shouwang Church, hundreds of members have been illegally gathering inside a private, unofficial “house.”

One particular CNN article had an accompanying video interview with a young member of the Shouwang Church, which had the effect of personalizing the issue. The article opens in a rather flowery fashion stating, “This calm denim-clad 28-year-old identifies herself only as Water, based on the Chinese characters that make up her first name. She has been deemed an enemy of the state, an unlikely label for a petite and well-educated woman who eschews violence and confrontation.” The fact that the article goes so far as describing her appearance and social status may likely serve to gain some sympathy points from its audience. Moreover, the quotes that they drew from her interview were quite dramatic. One such quote that was highlighted in large print on the sidescreen of the webpage was the following: “They try to harass your family, your workplace and your landlord.” The particular syntax structure, which involves listing, conveys the sense that the power and pressure of the government are thoroughly pervasive/invasive. Additionally, I noticed that the majority of the translated quotes they used, much like this one, often referred to the pronoun “they” to refer to the Chinese government. In reiterating the term “they”, the article may contribute to an “us” and “them” mentality, further perpetuating the biases maintained by Western audiences.

Always Awkward...

The title of a NY Times article, “Always Awkward, New Rights with China Now May Be Hopeless,” is enough to warrant a few raised eyebrows. Again, right from the get-go, the article seems to perpetuate the perception of the Chinese as inflexible negotiators, staunchly opposed to making any positive strides on human rights issues. What’s funny about this article is that the online version maintained the original heading, but the print version, which was released the following day, was titled “Bleak Outlook for US-China Talks.” Upon another look at the online article 2 days later, the article was re-titled yet again to “Grim Outlook for US-China Talks on Human Rights.” The reason for the changes remains unclear, and I don’t know enough about journalistic practices to make any substantial claims on the matter…but I just thought it was another interesting point to make note of.

For the past two days, China and America have engaged in human rights talks held annually for the past two decades. Given the circumstances of China’s recent crackdown on political dissidents, America has been pushing hard for China to adopt alternative strategies to dealing with such opposition. The writer notes, “The Chinese government has been in no mood to discuss its heavy-handed behavior, warning the United States this week that it would brook no interference in its domestic affairs and adding, as a Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman explained, that 'China does not fear the antagonism of other countries.'" In using words like “heavy-handed” and “antagonism,” the writer portrays the Chinese government as bearing some sort of threat and hostility. While the article primarily depicts China in an aggressive manner, it also does a good job at presenting the importance of China in terms of cooperative/mutual ventures like addressing climate change, confronting security issues, mitigating the global economic recession, etc. In this way, I appreciate the article for taking more than just a unilateral approach to the issue of China, particularly on matters of cooperation.

Chinese Media on Ai Weiwei

Although news of Ai Weiwei continues to dominate headlines in Western media, there is virtually no mention of the artist’s recent detainment in Chinese news. Instead, the homepage of major newspapers like China Daily and People’s Daily are plastered with headlines such as, “China Pledges Better Conditions for Workers,” “China Improves Military Transparency,” “China to Combat Profiteering in Homeselling.” A quick typing of the name Ai Weiwei into the search engine of the People’s Daily website (often referred to as the mouthpiece of the CCP) produced articles only involving his artwork or exhibitions; nothing of his recent "arrest" was remotely published. Surprisingly (or maybe not), even the more liberal China Daily, seems to tell a different account of the circumstances surrounding the lock-up of Ai Weiwei. The same process of searching Ai Weiwei’s name on China Daily was done, and this time the search offered some interesting results. One was an opinion piece written by a senior writer at China Daily titled “Ideological Bias Cloud Western Views.” This particular journalist criticizes Western society’s inclination to characterize every incident in China that arises as a political one and subsequently transform it into matters of human rights issues. The journalist writes, “Ideological confrontation is the default mode for some Westerners and Western media when it comes to issues of human rights. For these people, it has become an intuitive reaction to point their fingers at China when anyone they consider a dissident is detained or arrested on legal grounds.” This is a point very well made. However, the article takes on quite the defensive tone; more than simply urging Westerners for greater understanding, the writer actively defends the course of actions taken by the government. In this way, while this article helps illustrate the fallacies embedded in Western media, it does not do a better job per se, at objectively discussing the issue at hand. The other article that came up was another editorial linked from the Global Times. In what seems to be a direct response to the New York Times articles I wrote about earlier, this editor dismisses phrases employed by Western media like “catch all crimes.” Unlike most articles in Western media, this article offers some background information and notes China's political development - most likely as a means to give Western audiences a multidimensional view of the circumstances at hand. Very much like the People’s Daily article, this piece seemed to largely defend the Chinese government by counter-reporting what’s been published so far by Western media. However, one thing that caught me offguard was the last sentence in the article, which seemed like a last minute attempt at claiming objectivity. To me, it seemed as though the sentence was tacked on so that the writer would not be deemed an apologist for the Chinese government. After all, he/she(?) is still writing/catering to a Western audience.

One More Political Dissident Detained

As of late, Chinese authorities have detained a number of political dissidents, including the likes of lawyers, human rights activists, writers, journalists, and bloggers. Most recently, the widely celebrated artist/documentary filmmaker/architect Ai Weiwei (the same man who designed the Bird’s Nest in the Beijing Olympic Stadium) was arrested while boarding a flight to Hong Kong. The latest in a series of detentions has caused uproar among Ai Weiwei’s fellow peers in the intellectual community as well as many members in the international community. Ever since his arrest, Chinese netizens have launched an internet campaign, posting thousands of messages calling for his release. It has been nearly a month following Ai Weiwei’s detainment but public officials have yet to provide any information about his current whereabouts. It was also not until recently that the Chinese government even explicitly acknowledged that they had in fact, taken the dissident artist into custody. Just this past Thursday, perhaps partly in an effort to dissipate the widespread outrage that has followed, officials have announced that Ai Weiwei has been charged for suspected “economic crimes” – whatever that means. A New York Times journalist makes a note of this point, explaining:

“The catchall term “economic crimes” is frequently used as a legal cover by police officers who wish to detain or imprison someone whom Communist Party officials consider a political threat. Such crimes can include prosaic failures to properly comply with regulations on business registration or taxation. As often happens in China when political troublemakers are involved, the exact crime Mr. Ai is being investigated for may be announced only at a later date, after the police have more time to look into his affairs and decide what crime to accuse him of committing.”

Although this article is not an op-ed piece, the particular language used nonetheless seems to demonstrate incomplete objectivity. However true the last statement made by the NYTimes journalist may be, some may argue that it is imbued with liberal biases characteristic of the Western world. Despite the alleged commitment to neutrality, the tone of this article, at least to me, conveyed a sense exasperation with Chinese authorities.

More Tibetans Killed in Sichuan Province

A Tibet advocacy group has reported the deaths of two Tibetans who were purportedly killed by Chinese paramilitary officials raiding a monastery in Sichuan province last Thursday. According to reports, the two Tibetans killed, an elderly man and woman, were beaten to death as they were gathered outside a monastery to prevent several hundred monks from being detained. A New York Times journalist reporting on the incident said the following:

“Officers from the People’s Armed Police, a paramilitary force usually deployed to quell riots, had put the monks in 10 trucks, the group said, citing as its source a monk from Kirti living in exile who remained in contact with the monastery. The officers then clashed with a large number of laypeople, many of them elderly, who tried to prevent the trucks from driving out the main entrance gate.”

By emphasizing the brute force employed by Chinese military officials against traditionally helpless or at least peaceful individuals, this particular news story effectively appeals to the readers’ emotions. Stories concerning Tibet, a subject of intense scrutiny among the press, have generally tended to tug at the heartstrings of American citizens. Formalized news about Tibet is often juxtaposed against the democratic maxims of equality and American guarantees of universal human rights. However, media neglects to inform the public about the finer intricacies of Sino-Tibetan relations, opting instead to rely on particular “newsworthy” pegs. Tibetan revolts then, can have the effect of being perceived as a series of disconnected events that stem from a vague sense of discontent. Further details regarding Tibet’s history and culture among other paramount factors that has led to such uprisings, however, remains ever elusive.

Innocent(?) St. Patty's Day Celebration Cancelled in Shanghai

Recent rumblings of protest on the Internet have apparently left Chinese authorities quite shaken. Accordingly, officials have cracked down on journalists and other foreigners who they believe might engage in potentially subversive activities. Journalists who fail to abide by the new rules have been subsequently threatened with the revocation of their visas and also expulsion from the country. An annual St. Patrick’s Day parade, which was intended to take place in Shanghai on March 12, has been cancelled in light of these new regulations. According to reports, more than 2,000 people (among them foreigners) were expected to show up at the celebration. However, because the location of the event would have taken place on the same bustling corner where Internet campaigns have urged people to gather together against the government, officials took pre-emptive measures by canceling the event entirely. One diplomat spoke on the issue saying, “We’ve noticed that a somewhat larger number of our cultural and educational programs around China are being postponed or canceled, but we haven’t been notified by Chinese authorities of any specific reason.” Although protests have not taken place as of yet, reporters from The New York Times, The Associated Press, Agence France-Presse have been cited for loitering around possible protest sites. Reports of police brutality have also emerged as several journalists were physically assaulted for being suspected to have violated the rules.

Again, the latest set of actions taken by the Chinese is not the least bit surprising given the circumstances in the Middle East and the CCP’s long history of censorship. The profound effects of social media on Middle Eastern politics have put Chinese officials on high alert - and rightfully so. Inspired by the Tunisian revolt and the Jasmine Revolution, many Chinese netizens too, have begun to rail against the Chinese government for its backwardness and corruption. Perhaps the revolutionary sentiments induced by massive internet campaigns in the Middle East may very well carry over to China...

Inflation, CPI, reserve ratio, what?!

This blog entry from the LA Times is a typical article about the Chinese economy:  a lot of numbers whose importance is easily lost on readers not familiar with economic terms.  Examples of terms that were not defined or whose importance is not explained are "inflation", "deficits overseas", "consumer price index", "commodity prices", "currency fluctuation", "interest rates", "reserve ratio", and much more.

This article demonstrates exactly why China's rise is such a mystery to many and why the situation is vastly oversimplified.  For example, the following sentence means nothing to most people: "Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao blamed deficits overseas and volatile global commodity prices for complicating China's economy."  There are no links drawn, no explanations as to the mechanisms of how the two factors are tied into the Chinese economy and how the economy has been complicated.  The word that is easily understandable, however, is "blamed" -- a word that is laden with judgement and emotion that is akin to petulance.

To its credit, the article does also report on the steps taken by the Chinese government to try and slow down the overheated economy and measures that have been taken.  However, little explanation is given as to how their measures will address the inflation concerns, once again making economics a magic wave of the hand and incomprehensible to the average reader.

Tombs to symbolize income inequality

This New York Times article tries to demonstrate the problems of income inequality in China by featuring the battle over outrageous tombstones but does so in a way that is so personalized the point is easily lost to a careless reader.  The first image that greets us is the an elaborate tombstone with a statue of a unicorn, gleaming floors, and a custodian cleaning the tomb.  The first page of the article discusses, with quotations from Chinese officials and an economics professor, the problems with allowing the rich to flaunt their wealth.  A contrasting picture is provided, contrasting funerals "with pomp benefiting a state funeral" to the  "many Chinese [that] find even a simple grave market beyond their means".   

There is a strong hint of mockery in the coverage of this problem (and not unjustly so), and I will even go so far as to say the article paints the Chinese as an exotic and ridiculous 'other' that does very strange things with their newfound wealth.  The explanation provided for the extravagance of the tombs is "face" (a very Asian concept that is easily ridiculed, especially when "face" with quotations is used as opposed to the word pride or image).  It is this type of reporting that is harmful in influencing people's perception of China and their rise. 

Lorry strike amid rising prices

This BBC article provides a very dry overview of the lorry driver's strike in Shanghai.  The article's first paragraph gives a very concise summary of the situation and the paragraph immediately after reports what the local government spokesperson announced.  The article is vague on the details and the analysis is very brief and superficial.

The Shanghaiist article, printed on April 21st, is a bit more dramatic, using words and phrases such as "hundreds of angry truck drivers", "refused to take part", "smashed by protesting drivers", and "unconfirmed rumours of the death of at least one protestor".  The focus is more on the protesters, and the framing is very personalized.  The article consists mostly of pictures of the protest.

The Financial Times article (April 24th) on the other hand, gives a more aggregate view of the situation.  The writing style is very similar to that of New York Times and the Economist (it should be noted that the group that owns FT also has a large share in the Economist).  The article begins with an interview with a "wizened" driver from Henan and the rest of the article is littered with soundbites from other drivers.  At the same time, it also reports from the macro-level, giving national statistics as well as an overview of the trucking industry.  There is only one sentence mentioning the strike (although this may be because the article was published a week after the strike).

Pros and cons of China investing in Africa

In recent years China expanded into the African continent, providing much needed infrastructure and economic development but also sustaining despotic governments and corrupt practices.  This article from the Economist caught my eye for presenting both sides of what is essentially an economic story very well in terms that are very easy to understand.

The article uses both personalized and macro-level framing to discuss the question of whether Africa is benefiting from Chinese investment.  It starts out using the personalized frame, beginning with the interview of a Chinese shoemaker doing business in Africa and how the attitudes of his African partners towards him have changed.  The article consists of several quotes from people such as Zimbabwe's environment minister and Chinese factory owners that help personalize a continent-wide issue.  At the same time, the article also uses statistics and charts to give an overall picture of the situation, hence also giving it a macro-level frame.

Unlike most other articles I have come across which show a clear bias towards or against the Chinese, the Economist gives a fair argument for both sides of the story.  They are not immune to dramatization, as seen from the quotes used and the pictures painted ("a young factory-owner"..."sleep on a dirty mattress on the factory floor").  However, such quotations and dramatization is used more to drive home each point they make and a fair case is presented both for and against Chinese investment in Africa.  The African nations are shown to be taken advantage of from time to time ("Mots loans and payments are 'tied' -- ie, the recipient must spend the money with Chiense companies"), but it is also acknowledged that they are not helpless ("[Angola's] president publicaly told his Chiense counterpart, "You are not our only friend."").  It is refreshing to see both sides of the story given voice.

Additionally, the article discusses economic concepts such as imperfect competition and gains from trade in layman terms that the average reader will not even realize economic theory is being discussed.  At the same time, it also acknowledges that the economic models don't work perfectly and point that out as well.  All in layman's terms.  What is even more impressive is that the article not only reports, it also offers advice to the African nations as to how to influence events ("Growing policy co-ordination between African embassies in Beijing is a useful first step in improving African bargaining power.").

All in all, a very well-written article that is not filled with paranoia or glorification.

Note: for more on the discussion of Chinese in Africa, please see the debate on the Economist as well as another article that discusses the backlash.

US and China to Hold Human Rights Talks

Articles on Reuters and CNN both reported today that US and China will be holding a human rights talk on April 27 and 28.

"Discussions will focus on human rights developments, including the recent negative trend of forced disappearances, extralegal detention, and arrests and convictions, as well as rule of law, freedom of religion, freedom of expression, labor rights, minority rights and other human rights issues of concern," the State Department said in a statement. -Reuters

This is a step in the right direction, given the recent tensions between the US and China that have arisen as a result of China's crackdown on dissent.

These two articles reported on the same thing but left me feeling completely differently on the topic. The Reuters article does a great job of providing background on the issue while at the same time expressing hope and anticipation for the outcomes of the talk. The CNN article, on the other hand, is extremely short and to the point, only mentioning that "the meetings follow a crackdown on Chinese dissidents in recent months." Despite the fact that this news means progress on the human rights issue, the article maintains an extremely negative tone. These differences highlight the power of framing and confirm the importance of fair and comprehensive coverage.

-Annie-

Despite China’s Foreign Aid, Western Countries Still Express Doubt

Despite this economic crisis, which has prevented many other countries from contributing more of their budget to foreign aid, China foreign aid budget has increased 30% since 2004. The Associated Press today, cited a passage from China’s report in defense of their foreign aid, “Over the years, while focusing on its own development, China has been providing aid to the best of its ability to other developing countries with economic difficulties, and fulfilling its due international obligations." Despite China’s assistance in locations such as Africa, Syria, Bangladesh, and Peru, Western nations including the United States are, again, concerned with China’s lack of transparency on the matter.

Deborah Brautigam, an expert in U.S.-China relations, defends China’s release of a foreign aid report to be progress. “They're trying to figure out what it means to be a responsible, great power, and one of the things they've been getting beaten up about a lot is foreign aid." It should be noted that Brautigam is from American University in D.C. and is not a governmental source.

Brautigam’s optimistic opinion differs greatly from that of Western powers that worry that China is “securing rights” to oil and natural recourses in the countries to which they are sending foreign aid. "In developing countries, all this aid could potentially be abused and become a source of corruption. That is why Western countries accuse China of basically making it difficult for them to pursue policies of good governance and human rights," says Yanzhong Huang, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. But while China continues to stretch its wings internationally and the economic crisis persists, Western countries as well as those being financially aided by China must wait and see.

The two expert opinions in this article highlight the divergence between the governmental and civil opinions about China’s foreign aid. Much like Merriman’s chapter on debate in the news, it is true that government officials will reflect those of the government and not necessarily what is most valid. Yanzhong’s opinion on China’s aid reflects the U.S.’s concern about China’s growing power internationally. Brautigam represents the expert opinion of someone removed from the political pressures of Washington. This type of source is recommended by Merriman in order to avoid a governmental “spin” on their source.

All in all, although this report is inconclusive in respect to China’s motives behind its foreign aid, the sources considered in this article reflect both the U.S. government as well as civilian expert opinions.

U.S. vs. China's Tone Within the Media

Congress is currently in the midst of a two-week recess. During this time, Senate Majority leader Harry Reid and a bipartisan delegation of nine other Senate members traveled to China in order to meet with Chinese leaders to discuss foreign policy, trade, human rights issues, and currency.

Reports about these meetings vary in tone depending on its source. A Washington Post blog just lists the members of the U.S. delegation and the topics slated for discussion with Chinese leaders. The article then speculates whether the delegates will meet with Jon Huntsman, the current Chinese ambassador and potential Republican candidate for the Presidential election next year. The remainder of the article proceeds to talk about Speaker of the House John Boehner’s visit to Pakistan.

Another article from USA Today spoke in more detail about the currency concerns the United States has about China’s currency manipulation in order to “gain a trade advantage over competitors.” The Obama administration not announced yet whether it will label China as a currency manipulator, but Harry Reid is quoted as saying, “How the United States and China work together on commerce, currency and clean energy will help determine the future health of the global economy."

In contrast to these two articles from American news sources, which focus primarily on the substance of the meetings in various amounts of detail, another article from Xinhuanet portrays the meetings in a less serious manner and places more on the importance of a delegation of “heavyweights” visiting China rather than the issues slated for discussion. Vice Premier Wang Qishan is quoted as saying, "Such a formation alone reflected the weight you place on China-U.S. relations.” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was reported to have joked, “we may not have started this journey as heavyweights, but having spent two days in Hong Kong and Macao eating as we did, we are all heavyweights.”

The contrast between the first two articles and the final article can be interpreted by some to show the differences between how American and Chinese news sources are choosing to frame the meetings between the U.S. delegation and Chinese leaders. The more serious tone of the articles from the United States matches how most articles from American sources address issues concerning China while the article from the Chinese new media is consistent with the tone of nonchalance or assurance which China uses to address the same issues.

Columnist's Comprehensive Coverage of China Crackdown

In this April 13th article, CNN political columnist Jaime FlorCruz weighs in on the crackdown by the Chinese government. Given the development of recent events, it's not surprising that the tone of the article is overwhelmingly negative. However, the colorful language he employs and the quotes he pulls from multiple sources heighten the sense of drama - something that was amiss in the matter-of-fact articles that were published in the immediate wake of the events.

The article starts with a very brief introduction to the crackdown before focusing in on "the latest victim" Ai Wei Wei. In a phone interview with CNN five days after his arrest, his mother said, "I have no idea where he is, why he was taken away, where he is kept now. I am very worried about him. He is very stubborn. He won't change his attitude." Quoting the worried mother of the artist calls upon the sympathy of readers. It also relates that these arrests have impacted not only the lives of those detained but also their loved ones.

The article then goes into detail about Ai's history of political activism and quotes him in a past interview saying, "They crack down on everybody who has different opinions -- not even different opinions, just different attitudes. Simply to have different opinions can cost (dissidents) their life; they can be put in jail, can be silenced and can disappear." This shows that Ai was fully aware of the trouble that any hint of dissent could cause him

'"Mr. Ai Weiwei is under investigation on suspicion of economic crimes," said foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei, answering a reporter's question at a regular press briefing. "It has nothing to do with human rights or freedom of expression." He added, "China is a country under the rule of law ... other countries have no right to interfere."' In using this rarely publicized statement by a Chinese official on the matter, the columnist only confirms the suspicious nature of the Chinese government's actions.

The article then dives into more depth on the background and history of protests in China, offering that "rapid industrialization and urbanization, which have triggered disputes over wages, land seizures, income disparity and pollution" are the underlying causes to yearly dissent. This is useful background information that no other article has provided.

The columnist then quotes a representative of a nonprofit human rights organization in China: "The willingness on the part of the authorities to employ raw power and make individuals simply disappear is a very troubling aspect of this latest effort. It seems aimed at intimidating both those who have already been taken into custody and those who might worry about being next on the list." The writer recounts his personal experience of trying to meet up with a dissenter who buckled under the pressure of these scare tactics. This adds a personal angle and increases the ominous undertones.

The article explains China's struggle to control and contain the spread of information on the Internet with the "Great Firewall," wrapping up with another little known piece of information: "Beijing is gambling that, with its relatively tight grip on information, Ai and other activists at home and overseas can do little to get their message heard at home.
So far, most Chinese do not know who Ai Weiwei is."

This column was much more comprehensive than any of the previous articles on individual developments in the crackdown. While it ups the drama and portrays the Chinese government in a more negative light, it also provides new angles on the issue, which is useful in helping readers to understand these recent events.

-Annie-

U.S. Navy States China's Navy Less Aggressive in 2011

It was reported today in BBC news that the United States has deemed China’s navy to be less offensive in 2011. Seen as a very positive step, U.S. officials are attributing this change to military talks between the U.S. and China where both Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert Gates “made very strong statements” in supporting non-Chinese competitors in the South China and East China Sea.

Admiral Willard stated undoubtedly that China "aims to have great influence over that maritime space, and especially over the contested areas that they've laid claim to.” Among other avenues, that goal is pursued by the remodeling of an old Soviet aircraft, but will not be ready until extensive tests are completed.

However, Adm. Willard and the Navy say that their regional partners perceive China’s diminished aggression in these waters in the midst of what has otherwise been a remarkable growth in their military capability as significant."

I found this article interesting because it is meant to show China’s steps toward more responsible and less aggressive behavior militarily. However, China’s change in attitude is not attributed to the Chinese military, but the heavy hitters from the United States. The tone of the article suggests to me that China’s older sibling, the United States, didn’t like the way China was behaving so it gave it a slap on the wrist.

Adm. Willard also makes it no secret that the U.S. knows China’s plan to exert control over these seas, which happen to be deemed an Exclusive Economic Zone by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and that China’s scaling back of aggression is a “symbol” –suggesting there is no real value to this behavior other than the effect of its façade. The map below also doesn’t inspire much confidence in China’s actions. Without a title explaining it’s purpose, it simply shows China’s claimed territorial waters outlined in red dash marks, the UNCLOS Exclusive Economic Zone in blue, and disputed islands in gray. China’s claimed territory clearly surrounds all the disputed islands, which, by the way, are never explicitly mentioned in any part of the actual article. Placing this map at the end of the article, along with the final implication that the U.S. Navy’s security umbrella is the only reason most Asian states have been able to “freely develop trading economies,” does not inspire the reader to have much confidence in China’s “symbolic” gesture.

Tensions Between U.S.-Sino Relations Continue to Be Reported

Although Chinese foreign investment or acquisitions in U.S. companies may be welcomed in some parts of the country, Washington, according to an article in Reuters, is far from ready to call China a “bosom buddy.”

Many lawmakers are hardly open to the idea of Chinese takeover in “anything remotely sensitive in terms of military or technological value.” Senators, too, are growing exceedingly wary in China’s expansion as a world power. Senator Susan Collins has been quoted saying, “The Chinese buildup of its military, particularly its naval fleet, has made people more concerned about what China's ultimate intentions are” as well as expressing her concern about cyber attacks from China aimed at the intellectual property of U.S. companies.

Senator Jack Reed, from my own State of Rhode Island, is concerned about the close ties between business and government in China. "The real concern -- and it has to be case by case -- is that many of these companies are so closely intertwined with the government of China that it is hard to see where the company stops and the country begins, and vice versa," he says.

On the flip side, there is a strong sense of Chinese nationalism and pride at China’s growing economic competence as well as a growing resentment toward certain United States officials, like U.S. Treasury Secretary, Hank Paulson, who was perceived by many Chinese officials to be “telling us what to do.” Many Chinese financial services feel “China's rising assertiveness in light of the country's continued growth and positive role in the global recovery."

The clear divergence between China’s growing confidence and the United States’ increasing wariness is a common frame for news reports about Sino-U.S. relations. Once again, even in an article framed as a discussion about the financial relations between China and the United States, China’s military expansion and other potential threatening actions were discussed. The article continues to highlight the tension and difference in perception between United States and China’s on the same subject with a quote from a Chinese official stating, "For the U.S., every bush and tree looks like an enemy soldier."

So is the United States over sensitive to China’s advancements or is are there certain things United States officials should be genuinely concerned about? This article does not make any attempt to help the reader come to a conclusion. It simply perpetuates the same anxieties many feel about China’s continuing growth. The article ends on an ominous note, quoting William Reinsch in saying, along with the changes in government in 2012 for both China and the United States, "We could see a deterioration next year that is politically motivated in both countries -- in that case I think you have a potentially very serious problem."

China Responds to US Criticism

Last Friday, following China's crackdown on dissidents and activists, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton expressed that she was "deeply concerned" about the issue and cited "negative trends" such as the Ai Weiwei arrest.

"A U.S. State Department report on global human rights released on Friday said Beijing had stepped up restrictions on lawyers, activists, bloggers and journalists, and tightened controls on civil society. It has also increased its efforts to control the press, Internet and Internet access, the report said." - Reuters

China's foreign ministry has, in turn, dismissed the report as meddling and issued a counterattack in its own annual report on US human rights. In an attempt to delegitimatize the concerns expressed by the American government, the report accuses the US of ignoring its own human rights problems, citing poverty, hunger, homelessness, violent crime, etc. as threats that face many Americans.

The Reuters article concludes by pointing out that foreign governments are not the only ones criticizing China's actions, as rights lawyers and advocates within China have also been dismayed by the serious crackdown.

With these official reports released by China and the US, it seems as if relations between these two world powers have become extremely strained. This was exactly what I had been fearing since the start of China's crackdown. China is continuing a long streak of bad decisions in human rights policy and only doing harm to the peaceful image that it wants to project. One can only hope that these recent occurrences will not escalate into nationwide uprising and unrest as seen in the Middle East and North Africa.

-Annie-

Chinese Crackdown on Dissent Intensifies

Following the recent tightening of Internet censorship, the Chinese government has taken things one step further in the process of quelling rumored civilian uprising. Internationally renowned artist Ai Weiwei, best known for being the artistic consultant to the 2008 Beijing Olympic Stadium (bird's nest), has reportedly been detained on his way to Hong Kong.

This is the latest and highest profile target of the Communist Party's broad crackdown on political dissent. With the unrest in the Middle East and North Africa escalating, the Chinese government is taking extreme measures to prevent the same sort of thing happening on their own soil. Hundreds of protesters have already been detained. This crackdown is said to be the worst in over a decade.

US media coverage on China is becoming increasingly negative in light of these recent events. Stories like this and this are chock full of negative connotations. In reporting events like these, is it even possible to maintain a neutral tone? I can't help but feel like China is making it easy for the Western media to bite onto the negative. When you act like an oppressive police state by detaining social dissenters, it's hard to cast you as the peace loving nation you project yourself to be. I will keep a wary eye on this issue to see how things develop in these upcoming weeks.

-Annie-

China's National Defense White Paper Causes Strain on U.S.-China Relations

China’s national defense white paper released last year reflected China’s attempt to both discuss its plan modernize China’s military and simultaneously diminish any foreign concern that its purposes were for regional dominance or driven by expansionist goals by stating that their military build up was “purely defensive.”

The paper, along with China’s more assertive foreign policy, has caused diplomatic friction between China and the United States. Secretary of Defense, Robert M. Gates, has already had to navigate some prickly situations with China’s military, including an argument with General Ma Xiaotian which revealed the “deep fissures in the military relationship.”

Considering the discord militarily between China and the United States, why aren’t China’s attempts at military transparency being well received by American officials? Some say the answer is because, in reality, China is not being transparent at all. China plans to soon deploy an aircraft carrier that is currently under construction, a plan completely omitted from the white paper. Sen. Colonel Geng Yansheng also refused to answer any questions about the aircraft carrier at a news conference.

The white paper states that, “China pursues a national defense policy which is defensive in nature,” and “China will never seek hegemony, nor will it adopt the approach of military expansion now or in the future, no matter how its economy develops.” However, the continuing development of an antiship ballistic missile by the Chinese military may suggest otherwise.

I found this article to be particularly interesting because it represents the opposite opinion of my previous post. While the former trumpeted China’s attempts to become more assertive in their international policy, the latter suggests that China’s expanding military and more forceful participation internationally are cause for concern, especially for the United States. The author of the article uses quotes from the white paper which are meant to assure foreign powers that China’s military advancements are strictly for defensive reasons. But right after these quotes, the author contrasts them with evidence or suggestions that China has ulterior motives.

The effect is a strong one. It associates all of China’s attempts to assuage the concerns of foreign powers with other dubious evidence, causing readers to believe that the white paper is a façade to present to the international community while China continues along its own path toward hegemony and all that status entails. This, like many other articles published in main American media sources, seems to be the more predominant tone toward China’s changing international policies and military development.

NYT Op-Ed Contributor Expresses Desire for China to Be More Assertive in International Affairs

Yan Xuetong, an Op-Ed contributor to the New York Times, wrote on March 31^st he firmly aligns himself with Chinese analysts who believe, in contrast to the mainstream Chinese belief that China should keep a low profile in the international arena, that China needs to in fact become more aggressive and take on more international responsibility.

The philosophy Xuetong aligns himself with “draws inspiration from ancient Chinese philosophy, which regards both material capability and morality as necessary conditions for building strong and durable global leadership. For the sake of making itself a rising power that is welcomed by the rest of the world, China should act as a humane authority (wang in Chinese) and take on more international responsibilities to improve its strategic credibility.” Xuetong argues more and more thinkers like him are beginning to emerge in China, coinciding with recent changes in China’s international policy that demonstrate China’s efforts to assert itself as more of an international power.

Xuetong highlights China’s mobilization of rescue teams in Japan, endorsement of sanctions against the Qaddafi government (although China still abstained on the U.N. vote pertaining to taking military action against Libya), and sending military forces to Libya in order to evacuate Chinese citizens and 2,100 other foreigners as evidence that “China has learned how to improve its international image.”

I found this article interesting because it highlights what China is trying to do to assert a more positive and prominent role internationally rather than emphasizing China’s shortcomings in the international arena which something more commonly seen in major news sources.

One must also take into account, however, the source of this article. This different perspective on China’s developing international role could also be attributed to the author of this Op-Ed, Yan Xuetong, who is professor of political science and dean of the Institute of Modern International Relations at Tsinghua University in Beijing. It is possible that his profession as well as being a Chinese citizen living in China impacted how he framed this argument to focus on China’s attempts at improvement on the international platform instead of covering more of China’s persisting shortcomings in this arena as well.

China's Final Say on Drug Smuggling

In China, drug trafficking is a serious offense. According to Chinese law, trafficking of “50 grams or more of drugs is punishable by long prison terms.” The smuggling of larger amounts receives life sentences or death.

As of October 21, 2010, according to the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) in Manila, there are more than 70 Filipinos in China who were convicted and sentenced to death for drug trafficking. In recent years, China has also executed drug traffickers from Britain, Malaysia, Thailand and Japan.

China has always been a big brother figure in the East Asian region. Even now as China emerges as a significant power in the world stage, its neighbors must respect China’s methods and laws.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/03/30/china.philippine.executions/index.html

Japan nuclear crisis a wake-up call for China

Following the nuclear power plant crisis in Japan, China has ordered safety inspections of its existing nuclear plants and suspension of new plant approvals. On March 16, Beijing's top nuclear power regulatory body quickly announced a series of guidelines advising nuclear power plants to take disaster stress tests on planned and existing projects.

China operates 13 nuclear reactors. Even though it is a small number compared to the 104 in the United States, China is currently constructing more than two dozen others and 50 more are being proposed. In the last twenty years, China's energy needs have grown exponentially due to its rapid economic boom and urbanization. China last year surpassed the US as the world's largest consumer of energy; it depends on fossil fuel for 91% of its needs. Hence, such an ambitious nuclear power program is understandable.

However, in light of the human and environmental disaster looming in Japan, many Chinese are asking: How safe are China's nuclear plants? Experts say China is now reviewing the risks associated with earthquakes and tsunamis. China has had its share of major earthquakes, like the 7.9-magnitude quake in 2008, which killed over 80,000 in Wenzhou, Sichuan province. The existing and planned nuclear plants are all located along its eastern and southern coastlines, which brings up questions of whether the facilities are vulnerable to a tsunami. Moreover, another worry is lack of transparency. Although China has signed and ratified the International Atomic Energy Agency's Convention on Nuclear Safety, critics say China is slow in providing public information on safety and waste-management.

Before the disaster in Japan, most people did not necessarily understand the risks they were facing, but now people are actually more aware of the potential harms. Perhaps, the disaster in Japan can help to raise awareness of nuclear energy not only in China, but in other parts of the world.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/03/25/china.nuclear/index.html

Tightened Electronic Censorship in Light of the Middle Eastern Crisis

As political turmoil continues to grip the Middle East, China is becoming increasingly wary of electronic modes of communication. Not surprisingly, the Chinese government has opted to crackdown on cellphone conversations, e-mail messages, and Internet usage. Most recently, the government has tightened censorship control over VPNs (internet proxies favored by students and expats that help detour firewalls) and Google. While the Chinese have not explicitly declared the censorship of Google, engineers have determined that there is no evidence of technical malfunctioning. The inference then, is that the Chinese government is most likely to blame provided that they have previously condemned social media sites like Facebook, Twitter, and even Google as tools of the United States. Moreover, the Chinese government has, on multiple accounts, claimed that such sites pose a threat to political stability and serve only to "manufacture social disorder." Given that China has always maintained a sense of notoriety for its censorship of the press, this article seems to cater to the already critical attitudes harbored by most Americans against China's human rights policies. The journalists in this particular news article notes how one English speaker’s cellphone conversation was cut short by casually recapitulating a famed Hamlet quote that coincidentally included the word “protest.” The article even invokes Shakespeare in the very opening line (and rather humorously at that), which immediately serves to the draw readers’ attention. By poking fun at the new lengths for which the Chinese will go to stifle basic civil rights, the article perpetuates the perception of extremity that is widely associated with the Chinese government.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/22/world/asia/22china.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&ref=china

- Grace

Behind China's Internet Censorship

Online censorship has been a major issue in China's new media realm since the rise of the Internet itself in the mid 90s. The Chinese government and its large Internet police force actively block anything and everything that introduces the possibility for uprising or unrest. This includes social networking sites such as Twitter and Facebook, online forums, and risky keywords.

China's restrictions tighten with every rumor of possible protest. Recently, there has been a call in the online community for a "Jasmine Revolution" inspired by the uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa. As a result, the government has quickly moved to plug the holes in its "Great Firewall." A number of virtual private networks (VPNs) - "encrypted tunnels through the Internet that make communications secure and enable users to bypass censors" - have reported problems in the past few days. Gmail has also encountered problems such as long loading times and chat malfunctions. Google, which moved from mainland to HK after a public struggle with the censorship system last year, stated that there are no technical difficulties on their end. The government is going to lengths to mask the issue by not blocking Gmail directly but by making it seem as if the issue is internal.

The unrest in the Middle East has also presented a major threat to China's social stability since China is experiencing many similar issues (rising public dissatisfaction over inflation, official corruption, and growing income disparities). Not surprisingly, keywords like "Egypt" and "Libya" have been blocked from all search engines. Interestingly, Chinese netizens have employed the use of different euphemisms to get around the blocked material (for example, embedding social commentary in discussions of "jasmine tea").

More and more, China's Internet system is becoming an isolated intranet. The increasingly limited flow of information could very well hinder China's progress in innovation and development. The new move is also angering many who are dependent on proxies to access blocked overseas information. Expats are losing patience with the government interference and considering moving out of China. This may have a serious economic toll on China's growing number of foreign firms.

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/TECH/social.media/03/28/China.blogger.mao/index.html?hpt=C2

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/china-plugging-holes-in-great-firewall-2254327.html

-Annie-

An Increase in Chinese Undergrads at American Universities

An article in the Chicago Sun-Times yesterday reported that China exported more students to the U.S. than any other country last academic year and that out of the 691,000 international students attending in American Universities, 18 percent were Chinese.

China has had this ranking before in both the late 1980’s and 1990’s, but this difference this time around is that the majority of these Chinese students are coming to American Universities as undergraduates.

The influx of Chinese students enrolling in American Universities this time around can be attributed to premium China places on American degrees and the new wave of middle class families in China that want and can afford to send their children to American Universities at full price.

With this influx comes many benefits. With the great increase in U.S. corporations conducting business with China, having U.S. educated employees is a great advantage.

The increase in diversity on campuses is also beneficial for the students by “creating more of the global community students will graduate into,” said Robert Easter, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s interim chancellor and provost. However, there is an element of alienation as well. “They definitely stick with each other,” said Keira Huang, 22, a senior at the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign who transferred from a Chinese university. “Most of them complain that we want to have more American friends, practice English and learn more about the Western campus. But they stick with each other maybe because they are shy or afraid of a new environment.”

Much of the United States’ concerns about China as a rising superpower have to do with China’s differences socially, politically, and ideologically. With this influx of Chinese students to the Unites States, America has been given a unique and important opportunity to educate and close the gap between China and the U.S. on these platforms. By educating a portion of the youth of China now, it will undoubtedly ease some of the tension that exists between the United States and China improve how interactions on all platforms are conducted between these two powerful countries.

Also, with schools like NYU opening up a campus in Shanghai
for as many as 3,000 students in the Fall of 2013, it seems like an even more global education and mutual understanding between the United States and China is on the horizon.