Journalist: As U.S. Retreats From World Stage, China Moves To Fill The Void - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues in the People's Republic of China.

Moderator: PoFo Asia & Australasia Mods

Forum rules: No one-line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum moderated in English, so please post in English only. Thank you.
#14876446
NPR

New Yorker journalist Evan Osnos says Chinese leaders think of President Trump as a "paper tiger" who makes promises he can't deliver and who can be "managed" with flattery.

TERRY GROSS, HOST:

This is FRESH AIR. I'm Terry Gross. Under the banners of America First and Make America Great Again, President Trump has been reducing commitments abroad and withdrawing from treaties. Meanwhile, China is doing the opposite, trying to fill the gaps, expanding its power and playing a larger role on the global stage. How and why it's doing that and what that means for the U.S. is the subject of an article in The New Yorker called "Making China Great Again: How Beijing Learned To Use Trump To Its Advantage." It's by my guest, Evan Osnos.

President Trump has been leaning on China to pressure North Korea to end its nuclear program. But the fragile relationship between China, the U.S. and North Korea became more complicated yesterday after President Trump sent out a provocative tweet that he has a bigger nuclear button on his desk than Kim Jong Un does. On New Year's Day, North Korea reached out to South Korea, and now they've agreed to begin talks and open a hotline. I'll ask Evan Osnos about that a little later. He reported from North Korea last year. Osnos lived in China from 2005 to 2013 where he first reported for The Chicago Tribune, then for The New Yorker. He went to China at the end of last year to report his new article.

Evan Osnos, welcome back to FRESH AIR. So I want to start the interview the same way your piece does because it's such a great start. Your article starts with a Chinese action film that you think has a message about the direction China is heading in and the image it's trying to create under President Xi. And this is a movie called "Wolf Warrior 2." I guess it's the sequel to "Wolf Warrior."

EVAN OSNOS: Right.

GROSS: It's an action film released in China in July. It's China's official entry into the Oscars. So tell us about this movie.

OSNOS: Well, I first thought that "Wolf Warrior 2" was going to be a pretty forgettable sort of shoot-'em-up. You know, it had a lonesome hero and a lot of explosions, and I don't think anybody saw "Wolf Warrior 1" as far as I can remember. And then something surprising happened, which is that "Wolf Warrior 2" instantly became a phenomenon. People started standing in the theaters at the end and giving it a standing ovation, and they started singing the national anthem. This is all, of course, happening in Chinese theaters. And it became quite clear that the story had captured something really important about where China was, and the story is very simple.

I mean, the story is about a special forces veteran of the People's Liberation Army who goes overseas and goes into a sort of fictional African country and saves civilians, not just Chinese civilians but also foreigners and helps get them to safety. And there's this one scene where he's saving an American, and the American says, well, the U.S. Marines will come to our rescue, and the Chinese villain says, well, where's the U.S. Marines now? And so there's moments like that that really expressed in a lot of ways the way that Rambo kind of captured the Reagan era for Americans. "Wolf Warrior 2" captured something in China's self-image, a much more muscular iteration of its own self-image. And it wants to be seen now not only as a more vigorous, forceful presence around the world but also as something of a protector, something of a leader, and that was really new and interesting.

GROSS: I like the way America is depicted because in the final battle, the villain, the American villain, tells the Chinese hero people like you will always be inferior to people like me, get used to it. And then the Chinese hero beats the American to death (laughter).

OSNOS: Yeah. Yeah, it's - you know, it was not a subtle piece of work, I have to say, but it does capture exactly what the message is they're trying to give off.

GROSS: And then you write that the film closes with the image of a Chinese passport and the words don't give up. If you run into danger, please remember a strong motherland will always have your back.

You say in your article that there are things in this movie that wouldn't have made sense, that wouldn't have existed as concepts in a Chinese film when you first went to China to report from there in 2005. What are some of those things?

OSNOS: Well, in 2005, there were very few Chinese businesses that were operating around the world, meaning they didn't have large numbers of staff that were in Africa or in Latin America. That was really just beginning. China adopted a policy around that time called the Going Out policy, which meant that they were literally going out into other parts of the world where China hadn't existed. There's always been Chinatowns, of course, but this was something different. This was about Chinese companies and individuals planting the flag.

And the other thing that was new was that for a long time China viewed itself - really for more than a hundred years China has viewed itself as being in a position of weakness. At the end of the 19th century, there was a great Chinese philosopher named Liang Qichao who called China the sick man of Asia because it had been invaded and it had been carved up by foreign powers, and that became the defining image. The sick man of Asia was something that extended all the way through the communist revolution all the way up even into the late 20th century as China began to become more prosperous.

But it was only really in the last couple of years - just, you know, in the last sort of three or four years - that China began to see itself as a much more powerful player in the world, as something that was beginning to edge towards becoming a competitor or a rival to the United States. But until recently, it still held itself back, and there was a - there was an expression that the Chinese political class used. Deng Xiaoping coined it in 1990. He said we must hide our strength and bide our time, meaning let's just make sure that we keep a step back from the United States because we don't really want to irritate them. We want to let them be the sole superpower in the world, and we'll just steadily build up our strength as we go.

GROSS: And is that changing now under President Xi?

OSNOS: Yeah. That's the big surprise for me, frankly. It's really quite stark. You know, I lived in China until 2013, and now I go back periodically. And when I came back on this most recent set of trips over the course of the last few months, it was quite striking how that period of hiding your strength and biding your time is just emphatically over. China is now embracing in a much more full-throated and explicit way the sense that it is - its moment has arrived. And the leader, Xi Jinping, says this much. He says - in a big speech in October, he said that a new era is here in which China will now move closer to the center stage in the world. He said we now represent what he called the Chinese solution, the (speaking Chinese) which means an alternative to Western democracy. And those are words that they never would have said as recently as three years ago.

GROSS: So at the same time that China is building itself up, America under the Trump administration seems to be withdrawing in some ways from the world stage, withdrawing from certain treaties, withdrawing from U.N. commitments. Is China trying to take advantage of the vacuum that we're leaving as we withdraw from certain areas?

OSNOS: They are. Actually, they'll say as much. If you go and talk to strategists in Beijing, what you find out is that they call this the period of strategic opportunity. And I asked a strategist in Beijing, this very prominent figure, a guy named Yan Xuetong. I said, how long does the period of strategic opportunity last for China? He says, well, it lasts as long as Trump is in office. And if you line up - just on a piece of paper, if you line up the ways in which the United States is withdrawing from the world, you see that there are all of these quite immediate and natural ways in which China is seeking to fill that void.

And it's worth pointing out that President Trump is not withdrawing from the world apologetically. He's doing it with some verve. I mean, he believes this is the right thing to do. So he is, as he said, withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement, withdrawing from UNESCO, he's pulled out of the U.N. negotiations on how to handle the refugee crisis, he's threatening to overturn the Korean Free Trade Agreement. And in each one of these cases, China has found a way to try to move into that space. So at the same time that the United States has said that the U.N. General Assembly needs to cut the peacekeeping budget by $600 million, China has said, well, we will now invest more in peacekeeping at the U.N. They've become one of the largest contributors of troops and money to U.N. peacekeeping.

Another example is foreign aid. You know, the United States, under the budget that the Trump administration has proposed for 2018, would cut foreign aid by about 42 percent. China has said in fact that it's expanding its foreign aid around the world. They've embarked on a project called The Belt and Road Initiative, which is essentially a play on the Silk Road of the old days where they're going to build bridges and railways and things like that. And it's a vast project. It's about seven times the size of what the Marshall Plan was in 1947, which was the U.S. project to rebuild Europe. So there's this very clear sense that into the void created by America's return, America's withdrawal to America First, is the possibility for a Chinese renewal and a new era of Chinese leadership.

GROSS: So that belt and road project, which is basically a huge infrastructure project, that's a project in African and Asian countries. That's not just a China project.

OSNOS: Exactly. You know, ironically, Terry, China is doing many of the things that the United States was doing about 70 years ago. That is to say that they are investing in the kinds of assets that we believed were really important to us at the end of World War II - diplomacy, foreign aid, influence beyond our borders, infrastructure. And that's why we undertook projects like the Marshall Plan, which was explicitly designed to, not only rebuild the physical infrastructure of Europe after the war, but really also to plant our values there so that when we rebuilt Germany or we rebuilt Japan in Asia, that we were also putting down things like freedom of the press, democracy, human rights.

Our view was that it would actually fortify America's position in the world. It would make us stronger because we had seeded our values beyond our own borders. And this president takes a very different view. He really believes that doing those kinds of investments - investing in foreign aid, investing in diplomacy - he believes it's either too costly or irrelevant and, therefore, he is cutting back systematically and quite dramatically from those commitments.

GROSS: So if America is pulling back on planting democratic values - and we should insert here that America has also propped up dictators, historically. It hasn't just been about planting democracy. But if we're withdrawing from countries and China is moving in to implant their values - they're an authoritarian country.

OSNOS: They are. They represent something almost sort of idiosyncratic in the world. I mean, let's - you know, China is a very odd political and economic picture after all. It's grown very fast over the course of the last three decades. And yet, at the same time, it's maintained this very rigid and repressive political environment - an authoritarian structure. And in some ways, I think it's going to have a much harder time projecting those political values around the world than they might imagine at the moment.

That's - it's sort of an interesting puzzle because they see this sense of opportunity. They grasp this moment of opening that the United States has presented. And yet, at the same time, you don't see a lot of people in countries in Latin America or in Africa or in Southeast Asia that say, yeah, we really want to adopt the Chinese political model. They're not ready to do that, but they are certainly interested in the kinds of economic inducements and the sort of foreign aid that China is willing to provide and that the United States is not as willing to provide anymore.

GROSS: Why don't we take a short break here, and then we'll talk some more? If you're just joining us, my guest is New Yorker staff writer Evan Osnos. We're talking about his new article "Making China Great Again: How Beijing Learned To Use Trump To Its Advantage." We'll be right back. This is FRESH AIR.



See, link for more.
#14876507
Note the movie ending where the Chinese hero kills the white American villain. That is a common theme in masculine Chinese movies. Below is an article about Chinese racism. The author is a white English woman and misunderstands Chonesie racism. She thinks white people are an exception. Not true. White devils are the rival. The idea is to replace them in authority and have all other races below them in a suitably Han centric hierarchy with the evil white person as the excluded other that the noble Chinese protect subordinate races from.

Think I’m kidding? This racism will become an important part of contested global norms in the next decade.

I recommend the writings of Dr Kam Louie for a more in depth description https://books.google.com.au/books/about/Theorising_Chinese_Masculinity.html?id=QG-InT7dB6cC&redir_esc=y

Anyway, here is the English lady’s view. Use the link to view the racist ad.


https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/08/beyond-the-pale-chinas-cheerful-racists/

Beyond the pale: China’s cheerful racists
Ideas about racial hierarchies are not outdated ­anathema here but unquestioned belief

Carola Binney


Setting off to spend a year teaching English in Zhejiang province in south-eastern China, I expected plenty of surprises. But what struck me most was something they tend not to tell you about in the guidebooks: the racism.

It started when I went around the classroom, asking pupils which city they were from. When I got to a slightly darker-skinned boy, his classmates thought it was hilarious to shout ‘Africa!’ It’s a theme. A girl with a similar complexion was taunted with monkey sounds; her peers refused to sit next to her, saying she smelt bad. I apparently erred when, teaching the word for wife, I showed my students a picture of Michelle Obama. The image of the then First Lady was greeted with exaggerated sounds of repulsion: ‘So ugly!’ they said. ‘So black!’

Such comments would have been treated harshly in a British classroom a quarter-century ago, let alone today. But my own protestations were met with confused faces — crestfallen that they’d disappointed their teacher, but clueless as to the nature of their mistake. And this stretches far beyond the classroom. To many Chinese, ideas about racial hierarchies are not outdated anathema but unquestioned belief.

In Britain, a politician who uses a defunct idiom like ‘N***** in the woodpile’ loses the whip. In China, racism is a standard undercurrent of public debate. A few months ago, Pan Qinglin, a Tianjin politician, announced to reporters that he had found out how to ‘solve the problem of the black population in Guangdong’ — a province with a small amount of African migration. Warning that the new arrivals brought drugs, sexual assault and infectious diseases, he urged local policy-makers to tighten controls to prevent China turning ‘from a yellow country to a black-and-yellow country’.

The Chinese don’t make a big deal about their racism: it’s so commonplace it can seem almost cheerful. An advert for a detergent shows a black man chatting up a Chinese woman, only for her to shove him in the washing machine until he emerges a fair-skinned Asian. The advert aired for months before it was picked up by an English-language website and caused uproar. The company, Qiaobi, apologised — to its non-customers. Its analogy of black skin and dirty laundry made perfect sense to the Chinese.

Chinese racism is, in part, the extension of a long-standing association of wealth and pale skin: a near-universal construct that is particularly acute in a country that was for centuries ruled by various subsections of its pallid northern population.

The history of China is also the history of proud isolationism: it has been keeping outsiders outside for generations. China was long the most developed country in Asia, and just as the Greeks stigmatised their neighbours as barbarians, the Chinese scorned theirs. The turn of the 20th century brought the grudging acknowledgement of western technological superiority, and with it a shift from the general policy of viewing all foreigners as inferior: an exception was made for westerners.


The racism begins with the assumption that all westerners are white. In the words of my black Cameroonian colleague, the Chinese are prone to think that ‘all blacks are from Africa, and everyone in Africa has AIDS’.

The notion of a black Briton is puzzling, when to be Chinese is to be Han and vice versa: the Party believes itself to be the legitimate government not just of all the Han in China, but everywhere else as well. In 2015, five Hong Kong-based Han booksellers were arrested for allegedly selling seditious works. One man was a British citizen and another a Swede, but their foreign passports did nothing, in the government’s eyes, to counteract their Chinese blood: both men were denied consular support. The Swede announced on state television, probably under duress, that ‘I truly feel that I am still Chinese’.

Conversely, a non-Han Chinese person is considered a contradiction in terms, and the Chinese apply the same logic to the citizens of other countries. When I showed my class my own school photograph, I expected them to remark on how terrible my hair looked. Instead, their first response was ‘Why are there those black girls in England?’

China’s government says it is ‘a unified multi-ethnic country’. It is not. To a British visitor, China appears astonishingly ethnically homogeneous: the Han ethnic group make up 92 per cent of the population, but walk the streets of almost any city and you’ll wonder where the other 8 per cent are hiding. The answer is: in ethnic minority enclaves on the fringes of some of the country’s poorest provinces. China has almost no citizens of non-Chinese descent: it is extremely difficult for expats to secure Chinese citizenship, so most are forced to leave as soon as their employment visas expire. China’s non-Han residents are members of the country’s indigenous minorities, who are almost always darker-skinned than their Han neighbours.

Treated variously as a security risk or as purveyors of quaint cultural curiosities, China’s minorities have been left behind by the economic progress of the last half century. Most work in the fields, and a few find employment performing folk dances to Han tourists. One study found that the per capita income gap between Han and minority Chinese increased by almost 17 percentage points between 1988 and 1995, when the Chinese economy began to skyrocket. While the incidence of poverty in China has decreased by a jaw-dropping 92 per cent in the past 40 years, almost half of those still living on less than $1.50 per day reside in minority enclaves.

When development does come, it is often seen as centrally imposed Sinicisation. Efforts to ensure that Tibetan children speak fluent Mandarin, for example, have resulted in the arrest of those who promote the local language. The approach to minorities is cruel and contradictory: most Han Chinese don’t see minority citizens as their fellow country-men, but still maintain that Beijing has a right to govern them.

My time in a Chinese classroom didn’t instil much hope of an enlightened next generation, but there are a few signs that things might be starting to change. Chinese teenage boys idolise the African-American basketball star Kobe Bryant, for instance — posters of him festooned the dormitory walls.

If China wants to realise its aspiration of replacing America as the country the world looks up to, it will need to sort out its race problem. It is an issue which fuels unrest at home, and damages the country’s reputation abroad. Xi Jinping has talked about a ‘Chinese dream’ — let’s hope it exports tolerance, not racism.
#14876581
None of this is new. Trump is god's gift to the Chinese. The Chinese have always seen themselves as the superior race, while racism and ultra-nationalism come naturally to the Chinese.

By the 19th century, Chinese self-esteem had become so battered that they grudgingly accepted the superiority of Western culture in technical fields while maintaining the superiority of Chinese culture in human sciences. They accepted white racism as long as they were not put on the same level as black people, whom they considered to be infinitely inferior. But a sentiment of Chinese superiority in the face of Western decadence has already been growing for decades.
#14876716
Everything Trump says about Pakistan is correct, and I doubt China's leaders are blind to the fact that closer relations to Pakistan will lead to a lot of headaches in the future, especially in regards to China's little problem with ethnic and Muslim unrest in the west that Pakistani Islamists support.

The way Trump went about this, airing his random thoughts on a social media platform while stuffing his mouth with tasteless McDonald's cheeseburgers in the White House Presidential bed with his 3 TVs in front of his face, is exactly the kind of behavior we've come to expect from a boorish, loud-mouthed retard who has no tact. Pakistan is not a trustworthy ally of the US or particularly anyone, but what Trump did was expected since he's a fucking idiot.

The intelligent president wouldn't have talked like that, and would continue to use Pakistan as appropriate, while remaining mindful of the obvious fact, even to the rest of us who aren't privy to the fine details of US intelligence, that Pakistan isn't trustworthy.
Last edited by Bulaba Khan Jones on 05 Jan 2018 01:19, edited 1 time in total.
#14891680
foxdemon wrote:Note the movie ending where the Chinese hero kills the white American villain. That is a common theme in masculine Chinese movies. Below is an article about Chinese racism. The author is a white English woman and misunderstands Chonesie racism. She thinks white people are an exception. Not true. White devils are the rival. The idea is to replace them in authority and have all other races below them in a suitably Han centric hierarchy with the evil white person as the excluded other that the noble Chinese protect subordinate races from.

Think I’m kidding? This racism will become an important part of contested global norms in the next decade.


By this logic, movies like Red Dawn, where the plucky white American heroes kill off the evil Chinese North Korean hordes, are equally racist propaganda. We're in the tail end of the American century - of course the Americans will sometimes be the villains in another culture's stories. How many films have American directors made about evil Muslims, Germans, or Brits? Is this a concentrated effort to establish a racial hierarchy with Americans at the top, by Hollywood?
#14891697
Fasces wrote:By this logic, movies like Red Dawn, where the plucky white American heroes kill off the evil Chinese North Korean hordes, are equally racist propaganda. We're in the tail end of the American century - of course the Americans will sometimes be the villains in another culture's stories. How many films have American directors made about evil Muslims, Germans, or Brits? Is this a concentrated effort to establish a racial hierarchy with Americans at the top, by Hollywood?



Well that is right. Cowboy and Indian movies are a good example. But such racist American movies are analysed and criticised for this. Shouldn’t Chinese racist expression in film also be criticised?

The pertinent information is in the post, for whic[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

It has already been explained that this type of co[…]

Sure, keep thinking that. Election year is caus[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Again: nope. Putin in Feb 2022 only decided ... […]