there is one statement that is right here "Elected leaders have
to balance the act between national interest and reflect upon its
value." Yes, China's national interest does not coincide with that
of the west, and Chinese culture differs from western culture, in
many many ways.
The small nations, new nations, poor nations had only two
choices in the past, the West, headed by the American, and the
Commie, headed by the USSR. Even China, had depended on the US and
the Russia to kick the Jap out of China. Many cities of China in
the north has great russian influence, Heilongjian was even built
by the russian. The US crushed the USSR, they thought they had the
world, now China is a challenge, a threat, NO?
Don't blame the arrest of Aung San Su Kyi on the influence
of Chinese, Asean need to reconsider their engagement with
Burma; India, no influence on Burma, or Myanmar? just to name a
few.
The political problem between China with Tibet, Taiwan
began with the British and the Japanese, who occupied these Chinese
territories and declared them independent! If China were not strong
enough, the countries that occupied many parts of China during the
late Qing Dynasty would have had the north eastern provinces,
Tianjin, Shanghai all declared independent nations, then today
China would have more political resolution to make. The Chinese
must be glad that the west had only wanted the colonies, where they
could exploit the great resources!
Looking at the way the Brits handed independence to the Indian
subcontinent, which is now broken down into India, Blangadesh,
Pakistan, and they are permenantly at war, speaking only english to
communicate....again, if Chinese were considered a threat, they are
proud of it.
It is not to "question how do they behaved internationally", it
is what you want to do with the existence of a prosperous and
wealthy China. Call it a threat? "Action comes with
Reaction."
That is why i said the arguments are outdated. The premises that
you indicate are not in todays worlds concern.
1) The US did not Crushed USSR. -- It was its economy that
could not substained the bloc and its ablility to control
its sphere of influence.
2) China national interest or the Communist party interest to
survive. The communist has embark on this economic reformed and
found that in order for it to continue to exist it has to substain
its economy.
3) Nobody is disputing the cause of Tibet and Taiwan, But
its been 50 yrs. if you look at conflicts across the globe,
leaders who are unable to negociate and come to peace tend to
fail.
So Western nation and its people around the World looking
at CURRENT.....
All the regimes such as Myanmar military junta, Sudan, Zimbawei
behave the way they do are because they know that China's
abilities to exert its influence in the UN. And they can get away
of what they do so long as they trade with China in -- OIL.
n Resources.
So People around the world is asking what is China doing against
the atrocity against the weak when it has the upmost influence in
these region!......because it is a communist regime and it is
immune and insensitive to the fact that other nations are
elected official and are answerable to its citizens.
Protest against China comes at the Grass root level. It will
escalate to the elected official. look at hunger strike by Mia
Farrow and Branson. Are they politically motivated? But their
action will trigger down to the elected official to response.
Understand it is people that change politics. Not Govt that
change politics.
That is why i said argument is outdated.
