Actions by the People's Republic -- intentional or not -- have created the worst regional environment for China since Tiananmen.
One of the elementary rules of foreign policy is when you are in a hole, stop digging. But judging by their recent behavior, Beijing’s foreign policy mandarins and national security establishment are clearly in violation of this rule. Despite the diplomat heat China has received for its tough stance on territorial disputes in recent months, the Chinese Foreign Ministry apparently seemed to believe that it could strengthen Chinese claims symbolically by issuing a new passport containing a map that claims the disputed maritime areas in the South China Sea and the contested territories along the Sino-Indian border. The reaction was predictable. Southeast Asian countries, particularly Vietnam and the Philippines, protested loudly. India retaliated by promising to stamp visas containing its own map on Chinese passports.
At around the same time as the diplomatic uproar over the new Chinese passport design, the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) conducted its first successful landing and take-off operations from its retrofitted aircraft carrier. The televised test might have boosted the Chinese military’s image and self-confidence, but the message this event sent around the region, given China’s hardline position on territorial disputes and its neighbors’ fears of the PLA’s growing military capabilities, cannot be very reassuring.
But that is not the end of the actions taken by China recently that are likely to cost Beijing’s new government dearly. A few days before Japan’s Diet elections on December 16, which are expected to produce a right-wing government with deep antipathy toward Beijing, the Chinese government escalated its challenge to Japan’s territorial claims to the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands by flying an official, albeit unarmed, maritime surveillance plane over the airspace of the disputed islands. As expected, the move incensed Tokyo and can only be expected to bolster the Liberal Democratic Party’s (LDP) chances and lend more credence to their call for a tougher policy toward China.
Photo Credit: Flickr (Francisco Diez)
View as Single Page
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
Observer
@ Anon,
Still here and continued to spew out ignorant statements?
Again, did Vietnam swallow Cambodia as its own land as china did with smaller neighbors? YES or NO.
Oh, Vietnam was under china's rule for 1000 years, why wouldn't china dare to take it back? LOL. What is the matter?
Look here =
http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1879849,00.html (moderators, the link is not spam).
So by using your logic, Italy (Rome Empire) can reclaim the whole Europe and Northern Africa? Iran (Persian Empire) can reclaim most of Middle East? YES or NO.
Still nothing about Mongolia and Manchuria take back china as whole, Japan and Britain take back china as parts, and Vietnam takes back southern china by using the same logic as yours? YES or NO.
Did you see any countries on Earth claim the whole sea area as china is doing now? Did you see any countries can be that stupid and ignorant? YES or NO.
Until you answer my questions above, you have to right to debate with me, comrade.
In closing, still nothing, nothing at all about Russia in 1858 (Aigun Treaty) and a few months ago, how they mistreat china and chinese but china and chinese would not dare to say a word but continuing to kowtow to them. What is the matter? Why continue to lose face and suffer so much shame and humiliation? Do tell us the reasons.
Jean-Paul
@ Observer
My point exactly, using his logic, any empire that has owned any sort of territory for hundreds of years has a legitimate claim on those territories. Its really quite hilarious watching him try and defend imperial expansion of China and at the same time constantly complain about the USA, Japan etc…… hypocrisy at its finest.
Trust me however, this guy will not respond to your challenges directly, he will simply try and evade whatever your saying and spew some random conspiratorial "facts" about the USA. He has not interest in honest debate, just distractions and pointing fingers like a child.
Ben
The west should start claiming China's airspace and under water as we went there first, having built airplanes and submarines. Also the moon, since sorry China, a firecracker just wasn't enough to get you there first.
Maybe then China will moderate its SCS demands.
Jean-Paul
"For all the lies you posted about Mongolia, Xinjiang, Tibet, etc., they were incorporated into China for hundreds of years, dates can be easily Googled, so no point for you to keep stating lies."
That does not mean that they belong to China so he is not stating lies, but merely showing how intellectually dishonest you are. For example the Ottoman empire has ruled vast regions of eastern europe for centuries as well, before the USA even existed. By your logic of owning territory for hundreds of years, turkey has a legitimate claim to all of its territories that it had during its imperial reign.
"so if you want to criticize China for Tibet and Xinjiang, then you should also declare New Mexico, Ryukyus, ect. as illegitimate conquered territories by the US and Japan or you look like a huge hypocrite."
No he doesn't because all of those territories are peacefully co-existing within their federal government and do not engage in self-immolations and protests against the federal governments. Also, none of these territories have a ruler in-exile (dalai lama). Your failure to note these key differences once again exposes the agenda you have very clearly.
Let me guess your next response, "ohhh but the CIA is funding those self-immolations!!!" hahahaahahhha
Anon
@Observer Historic
EVIDENCE *IS* Historic Truths. I guess you're unable to tell the difference. However, Cambodia was a sovereign nation when Vietnam invaded. Vietnam is as expansionist as any nation that invaded another SOVEREIGN nation. No different from Iraq invading Kuwait.
For all the lies you posted about Mongolia, Xinjiang, Tibet, etc., they were incorporated into China for hundreds of years, dates can be easily Googled, so no point for you to keep stating lies. These territories were incorporated even earlier than the existence of the USA, before New Mexico was invaded and conquered by the US, before Ezochi and Ryukyus became Hokkaido, so if you want to criticize China for Tibet and Xinjiang, then you should also declare New Mexico, Ryukyus, ect. as illegitimate conquered territories by the US and Japan or you look like a huge hypocrite.
There were secessionist movements all over the world, from Catalonia to the US Southern States, so I would like to hear your opinion if the USA's South is "invaded" by the North when the Southern States tried to secede during the Civil War, and that the South is illegally occupied.
So you engage in Doublespeak, and resort to firing cheap shots about 50cents when you cannot answer these challenges?
Observer
@ Anon,
Are you for real? Did you smoke something before you spew out those ridiculous statements? Let see.
Did Vietnam swallow the whole Cambodia and declare it as "historic evidences" as china did with smaller neighbors of Inner Mongolia, Xinjiang, Tibet? Who attacked who again? LOL, read this =
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War Do you want to compare that?
You need to look up at this =
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_Fields and see how china created the monsters that killed 1/2 of Cambodia people. Just like Chairman Mao killed tens of millions chinese in the Great Leap Forward Program, the Culture Revolution or chinese tanks rolled over chinese students at Tianament Square. Do you want to compare that?
You want to say since those lands were a part of ancient chinese empire, ok, how about let go farther back and let Mongolia takes back the whole china (Yuan Dynasty) or Vietnam takes back southern part of china (Yue people) or Manchuria (Quing Dynasty) or Japan (WWII) or Britain (Opium Wars) takes back parts of china? Do you want to compare that? Can't just pick and chose the ones you like, comrade.
LOL @ your pathetic attempt to compare US military bases as china enslavement of its smaller neighbors. Did you see US sends millions of its own people to occupy those lands as china is doing with Tibet, Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia? Did you see those people that live near the US bases burn themselves to death in protest as Tibet people have been doing or uprising in Xinjiang? Do you want to compare that?
Learn how to use logic and facts, my poor and pathetic comrade. Oh, still nothing about Russia took 600 thousands square kilometers of land from china and Russia Navy shot to death several chinese poachers? Why? Why keep kowtowing to them for so long and so low? ROTFLMAO.
We do not need to insult you guys. You guys insult yourself with your lack of knowledge and understanding of history.
Anon
Here's a challenge to the NATO bullies – come on guys, be a bit more imaginative, when you can't argue on points you repeat over and over about 50 cents armies, how original and intelligent! That type of posts are worth at most 1 cent per line, as even bots can generate them.
Go find some newer insults, ok? Surprise me.
Anon
And let's not forget the spread of disgusting financial weapons of mass destruction, derivatives, junk investments, pyramid schemes, initiated by economic hitmen, that subvert governments and impoverished millions all over the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confessions_of_an_Economic_Hit_Man
Jean-Paul
"The commentators are said to be paid fifty cent of RMB for every post that either steers a discussion away from anti-party or sensitive content on domestic websites, bulletin board systems, and chatrooms,[3] or that advances the Communist party line.[4][5]" Seems exactly like what this anon guy is doing. Can't argue against the facts that Beijing is a bully? Just go on a lame, copy and pasted rant about how bad the US is!!!
Wow this anon guy sure is a professional wumao here, he seems to be really good at trying to completely change the topic of the article towards whatever US foreign policy rant that has been beaten to death one thousand times over.
Please buddy for the love of god your telling us nothing new here get a real job and stop beating the dead horse!!!
Anon
@Jean Paul And you are a "one-note", notice you have NOTHING to refute all the points raised but go on ad nauseum about the "wumaos"…sorry, all the 50cents can't math the low-level punching of your cheap shots.
Jean-Paul
I dont refute the points because there is no point in doing so, this article is about China and its neighbours, it has nothing to do with NATO, US or anything else for that matter. You are just spouting random conspiratorial nonsense like a robot, why would I waste my time?
I haven't seen you make any legitimate, well reasoned, well supported arguments against this article and what it states. All you have done is simply try to distract and point the finger somewhere else, which, conveniently is the exact definition of what a wumao poster is paid to do, ironic no?
Anon
Well, we have the resources to look up the FACTS for ourselves, so you saying something doesn't make it true. However, the fact that instead of refuting with easily found evidence, you resort to insults, indicates a poverty of factual evidence at your disposal to support your contention. The insult is the ultimate proof of failed debate. For example, was China Quarterly, publishing "Chinese facts", funded by the CIA? What did its editor, Roderick Macfarquhar, Harvard Professor, eventually admit? What does it say about "the image of China" as a construct? Easily Googled!
Jean-Paul
I do not debate with intellectually dishonest people such as yourself because we all know the true intention of your posts. You do not post to make an honest debate but to simply turn the discussion away from whatever the article is stating and turn it into some sort of mud slinging contest between the west's history and China's history.
The fact that you frame all of your "arguments" on "but but but the west is MORE evil" shows that you have no interest in honestly debating the FACTS about China's expansionist desires and the FACT that it has dozens of territorial disputes with its neighbours.
Please for once construct a legitimate, well reasoned, well supported argument against what the ARTICLE is actually saying and maybe people will take you more seriously.
ACT
@anon
i looked for myself into the issue with regards to Mr. Macfarquhar, and the sole interview or email that i could find was by a pro-maoist site with a clear mind to distorting the issue; not only did Mr. Macfarquhar not know that the CIA was funding it, but he nevertheless ensured that that there was equal representation within the debate sphere of China Quarterly. But let's not mince facts; as Observer has continuously pointed out, you constantly attempt to distract this issue back to the "evils" of the west. Let me put it simply; every culture that exists currently has, at some point in its history, attempted or carried out the conquest or genocide of other peoples. However, in the modern day, only the PRC continues to justify an expansionist policy–one that has been carried out since its birth– on the idea that certain territories belonged to it since antiquity, a concept that flies in the face of independent research done by–of all places–Taiwanese universities. this is better supported if we look at the Chinese history, as explained by Martin Jacques:
"Chinese historians generally describe the process of Chinese territorial expansion as one of ‘unification’ rather than ‘conquest’, with expansion being seen as a progressive evolution towards a preordained and inevitable unity. Territory, once taken, has been regarded as immutably Chinese.18 There is a powerful underlying assumption that the numerous races and nationalities have always demonstrated undivided loyalty to the imperial regimes.19 The truth, in fact, is rather different. Far from China’s expansion to its present borders being a harmonious and natural process, the realization of a nation always waiting to be born, it was in fact, as one would expect, a complicated process of war, rivalry, ethnic conflict, hegemony, assimilation, conquest and settlement.20 The embryo of contemporary China was born out of the military victory of the Qin kingdom (221- 206 BC), following the Warring State period during which over 100 states fought for supremacy in north and central China. The Qin dynasty – which, prior to its triumph, roughly coincided with the present north-west province of Shaanxi – eventually emerged victorious over six other kingdoms and succeeded in expanding its territory sixfold.21 During the 2,000 years that followed the Qin victory, China expanded southwards to the South China Sea, northwards to incorporate much of the steppe lands, and westwards into Central Asia. Far from this enormous geographical expansion being characterized by a natural process of fusion, peace and harmony, it predictably entailed much conflict and many wars.22 The growth of China is the story of the outward expansion of the northern Chinese. The best-known area of conflict concerns the region to the north of Beijing, bordering on what we now know roughly as Mongolia and Manchuria. For thousands of years this region was contested between the northern horse-bound nomads of the steppes and the agrarian-based Chinese. The picture painted by official Chinese histories is of aggressive, rampaging nomads and peace-loving Chinese peasants.23 While it is true that the Chinese were constantly preoccupied with the security of their northern borders – until the Qing dynasty, the steppe nomads showed themselves to be highly effective fighters – the Chinese frequently sought to conquer and hold the steppe lands to their north. Rather than seeing the Great Wall as a line of fortified defence against the nomads, in fact, it is more appropriate to regard it as the outer perimeter of an expanding Chinese empire.24 The names of the fortifications reveal the nature of the Chinese intent: ‘Tower for Suppressing the North’ and ‘Fort Where the Barbarians are Killed’. The Chinese saw the nomads as much their inferior, referring to them as barbarians. It was the long-running conflict between the Chinese and the steppe nomads that shaped the Chinese sense of cultural superiority, gave rise to the distinction between ‘civilization’ and ‘barbarians’, and largely conditioned Chinese thinking about ‘self’ and ‘the other’.25"
on southern china:
"The conquest of the lands to the south is less well known. It took place over a period of nearly three millennia and involved the movement of whole populations, the intermixing of races, and the disappearance or transformation of cultures. Some races vanished altogether, while substantial kingdoms were either destroyed or subject to a process of absorption and assimilation. The rich foliage of these subtropical lands lent themselves to guerrilla warfare and the Han rulers, during the Qin and Han dynasties in particular, were kept in a more or less permanent state of insecurity.28 By far the largest single expansion – and certainly the most rapid – took place in the early phase of the Manchu-controlled Qing dynasty, from 1644 until the late eighteenth century, when the territory under Chinese rule more than doubled. This involved the conquest of lands to the north, notably those occupied by the Mongols, and to the north-west, the homelands of the diverse Muslim populations of Turkestan.29 Many of the peoples conquered, particularly in Central Asia and Tibet, had little or nothing in common with the Han Chinese. These lands became colonial territories of the Qing empire, huge in extent, sparsely populated and rich in some natural resources. China’s expansion usually involved a combination of military force and cultural example. This was certainly true of the southern and central parts of China as well as the steppe lands. But the Qing conquest of the north-west and west was different, being achieved by the use of particular force and brutality.30 Most of the Zunghars, for example, who occupied much of what we now know as Xinjiang, were exterminated.31"
on racism in china:
In the Chinese perception there is a clear racial hierarchy. White people are respected, placed on something of a pedestal and treated with considerable deference by the Chinese; in contrast, darker skin is disapproved of and deplored, the darker the skin the more pejorative the reaction.105 People from other East Asian countries, traditionally regarded as inferior, are not immune. A Filipina friend studying at Beijing University was shocked by the level of discrimination she experienced. Unlike her white colleagues, who were treated with respect, she often found herself ignored in restaurants, with waiters refusing to serve her. Local Chinese would audibly refer to her as ‘stupid’ or ‘ignorant’. One day she was refused entry on to a bus by the conductor in a manner that suggested that she was afflicted with a disease"
on expansion:
Another Taiwanese writer, Lu Liang, is unambiguous about underlying Chinese attitudes: ‘Deep down the Chinese believe that they are superior to Westerners and everyone else.’144 No other people from a developing country possess anything like this sense of supreme self-confidence bordering on arrogance. It would be wrong to regard this feeling of superiority as purely or perhaps even mainly racial in character. Rather it is a combination of both cultural and racial, and has been such for thousands of years.145 The steady expansion of the Chinese empire rested firstly on a process of conquest and secondly on a slow process of absorption and assimilation. As we have seen, Chinese attitudes fluctuated between regarding other races as incapable of adaptation to Chinese ways, or alternatively believing they could be assimilated, depending on how self-confident the Chinese felt at the time and the precise balance of power. Expansion, in other words, was a hegemonic project, a desire to absorb other races, to civilize them, to teach them Chinese ways and to integrate them into the Chinese self.
and:
The idea of China’s restoration is rather succinctly expressed by Yan Xuetong, one of China’s leading international relations experts: The rise of China is granted by nature. The Chinese are very proud of their early achievements in the human history of civilization. In the last 2,000 years China has enjoyed superpower status several times, such as the Han dynasty, the Tang dynasty and the early Qing dynasty . . . This history of superpower status makes the Chinese people very proud of their country on the one hand, and on the other hand very sad about China’s current international status. They believe China’s decline is a historical mistake which they should correct. . . . The Chinese regard their rise as regaining China’s lost international status rather than as obtaining something new.148
Jacques, Martin (2009-10-15). When China Rules the World: The End of the Western World and the Birth of a New Global Order: Second Edition (Kindle Locations 4909-4915). Penguin Group. Kindle Edition.
effectively:
this is what i have been arguing all along, anon: China has never been peaceful, and cannot be compared to the US or any other power for it is guilty of a far longer list of irredentism, etc, that stretches into the modern age. Furthermore, this recent activity is not in any way an exercise of China's "rights" but a blatant attempt to revert the geopolitical clock to what it once was.
Anon
@ACT What a lengthy cut n paste job! But you actually support the main point I am making – FACT: CIA DID FUND DISINFORMATION ABOUT CHINA, despite all the "protests" of Mr MacFarquhar, that he did not know, that he tried to be "balanced", etc…to save his own tattered reputation.
You tried to belittle the source as "socialist",when there are many other sites that referenced the original "London Review of Books" letters by MacFarquhar – the original source of the MacFarhuqar owned penned and signed letters is NOT a fringe site, but a respectable site. It shows you did not pay attention.
Moreover, any Google of "China Quarterly CIA" would show other connections that led to widespread belief in the "75 million killed by Mao" assertions.
That no mainstream media would pick up the story only demonstrates how the MSM is in cahoots and completely dedicated to further CIA or NATO propaganda goals.
This "China's Image " problem thus isn't of China's own making – what China looks like in the MSM is fully controlled by the US-NATO governments.
ACT
@anon
what i punched in, specifically, into google was "China Quarterly Roderick Macfarquhar", and it came up with this site: "http://www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/faq/chinaquarterlycia.html", which was a maoist site by its own definition. I find your characterization of the mainstream media to be amusing, because you seem to be of the illusion that, somehow, the media within the PRC is not aligned to the greater foreign policy goals of the PRC itself–i.e, the restoration of the Chinese Empire Thus, the CIA is by no means unique in this regard, and your entire argument can be upended by this; every nation practices misinformation, and the only true truth can be told by those who were actually at the events in question. Nevertheless, I base my opinion not on the propaganda that you seem to think i look at regularly–i read the Asia Times, this site, the BBC, The Guardian (which exposed murdoch), MSNBC, CNN, Al-Jazeera, as well as blogs such as those by Michael Turton and Ampontan, as well as J. Michael Cole–but via credible information, views of chinese history, as well as recent events. It is extremely telling to me when the PRC aims its military force expansion at directly being able to defeat the united states in direct confrontation (Type 99 ZTZ, Dong Feng 21-D, LACMS, J-21, J-32, the latter of which is almost a carbon copy of the F-35), especially when the PRC has no open antagonists within its periphery, other than the U.S itself, a nation which has repeatedly said that it desires greater cooperation with the PRC, which appears to be gearing up to defeat it. It is also telling that when people carefully ask what proof the PRC has of this historic evidence, the answer is usually "since ancient times", with no other clarification. This says nothing of the fact that the NATO-U.S conspiracy that you cite here is most likely illusory at best, especially given how NATO's capabilities have deteriorated; during the libya intervention, which was approved by the U.N, NATO very nearly ran out of ammunition.
I tend to believe that your "conspiracy" is actually the product of PRC counter-propaganda to excuse the military buildup and modernization that i suspect they will eventually use to take back what they see as rightfully theirs. Let us look at this example; it is a well known fact that the U.S has, and continues to, destabilize governments for its own gain; this is not a feature unique to it, looking at the behavior of nations such as Russia during the cold war, as well as the PRC itself (one of the reasons why it invaded vietnam was that said nation dared to move outside China's sphere of influence and align itself with the Soviet Union) but you seem to believe, anon, that–somehow, and despite the fact that all nations perform some form of interference against each other–the position of the U.S as the leading military power makes it uniquely evil amongst all the nations on our home planet, which we all share. My question to you is, given China's history and how the PRC has warped it for its own gain, do you honestly expect it to be any different, and do you honestly expect that they will not make good on their constant rhetoric of revenge when they have the unchallenged ability to do so? I find it especially ominous that the PRC's mission from the beginning, as well as the mission of the PLA, is the "correction of historic wrongs"; wikipedia, under the entry for "revanchism", defines the term as:
"a political manifestation of the will to reverse territorial losses incurred by a country, often following a war or social movement. Revanchism draws its strength from patriotic and retributionist thought and is often motivated by economic or geo-political factors….Revanchism is linked with irredentism, the conception that a part of the cultural and ethnic nation remains "unredeemed" outside the borders of its appropriate nation-state. Revanchist politics often rely on the identification of a nation with a nation-state, often mobilizing deep-rooted sentiments of ethnic nationalism, claiming territories outside of the state where members of the ethnic group live, while using heavy-handed nationalism to mobilize support for these aims. Revanchist justifications are often presented as based on ancient or even autochthonous occupation of a territory since "time immemorial", an assertion that is usually inextricably involved in revanchism and irredentism, justifying them in the eyes of their proponents."
That this description defines the continuous rhetoric–as well as the very existence–of the PRC to a tee should make one's blood run cold, for it suggests, if nothing else, that there has been a decades long project on the part of its leaders to devote an entire population to the purpose of taking bloody revenge on any who wronged the supposed and, ultimately, false notions of cultural and racial superiority on the part of China, and the PRC seems to be increasingly well placed to do just that. When matched with the increasingly fiery rhetoric from other posters such as John Chan, certain lines of evidence can be connected. After all, the PRC is the only nation where plainclothes police have both encouraged and discouraged the torching of Japanese businesses and the hunting down of Japanese citizens over the mere formalization of Japan's century-old ownership of the senkaku islands, which–unlike China's irredentism–is legal within the bounds of international law, and cannot be easily disproved by the volumes of maps showing that China previously acknowledged Japan's past ownership of said isles.
I tend to shy away from sites such as "alex jones' info wars" or "land-destroyer blog" precisely because they practice fearmongering extensively, and the crowds that attend them are of the same shrill character of anti-government whack-jobs in the U.S who use the cover of "states rights" to promote a "my way or the highway" form of rule that would promote only their view of what is just and right. Witness the controversies surrounding the non-issues of abortion and gay-marriage; its a similar kind of tactic.
Ultimately, however, and as Ben noted, this boils down to which version of racially, culturally,as well as propaganda, motivated version of Chauvinism (Han or western) one believes justifies territorial expansion, black operations or so on conducted by all nations that have the power to do so. China's is just that much more obvious and disgusting, made even more so by the paper thin attempts to call it otherwise; your arguments against the positions of Jean-Paul, myself and other "pro-western" posters can be tossed away because we know full well what goes on in our names; unlike the actions of the PRC which are always made to seem as though they are justified by its past victimization by the west, the crimes of our various governments are known to us as publicly available information, much of which is taught in university classrooms; criticism is easily available, readily supplied by respected individuals such as Noam Chomsky. You might argue that we of the west are in the same position as the Germans were during the period of Nazi rule, content to sit idly by with full knowledge when our governments inflict misery upon others in our name. Yet there is active protest against this, and we are far from silent when our governments do something that is morally bankrupt. There is nothing like this in the PRC, and all those who question the "truth"–most notably Ai Wei Wei, and for the "crime" of arguing against the one-child policy–are brutally silenced. Who then, do you think is–if only slightly–more morally commendable? the governments that encourage criticism and allow the public knowledge of any past horrors committed, and do not make active effort to quash protests or the government that brainwashes its population to the point of active arson and man-hunting?
Anon
What you called "invaded India and Vietnam" was actually India and Vietnam invading China's borders. (India initiated a Forward Policy in which it placed outposts along the border, including several north of the McMahon Line, and Vietnam first invaded and cuppied China's ally, Cambodia, the way the the US would come to Japan's aid if Japan were invaded and occupied, so China was REACTING to aggression, NOT initiating them. )
Most of those so-called "invaded and enslaved" territories were ALREADY part of Qing China when China made the transition to become a Republic and then a People's Republic. In fact, Modern China LOST territories in negotiations with Mongolia, India and Russia, to their benefit.
Facts are twisted and warped to spread the campaign of Lies, Disinformation and Doublespeak…Shame.
Let's look at the Bully Cops, starting with the US shall we?
Invaded and colonized China, the Philippines, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, waged wars in Europe and in the Pacific, bombed Cambodia and Laos, currently invaded, and oh, let's not forget your favorite word, *ENSLAVED* and occupying Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, the US currently has *760* military bases all over the planet. As for CIA black ops TORTURE SITES, who knows…must be in the thousands. No other country, not even Russia, comes close to this. China has *1* military base in Laos.
Like I said, bust the Chinese for some pots of weed while the Cops get away with a global chain of meth labs, crack cocaine factories and fields of poppy.
Observer
@ Anon,
As I said previously to another poster, this article is about china and its aggressive behavior toward smaller neighbors. This article is NOT, again I repeat, NOT about the US, UK, Germany, or any other Western nations. Why can't you guys understand that? It is not that hard.
Also, where did I ever say other Western nations' colonist behavior were good? You said that, not me.
Do you know the old proverb of "Two wrongs don't make a right"?
Anon
Yes of course that is *your agenda* – it's all about how evil China is, oh give or take a couple of thousand years. Period. However, we don't really know what level of EVIL unless we measure China's sins and depravity against the GOOD of the US, Japan, UK, NATO, etc. in terms of invasions, land grab, expansion, slavery, treatment of minorities, colonization, unprovoked wars, etc. right?
This is called PERSPECTIVE, look it up.
Anon
@Observer It's like busting the Chinese guy for a home garden of marijuana, slapping on him a 20 year sentence while the Cops themselves own 200 acres of poppy fields, the largest meth labs and crack cocaine factories in the neighborhood. You will of course tell us that two wrongs don't make one right so let's ignore the Cops' drug dealings!
Observer
@ Anon,
You don't want to go back to thousands of years? Ok, how about this.
Since the creation of the CCP in 1949, bully china invaded and enslaved
Inner Mongolia, Tibet, Xinjiang. Bully china also attacked India in 1962, attacked
Vietnam in 1979 in which tens of thousands PLA soldiers lay dead at the
border. Bully china also attacked Vietnam in 1974 at Paracel Islands while the North and South
were involved in a civil war (very sneaky). Bully china also attacked a Vietnamese
unarmed supply ship in 1988 at Spartly Islands. Bully china also harrashed Philippines at
their own EEZ area a few months ago. Do you want to compare that?
The US is about to pull out of Afghan and Iraq. How about bully china? No, the invaders
are still at the occupied lands. Do you want to compare that?
Do you want me to go on?
A mind is a terrible thing to waste. Look it up and USE IT. Understand?
One more thing, when will china and chinese get some backbones and get back the vast land that
Russia took from you in 1858? Why no chanting of "historic evidences" or "teach
them a lesson" or "we will nuke them" and all the big talk? What is the matter?
How pathetic and sad. Acting so tough with smaller neighbors but kowtow and kowtow
to the strong. Always have and always will. Do you want to compare that? ROTFLMAO.
Observer
@ Jeremy,
Excellent write up with detailed events about china multiple invasions of Korea. So much for ignorant statements from chinese posters such as "china is about harmony" and "china did not enslave" anyone.
As I said before, bully china did try to invade and enslave Vietnam for the last few thousands years. Since 938, the bully invaders got kicked out for good and they are still mad about it. Too bad, you lose, get over it. Better yet, take on Japan and Russia to get revenge of what Japanese soldiers did to your women and Russians did to your ancestors and land.
What is the matter? Why so silent?
Anon
@Observer
So up till these past years, Great Britain, the US, Germany, etc. have REPEATEDLY invaded, colonized and exploited other nations, at far greater frequency than China EVER did in its long history. So what makes China "evil" and these colonial, imperial powers "good"?
Errol
Nothing. All empires, by definition of their bloody origins by conquests, are evil. You don't always see a nation clamoring to give up its independence and unite with a bigger nation. The premise that was negated was the claim that the PRC's rise is in accordance with its 'peaceful and harmonious' history. It turns out that the Chinese Empire wasn't all that squeaky clean either. Exceptionalism with Chinese characteristics, one would say. Call a spade a spade. The US military loves its wars, and the CPC is out to grab what it can get away with.
Anon
Well the, how does one mete out judgment without some kind of benchmark, how "evil" the evolution of China today or how "good" the US, Japan, UK, NATO, etc.?
Nothing can be weighed in a vacuum, there has to be some frame of reference before one entity can be confidently pronounced as inferior to another.
So let's compare apples to apples, Empires to Empires, in order to come up with a fair and accurate measurement against the trajectory of human history.
Anon
This article is built on a false premise, that somehow China by itself created its "image problem", yet the global media is firmly in non-Chinese hands, and ALL news and opinions, including this one, spins China's image at will. There is a strong whiff of Al Capone style negotiation here - that if only China were to give in to the demands of the US and its allies, its image would improve. Quite a cynical piece.