re: Safety in China and Elsewhere (Istvan Simon, US)

Istvan Simon comments on Charles Ridley’s and Mike Bonnie’s recent assertions that they feel safe in China:

I personally never felt unsafe in China either. But feeling safe and being safe are two different things. Clyde McMorrow felt safe in Rio de Janeiro, and statistics show that Rio is one of the most violent cities in the world. Rio is much much less safe than Oakland, California, which is a lot less safe than San Francisco, where Charles tells us he did not feel safe, or Palo Alto, or where I live in Pleasanton. I used to walk at 3 AM in Pleasanton, and never felt threatened or unsafe. In fact the police more than on one occasion stopped to ask me if I was OK and needed help, because walking at that hour is so unusual. But when I explained what I was doing, and offered to identify myself, the policeman politely declined, as he had no suspicion that I was doing anything wrong.

In 2004 when I got married in China I used to walk by myself to the park in Nanning at 6 AM, 2 miles from where we lived, every morning, because that was the only reasonable time to walk, avoiding the intense and very unpleasant heat during the day or evening. There were many many people in the park and on the streets, and I never felt unsafe. But my family members, who knew better, were actually apprehensive about my safety, because there had been several murders in the very same park in which I did my daily walking.

I also participated at the time in a forum where one of the participants wrote several hair-raising stories that he had witnessed personally in China. He had lived in China for three years, and he was living in a neighborhood which was poorer than where we lived, and apparently encountered violence on the streets that he claimed to have witnessed. One involved the savage beating and near-lynching of somebody who had been accused of stealing something from someone. This is hearsay, and I cannot vouch for its veracity, but I assumed that it was true, as I had no reason to doubt the person who made the claim.

I was robbed by a taxi driver in Shanghai, who charged me much more than what he should have to take me from the airport to my hotel. I knew that he was robbing me, because I had taken many taxis in China before, and knew that taxis just did not cost as much as what he was charging me. The meter showed the exorbitant charge, but it was obviously a scam. He gave me a handwritten receipt instead of using the little mechanized machines that print a receipt automatically when the meter is reset. When I returned to the United States, I went to the police at Pudong International Airport before my flight took off, and made a complaint against the driver, and showed them the handwritten receipt. The policeman that took my complaint accompanied me to the area where drivers wait for passengers, to see if I could identify the culprit, as evidently I was not the only one that he had robbed this way, but unfortunately he was not there, so this attempt at catching a thief failed. They told me that it was an illegal taxi, not registered with the authorities, who probably prey on foreigners.

JE comments: A followup question for the Floor: what’s the worst you’ve ever been ripped off as a tourist in a foreign land? My response would be $75 for two local phone calls, totaling about 40 minutes, made from my Buenos Aires hotel in 1994. Actually, I researched the problem with friends after paying the tab, and determined that the calls really did cost $75. That was an expensive time in Bs. As.

re: China, Japan and Safety (Mike Bonnie, US)

Cameron Sawyer wrote on 16 November:

I think it’s not totalitarianism which determines the level of street crime, but probably more factors like (a) the prevalance of poverty, particularly whether or not there exists some kind of underclass; (b) city planning character of a city–do people live and walk around in the centers of cities? Or do they travel by car and live in suburbs?; (c) general level of order in the country; (d) prevalance of drug problems in the city.

Mike Bonnie responds:

I agree with Cameron and believe he is right on each of the points he has made, with one addition. Although I don’t have empirical data to back this up, intuitively, safety has everything to do with levels of poverty and relative income (limits in extremes), more so than the form of government. It was not the intent of my November 15 message to point to any other correlation other than that of content of the media and feelings of safety.

The one thing missing from Cameron’s list, and I believe this to be what sets America apart from other countries, is access to weapons, in conjunction with sizable and increasing discrepancies between the “super rich” and people living below the poverty level. If one wanted to add “financial vehicles” to a list of potential weapons, America has more “hit and run fatalities” than many other countries. As a former licensed life-insurance agent, I know “financial death” may be more painful to some than “death” death, and will drive others to take drastic measures to alleviate the pain.

The ideal society to me is one that provides meaningful employment with sustainable wages, and family/community values (compassion). My favorite quote on this subject is the African saying, “He who does not produce his own food is not free.” The word “food” can be taken literally or figuratively. Let that saying apply to Western media.

China: Obama’s Visit (Ying Rong, US)

Ying Rong writes:

President Obama’s visit to China takes place shortly after the 20-year anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall.

At Obama’s speech to college students in Shanghai, several “students” who raised questions in fluent English have been identified as college teachers who are heads of the committee of the Communist Youth League (a sub-division of the Communist Party among youth). Several of these “students” have their own blogs with their real identities.

For example, the first student who asked Obama a question was a female “student,” Cheng Xi. Her true identity is the vice chair of the committee of Communist Youth League at Fudan University. The second one was a male “student”; his true identity was head of the committee of the Communist Youth League at the College of Foreign Languages, Tongji University.

Obama carefully touched the topic of Internet censorship in his speech. (As I wrote before, all posts related to Falun Gong on the Chinese Internet are negative propaganda by the communist regime; one can’t find clearwisdom.net or minghui.org in China.) Some monitoring the Internet revealed that this topic was reported on 55 Chinese Internet sites, but over 50 of them were deleted within a day.

http://www.peacehall.com/news/gb/china/2009/11/200911162239.shtml

向奥巴马提问的内定的所谓学生 都是来头不小的 (博讯 boxun.com)
第一位向奥巴马提问女“学生”程熙，共青团复旦大学委员会研究室常务副主任；第二位男“学生”黄立鹤，同济大学外国语学院团委书记。

http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_5053613d01008zd9.html
访谈中,上海大学生清一色用流利的英语提问奥巴马..每一个用提问的都是“装学生”的老师，本人同济在读~

China, Japan and Safety (Charles Ridley, US)

Charles Ridley writes:

Like Mike Bonnie (15 November) I certainly felt safe in China. One might be cheated in bargaining over the proce of a scarf with a store clerk, but one doesn’t feel in danger amongst the crowds of Beijing or at the popular sightseeing spots.

In Japan, another country in which I always feel safe, one sees young girls bicyling home after dark on the streets of Tokyo and one knows that they will be perfectly safe. One night I was walking along a Tokyo Street and three young men approached me coming the other way. I was nervous for a moment until I realized I was in Tokyo, not San Francisco. I am always apprehensive when I walk down a street in San Francisco in the evening, particularly when not many people are out. I remember one evening when I was walking to the parking lot in Union Square after attending a meeting. There was no one on the street at the time and I was frightened should someone suddenly appear out of a doorway and possibly attack me.

Even in our own seemingly peaceful neighborhood here in residential Palo Alto, people have been killed on the streets in the evening.

Violent crimes in Japan often appear to be crimes of passion against personal enemies or unfaithful lovers. I am sure the same is true in China, as it was in Taiwan when I was there as a student.

JE comments: The more totalitarian the society the safer the streets–truth or poppycock? I cannot but predict that when/should/if China becomes more democratic, its street crime will increase. This was the case in Spain, the USSR/Russia, Iraq, Chile…everywhere that has gone from autocracy to democracy. Japan, which has always seemed safe, doesn’t fit into the formula. A contrary question: has there ever been a nation where a transition to democracy has actually coincided with a lessening of petty crime (muggings, vandalism, thefts, removing tags from couches, etc.)?

re: Economics: “The Asian Knout and the European Stock Market” (Tor Guimaraes, Brazil/US)

Tor Guimaraes responds to John Heelan’s post of 13 November:

I believe Slavoj Zizek is on to some critical issues. In practice over the years I have reached a few conclusions about capitalism which dovetail with what he is saying. Capitalism can be good or bad depending on what we do with it. Thus any blanket statement that capitalism is evil is as wrong as a blanket statement that we need no market rules and regulations to limit potential abuse. Properly harnessed, capitalist greed can be a wonderful force as an integral part of creating new goods and services which improve people’s lives. Without a doubt, free markets must be constantly protected by all parties. However, in practice free markets are at every opportunity being undermined by capitalists themselves for an unfair advantage and greater profits in the short term. Totalitarianism may provide a great tool for gaining monopoly power if the opportunity arises

A major problem with capitalism in practice stems from its very success.

As corporations grow into huge global companies, their socio/political/economic power grows much larger than the governments of most societies they can manipulate. For example, having these giant global companies making multi billions in profit while families go under financially is not good for anyone in the long run. Presently the Chinese government seems to be striking a reasonable balance between free markets and central control, between capitalism and socialism.

The struggle between capitalists and labor has been going on since Adam and Eve. Since 1945 what kept capitalists from running over labor and the middle class was the Soviet Evil Empire and the threat of Communism looking more appealing than Capitalism. Since Communism has gone to oblivion, Capitalists can now quickly forget their dogmas and really get creative; including using social funds for bailing themselves out of their self-created disasters and refilling their own pockets at taxpayers expenses. The reality is that capitalists with the big money to invest, the controlling power, and the knowledge to position themselves properly, need major dislocations in the markets to really gain great payoffs. That is why periodically we have bubbles and bursts; stable markets are rather boring to most capitalists. The present global financial/economic crisis was not caused by Chinese capitalism but by seasoned American capitalists.

The greed which drives capitalism is an extremely powerful human force. Capitalists don’t have enough wisdom to voluntarily give capital back to the people except as charitable donations. Otherwise, it is a one-way street. Capitalism is like a game, relentless, creative, and difficult to resist. As common people become relatively more ignorant, overworked, stressed out, and complacent, capitalists take over the financial system and the information systems. Once they have these two systems as they do now in the US and most of the world, how long before they have the government? The evidence is clear that they control most of our government. Is there any way to turn this tide back? I doubt it. Just as with any other “ism,” without strong democracy and proper controls, rampant capitalism will accumulate wealth in the hands of the few and to the detriment of the people. Up to now the Chinese government seems to be holding its own managing foreign and indigenous capitalist forces, but for how long? And, what will happen if a powerful totalitarian government becomes driven by capitalist zeal?

In a supposedly democratic nation as the US, what will capitalists do after they own everything? Unfortunately there will be no winners; poorer people will afford less, thus business will spend less and produce less. In turn, government will have lower funding sources, a weaker military, etc. Concepts like free markets, competitiveness, shareholder value are critical for a healthy economy, but are no panacea. Lenin has been proven wrong but, if we capitalists aren’t harnessed by intelligent regulations which promote entrepreneurship and ensure free markets, Karl Marx might eventually be proven right in many ways. In a Marxist country as China, what will happen if the socialist government becomes controlled by capitalist groups?

JE comments: Isn’t the last scenario already the case in China, Inc? WAISer thoughts?

re: Religion: on Prophets, Persecution and Falun Gong (Ying Rong, US)

Ying Rong responds to Istvan Simon’s post of 8 November:

I agree with Istvan that persecution over Falun Gong is a human right issue. Belief is everyone’s choice, and Falun Gong practitioners respect other people’s choices. We don’t and won’t impose our belief/practice over others.

Falun Gong practitioners respect Mr. Li but we don’t worship him, since this has been strongly discouraged from the very beginning. The practice is focused on becoming a better person.

Below is from FalunInfo.net:

Who is Li Hongzhi?

Mr. Li Hongzhi is the founder and instructor of Falun Gong. He first taught the practice of Falun Gong to the general public in 1992 in northeastern China in the city of Changchun. He is the recipient of numerous awards and citations for his efforts to promote human betterment. He is a four-time Nobel Peace Prize nominee, and has been nominated by the European Parliament for the Sakharov Prize For Freedom of Thought.

Why do you call him “Master”?

This is a common honorific in China for any accomplished instructor in any of a variety of skilled arts–such as the martial arts, Tai-chi, or qigong–or religious disciplines, such as Buddhism or Daoism. There is nothing sensational about it, any more than, say, might the designation “professor” be for one’s instructor while in college.

An article I read said that you “worship” Master Li?

Those who practice Falun Gong do not as a practice worship Mr. Li, and Li has, for his part, specifically discouraged this sort of thing in his teachings (veneration of one’s spiritual teacher is common in Asian culture). While it is common in the Asian martial arts to, say, bow to a portrait of one’s sensei/teacher before commencing one’s training, Falun Gong’s teachings do not suggest anything of the sort. Attention has always been directed to the teachings in Falun Gong, as opposed to any one personality.

Why did he leave China?

Mr. Li has explained that he wished for a better educational opportunity for his daughter, who was then of high school age, when deciding to relocate to the United States. The move could also be seen as consistent with his decision in 1996 to discontinue teaching in China in favor of introducing the practice abroad.

Where does he now live?

As of the time of this writing, Mr. Li is said to be living in the United States on the East Coast.

I heard he lives a secretive life. What’s he hiding?

Mr. Li keeps a low profile at this time, presumably owing to threat of physical harm from agents of China’s communist regime. Radio Free Asia and others have reported that China’s rulers have dispatched assassins to the U.S. with orders to track down and kill Li. Several of his more prominent students, active in human rights efforts, have been physically assaulted by hired thugs; in at least two cases the thugs were later found to have been sent by the Chinese consulate.

Why doesn’t he address the public or do interviews?

Alongside the above concern for safety, Mr. Li has suggested a wish to avoid media fanfare and the possibility of a cult of personality forming around him; several journalists have not represented his words or teachings accurately, which might be another factor.

How does Mr. Li make a living?

He has indicated that his income as of 1999 came primarily from the sales of books which he authored.

Is it true he’s made millions off of Falun Gong?

No. Mr. Li is believed to have only made a nominal amount from the sales of Falun Gong books and videos, and the giving of lectures in China between 1992 and 1994. China’s Ministry of Propaganda has labored to paint Li as a wealthy swindler in an attempt to turn public opinion against him, going so far in one story as to show photos of a Manhattan skyscraper and claim he had amassed a real estate empire in the U.S. In reality, he owned a small residential home in Queens.

Who taught him the practice?

Mr. Li has indicated that he studied under several Buddhist, Daoist, and other masters in China in the decades leading up to Falun Gong’s public introduction in 1992. He has expressed a wish to protect their identities following the persecution of Falun Gong which began in 1999; their identification would likely lead to arrest and torture, as it has others associated with the practice.

Is it true he is “controlling the movement” via the Internet?

No. Mr. Li reportedly didn’t know how to use a computer when last asked. He has composed a number of essays in recent years, published by various adherents online, which offer spiritual and philosophical guidance to students of the practice, many of whom live in China under constant threat. But it would not be accurate to describe this as “controlling” what is happening in China, particularly given how loosely organized are the grassroots efforts there meant to resist the suppression.

What is Li’s response to the suppression in China?

Mr. Li originally called for dialogue with Chinese authorities, believing them to be acting on a mistaken perception that Falun Gong threatened their power. China’s rulers refused, and issued an arrest warrant for Li; soon after it was reported they sent assassins to the U.S. Li has since then suggested that students try to expose human rights abuses against Falun Gong to fellow citizens, and combat official propaganda with grassroots informational efforts.

JE comments: Does Mr. Li make public appearances now? Does he still live in his “small residential home in Queens”? The information presented above appears to be current only through 1999.

re: Religion: on Prophets, Persecution and Falun Gong (Mike Bonnie, US)

Istvan Simon wrote on 8 November:

It seems to me that Massoud Malek [7 November] misstates the relationship of Li Hongzhi with the Falun Gong, and I think also the nature of the Falun Gong when compared to other religions. Li Hongzhi is not a prophet. As far as I know Falun Gong practitioners do not consider him to be a prophet either. If so, it is inappropriate to compare him to either Jesus or Muhammad, because the latter are considered to have been endowed with divine powers by their followers, whereas that does not seem to be the case with the Falun Gong practitioners and Li Hongzhi.

Wikipedia has a balanced and well-researched summary, which I think could be a good starting point for an understanding of the proper relationship of Li Hongzhi to the Falun Gong for non-expert WAISers like me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falun_Gong

Mike Bonnie responds:

Istvan cites Wikipedia.org/Falun Gong as a balanced and well-researched summary of the beliefs of Falun Gong members. I believe its fair to cite Wikipedia.org/Li Hongzhi as an equally balanced and well-researched summary:

“Much of Falun Gong’s doctrine and all of its texts are directly compiled from Li’s lectures and he wields near-absolute influence over the practice.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Hongzhi

In my opinion, it’s not what a teacher as Li Hongzhi professes himself to be (a metaphor for religious, spiritual leader) teaches that is important–what’s important is what sticks in the students’ heads.

A bit more researched information can be found in translations of Zhuan Falun II, one of the principle writings and teaching of Li Hongzhi.

From a Wikipeidia.org discussion of Falun Gong text on the subject of homosexuality:

Li’s Statement About “the disgusting homosexuality” in Zhuan Falun II:

Dilip: You questioned the validity of the Li Hongzhi quote in “Ephasis
on Moral Nature,” so I just added a link to the source. I hope we can
avoid an overt war over this one paragraph on homosexuality. I agree
that we do not need a big section on homosexuality in this article, but
we certainly need a fair representation of Li’s teachings on this
subject. Frankly, I don’t undertand why you keep deleting these
statements of Li, except perhaps that they embarrass you.

This particular quote has appeared in many English articles over the
years. There may be a question of translation from the Chinese. Here are
two possible versions:

Existing version: “The disgusting homosexuality shows the dirty abnormal
psychology of the gay who has lost his ability of reasoning at the
present time.”

More literal translation provided by Samuel Luo: “The disgusting
homosexuality reflects the dirty twisted mind which has lost its
reasoning ability at the present time.”

I am happy with either version, and wonder if anyone on this site can
offer an expert opinion on the best translation of this quote.

Source: Falun Canada web site.

Select “Dafa Books” in left column. Select Zhuan Falun II. Go to
“Humankind at the Period of the Last Havoc” at page 22. –Tomananda
20:04, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

As I stated above, this quote serves no purpose as the issue is
comprehensively addressed in the following quote from Germany. It’s
clear from the Germany quote that Falun Gong views this behavior or
state of mind as filthy. And since there is no official translation it
is even less acceptable. If you cannot provide a better reason to keep
the quote it cannot stay in the article. The same goes for the poem
quote; I stated ample reasons for it’s removal, so unless you or anyone
else can respond, it should not be included.

Mcconn 16:35, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Falun_Gong/Archive6#Li.27s_Statement_About_.22the_disgusting_homosexuality.22_in_Zhuan_Falun_II

For greater depth in understanding the nature of cults, I’ll defer to
the late Dr. Margaret Singer and recommend watching a video interview of
her discussion of cults and Falun Gong:

Interview with Dr. Margart Thaler Singer on Falun Gong:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lC3USBF42RM&feature=related

For people who do not know of Dr. Singer:

Dr. Margaret Thaler Singer (1921 - 2003) was a clinical psychologist
and adjunct professor emeritus of psychology at the University of
California, Berkeley.

Singer’s main areas of research included schizophrenia, family therapy,
brainwashing and coercive persuasion. Singer performed research at the
University of Colorado’s School of Medicine, Walter Reed Army Medical
Center Institute of Research, the National Institute of Mental Health,
the United States Air Force and the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology. She received many awards for her work, including the Leo J.
Ryan Memorial Award, the Research Scientist Award from the National
Institute of Mental Health, and both the Hofheimer Prize and the Stanley
R. Dean Award from the American College of Psychiatrists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Singer

re: Religion: Falun Gong (Charles Ridley, US)

JE: I know, I know–this morning I said no more Falun Gong posts for awhile. But I always want to know what Charles Ridley has to say. So this is what Charles has to say:

I will have to leave the question of the degree of suppression of the Falun Gong to those better informed than I. It does appear that the Chinese government has chosen the Falun Gong as its major domestic enemy at the present time. As I noted in my WAIS ‘09 talk, the government most likely feels the necessity of indentifying an “enemy” within the society as a rallying point so that people will have a ready target for their discontent. In earlier days, it was landlords and other “rightists” who were the targets.

The primary fact about the Chinese government is that it is extremely authoritarian. The history of the regime since 1949 has been one of persecution of those seen to be on the wrong side of regime values, a tendency that led to a high level of slaughter of innocent citizens.

A major difference now is that the eyes of the world are on China, which means that any persecutions inside its borders must be handled without undue publicity. Whether the nature of the beast has changed is another question.

My own personal and very anecdotal evidence suggests that people are well indoctrinated into a belief that the Dalai Lama is an evil man, and, I suspect, on the idea of the “civilizing” character of the regime in dealing with the “decadent” culture of Tibet.

At a personal level, because of my past publication history, I was a bit nervous about undertaking my trip to China this past summer. When I applied for my visa I wondered of they would check on me and deny me entry. And I even wondered if I might be challenged once I was in the country. That can be chalked up to paranoia, of course.

When I get to analyzing the school books, one of the approaches I will take (and have undertaken in the past) is to look for contradictions between the values the government wishes to inculcate and the behavior of the government.

One of the problems deriving from actual visits to China is that the Chinese are very charming and most visitors returned enthused. One acquaintance of mine who spent last year in China has informed me that he “loves that country” and prefers Chinese to Americans. (He has also taken a dislike to Japan, after having spent three years there studying Japanese.)

I must conclude with the caveat, that in spite of my doctorate in Chinese studies, I have had virtually no experience, excluding my visit in July, of the country and do not think of myself as a “China expert.” I merely investigate one aspect of the culture, namely education, and that only from a “documentary” basis as I lack the experience of observing Chinese schools in action and have no way of knowing what actually happens in moral education and language classes. Thus, in practice, I am merely an amateur.

JE comments: Amateur, schmamateur. Don’t be so modest, Charles! Your on-the-spot readings of Chinese textbooks at the WAIS conference was one of the most impressive demonstrations of the entire weekend.

re: Religion: Falun Gong, Cults and Persecution (Siegfried Ramler, US)

Siegfried Ramler writes:

In relation to the recent postings on Falun Gong, may I add a perspective
based on contacts with academics in China under East-West Center
auspices during the last several years. There is a wide spectrum in
China from often brutal repression to freedom of religious
expression, reflecting the diversity in twenty-first century China.
Take, for example, the centers for religious studies at Nanjing
University, the theological Protestant seminary and the Nanjing
center for Judaic studies in that city. While the government
forbids proselytizing, such centers do grow in research and
publications.

Travelling in China with American scholars in recent years, including
discussions in Nanjing, we raised the issue of brutal Falun Gong
repression. We would point out that in the US, as in other
countries, sects or cults, such as Hare Krishna, would manifest on
the streets, chanting and beating drums, and generally would be left
alone by police. Why can’t the Chinese authorities tolerate
manifestations which do no harm? The answer was consistent wherever
we raised this issue. We were told that social stability must be a
priority for China. If manifestations are not stopped, they will
grow and interfere with the social order. Though not openly
expressed, the argument goes that a relaxation in maintaining public
order would not only endanger social stability but might also incite
political unrest, such as the 1989 Tiananmen incident, to be avoided
at all costs.

re: Religion: Falun Gong: Response to Mike Bonnie (Ying Rong, US)

Ying Rong responds to Mike Bonnie’s post of 5 November:

Falun Gong practitioners believe in “Truthfulness, Compassion and Tolerance.” We are also striving to become selfishless human beings, putting others as first priority. Our practice only has benefits to ourselves, our families and friends, our coworkers and the society we live in.

It is the communist regime that sets this group of practitioners as the “No.1 enemy,” treating Falun Gong as “anti-revolutionary” because of the party’s fear of Falun Gong’s popularity. It is the communist regime’s negative propaganda that has put so many negative thoughts in your mind. Think about it, did you have any negative thoughts about Falun Gong in the first 6 years when Falun Gong was being spread in China and the persecution hadn’t started?

Being merciful to a murderous dictator is not compassion. Following a murderous regime’s logic to justify a large-scale genocide is wrong.

This world’s history is filled with battles between the evil and goodness. However, it is up to each person to choose which side he or she stands with. There is an old saying in Chinese that goes, “Doing good deeds will be rewarded; doing bad deeds will be punished.”

I don’t truly have anything more to say to you since you claim you are so well-informed about Falun Gong. May my compassion go all the way out to you. I silently wish that one day in the future your heart will wake up to the truth. I hope that you will have a chance to appreciate the truth soon.

JE comments: Ying Rong has also sent me an “open letter” to President Obama on the eve of his trip to China (12 November). I’ll post it tomorrow.

re: Religion: Falun Gong, Cults and Persecution (Istvan Simon, US)

Istvan Simon writes:

As the moderator of the China panel at WAIS’ 09, I would like to offer my comments on the persecution of the Falun Gong in China, and address the recent comments on this subject by Ying Rong, Mike Bonnie and Alain de Benoist.

There is no doubt in my mind that Ying Rong’s presentation at WAIS ‘09 was one of the high points of the WAIS’ 09 conference. Her presentation was powerful, because it included a first-hand testimony of someone who was actually tortured by the Chinese authorities for no other reason that she was a follower of the Falun Gong. The savage and on-going persecution of the Falun Gong by the Chinese authorities is a stain on the Chinese government which in my opinion no moral person can condone. I condemn this persecution as unjustifiable, inhumane, and I believe ultimately futile. No spiritual movement was ever successfully suppressed by savage persecution, and so the Chinese government is being extremely short sighted in believing that their persecution of the Falun Gong will succeed in suppressing this movement. I believe for many reasons that it will fail, just like the persecution of early Christianity failed, and the even more savage and persistent persecution of Jews throughout history failed too.

Alain de Benoist is correct that the persecution of the Falun Gong in China, terrible as it is, is not a genocide, and so it should not be called so. And he is also correct that the Falun Gong has turned into a movement which now has partially political overtones. But I would add that this is hardly surprising, and it should be noted that this political tilt is not due to the original ideas of the Falun Gong, which were not overtly political, and in fact for many years were viewed positively by the Chinese authorities themselves. In a nutshell then, it is the Chinese government’s savage persecution which turned the movement into something which also has political overtones, because o reasonable person would expect followers to remain politically neutral towards their persecutors when their brothers and sisters in belief are imprisoned, beaten, tortured, and “re-educated,” and in many cases murdered by a government gone berserk.

I have many things in common with Mike Bonnie. Like him, I have a Chinese wife, and through her, Chinese family members. And like him I have many many Chinese friends. I can say like him that I love China, and I wish the Chinese people well, and even that I wish success to the Chinese government when I see their efforts as benefiting China and the Chinese people. All of this is true, in spite of the fact that I abhor communism and dictatorial governments. But I draw the line when it comes to human rights and issues of freedom. So I part company with Mike Bonnie when he says that the Falun Gong is “not worth” saving.

It is clear to me, that even though I am not a follower of the Falun Gong, and some of its practices even strike me as strange, nonetheless, when a spiritual movement has as many adherents as the Falun Gong does, it is absurd to call it a cult. Furthermore, calling it so is disrespectful to the many many millions of people that believe in it. Freedom of worship and tolerance of the beliefs of others is a cornerstone of our values. I support such tolerance and condemn intolerance wherever it comes from. For me, the key point in this kind of question is whether or not the belief is unduly threatening or not to the beliefs of others. But I have never seen the Falun Gong resort to violence, and so I see it as a peaceful and primarily spiritual movement. Who resorted to savagery and violence is the Chinese government. So it is the Chinese government that is wrong, and the followers of the Falun Gong are doing nothing more than exercising their right to believe in whatever they want to believe in. It is not against the law, or in any case it should not be against any reasonable law, to have beliefs that in some aspects may appear to us as bizarre, and we do not necessarily share.

What is the difference between religion and cult? What is it that gives anyone the right to term the beliefs of millions of people as a “cult” and thus with a simple arbitrary choice of a word make their persecution supposedly acceptable? I do not particularly care whatever Li Hongzhi may or not have said in front of television cameras. That is because I think that Li Hongzhi is not the Falun Gong, just like Maffeo Barberini, who as Pope Urban VIII ended up ordering the persecution Galileo by the Inquisition, was not the Catholic Church. So what Li said or did not say is irrelevant. What matters to me is that millions believe in the ideas of the Falun Gong, and who is anyone to say that they are being deceived or wrong? No one is the judge of what people may believe in and no one should be. I have never seen the Falun Gong threatening anyone. Therefore, as far as I am concerned, Falun Gong practitioners are entitled to their beliefs, and whoever persecutes them or is indifferent about their persecution is wrong.

re: China: Compassion and Confucian Thought Today (Charles Ridley, US)

Charles Ridley responds to Robert Whealey’s post of 5 November:

Although the negative view alluded to by Robert Whealey was stated by Confucius, the central virtue of Confucianism is compassion, often translated as “human-heartedness” or “humane-heartedness.” The Confucian ethic is the foundation ethic of the East Asian societies that were the heirs of Confucianism and is still operative to this day. To be sure, if you were to ask a Japanese on the street what the Confucian values are, he or she would not be able to tell you. Nevertheless, these are the values that are operative in Japanese society. And, of course, the governments of Singapore and Taiwan have made a great effort at cultivating the Confucian values.

At present, the government of China is also restoring Confucianism. I have been working through the latest Chinese textbooks, primarily of elementary schools, and am finding concrete evidence of this revival of Confucianism. In the school readers, there is a considerable emphasis on caring for others.

As far as I am concerned, the Confucian ethic is alive and well.

JE comments: The reigning WAIS King of Punsters, Charles Ridley, titled this e-mail “State of Confucianism.” I like that.

re: Religion: Falun Gong (Ying Rong, US)

Ying Rong writes:

I would like to recommend a few websites to Mike Bonnie to read and absorb before he writes his next post, since a person like him should gain some fundamental understanding of Falun Gong prior to making a judgement, otherwise this person’s actions are not responsible to himself, and not responsible to WAISers either.

In face of such a brutal large-scale genocide, randomly writing some negative comments to defame a peaceful group of Falun Gong practitioners and support the Chinese communist regime is absolutely wrong.

If Mr. Bonnie truly wants to become an expert, please read:

Falun Dafa Information Center

http://www.faluninfo.net/

Friends of Falun Gong

http://www.fofg.org/

Falun Gong books, please read the whole book “Zhuan Falun” if time permits:

www.falundafa.org

In today’s world it is not easy to find true facts about Falun Gong (in English it is even more difficult). In 1999, the Chinese communist dictatorship mobilized all the state-controlled media to churn out negative propaganda to defame Falun Gong. The Chinese communist regime fabricated a large amount of stories to demonize Falun Gong over the years.

At that time, Falun Gong practitioners, a loosely organized group of people didn’t have any right to have their own opinion being exposed in any of the Chinese media (sadly, this is still the case today). While the rest of the world was interested, the foreign media could only copy what was reported by the Chinese state-controlled media then. That is why many, many westerners also were deceived by the communist party on what Falun Gong truly is.

What opiton was left to the Falun Gong practitioners? All they could do was to go to Beijing, telling their own experiences, appealing to the central government and hoping the government would change the policy. But what did they get in return? Brutal beatings, detentions, tortures, killing and organ harvesting.

Just for saying one phrase, “Falun Gong is a good (a righteous) belief,” a person in China can be detained, tortured to death by the evil communist regime.

Why are the other governments silent? Because of economic benefits with China.

How to stop the ruthless persecution over Falun Gong? This is a question for every WAISer, for every person in the world.

re: Religion: Falun Gong (Charles Ridley, US)

Charles Ridley writes:

I will be starting my survey of the latest Chinese elementary school readers in a couple of days (being impeded at the moment by the necessity of performing a “commercial” translation), and will check carefully for any references to the Falun Gong. In other textbooks, I see “Love for science” coupled with condemnation of “superstition,” but have not seen another specific attack on the Falun Gong except for the one cited in my presentation.

I will let you all know as soon as I have more evidence.

JE comments: I look forward to your findings. For those who missed Charles’s paper, “Attitudes Towards Science in China” (posted on 29 October), it can be accessed at:

http://cgi.stanford.edu/group/wais/cgi-bin/?p=40223

re: Religion: Falun Gong (Ying Rong, US)

Ying Rong responds to Vincent Littrell’s questions (17 October) on Falun Gong:

The persecution of Falun Gong is one of the most brutal persecutions in the history of humankind. In 1999, the Chinese communist regime turned 100 million Falun Gong practitioners into the “No.1 enemy” and started the most ruthless genocide of this peaceful group. I would like to recommend some links here:

About what Falun Gong is and why it is being persecuted:

http://www.fofg.org/

About the large-scale persecution:

http://www.faluninfo.net/article/918/?cid=84

About the actual torture cases and death toll:

http://www.clearwisdom.net/

In a recent article on FalunInfo.net titled “Large Numbers of Falun Gong Practitioners Targeted for Persecution and Arrest in 2009, Says Congressional-Executive Commission on China,” it was stated that:

In its 2009 Annual Report released last week, the U.S. government’s Congressional-Executive Commission on China thoroughly documents the continued and intensified targeting of Falun Gong practitioners by the Chinese security apparatus over the past year. The section on Falun Gong cites, in particular, the involvement of top Chinese Communist Party officials in directing a “strike hard” campaign against Falun Gong, as well as the robust activity of the extralegal 6-10 Office in carrying out such directives.

“The government maintained its longstanding ban against the Falun Gong spiritual movement [in 2009],” says the report. “Viewing the 10th anniversary [of the ban] as sensitive, the central government held fast in 2009 with its 2008 pre-Olympics efforts to ferret out and punish Falun Gong practitioners.”

Authorities conducted propaganda campaigns that deride Falun Gong, carried out strict surveillance of practitioners, detained and imprisoned large numbers of practitioners, and subjected some who refuse to disavow Falun Gong to torture and other abuses in reeducation through labor facilities. International media and Falun Gong sources also reported deaths of practitioners in Chinese police custody in 2008 and 2009.

The Congressional-Executive Commission on China is a special joint body of the U.S. House of Representatives, Senate, and executive branch established in 2000 to monitor human rights and the development of rule of law in China. Its 400-page annual report, released on October 10, covers in detail a wide range of issues, including freedom of religion, freedom of expression, and the functioning of the judicial system. The research on Falun Gong draws on official Chinese documents and websites, reports by international media and human rights groups, and testimony from Chinese rights lawyers and former prisoners of conscience.

Key Findings and Evidence

Four key conclusions emerge from the CECC’s research insofar as it relates to the current persecution faced by Falun Gong practitioners in China. Following the abbreviated list below is a more extensive explanation citing samples of the relevant evidence provided in the report. For a full compilation of Falun Gong-related excerpts, see CECC 2009 Annual Report (excerpts):

Advancing the CCP’s decade-long persecution against Falun Gong was a key priority in a nationwide crackdown in 2009. The crackdown was led by top Party leaders—including Vice President Xi Jinping and Politburo Standing Committee member Zhou Yongkang–and carried out by the public security bureau (PSB) and local Party branches throughout the country.

Large numbers of Falun Gong practitioners nationwide continued to be subject to surveillance, detention, “re-education through labor” and abuse in custody, leading sometimes to death.

During the year, concerns of organ harvesting from nonconsenting Falun Gong prisoners of conscience continued to arise, including from the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture.

Extensive efforts were made, led by the 6-10 Office, to vilify Falun Gong practitioners amongst Chinese citizens and mobilize the public to contribute to the arrest of practitioners–including via special school lessons and offers of monetary rewards to informants.

The CCP and 6-10 Office continued to use political control over the court system, legal profession, and law enforcement agencies to systematically deny Falun Gong practitioners their basic rights to due process, fair trials, and access to counsel. These efforts included direct instructions to judges on how to decide Falun Gong cases and an escalation in the assaults and harassment of Chinese lawyers seeking to defend Falun Gong clients.

I hope this answers your questions.

re: China: Tsien Hsue-Shen and Falun Gong (Mike Bonnie, US)

Ying Rong wrote on 1 November:

I am deeply saddened by Mr. Tsien’s death. He was a great scientist whom I have admired since high school. In fact, I almost followed him to become a scientist studying supernormal capability within modern science.

In 1999, Jiang Zemin, the Chinese communist regime’s leader, then launched a brutal suppresion over Falun Gong because he was in fear of its popularity. Jiang himself visited Mr. Tsien quite a few times, pressuring Mr. Tsien to support the suppression of Falun Gong and asking Mr. Tsien to condemn Falun Gong and name it “superstitious,” but Mr. Tsien refused. This was the true reason Tsien’s work in the last 40 years of his life was buried long before he passed away, and his voice was muted during the last 10 years of his life.

Mike Bonnie responds:

Ms. Rong’s sadness over the passing of Tsien Hsue-Shen is acknowledged. However, associating Tsien with the suppression of Falun Gong in China sounds disingenuous.

Tsien Hsue-shen, or Qian Xuesen (as his modern name is spelled) served as the first chairman of the Department of Mechanics of University of Science & Technology of China (USTC) under the umbrella of Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), where research and experiments were conducted involving meta-physics and extra-ordinary capabilities of humans. Qian advocated scientific investigation of traditional Chinese medicine, Qigong and “special human body functions.”

It shouldn’t be necessary to point out, there are huge differences between advocating for one point and refusing to denounce another. Advocating research and practice of Qigong is not advocating for a religious cult, even if the religious cult were to use Qigong as a foundation of the organization. Association with members of a religious cult, doesn’t not make a person an advocate. This could only be clearer in the case of Qian if the words “communism and McCarthyism in the 1950s” were used to describe his beliefs.

That the Chinese government may have suppressed Qian’s writing for 40 years cannot explain why he was allowed to tour and lecture at some of the most prestigious colleges and universities during that some period time.

Perhaps a quick search of the Internet can provide some insights, using key word including: “Tsien Hsue-schen,” “Qian Xuesen,” “Falun Gong,” and “Falun Dafa.” There’s very little evidence Qian advocated or denounced Falun Gong except for editorial license based on extended facts on Falun Gong web sites. Here are some excerpts this writer found:

“Spiritual Practice or Evil Cult? Comprehending Falun Gong in the Context of China’s Religious Policy”

by Zhonghu Yan
Center for the Study of Religion University of Toronto

On the other hand, as qigong originally emphasized health improvement alone and did not belong exclusively to any of the five legitimate traditions, it obviously could not be registered under any of these organizations. With qigong in general attracting more and more followings, the government realized the necessity of regulating its activities. The Chinese Qigong Research Association was thus established.

This name is suggestive of an academic or scientific mission. Reportedly, this association conducted some scientific experiments proving the existence of qi and efficacy of qigong practice. There has been no independent agency to verify the claim. Within the scientific community, there were two opposing views on qigong represented by two rather well known scientists in their own rights. One was He Zouxiu, a theoretic physicist, who later was to trigger off Falun Gong’s Tiananmen assembly, and became a national hero for opposing Falun Gong. The other was Qian Xuesen, a holder of Caltech Ph.D. and the father of Chinese rocket technology. Because no conclusion could be drawn about the nature of qigong, the government’s policy was one of “three no’s,” namely “no promoting,” “no criticizing” and “no encouraging.” Falun Gong was first registered as a member of the Chinese Qigong Research Association, and somehow it withdrew from it. In the April 1999 issue of a popular science magazine, He Zouxiu wrote an article on qigong, where he drew a negative picture of Falun Gong. Considering the negative report as a violation of the government’s ” Three No’s Policy,” Falun Gong practitioners assembled in front of the magazine editorial office in Tianjin for an apology. Failing to get the apology they wanted, around ten thousand practitioners gathered in front of Zhongnanhai, the compound of the Chinese top leaders: this famous incident made Falun Gong the headline news in the world mass media.

It was also this incident that ultimately led to an official ban on Falun Gong in July 1999.

http://religiousfreedom.lib.virginia.edu/nationprofiles/China/yan.html

“Beyond the Red Wall: The Persecution of Falun Gong”

by Mr. Anderson 08/09/2009

Qigong in Communist China

In recent years, thousands of “masters” of schools and research organizations appeared on Qigong, with the support of members high-ranking government and the scientific community (eg Qian Xuesen, the inventor of the Chinese atomic bomb). This social trend reached a climax in 1987, after the publication of results of research conducted at Tsinghua University, the most prestigious faculty of sciences in China there was said that the “external Qi” issued by a famous master Qigong of the time could “change the molecular structure of a water sample” to more than 2000 kilometers away.

http://911truth-sherbrooke.org/2009/09/08/beyond-the-red-wall-the-persecution-of-falun-gong/

“Falun Gong” (Perhaps someone in WAIS can translate?)

“Supernaturalismin” kannattajiin ja qigong-tutkimuksen uranuurtajiin lukeutuu mm. Qian Xuesen, Kiinan avaruusohjelman perustaja.

http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falun_Gong

“Overseas Falun Gong Family Rescue Effort Allows Aeronautics Scientist Ms. Yang Yueli to Gain Early Release”

According to Yang Zhendong, Ms. Yang is now 63 years old. She graduated from Northwestern Polytechnic University. In the 1960s, she was one of four young scientists nominated by Qian Xuesen, the foremost scientist in China and the Director of China’s National Science Committee, to participate in the research and launch of China’s first satellite, “Dong Fang Hong.” In the 1980s, she received awards from the National Defence Council for her outstanding contribution in research and launch of the “Long March 3″ rocket.

On December 7, 2001, she was arrested while applying for a passport to come to Canada to join her son, because she refused to renounce her belief in Falun Gong. She was first detained in Beijing’s Dongcheng Detention Centre. Forty one days later, she was sentenced to one and a half years of forced Labour without a trial. She was sent to Tuanhe Forced Labour Camp. Three months later, she was transferred to the Beijing Women “Re-education through Labour” Camp. Mr. Yang Zhendong said, “The Chinese police did not provide any legal documents. There were more than four months that no information about my mother was made available. We were not allowed to visit my mother, nor were we allowed to send her any daily necessities. We had no way to verify whether my mother was still alive.”

http://clearharmony.net/daily/20030209_zip.html

“Tsien Hsue-shen/Qian Xuesen: No mention of Falun Gong or Falun Dafa”

\http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qian_Xuesen

“Chicago: Practitioners Celebrate World Falun Dafa Day–Their Hearts Are Close to Fellow Practitioners in China (Photos)”

Many practitioners who participated in the celebration activities near the Buckingham Fountain were from Tsinghua University. Mr. Zhu, who is a senior manager in a large steel and iron enterprise, graduated from Tsinghua University over 20 years ago. He said that this was the eighth time that he and Chicago practitioners had celebrated World Falun Dafa Day. Mr. Zhu talked about why he began Falun Gong practice. At the beginning, Qian Xuesen, an icon in the scientific community, hosted a “Research on Human Body Science” in the late 1980s in the field of science and technology. This event included Tsinghua University, and many supernatural phenomena were discovered and discussed, which inspired Mr. Gao’s interest in qigong. Mr. Zhou, who graduated from the Department of Precision Instruments at Tsinghua University, is currently a senior researcher at a chemical company. Mr. Zhou said that he saw clearly the CCP’s evil nature from the persecution of Falun Gong.

http://www.clearwisdom.net/html/articles/2007/5/14/85617.html

“Qigong & Science”

A large body of scientific data on Yan Xin Qigong phenomena and effects have been scientifically documented. They have been reviewed by Chairman (now honorary Chairman) of Chinese Association of Science and Technology, Dr. Qian Xuesen (Tsien Hsue-Shen), to be “new scientific discoveries and the prelude to scientific revolution.” Prof. Hans-Peter Duerr, colleague and successor of Werner Heisenburg as Director of Institute of Theoretical Phyiscs in Germany proclaimed the Yan Xin Qigong research results to be “within my window of acceptance.”

These data have established that external qi of Yan Xin Qigong:

-physically exists.
-can interact with and affect matter from molecular to atomic levels.
-can affect the fundamental components of living organisms (water, sugar, cell membrane, proteins, DNA and RNA).
-can recognize and optimize genetic properties without adverse effects.
-can be applied in biotechnology, materials processing and chemical reactions.

http://www.meaningoflife.i12.com/science-qigong.htm

“Heal Qigong: Scientfic Proof”

If fact, in referring to the research presented in this book, Dr. Qian Xuesen, Ph.D. (on the left in the photo with Chinese President Jiang Zemin), Chairman of the Chinese National Association of Scientists has said, “These experimental results are a first in the world. They unequivocally demonstrate that without touching subjects the human body can affect them and change their molecular structure and properties… They are new scientific discoveries and the prelude to a scientific revolution.”

http://www.healqigong.com/index_files/documentation.htm

re: China: Death of Tsien Hsue-Shen (Ying Rong, US)

Ying Rong responds to Mike Bonnie’s post of 31 October:

I am deeply saddened by Mr. Tsien’s death. He was a great scientist whom I have admired since high school. In fact, I almost followed him to become a scientist studying supernormal capability within modern science.

In the press release about Mr. Tsien, Xinhua News Agency, the mouthpiece of the Chinese communist regime, only mentioned his early-day contributions to rocket science, but didn’t mention a word about his great achievements since 1970. In fact, Mr. Tsien’s later research was not permitted to be published in the last 10 years since the persecution of Falun Gong started. Basically, the communist regime muted his voice in the last 10 years of his life.

One of Mr. Tsien’s biggest contributions to the world is his Human Body Science theory, which he proposed in the 1980s. Mr. Tsien was one of first scientists who boldly supported study of Qigong and supernormal capability with morden scientific techniques during the time Qigong was very popular in China. At the time, many Chinese, including communist leaders, were still strongly against Qigong, calling it “superstition.”

He and other scientists formed a research group and tested many Qigong masters and people with supernormal capabilities between the 1970 and ’80s. From the study, he concluded that supernormal capabilities do indeed exist but our modern science cannot explain them yet.

He also proposed that Chinese Medicine, Qigong and Supernormal Capability are in fact all originated from one source, and the human body is an integrated system. Between 1983-97, he gave over 100 lectures to aerospace researchers, medical researchers in China on Human Body Science, Qigong, supernormal capability, Chinese Medicine and their relationship with modern science. These speeches later was edited into a book.

It took tremendous courage and integrity to be a scientist like Mr. Tsien, who dared to study a subject many were against, especially the government. It was his dedication and research results that changed some of communist leaders’ opinion on Qigong, including Hu Yao-bang.

In 1999, Jiang Zemin, the Chinese communist regime’s leader, then launched a brutal suppresion over Falun Gong because he was in fear of its popularity. Jiang himself visited Mr. Tsien quite a few times, pressuring Mr. Tsien to support the suppression of Falun Gong and asking Mr. Tsien to condemn Falun Gong and name it “superstitious,” but Mr. Tsien refused. This was the true reason Tsien’s work in the last 40 years of his life was buried long before he passed away, and his voice was muted during the last 10 years of his life.

Mr. Tsien will be remembered as a great scientist with remarkable intelligence, wisdom, courage, and integrity. I do believe his pioneering work on Qigong, supernormal capability and modern science will also be remembered and known to the world in the near future.

China: Death of Tsien Hsue-Shen (Mike Bonnie, US)

Mike Bonnie writes:

It is with deep regret that today, October 31, 2009, the world of science and technology acknowledges the passing of Tsien Hsue-shen. Scientist, researchers, students and readers of Iris Chang’s book, Thread of the Silk Worm (1995), in America, China, and throughout the modern world, will recognize his name. Born in Hangzhou, China, Tsien was educated in the United States at MIT and CalTech (where he taught as well) on funds from the Boxer Rebellion Indemnity Scholarship Program (1935). He was an graduate student assistant to the founder of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, CA. Tsien died today of an unreported illness at his home in Beijing at age 97.

Tsien served in the U.S. Army in Germany during WWII in the ballistic missile guidance program as a designer. Directly following the end of the war in Europe he was sent to Germany as a lieutenant colonel to examine V-2 rocket facilities and assist in the interrogation of German scientists. A victim of U.S. McCarthyism, Tsein along with his family were forced to return to China in 1955.

The following are excerpts from INEX (Wikipedia.org): http://infao5501.ag5.mpi-sb.mpg.de:8080/topx/archive?link=Wikipedia-Lip6-2/343445.xml&style

“In 1945 Tsien Hsue-shen married Jiang Ying , the daughter of Jiang Baili–one of Chinese nationalist leader Chiang Kai-shek ’s leading military strategists. Soon after Tsien applied for US citizenship in 1950 , allegations were made that he was a communist and his security clearance was revoked. The Federal Bureau of Investigation located a 1938 US Communist Party document with his name on it. Tsien Hsue-shen found himself unable to pursue his career and within two weeks announced plans to return to mainland China. After his announcement the US government wavered between deporting him and refusing to allow his departure due to his knowledge. Tsien Hsue-shen became the subject of five years of secret diplomacy and negotiation between the United States and PRC. During this time he lived under virtual house arrest. Tsien found himself in conflict with the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service including an arrest for carrying secret documents which ultimately turned out to be simple logarithmic tables. During his incarceration Tsien received support from his colleagues at Caltech, including Caltech President Lee DuBridge who flew to Washington to argue Tsien’s case.”

Following his return to China:

“In 1955 Tsien was deported from the United States and immediately went to work as head of the Chinese missile program as soon as he arrived in China. Tsien deliberately left his research papers behind when he left the United States. Tsien joined the Chinese Communist Party in 1958 . Tsien established the Institute of Mechanics and began to retrain Chinese engineers in the techniques he had learned in the United States and retool the infrastructure of the Chinese program. Within a year Tsien submitted a proposal to the PRC government to establish a ballistic missile program. This proposal was accepted and Tsien was named the first director of the program in late 1956. By 1958 Tsien had finalized the plans of the Dongfeng missile which was first successfully launched in 1964 just prior to China’s first successful nuclear weapons test. Tsien’s program was also responsible for the development of the widespread Silkworm missile. In 1979 Tsien was awarded Caltech’s Distinguished Alumni Award . In the early 1990s the filing cabinets containing Tsien’s research work were offered to him by Caltech. At first Tsien refused but was finally convinced to accept the work by his former colleagues. These works became the foundation for the Tsien Library at Xi’an Jiaotong University. Tsien retired in 1991 and has maintained a low public profile in Beijing, China. The PRC government launched its manned space program in 1992 and used Tsien’s research as the basis for the Long March rocket which successfully launched the Shenzhou V mission in October of 2003 . The elderly Tsien was able to watch China’s first manned space mission on television from his hospital bed.”

The announcement of Tsien’s death came from Xinhau News which reported:

“Many regarded his death as ‘a superstar fell’ and expressed their blessings for him–’Dear Mr. Qian, rest in peace. We will never forget your achievements.’ According to the Shanghai Jiao Tong University Press, the press is currently compiling a picture album of Qian and a collection of his writings based on 800-plus-page documents retrieved from the U.S. National Archives, which include details about his encounters with the U.S. government and his trip back home.” http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-10/31/content_12365319.htm

References:

Tsien (detailed biography): http://www.astronautix.com/astros/tsien.htm

Tsien Hsue-shen: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsien_Hsue-shen

Boxer Rebellion Indemnity Program: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxer_Rebellion_Indemnity_Scholarship_Program

Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_Propulsion_Laboratory

Silkworm Missile: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silkworm_missile

JE comments: I must read the late Iris Chang’s book. Prior to now I was not aware of Tsien’s enormous achievements, but it appears the US committed a grave error by deporting someone of such genius. A very interesting post from Mike Bonnie.

WAIS ‘09 Proceedings: “Attitudes Towards Science in China” (Charles Ridley, US

JE: As promised on 28 October, I now post the WAIS ‘09 talk of our beloved colleague, Charles Ridley. I’ve enjoyed reading through it very much, and urge even those WAISers who heard the “live version” to check out the text: Charles adds a number of interesting details that time constraints prevented him from including in his presentation. I am impressed by how Chinese premodern education sought to make every (educated) man a “competent working poet”–things in technophile China have changed! Moreover, in the ever-practical US psyche, the terms “working” and “poet” rarely appear together…

Without further ado, here’s is Charles Ridley’s

Attitudes Toward Science in China

As this gathering drew closer, I changed the title several times from the one presented in the program, having decided to expand the scope from “Love of Science in Chinese Education.” One reason for this was my decision to talk about the development of interest in science in China from a more historical standpoint.

This decision also entailed approaching attitudes toward science in China from two standpoints. For premodern times, I have based my remarks on the historical record of science in China, whereas for the more contemporary period I have based my remarks primarily on what the Chinese government and educators have thought as desirable attitudes and approaches to science education. To use the sort of Western term that I have in recent years come to dislike, I will be talking about the ideas promulgated by the “socialization community.” That is, I will be discussing the “top-down” views of education in the sciences.

Although education in premodern China consisted primarily of a Confucian education stressing the Confucian Classics, philosophy, history and literature, indeed, every young man emerging from this process as a competent working poet, what can properly be described as endeavor in science and technology also played strong roles in traditional society. We need only to think of the early Chinese inventions of gun powder and the compass to realize this point. Another important invention was that of the first seismograph in about the second century A.D. consisting of a device located in Beijing that could indicate the direction of origin of an earthquake and its intensity.

The fact that China was a large country of many rivers meant that there had to be specialists in practical engineering skills in bridge building and river control. There were two spheres to which strong efforts were devoted, astronomy and materia medica. The interest in astronomy derived from the belief that celestial phenomena were predictive of the fate of a dynasty. As a consequence, detailed astronomical records were kept. As an example. a celestial phenomenon that was later identified as a supernova that was missed in Western observations was recorded.

Another area in which great progress was made was that of material medica. One of the greatest works in this field was the Bencao Gangmu by Li Shizhen, a work that was completed in 1596 after about thirty years of work. It lists 1882 kinds of medicinal drugs and provides descriptions of them and their uses. The first entry under the description of each herb differentiated whether it “has poison” (i.e., was toxic) or it “did not have poison” (i.e., was non-toxic). The distribution of each herb throughout China is presented and the conditions for which it can be used are listed. In a paper I wrote for a pharmacology class that I took under the rather grandiose title, “A Comparison of the Therapeutic Applications of the Medicinal Herb mahuang (Ephedra sinica) in Traditional Chinese Medicine and the uses of Ephedrine in Modern Western Medicine – A Model for Studies of Herbal Medicines –.” The conclusion was that the applications described in the Bencao Gangmu were highly consistent with those in modern Western medicine.

Mathematics was also well developed and covered negative numbers, the Chinese version of the theorem of Pythagoras, formulas for the areas of plane figures and the volumes of solid figures, solutions of quadratic and cubic equations and an elementary form of integral calculus.

What is of perhaps more interest from our standpoint is that many scientific investigations were undertaken by scholar officials in their off hours, ranging from botany, including identification of plants in the Monograph on Grass and Flowers, and such works as Introduction to Tea Cultivation, Cultivation of the Cherry Apple, Cultivation of the Lichee and Cultivation of Mushrooms, to marine biology, including such works as Notes on the Varied Marine Life of Fujian, Monograph on Crabs, and An Illustrated Guide to Unusual Fish.

An interesting example of what was done is the description of the cuttlefish in Notes of the Varied Marine Life of Fujian, which runs, in part, as follows:

Cuttlefish. Another name for it is inkfish. It resembles a
slipper-sack. Its flesh is white and its skin is mottled. It has
no scales and as eight feet. On its front side, it has two very
long tentacles. All its feet gather about the mouth. There is a
snout connected to the abdomen. The blood and gall in its
abdomen are jet black. In its back there is a pure white bone
shaped like a weaver’s shuttle. It is as light as akebia and can
be engraved.

This description is followed by a note in which aspects of its behavior are described:

When the cuttlefish encounters stormy weather, it clings to
rocks while floating in the water. When it sees a human
being or a large fish, it suddenly ejects its ink for a distance
of several feet in order to hide its body. This, however. makes
it easier for a person to capture it. Its ink can stop heart pain.
When a shrimp or small fish passes in front of it, it suddenly ejects
its ink, thereby catching it.

There is a further curious far from scientific statement that crows enter the water and turn into cuttlefish when the season turns cold in the ninth month. Thus, there is a mixture of careful observation and unfounded views.

Progress was also made in the study of chemistry and chemical reactions as the result of the search for an elixir of eternal life.

The foregoing discussion is intended to demonstrate that an interest in scientific observation was fairly widespread in premodern China. Later, the modernizers in the early twentieth century also stressed science as a key aspect of their programs.

After the revolution of 1949 and the rise of the Chinese Communist Party to power, there was a good number of scientific journals in major fields such as zoology, entomology, microbiology, genetics, geology, mathematics, chemistry and astronomy. An early success was the development of a method for the synthesis of insulin before the Cultural Revolution.

With the coming of the “Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution in 1965-66, I was working in a division of the Library of Congress devoted to abstracting Soviet and Chinese scientific literature. In the early stages of the Cultural Revolution, one political article might appear in, let us say, the Journal of Meteorology. As time wore on, more and more of the content of the journal became political until, when publication of journals ended in 1966, the last issues of the journals consisted solely of reprints of political articles from the Peoples Daily and other newspapers of the popular press.

The outcome was that scientists even in research institutes of the Chinese Academy of Sciences were required to work closely with working class people on more practical problems than their high-level research. For example, botanists in the Botany Institute were expected to go out into the fields and work with farmers on treating plant diseases. Although this reorientation of scientific research was often interpreted as ideal by Western intellectuals of a leftish persuasion, it had a devastating effect on the course of science in China. This was compounded by the equally devastating effects on education resulting from closing of schools.

This could be described perhaps as a period of perversion of the value of love for science.

There were twenty journals that were published until 1966 at the outset of the Cultural Revolution that were no longer published when publication of journals was resumed in 1972. There were 13 journals that survived the Cultural Revolution and there were 8 other journals that were inaugurated in 1972. My calculations indicated that 33 major scientific journals were published before the Cultural Revolution, whereas only 21 journals were being published following the Cultural Revolution.

After publication of scientific journals resumed in 1972 after the Cultural Revolution, scientific papers were highly politicized, with the Acta Psychologica Sinica, the prime psychology journal at the time, being the most severely affected.

An interesting paper illustrating the politicization of psychological research is “The Effect of Model Contrast on Self-Evaluation in School Pupils,” in which class analysis was brought to bear on how study of the behavior of the popular Hero Lei Feng affected student’s behavior. In another paper, a celebrated geneticist, bowing to political pressure in a discussion of the relationship between the cytoplasm and the nucleus of a cell and in reference to Mao’s statement that “of two contradictory aspects, one must be the principal and the other secondary” and that the “principal aspect is the one playing the leading role in the contradiction,” points out that this what he believes to be true of the relation between the cytoplasm and the nucleus.

A tendency in scientific papers after the cultural revolution was for the writers to purport to apply the method of dialectical materialism to the solution of scientific problems. An example of this is a paper entitled, “Analysis of Some Problems of Electrolysis and Electroplating in the Light of Dialectics,” which appeared in the journal Chemistry Bulletin in early 1975. The authors were identified as “worker-peasant-students” of Hua Chung Engineering College.

In time, this sort of nonsense disappeared and more rational approaches were again taken to scientific work.

The foregoing discussion is intended to demonstrate the extent that science was damaged by the attempt to fit it under the rubric of dialectics. By the 1980s, science was back on track again. It was at this time that we begin to see references to “love of science” as a value to be inculcated in students.

One of the earlier statements on inculcation of love of science is presented in a book entitled “Preschool Education” by SHAN Chuanying that was published in 1983 by Hunan Educational Publishers. What is of interest to us here is that “love of science” is seen as an aspect of moral education.

In this context, his statement of the mission of preschool morale education takes on added significance. In the following quotation, the italics are my addition.

On the basis of the education policies of the Party, its objectives
and mission and of the requirements of the people of our nation
for a socialist moral education in combination with the age
characteristics of preschool education, the mission of preschool
moral education has been determined to be as follows: To carry
out the initial stages of education of preschool education on love
of the nation, love of the people, love of socialism, love of labor,
cherishing public property and love of science, to cultivate in them
the fine moral characters of solidarity, friendliness, honesty,
courage, overcoming difficulty, having manners and observing rules,
cultured behavior and a vivacious, bright and cheerful disposition.

In a section on “The Content of Moral Education of the Child,” the author provides detailed descriptions of the nature of each category of moral education. Here we will center our attention on love of science as described in the following paragraph.

Cultivating a love of science in the child. Mastery of science is
described as the essential condition for achieve the four
modernizations, creating material wealth, expanding production,
improving the lives of the people and greatly raising the cultural
and scientific level of the people. From an early age, children should
be cultivated to have a scientific attitude toward the environment of
seeking truth from facts and to have an interest in seeking
scientific knowledge. Their desire to seek knowledge should be
stimulated and habits of independent thought should be nurtured.
In kindergarten, children can be taught to recognize commonly seen
vegetables, fruits, flowers, trees and plants the seeds of which are
easy to cultivate. They should observe their growth and how they
undergo change and to know that soil, sunlight, air and water are
essential for the growth of plants. They should be able to
recognize commonly seen domestic animals, domestic foul and
birds, fish, insects and wild animals. They can also rear small
animals and observe their growth and life habits, Young children
should be taught to observe such natural phenomena as wind, clouds,
rain, snow, thunder, lightning and rainbows. They can also perform
simple experiments for the purpose of nurturing their interest in
natural sciences such as making ice from water by cooling it and
producing water by heating the ice and attracting iron with magnets.

Love of science as a goal of moral education is also spelled out in an article published in 1987 in the Journal Educational Research entitled, “Qualitative Assessment of Moral Education in Elementary and Middle Schools.” In this article, the following values are associated with “love of science.”

Studying hard and having a deep interest in science

Liking to take part in scientific and technological activities and
having the capacity to engage in them

Ability to think independently and to be courageous in pursuing
new knowledge

Among the goals that are spelled out for the twenty-first century are the cultivation by means of science courses in children from the time they are young “rigor, pragmatism and earnestness” as well an “inquisitive scientific spirit and life habits.” As can be seen from the most recent textbooks, a spirit of a hands-on approach involving use of the senses and engagement in experiments is encouraged and exemplified. In textbooks other than science textbooks, the emphasis is on a spirit of love of and protection of nature.

A major general theme of the new editions of the moral character textbooks is that “venerating science is honorable and ignorance is disgraceful.” This theme is reflected in the first lesson of the Grade 5 first term textbook (2007 edition), “What do Science and Technology Bring Us?” In a section of the lesson entitled, “Venerating Science and Opposing Superstition and Perverse Religious Sects,” the introduction to the section runs as follows:

The advance of science has propelled the development of human
society. However, the phenomena of superstition and pseudoscience
still exist in modern society. Confronting the boundless universe, we
should arm our minds with scientific knowledge, make judgments using
scientific vision, analysis and knowledge so that we cannot into
spiritually mistaken ideas through superstition and ignorance.

In 2003, there was an epidemic of atypical pneumonia in our nation.
This was a severe infectious respiratory disease. At that time, the people
still not have a complete understanding of the characteristics of the
incidence and spread of disease and differential diagnosis and treatment
were comparatively difficult and serious diseases could endanger human
life at any time. In the face of this sudden calamity, medical specialists
studied and investigated scientific methods of treatment and prevention
so that the masses of people could do as much as possible to use
scientifically sound methods of protecting themselves.

However, phenomena like the following also arose:

Superstitious activity arose in many agricultural regions. A number
of sorceresses and sorcerers started rumors to mislead the masses.
Calling themselves supernatural beings or saying that they could turn
bad luck into good if people would follow their directions. Many
peasants believed that this was true, and, one after another, contributed
money to tem, seeking help. In some regions, fifty to sixty people
kneeled on the ground praying to god to eliminate the “atypical”
conditions.

There were also some regions in which there was the rumor that the
“atypical” could be eliminated if they “every evening burned three
sticks of incense, kowtow in three directions and fire a gun three times.”

The students are asked the following questions in the textbook:

Do you think that diseases can be overcome in this way?

Why are there people who spread rumors to deceive the masses and
some people who believe them?

What are the consequences of acting in this way?

At this point, there is an illustration of a boy with the following statement printed beside it: We will conduct activities about believing in science and opposing superstition. The lesson then goes on to target a specific villain, the Falun Gong.

In China, there has been a perverse religious sect, the “Falun Gong”
that makes use of the people’s mentality of eagerness for health to
lure them into the practices of the “Falun Gong.” The “Falun Gong”
has created a shocking series of massacres that left behind debts of blood.

There follows a story about a five-year old elementary student who died when her mother, who was obsessed with the “Falun Gong” threw gasoline onto the child and lit it, resulting in severe burns that proved fatal. The lesson ends with the following brief paragraph:

Do you know any other stories like this? We will use facts to condemn
the criminal acts of perverse religious sects.

One of the reasons for selecting the Falun Gong as a target of condemnation may well be the necessity of having an enemy group within the society a against which any dissatisfaction among the people can be directed.

At this point, let me draw this discussion to a close. I am now in the process of receiving shipments of textbooks from China and hope to supplement this meager discussion with additional facts at a later time.

China: on the Tajiks (Kaveh Farrokh, Canada)

Kaveh Farrokh writes:

I really missed not having the opportunity to see WAISers at the Conference–as several of you may know I have had to face serious family illnesses.

You may find this blog on the tiny Persian-speaking minority of China of interest. The Tajiks speak a vernacular of Persian known as Tajiki:

http://www.kavehfarrokh.com/news/tajik-speakers-of-china-heir-to-an-ancient-tradition/

A brief reference is also made with respect to a Persian connection and the Terracota army in China as well.

JE comments: Sorry you couldn’t join us at WAIS ‘09, Kaveh, but fortunately, Patrick Hunt of Stanford stepped in to say a few words about your book, Shadows in the Desert. I trust your family is doing better; you’re in my thoughts.

re: China and the Global Financial Crisis; on Population Control (Robert Whealey, US)

Robert Whealey writes:

George Zhibin Gu’s (25 and 26 April) survey of the current Chinese role in the world economy is very interesting. He seems to assume that automatic growth of world domestic product is a good thing. Does he have any concern for global warming? Does anybody believe in the “Club of Rome” (1970) and a static population for the world? Can China’s population control policy fit other countries?

JE comments: Of the world’s nations (to my knowledge), only China has addressed the problem of overpopulation, which for some is the planet’s #1 obstacle to sustainability. The draconian Chinese model cannot be exported to other nations. On the contrary, some of the nations of “Old Europe” are paying people to have children. “Population control” is a hot-potato concept, to be sure, and I don’t really have a stance on it. My adoptive state of Michigan, if anything, is suffering from under-population! Following Robert Whealey’s lead, shall we open up a WAIS conversation on this topic?

–

For information about the World Association of International Studies
(WAIS), and its online publication, the World Affairs Report, read its
homepage by simply double-clicking on: http://wais.stanford.edu/

John Eipper, Editor-in-Chief, Adrian College, MI 49221 USA

China: Falun Gong and 25 April 1999 (Ying Rong, US)

Ying Rong writes:

A WAISer once raised an issue about Falun Gong surrounding a government office. Here is what truly happened 10 years ago.

April 25, 2009 marked the 10-year anniversary of over 10,000 Falun Gong practitioners’ peaceful appealing at Zhongnanhai. 

In April, 1999, in Tianjin, a large city next to Beijing, a few Falun Gong practitioners were illegally arrested, beaten and detained; their belief was denounced as an “evil cult.” Shocked by this news, Tianjin practitioners went to the city government and police department to appeal, but were told that only Beijing central state government could resolve such a high-level issue.

On April 25, 1999, over 10,000 Falun Gong practitioners from Tianjin and Beijing spontaneously and quietly went to Beijing Zhongnanhai, where the Central State government’s office to receive the appellants was located. Directed by the policemen, Falun Gong practitioners peacefully lined up along the streets outside of Zhongnanhai. Later, Zhu Rong-ji, the prime-minister then came out to meet with a few representatives who volunteered from the crowd. His response was positive at the time: the government will investigate and Tianjin detained practitioners will be released soon. After hearing this, over 10,000 Falun Gong practitioners peacefully and quietly left Zhongnanhai. Before they left, they collected all the garbage on the ground, even the cigarette butts thrown by the police. This was the true story of “4.25″ event.

Such a peaceful appeal was later classified as “illegal organizing a large crowd to surround the government office” by the Chinese communist regime, therefore counted as one big “crime.” After three months of hard preparation, the Chinese regime launched a brutal crackdown on Falun Gong nationwide on July 20th. The communist regime issued an internal policy regarding Falun Gong called “ruin their reputations, bankrupt them financially and destroy them physically”.

There started one of the most ruthless persecutions in human history. Hundreds of thousands were illegally sent to labor camps, brainwash workshops and prisons, many were tortured to death; in 2005, the shocking organ harvesting from Falun Gong practitioners was revealed to the world ….10 years have passed since 1999. Sadly, not much has changed in terms of persecution of Falun Gong in China.

April 25 is a day to remember, also a day to reflect: what can we do to end this Nazi-like torture and slaughter in China?

We have been given 10 years; how much more time do we still have to help those innocent people? When the history turns to a new page in the future, are we going to be proud of what we do today?

In face of the economic crisis, do we truly understand how and why the world gets to today’s stage? “Selfishness and Greed” have deteriorated the morality of the world. On the Falun Gong issue, are we doing what we should be doing knowing the brutal killing of the innocent?

–
For information about the World Association of International Studies (WAIS), and its online publication, the World Affairs Report, read its homepage by simply double-clicking on: http://wais.stanford.edu/

John Eipper, Editor-in-Chief, Adrian College, MI 49221 USA

re: China and the Global Financial Crisis (George Zhibin Gu, China)

George Zhibin Gu responds to Tor Guimaraes’s question of 25 April:
 
Tor has raised an interesting issue on the possibility of a fast-expanding Chinese middle class, which could help to sustain a positive domestic Chinese economy, independent of global financial crises in the future.
 
My feeling is this: A further expansion of a Chinese middle class is relevant, but there are deeper issues. First, China’s global economic connections and trade are fundamental to the nation’s growth, which will be even more significant as time passes. At the same time, there is no way for China to distance itself from any troubles in the global marketplace for now or in the future.
 
Second, an even more relevant issue is at home: That is, China’s healthy social and economic development must be based on turning the government body from self-serving to a service provider. This issue is far from resolved as of today. Its failure would cause more harm, infinitely bigger than the adverse impacts of global financial crisis.
 
The following interview may shed some light on this deeper issue:
 
Heart of China’s Problems
 
1. Question:  What do you think is the biggest challenge for China today–both politically/economically and socially?
 
Answer from George Zhibin Gu: The government is no service provider. As such, there is no way to establish a law-based, fair modern society as well as modern organizations and businesses. In short, people’s power remains weak. What is more, all market deals are turned into bureaucratic dealings.  

2. Question: Is China (meaning a) the Government and b) the People) aware of the huge potential, which China has and will have in the global business world?
 
Answer: True, both parties are well aware of the giant potentials in the global marketplace. But China’s government remains self-serving. So that whatever it does must benefit itself above all, which happens at the very expenses of society and people. At this time, all things in the society and business world remain twisted.

3. Question: You presented the 3 elements that “pulled China out of the mud”–what will China need for the next 10 years to actually be as successful as the theories suggest?
 
Answer: One leg is out of the mud, while the other leg remains in the mud. Getting the other leg out of the mud will be the focus of the next decade. Further analysis exists in my books.

4. Question: And finally, some statistics suggest that China will need 1.2 million (trained and partly English-speaking) staff in the Hospitality Industries (tourism, hotels, gastronomy, meetings industry).  It’s called the “war for talent.” How long will it take to actually have those needed 1.2 million new hospitality staff in place and successfully working?
 
Answer: More experienced international managers and staffs are badly needed. For inbound travel has been skyrocketing, but services remain narrowly minded. For example, the domestic tourism industry remains inexperienced to provide extensive services to the sophisticated corporate and business travel communities from the outside world. In this regard, more experienced and knowledgeable international marketing and service professionals are badly needed. But at the staff level, Chinese employees would do provided that they get trained.

–
For information about the World Association of International Studies (WAIS), and its online publication, the World Affairs Report, read its homepage by simply double-clicking on: http://wais.stanford.edu/

John Eipper, Editor-in-Chief, Adrian College, MI 49221 USA

re: China and the Global Financial Crisis (Tor Guimaraes, Brazil/US)

Tor Guimaraes responds to George Zhibin Gu’s post of 25 April:

I think the evidence supports the main points made by George Zhibin
Gu. He clearly knows what he is talking about: Chinese/global
socio/economics. Thus, I hope he can help me with one question: China
has developed a substantial manufacturing base and is a huge market.
If the Chinese middle class can be cultivated into a consumer society,
China would be able to cushion future global crises. In broad
strokes, what would you advise the Chinese government to do to
accomplish this?

JE comments: “To be rich is glorious,” Deng Xiaoping said,
gloriously. Isn’t the economic might of the Chinese middle class
starting to show itself? They already buy a lot of Buicks. A
follow-up question to Tor Guimaraes’s: would it serve the interests
of the Chinese government to encourage its citizens to save less and
spend more–i.e., to act more like Americans?

–
For information about the World Association of International Studies
(WAIS), and its online publication, the World Affairs Report, read its
homepage by simply double-clicking on: http://wais.stanford.edu/

John Eipper, Editor-in-Chief, Adrian College, MI 49221 USA

re: China/US: Chinese Foreign Reserves at $1.954 Trillion (Tor Guimaraes, US)

Tor Guimaraes responds to Bienvenido Macario’s post of 12 April:

The relatively large Chinese reserves of US dollars makes them vulnerable to dollar weakness. The US dollar has been relatively strong vis a vis other currencies but in the next year or two if/when the US economy hopefully changes from deflationary to a mild recovery, inflation will quickly raise its ugly head and the deficits and ongoing easy money policy will conspire to weaken the US dollar. The Chinese know this, and they are nervous but cannot do much about it except be good partners, try to slowly diversify their currency reserves, and keep the yuan from rising against the US dollar.

–

For information about the World Association of International Studies
(WAIS), and its online publication, the World Affairs Report, read its
homepage by simply double-clicking on: http://wais.stanford.edu/

John Eipper, Editor-in-Chief, Adrian College, MI 49221 USA

re: China: Falun Gong (Mike Bonnie, US)

JE note: I received this message from Mike Bonnie after receiving,
but before posting, Ying Rong’s latest missive (28 June). The
following is Mike’s reply to Ying’s post of 24 June:

Ying Rong wrote: The biggest conflict in the history of China is still
unresolved today: the peaceful Falun Gong practice and ruthless
communist party. It is a conflict between 100 million innocent people
and one tyranny. This actually is also one of the biggest conflicts in
the history of humanity.

Mike Bonnie responds: It gives me little pleasure to address Ying
Rong’s comments. I’m not certain weather to be considered being
labeled a Communists sympathizer a compliment or a slur. In the city
where I live and work, being called a “hater” is a very derogatory
remark.

First things first; I just returned from a marvelous vacation, camping
with family in one of the most pristine areas of northern Wisconsin.
We spent three days in the wilderness of a state campground near
Mellon, Wisconsin, near the border of Lake Superior and the Upper
Peninsula of Michigan. We’re not experienced enough as campers to
venture into the more wild National Park areas. We still need access
to running hot water for showers.

Copper Falls campground makes creates to a conglomerate of water falls
and cascades created by receding glacier that moved through the upper
Midwest states of Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, parts of Iowa and
Illinois, 12,000 years ago. The park and surrounding areas are filled
with escarpments and drumlins, rock outcroppings and cavernous
valleys. The streams and rivers over the centuries have carved out
magnificent valleys flowing with copper-colored waters. The color,
which I learned on this trip, is not created by the abundance of
copper minerals embedded in the soil; rather it comes from tannin, a
substance created by the breakdown and decay of the abundance of pine,
poplar and birch trees that fill the landscape. Tannin in itself adds
to the flavor of fruits and has widespread use in making wine and
teas, and now accounts for the ambiance of the topography.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tannin

Parts of our adventure included conversations with a boat dock owner
in Ashland, Wisconsin, and while we waited along a roadside to capture
a photo of a sunset, a farmer and cow herdsman about the local
economy. This area of Wisconsin has a long history of copper and lead
mining and providing timber for building construction and the paper industries.
Those industries still provide a great deal of products and employment. However farming and tourism are mainstays and emerging parts of the supply and demand landscapes.

The tourism industry is going through a mixed bag of changes. On the
one hand local tourism is suffering due to the costs of fuel for cars
and mobile-type homes; on the other hand tourist (like ourselves) who
last year traveled by air, are now taking to the highways in search of
closer-by locations to explore. Recreational boating and the ancillary
support businesses (restaurants and clothing, etc.) are suffering the
most.

On the agricultural side of things, the outlook for costs of
vegetables is expected to soar with rising fuel costs. Farmers in
southern Wisconsin and further south who once grew legumes such as
beans and soy, potatoes, melons are opting to grow corn, taking
advantage of subsidies for alternative fuel. The northern part of this
state does not provide a long enough growing season for corn and must
struggle along with the traditional smaller plant crops, the changes
including costs of planting and harvesting will ultimately place a
higher demand. Reliance on so-called “migrant” workers has become a
misnomer over the years in this part of the world, as many of the
individuals and families depended upon for agricultural production,
are a permanent part of the social/economic/education/health care
paradigm.

Returning to Ying Rong’s post: Ying (and John Eipper, due to his
comment on the post) may be surprised to learn that in theory I agree,
to a certain extent, the conflict between Falun Gong and the Communist
Party of China may indeed be the greatest conflict in history. Being
the cynical pragmatist that I am, agreeing or disagreeing on
principle, supporting and encouraging someone’s ideas, can be
diametrically opposing concepts. In the nature of religious cults,
isolating individuals from family and friends, creating the “you’re
either with us or against us” way of thought, is fundamental to
developing undying loyalty to cult leaders and his or her ideals.
Inculcating grandiose ideals, such as developing super-human
attributes, attaining nirvana while still in this lifetime and
reality, are typical descriptions ascribed to cults and covens.

It’s not surprising individuals within a cult are often prone to
developing thoughts and feelings of persecution by nebulously defined
legitimate groups, and fabricating situations that validate support of
those views; making conflict, rather than solutions to disagreement
paramount.

The concept of hiding behind one’s ideals such as religion, using
those as a sword and a shield, is self-defeating in the development
process of becoming human. “Moderation in all we do,” a theme cutting
across theologies, includes participation in religious activity. I’m
reminded of a story that has circulated among treatment providers in
the world of alcoholism, another cycle of addiction which fluxes
between highs and lows, dependant in part on the amount one imbibes in
stimulants such as brain endorphins. Reportedly, a colleague of
Sigmund Freud sent to the great guru of psychiatry for treatment, a
person suffering from alcoholism. After several visits, Freud returned
the client back to his colleague with the caveat, “I cannot help this
person. He is a brick who has stepped outside the wall of human
protection.” Such are my feelings toward many who choose to dedicate
their passions to what are in my view are self-destructive or “end of
times” causes.

In further regard to the “greatest conflict” being between the members
of Falun Gong and the Communist Party, I would not consider Falun Gong
to be “ancient” by any way of counting; the group is hardly “old.” The
physical exercise aspect of Falun Gong, the practice of “Chi Gong,” is
borrowed from Buddhism, which does go back several thousand years.
Clearly, connecting Falun Gong to Buddhism adds to a cult’s referent
authority. I’m curious to know if the alleged 100 million membership
claimed by Falun Gong also includes the practitioners of Chi Gong in
Buddhism. Either way, it would be interesting to learn the Dhali
Lama’s attitude toward Falun Gong.

On this point I empathize with not only the Communist (in title)
government of China as well as any government. Following the rules of
serving and protecting citizenry includes (to varying degrees)
protecting people from themselves. It shouldn’t take a great deal of
imagination to extrapolate the mode of some cults in American past
that have imploded, to one “potential” destiny of Falun Gong.

Cases in point; The People’s Temple (Jim Jones’s group - 1978), the
Branch Davidians (1930-1990), and Heaven’s Gate (1997). Hiding behind
its own veil of secrecy, from the top leadership of Falun Gong living
the New York high lifestyle down to individual member’s unwillingness
to self-disclose, who’s to know what the future holds?

*************

It’s time for me to attack the summer reading list. On the menu today
is a freshly delivered copy of Rolf Menger’s biography, *Prisoners
Bluff*. Menger was a member of the now-famous group that included
Heinrich Harrer, author of *Seven Years in Tibet*, which was made into
a movie of the same title. Following the group’s break from the Indian
prison in Dehra Dun in the mid-1940s, Harrer headed north, while
Menger headed south to join the Japanese. Menger’s travels took him to
Rangoon, the subject of my interest, and later to Tokyo.

JE comments: Does Falun Gong espouse an apocalyptic eschatology? If
the practice is primarily a set of meditative exercises, as Ying Rong
wrote this morning, then I cannot see how it can be viewed as a threat
to the Chinese citizenry.

In any case, I thank Ying Rong, Mike Bonnie, Siegfried Ramler, Nigel
Jones and others, for this very informative (if not always harmonious)
conversation.

– For information about the World Association of International Studies
(WAIS), and its online publication, the World Affairs Report, read its
homepage by simply double-clicking on: http://wais.stanford.edu/

John Eipper, Editor-in-Chief, Adrian College, MI 49221 USA

re: China: Naval Buildup (Steve Torok, Thailand)

Steve Torok writes:

I was reading with interest the posts on this topic, especially from
Tor Guimaraes, Mike Bonnie, and David Krieger, as well as Michael Sullivan
and all the others. JE’s report on WHINSEC was juxtaposed in my mind,
as well as my UN peacekeeping work in Cambodia and my involvement with
South China Sea oil resources previously, where I wanted to organize a
meeting on the subject by the UN (CCOP, a UNDP project I collaborated
with from ESCAP). Though the meeting did not take place, I still think
it would be a good idea–maybe hosted by the Chinese Navy at its new
naval base?

The tone of the collaboration may be set by Michael Sullivan’s
description of the friendly conversations between SAC and Soviet
bombers, also inspired by JE’s description of WHINSEC classes and my
experience in collaboration between Russian, Chinese, American,
Australian, New Zealand and other armed forces in the 20000+ strong UN
peace-keeping force in Cambodia during 1991-93, during UNTAC rule there.

To go a step further with a surreal but not unrealistic scenario I
would like to pose to David Krieger: what if all the second-strike
nuclear capabilities housed on submarines (whether Murmansk, Diego
Garcia, or who knows where, including Hainan island) by the various
national navies would be pledged to the UN to guarantee nuclear
disarmament and peace–with a proviso that any first strike by anybody
(old and new, with declared or secret nuclear capability) would be met
by massive retaliation as a second strike, under UN auspices, from
these submarines, while nuclear disarmament is taking place as
negotiated under an expanded UN non-proliferation treaty?

JE comments: David Krieger’s cause is no nukes whatsoever, under any
circumstances, so I don’t think he can endorse Steve Torok’s proposal.

I would like to hear more about Steve’s participation in the UN peacekeeping mission in Cambodia in early ’90s. I hope these lines find him well.

– For information about the World Association of International Studies
(WAIS), and its online publication, the World Affairs Report, read its
homepage by simply double-clicking on: http://wais.stanford.edu/

John Eipper, Editor-in-Chief, Adrian College, MI 49221 USA

re: China: Economics and the Naval Buildup (Tor Guimaraes, US)

Tor Guimaraes writes:

Regarding the PRC navy, I think John Heelan (1 June) is on the right
track. What I don’t like about what is happening in this area are the
very negative strategic trends and the apparent nearsightedness of our
leaders. Even our experts seem to be out to lunch while Chinese
leaders are playing them like a fiddle. For example, naval
intelligence sources in London and Washington reported (May 2008) that
China is set to challenge US dominance in the Pacific by 2050. The
precision and usefulness of such statements boggle my mind. China is
challenging US dominance in the Pacific right now. It is just a
matter of degree and the strategic trends are for China and going
against us. Further, the 2005 edition of the *Chinese Military Power*
PLAN chart with surface combatants and submarines compared with the
2000 Report shows (I believe deliberately) a completely stagnant
Chinese navy, which is very far from the truth. Make no mistake about
it, the primary motivations for the PRC global navy are two components
of national security: 1. national prestige (carrying a big stick) and
2. direct protection of political/economic interests. Thus, and once
again, our military/political leaders are strategically committing
national suicide by failing to directly link economic power with
long-term military power.

– For information about the World Association of International Studies
(WAIS), and its online publication, the World Affairs Report, read its
homepage by simply double-clicking on: http://wais.stanford.edu/

John Eipper, Editor-in-Chief, Adrian College, MI 49221 USA

re: China: Naval Buildup (Mike Bonnie, US)

Massoud Malek wrote on 1 June:

“More than 80 per cent of China’s oil passes through the Strait of
Malacca and the South China Sea on its way to the country’s
energy-thirsty industries. That’s why they are beefing up maritime
capabilities, in order to secure those sea lanes.”

Mike Bonnie responds:

While researching on another topic I ran across several articles relating to oil/gas transportation from Calcutta, India to Kunming, China that may be of
interest:

“Pipeline carries gas of China: The longest pipeline in the
world,” May 10, 1945:

http://cbi-theater-1.home.comcast.net/~cbi-theater-1/roundup/roundup051045.html

Pipeline photos: http://home.comcast.net/~ledoroad/Ledo_Pipeline.html

“India wants not just China, but others to join Iran pipeline,” May 28, 2008
*Calcutta News*: http://www.calcuttanews.net/story/364429

– For information about the World Association of International Studies
(WAIS), and its online publication, the World Affairs Report, read its
homepage by simply double-clicking on: http://wais.stanford.edu/

John Eipper, Editor-in-Chief, Adrian College, MI 49221 USA

re: China: Naval Buildup (David Krieger, US)

David Krieger writes:

I agree with John Eipper (1 June) that the discussion of the Chinese
Navy is losing a sense of perspective. The only country currently
stationing its Navy throughout the world and using its military
aggressively is the United States. In this regard, it is setting a
terrible example for the rest of the world, in its aspirations for
military dominance. It is also proving its ineptness in its
aggressive war in Iraq and diminishing the prospects of having a
military capable of actual defense. This is not so much a critique of
the US military as of US military policy and militarism, particularly
under the current US administration, which is clearly vying to be the
worst US administration ever.

– For information about the World Association of International Studies
(WAIS), and its online publication, the World Affairs Report, read its
homepage by simply double-clicking on: http://wais.stanford.edu/

John Eipper, Editor-in-Chief, Adrian College, MI 49221 USA

re: China: Naval Buildup (John Heelan, UK)

Robert Whealey wrote on 31 May:

This speculation about China is mostly trying to scare people. The
idea of a Chinese Ocean Navy is highly exaggerated… In the future
where will China send its carrier? Taiwan? Japan? Alaska? China’s
future wars are more likely to be fought in Tibet, Mongolia, Xinjiang,
Southeast Asia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and Siberia.

John Heelan responds:

Why not Alaska,the the Persian Gulf, the Caribbean, Antarctica and the
African coast to protect/acquire energy and basic resources needed for
its expansion? Where are most of the US aircraft carriers stationed
at the moment?

JE comments: Aren’t we losing a sense of perspective here? The idea of any “future wars” involving China might include the US entering the conflict on the opposing side. This is all too horrific to contemplate.

– For information about the World Association of International Studies
(WAIS), and its online publication, the World Affairs Report, read its
homepage by simply double-clicking on: http://wais.stanford.edu/

John Eipper, Editor-in-Chief, Adrian College, MI 49221 USA

re: China: Naval Buildup (Michael Sullivan, US)

Following up on his post of 31 May, Michael Sullivan writes:

The question I have is will the Chinese Navy make their carriers
nuclear-powered? If they don’t they won’t be able to rival the US Navy in
projecting power around the world, which may not be a consideration for
them.

– For information about the World Association of International Studies
(WAIS), and its online publication, the World Affairs Report, read its
homepage by simply double-clicking on: http://wais.stanford.edu/

John Eipper, Editor-in-Chief, Adrian College, MI 49221 USA

re: China: Naval Buildup (Massoud Malek, US; ex-Iran)

Massoud Malek writes:

A naval intelligence sources in London and Washington reported in May
2008 that China is set to challenge US dominance in the Pacific by 2050.

Should our children or grandchildren worry about the eventual Chinese
dominance in the Pacific, 42 years from now?

In March 2, 2005, *The New York Times* reported that China was
increasing the number of ships in the PLA Navy (PLAN). That was a lie.

According to the 2005 edition of *Chinese Military Power* (released in
July 2005), the PLAN included a chart with surface combatants and
submarines broken out in detail. Here is a comparison chart of those
numbers with the 2000 Report:

Item 2000 2005

Destroyers about 20 21

Frigates about 40 43

Diesel Submarines about 60 51

Nuclear Submarines 6 6

Medium/Heavy Amphibious Lift Ships

nearly 50 43

http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/687/chinas-naval-buildup

It should be noted that the first real PLAN started in 1971 and it
took 30-odd years to come up with 6 nuclear submarines and 21
destroyers.

It should also be noted that the Chinese Navy has no aircraft carrier
yet. The first one will not be ready before 2010.

Could China’s military build-up at sea be more about oil than it is
about Taiwan and other territorial claims?

In April 2005, *The Washington Times*, quoting a report prepared for
US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, said China’s naval strategy was
about “protecting or denying the transit of tankers through the South
China Sea.”

“More than 80 per cent of China’s oil passes through the Strait of
Malacca and the South China Sea on its way to the country’s
energy-thirsty industries. That’s why they are beefing up maritime
capabilities, in order to secure those sea lanes.”

http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/chinainstitute/nav03.cfm?nav03=43902&nav02=43871&nav01=43092

PS. Today, PLA admirals have fewer ships than Zheng He, the
15th-century Chinese explorer and fleet admiral. His 1405 expedition
consisted of 27,800 men and a fleet of 62 treasure ships supported by
approximately 190 smaller ships.

JE comments: My greetings to Massoud Malek, from whom we haven’t
heard in several weeks. Massoud’s “PS” offers us a very interesting
historical perspective on Chinese sea power.

– For information about the World Association of International Studies
(WAIS), and its online publication, the World Affairs Report, read its
homepage by simply double-clicking on: http://wais.stanford.edu/

John Eipper, Editor-in-Chief, Adrian College, MI 49221 USA

CHINA; Harley Davidson and Hell’s Angels.(Mike Bonnie, China)

I said: Nostalgia for the past affects all countries. China used to be a land of bicycles Now all who can afford it, buy a car. Does that bring nostalgia for the good old times of bicycles? I cherish the maps of my bibycle tours of Europe. Some Germans long for the good old times of Hitler, some Russians for those of Stalin, some Chinese for those of Mao. Is that simply longing for the past, and not a political statement? For some it may be one, for some the other. This is of great interest to WAIS

Mike Bonnie writes: The classic favorite bike of Hells Angels has been the Harley Davidson, manufactured in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Harley recently announced an agreement to sell Harley’s, the “HOG” (Harley Operators Group) in China.

SAN FRANCISCO - Hells Angels ready to party - S.F. club celebrates 50th anniversary with weeklong rally

Julian Guthrie, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, July 30, 2004
Hundreds of Hells Angels roared into San Francisco on Thursday for a weeklong biker bash billed as a low-key celebration of custom hogs and brotherly love. The host is the Hells Angels’ San Francisco chapter, which is celebrating its 50th anniversary. The club is the second-oldest in the world, after the San Bernardino chapter founded in 1948.

Harley Davidson Rumbles into China - Boston Globe: http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2006/04/08/hog_heaven_comes_to_china/

Harley China: http://www.harley-davidson.cn/

Harley Davidson-USA: http://www.harley-davidson.com/wcm/content/pages/home.jsp?HDCWPSession=xNwyFKTQz9QRGNzX4Xm8mty1DgFHGJxxf7nPNL3277ZtQFZM9GR0!1768009281!-1009329802&locale=en_US

China really has the creativity to build bikes suitable to thier needs, however with the growing economy Harley is the sought after brand. I prefer something more family oriented without a sidecar……

RH; Are there Hell’s Angels outside the US?

WAISers whose bio is not in the WAIS Who’s are invited to send theirs to . If your bio is already in rhe Who’s Who, please hold any revisions for the time being. Nominations for new members should also be sent to with a short bio of the candidate. who must have expressed an interest in joining. If a vote seems necessary, the WAIS chairman wil be consulted.

Re: Geographic names in China (Steve Druszad)

Discussing Chinese place names, Istvan Simon said “ln the name of the city of Guangdong. Zhou generally means “city”. Dong means “East”. Steve Druszad comments: Sorry, Istvan, you got it reversed with the “jhou” and “dong” as you would see if we could print here the Chinese characters! RH: Why don’t they speak English?

WAISers whose bio is not in the WAIS Who’s are invited to send theirs to . If your bio is already in rhe Who’s Who, please hold any revisions for the time being. Nominations for new members should also be sent to with a short bio of the candidate. who must have expressed an interest in joining. If a vote seems necessary, the WAIS chairman wil be consulted.

Re: CHINA: Mao Ze Dong (Robert Crow, US)

Robert Crow writes: Unlike Xiao Liu, Istvan Simon believes that Mao Ze Dong is indeed a monster and ignores the context and accomplishments of Mao’s reign. First, Mao led the effort to throw out the thoroughly corrupt Kuomintang and the warlords. This at least provided the Chinese people with some reason to hope for a better future. There is no question that the Great Leap Forward was a ghastly mistake, leading — among other terrible consequences — to widespread famine. However, before Mao, China had a long history of famines; and it does not take much a stretch of imagination to think under the Kuomintang and warlords, they would have happened again. Also, the terrible consequences of the Great Leap Forward were the product of a mistaken economic model and distorted incentives rather than malevolence. They are an outstanding example of the road to hell being paved with good intentions. The Great Leap Forward was largely an attempt to rationalize an excess supply of labor and severe shortage of capital. This model of import substitution and self-sufficiency for developing countries was commonly tries in the 1950s and was followed with terrible — albeit not on the Chinese scale — consequences in Latin America as well as China. Its intellectual underpinnings won Gunnar Myrdal a Nobel Prize in economics. The good intentions aspect of the Great Leap Forward is a major distinction between Mao and Hitler and Stalin.

Nothing can be said in defense of the Cultural Revolution. However, it is not clear how much Mao had to do with its excesses once it got rolling. Much of the responsibility for those excesses can probably be laid at the feet of the Gang of Four rather than Mao himself. It was Mao that reinstated Deng Xiao Peng and brought the Cultural Revolution to a close.

“70% achievement and 30% mistake” may not be too far off the mark. The way I heard it in China from students was many great achievements and a few mistakes — but the mistakes were enormous.

during Mao’s reign, continues to arrest and imprison people merely for publicly opposing the communist party’s control of government. For example, Liu Di, known as “stainless steel mouse”, an obscure psychology student at Beijing Normal University, was imprisoned for writing an Internet blog in which she criticized the Chinese government. For this “offense” she was thrown into jail, forced to share a cell with a convicted murderer. When human rights activists and just regular users of the Internet protested her detention, the government responded by arresting five of her supporters simply because they signed a petition for her release. See for example, http://hrw.org/advocacy/internet/dissidents/8.htm There are many cases like Liu Di, so China still has a long long way to go on the road to political freedom.

Plan to attend the WAIS conference on “Critical World Issues ” at Stanford July 31-August 1, 2006. It will be a rare opportunity to meet other WAISers. it is open to the public. Tell interested friends. Registration fee until July 15 is $30, after that $35. Mail to WAIS, attn. Ronald Hilton, 766 Santa Ynez, Stanford, CA 94305-8441

CHINA: Mao Ze Dong (Istvan Simon, ex.USSR)

Xiao Liu, a biologist visiting Stanford wrote: “As far as I know, most Chinese do not think Mao as a monster. Our government’s conclusion is that Mao is of 70% achievement and 30% mistake. I agree on that.” Istvan Simon comments: I am afraid I cannot take Xiao Liu’s assessment of Mao seriously. Mao’s achievements consist in staying in power for about 30 years. His mistakes, on the other hand, were monumental and resulted in unimaginable suffering for the Chinese people. Mao’s crimes against China include the outright murder of millions of innocent Chinese for political and ideological reasons, the merciless political persecution of millions of others who while not murdered languished for years in Chinese labor camps, the deaths of tens of millions due to famine caused by his idiotic and irresponsible policies, the setting back of China’s economy by several decades by the Great Leap Forward, the collectivization of farms, and Mao’s hopelessly incompetent economic management, the wholesale destruction and vandalism of priceless cultural treasures during the Cultural Revolution, the loss of an entire generation during those same years, in which nothing was achieved, and China was ruled by a system of generalized madness, when mobs of roving unrestrained ignorant fanatical slogan-spouting teenagers blindly waving Mao’s writings took over the country, destroying anything of value in their path. Last but not least, the installation of a totalitarian system of government in which such gross incompetence could thrive, depending on the whims of a single individual, supported by a relatively small cadre of the inner circle of the Communist party, that held all power in China. Happily, most of that is in the past, and China today has little resemblance to Mao’s China.

I do not know what most Chinese think of Mao, and I believe neither does Xiao Liu, since to my knowledge no reliable survey has been done about that. And if such a survey were to be made, I doubt that its results could be trusted, because China is still governed by a dictatorial regime, which while not engaging in the same extremes of oppression that were common during Mao’s reign, continues to arrest and imprison people merely for publicly opposing the communist party’s control of government. For example, Liu Di, known as “stainless steel mouse”, an obscure psychology student at Beijing Normal University, was imprisoned for writing an Internet blog in which she criticized the Chinese government. For this “offense” she was thrown into jail, forced to share a cell with a convicted murderer. When human rights activists and just regular users of the Internet protested her detention, the government responded by arresting five of her supporters simply because they signed a petition for her release. See for example, http://hrw.org/advocacy/internet/dissidents/8.htm There are many cases like Liu Di, so China still has a long long way to go on the road to political freedom.

Going back to what the Chinese people think of Mao, I would like to relate some anecdotal evidence that seems to indicate that it is not that uncommon for Chinese to have a much less favorable opinion of Mao than Xiao Liu does. Two years ago I spent three months in China, and subsequently I spent another six months. During my first visit, I used to walk in a park every day. There were few foreigners, so it was not uncommon that people stared at me, probably because they have never seen a Caucasian before. But wherever I went, I always found that most people were very friendly and welcoming, eager to communicate with me, even though such communication was often difficult due to my very limited Chinese and their equally poor English. In any case, many complete strangers approached me spontaneously to strike up a conversation. Overall, I had a very positive opinion of China during this trip, and indeed I wrote an optimistic and very favorable review about it in WAIS.

One day a man, who was walking with his small child in the park, approached me and asked where I was from. He spoke understandable English. He asked me what I thought of China, and I told him of my favorable impressions, about the great improvements in the economy and greater freedom visible everywhere. He told me that yes, he agreed that the Chinese economy had prospered, and that there was greater political freedom and openness than had existed before, but he lamented that China was still far from being free, and that he was afraid for his son, because all the progress, both economic and political could be lost in an instant, if someone so inclined came to power. About Mao, he said he was a murderer like Saddam Hussein. Several weeks later, another person completely independently made the same comparison.

Plan to attend the WAIS conference on “Critical World Issues ” at Stanford July 31-August 1, 2006. It will be a rare opportunity to meet other WAISers. Tell interested friends.
Ronald Hilton, Editor, 2006

Re: China Hails a Good Nazi and Makes Japan Take Notice (Mike Bonnie, China)

” China Hails a Good Nasi and Makes Japon Take Notice” was forwarded by Glenye Cain, with the message:Of interest, I suspect, to the learning history discussion. It deals with the rape of Nanking by the Japanese. Miles Seeley commented; In many instances of turmoil abroad, we have no compelling national interest in intervening. Mike Bonnie adds this: I’m also be a “realist” in the sense that I believe there need not be one single compelling national interest fpr going to war. Try as we might to understand and label the causes of war, there may not be a cause or there may be so many causes no “one” should take precedence. Some wars or acts of war seem absolutely senseless.

I’m in the midst of reading The Diaries of John Rabe: The Good German of Nanking,” published by Little, Brown in Great Britain (1998), and Abacus Press in the US (2000). The book is a day-by-day account of the atrocities that took place during the Japanse take-over and subsequent occupation of Nanking, China between October 1937 and March 1938. John Rabe was the head of Siemens Company office in Nanking at the time. He became head of the International Committee, to protect the lives of Chinese residents of the city. He was also a member of the Nazi Party. Rabe along with his British and American counterparts are credited with helping save the lives of over 200,000 residents. His graphic account, depicts the maniacal immorality of unlimited war aimed at not only conquering a nation and acquiring its resources, but at destroying its people and attempting to cover up these crimes. The things Rabe wrote about the atrocities that took place in Nanking defy all my reasoning about war.

Plan to attend the WAIS conference on “Critical World Issues ” at Stanford July 31-August 1, 2006. It will be a rare opportunity to meet other WAISers. Tell interested friends.
Ronald Hilton, Editor, 2006

Cereijo, Bejucal, China and Cuba’s adversary foreign intelligence (Bill Ratliff,US)

Bill Ratliff sends: Cereijo, Bejucal, China and Cuba’s adversary foreign intelligence

Manuel Cereijo’s “Cuba’s adversary foreign intelligence” (http://www.canf.org/2005/1in/noticias-de-Cuba/2005-ago-16-cuba’s-adversary-foreign.htm), posted six or seven years prior to my writing now in mid-March 2006, but up-dated as recently as mid-2004, contains very serious and misleading mistakes. Even if the author takes it down or revises it, people who have read and filed it over those years need to understand its inaccuracies. The author argues that Cuba has a highly sophisticated intelligence network at Bejucal near Havana and that China is involved there. This is almost certainly true in some degree, making it all the more important that we find credible evidence as to the sort and degree of cooperation and what effect its product has on the interests of the United States and others. Given the current level of hysteria in some American quarters about expanding Chinese activities in Latin America, it is essential to try conscientiously to separate fact from fiction in this often murky area of intelligence investigation.

The main problem with this article is that it underlines alleged critically important cooperation and consequences by including a photograph of a truly awesome complex of radar domes with the capital letter caption: “GOLF BALL-SHAPED RADAR DOMES: BEJUCAL BASE CUBA.” Above and below the photograph the text says, among other things, “On dry land, guards patrol high fences surrounding acres of huge golf ball-shaped radar domes. . . They are trolling a vast sea of electromagnetic signals . . . .” These words, accompanied by the photo, are pretty sobering, scary stuff.

But when I visited Bejucal three years ago I saw nothing of the sort. And I saw nothing because there is no such complex of GOLF BALL-SHAPED RADAR DOMES at Bejucal and thus there are no high fences with guards patrolling them either. I have confirmed my on-the-spot visual conclusion by studying aerial photographs of the base with my colleague David Oppenheimer. We searched coordinates (22 degrees, 56′ 00″, 23′ 30) we had found on our own (and were later given to us also by Cereijo as the location of the domes) and confirmed that there is nothing even remotely resembling that complex there. (The aerial photos are now in the Hoover Institution Archives.) In sum, the juxtaposition of the photograph of an awesome complex that isn’t really there with very serious allegations, based in part on the domes that aren’t really there, significantly muddies the discussion of an important issue of intelligence cooperation that must be examined on the basis of facts not fantasy.

Not entirely fantasy, for the facility in the photograph does exist, just not in Cuba. It is indeed one of the most awesome and sophisticated bases in the world, very well worth being scared of if it is operated by one’s real or imagined enemies. But it is run by the United States, the Menwith Hill Station in the United Kingdom (http://www.fas.org/irp/facility/menwith.htm). Cereijo would not identify the source of the photograph but Oppenheimer found that it was taken by Duncan Campbell at about the time of Cereijo’s original article, though certainly not passed on by the photographer to Cereijo. Indeed Campbell originally published the photo along with an article entitled “Inside Echelon” (http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/6/6929/1.html) discussing among other things the very low quality of so much analysis and reporting on international communications surveillance and how much harm that kind of “analysis and reporting” can do. Events in the early 21st century have simply underlined the potentially tragic consequences of decisions made on the basis of mistaken or deliberately falsified intelligence like that presented in Cereijo’s article.

Plan to attend the WAIS conference on “Critical World Issues ” at Stanford July 31-August 1, 2006. It will be a rare opportunity to meet other WAISers. Tell interested friends.

Ronald Hilton, Editor, 2006

Big Chinese government vs big European government (George Zhibin Gu, China)

From China, George Zhibin Gu writes: Thanks to Tim Brown for explaining what is behind the popular trend of bigger and bigger European government (2/18/06). It prompts me to raise this issue: Is the big Chinese government the same as the big European government?

My answer: they are fundamentally different. The bottom line is this: Big, modern Western European
government is a service provider, while the Chinese government is no service provider at all. Instead,
Chinese government is omly a squeezer. This role of squeezing by the Chinese government has been so
throughout China’s history. I make this point in my book, China’s global reach: China’s government power has increased all the way for the last 2,200 years. Furthermore, this increased government power means for the government to squeeze more and more on the population and society. For this, t he Chinese government power - as a squeezer- reached the very height in the Mao era. Behind this ever-expanding Chinese government power is also this reality: an overextended government power produces no true owners for the wealth and property in any nation.

One may even argue this: the difference in making a different government in Europe and China has taken
place in the last 200 years or so, especially since the French Revolution. The US has had the fortune to
directly walk out the old trap. Before then, old Europe had a church-state for thousands of years. This
church-state has acted as a squeezer to the European society. In the same context, China has always had a
church-state up to now. So, therefore, China must go through something like “the French Revolution” or the
“English Revolution” of 17th century in order to destroy the old church-state. For this point, some
analysis is presented in my book.

RH: Does church state mean state church?

Plan to attend the WAIS conference on “Critical World Issues ” at Stanford July 31-August 1, 2006. It will be a rare opportunity to meet other WAISers. Tell interested friends.

CHINA (Ross Rogers, Jr.)

Ross Rogers, Jr. has kindly sent, in addition to a much appreciated donation to the WAIS survival fund, a pile of articles about China. Most concerned the amazing feat of building a railroad through Tibet. Ross facetiously suggests that the Chinese may now come and build the high-speed line from San Francisco to Los Angeles. That is no joke, since it has just been announced tat the plan is bogged down. Shades of Senator Stanford! Another subject is Canada, where the Chinese population has grown immensely. The Canadian parliamentary system is less corrupt than the American one, and now Confucius has been added, He is regularly quoted in speeches appealing to Chinese Canadians. Confucius is the embodiment of civic virtues. Too bad he has so .little influence on American politics, say the Chinese. The third issue concerns the word Chinese. After coming to this country, I learned not to use the ordinary English word “Chinaman”, because in the US the term conjures up “He hasn’t a Chinaman’s chance”. As Secretary of State, Colin Powell, of Jamaican extraction , was rebuked for using the word Chinaman. Now there is an article titled “Listen, I’m Chinian, not Chinese”?. The argument is that the “.ese” ending is demeaning, while “-an” in not. Singapore chose Singaporean rather than Singaporese for this reason. I plan to stick to “Chinese” unless there is an outcry. I have become accustomed to saying Ukraine rather than the Ukraine, which was denounced because “the” suggests it is not a real country, which I suppose means we will have to lop the article off the United States. Add this to the confusion caused by the change of place names (Mumbai for Bombatym, etc) and you realize that creating confusion is a nationalist hobby.

Plan to attend the WAIS conference on “Critical World Issues ” at Stanford July 31-August 1, 2006. It will be a rare opportunity to meet other WAISers. Tell interested friends.

China’s development vs world (George Zhibin Gu, China)

George Zhibin Gu sends “Author Interview: China’s Global Reach”

George, you grew up in China during a very difficult time, especially during the Cultural Revolution. How
has this impacted your thinking today in terms of how you view China?

GEORGE ZHIBIN GU: Well, while I was growing up in China, China experienced a cultural revolution, as
well as people’s communes in the countryside. It was chaotic, it was characterized by abusive government
power which was expanding into everybody’s lives. What is more, it was an entirely closed society. In
other words, every citizen had to work for the government to make a living. So the government exactly
demanded the servitude of citizens, but today everything has changed fundamentally. So, in my mind
two things are most crucial for modern society and progress, that is, having an open society is a must;
secondly, private initiatives ?C people must rely upon their own efforts for progress and prosperity. That is
exactly what has been happening for the last 25 years. This makes all the difference. The third one is that
international participation in any country’s development is a necessity, otherwise development slows down tremendously. So, the situation in China and India shows [this is] the case.

http://www.financialsense.com/transcriptions/2006/0114Gu.html

Plan to attend the WAIS conference on “Critical World Issues ” at Stanford July 31-August 1, 2006. It will be a rare opportunity to meet other WAISers. Tell interested friends.

Red China and the Council on Foreign Relations (Alberto Gutierrez, Cuba)

Alberto Gutierrez writes: I realize that I am swimming against the current, the world, the UN, and perhaps all WAISers, but so far I don’t see any reason to delete the prefix RED from China. And I don’t deny that many distinguished people are members of the Council on Foreign Relations. On the other hand, I strongly question that a competence in international affairs has always been a decisive factor to be a member of that organization. I quote from The Shadows of Power: The Council on Foreign Relations and the American Decline by James Perloff: “It all began in 1921 as a front organization for J.P.Morgan and Company. By World War II it had acquired unrivaled influence on American foreign policy. Hundreds of US government administrators and diplomats had been drawn from its ranks - regardless of which party has occupied the White House. But what does the Council on Foreign Relations stand for? Why do the major media avoid discussing it?”

RH: One reason people don’t use the expression “Red China” is that it infuriates China; letters addressed to “Red China” are not delivered. What does “Red” mean? Communist? Today China is more capitalist than communist. As for the Council on Foreign Relations, it is hard to measure its or any other influence. I imagine that it corresponds ro the Wall Street Journal.. However, to suggest that it has some secret sinister hold over the US is rather like similar charges made against Jews. I see no conspiracy of silence on the part of the major news media All kinds of important organizations are never mentioned.

Plan to attend the WAIS conference on “Critical World Issues ” at Stanford July 31-August 1, 2006. It will be a rare opportunity to meet other WAISers. Tell interested friends.

China: Foreign professionals on China (George Gu)

Gerge Gu writes: I am doing a paper for Asia Times on foreign� professionals working in China. Would you kindly help me by sending the following message to our fellow WAISers who have worked or are working in China?

1. your personal info (nationality, birthplace, work,experience, etc)
2. How long have you lived in China? Which company do you work for? What kind of job?
3. What is your experience in China - both workplace and living?
4. What is your biggest surprise about living and working in China?
5. Delights, surprises, and disappointments?
6. Your interactions with local Chinese.
7. Plans for Chinese new year?
8. Suggestions.

my email: gzb678@yahoo.com.cn

Plan to attend the WAIS conference on “Critical Issues of Today” at Stanford July 31-August 1, 2006. It will be a rare opportunity to meet other WAISers.� Tell interested friends.

China: New China government website (Mike Bpnnie)

From Beijing,Mike Bonnie reports:China’s government has launched its new official website: www.gov.cn The site is also available in English through a link at the top of the page. The site appears loaded with information (credibility on some topics may be questioned). Some of the topics presented include:
Agriculture, Commerce, Construction, Culture, Defense, Economy, Education, Environment, Finance/Banking, Industry, Labor/Personnel, Overseas Chinese, Politics, Public Health, Religion/Ethnicl Affairs, ScienceTechnology, Society/Civil Affairs, Sports, Statistics. Tourism, Transport.

Plan to attend the WAIS conference on “Critical Issues of Today” at Stanford July 31-August 1, 2006. It will be a rare opportunity to meet other WAISers.� Tell interested friends.

China-Agricultural Tax (Mike Bonnie)

From China, Mike Bonnie writes:Tomorrow will mark the end of China’s 2600 year old Agricultural Tax. The annual projected relief is expected to free up 100 million yuan for farmers and residents of rural and agricultural areas. The measure also includes providing free primary and secondary education. The news from CCTV (China’s PBS equivilant) states that upwards to 80% of China’s population depends on farming for a living.

Plan to attend the WAIS conference on “Critical Issues of Today” at Stanford July 31-August 1, 2006. It will be a rare opportunity to meet other WAISers.� Tell interested friends.
WAISday is December 31. Contributions for 2005 should be mailed by that date.

Confucius and the Bureacracy Again (Charles Ridley)

Charles Ridley writes: A few more thoughts relating to Confucius and the bureacracy in China.� In consulted on this matter with Don Munro, a distinguished China scholar and professor emeritus at the University of Michigan.� I am quoting, with his permission, statements of his from two e-mails to me.
�
“I like to distinguish at least three kinds of Confucianism: (1) Philosophical, with the focus on human nature and the chief virtue being humaneness, that begins as infant/care-giver love.� (2) State, the doctrines formulated in the former Han [Dynasty] by Tung Chung-shu, one of the policies being “the grand unity of everything,” especially with everyone thinking the same, and the chief virtue is loyalty, to the throne.� (3) Popular, with the chief concern being protection of lineage past and future and the chief virtue being filiality.� Now I also think that there a fourth: Cultural Confucianism, found in Japan and Korea, too. ….”
�
The following is his comment on the sources of the bureaucracy:
�
“There are roots of the bureaucracy in non-Confucian sources.� The state of Qin contributed,� Special innovations were designed by Li Si (d. 208BC) and his predecessor Lu Buwei (d. 235), both more indebted to Han Fei than to Confucians.� See Derk Bodde, China’s First Unifier. The enduring format has its origins in the Former Han, under Han Wudi who put into practice ideas of the state Confucian Dong Zhongshu (= Tung Chung-shu noted above; CR].”
�
Perhaps a good analogy between Confucius and the Chinese bureaucracy might be the relationship between Yeshua of Nazareth and the religious institution created in his name by the Gospel writers and Paul, among others.� (I state this on� assumptions reflecting Harold Bloom’s views in his recent work Jesus and Yahweh, i.e, that little is known of Yeshua of Nazareth, who most probably had no intention of creating a new religion or church and who would be dumfounded by the creation of the Gospel writers after the fact.)

�Read the home page of the World Association of International Studies (WAIS) by simply double-clicking on:�� http://wais.stanford.edu/ Please inform us of any change of e-mail address.

CHINA: One :child policy (Xiao Liu)

�A Chinese American sent a question about the one child policy in China. I asked Xiao Liu to answer.� He writes: As far as I know, the P.R.C. has not had any alternative population control policy yet. One official exception is that a minority family can have more than one kid.� Another major exception is for those families whose first kid has defects. All other exceptions essentially are not official.� For example, “if the first child is a girl, they can have a second child”.� This situation occurs in some areas, due to the compromise between local government and civilians.� It is not correct to say “Those willing to pay fines can have more”. Instead, you can not have an extra kid even if you would like to pay fine.� However after you deliver the second kid against the policy, the only punishment is fine. There are some calls to soften the one-child policy, i.e. a couple can have
two kids if neither of them has any sibling.� But I haven’t heard that it is approved. RH: “Minorities” would include the Muslims and the Buddhists in the West, so their numbers should increase, and with that the problem they represent. Probably Beijing realizes it cannot impose its ine child policy there without causing violent protests.

�Read the home page of the World Association of International Studies (WAIS) by simply double-clicking on:�� http://wais.stanford.edu/ Please inform us of any change of e-mail address.

China: Education in imperial China (Charles Ridley)

WAIS has a special interest in the way educatioo forms the world outlook of children and therefore people, and the question of traditional Chinese education arose.� I therefore asked Charles Ridley for a synopsis of his dissertation.� He replies: I am herewith presenting, as requested, a synopsis of my doctoral dissertation, which is intended to be informative by not necessarily reverent.� A good many years have elapsed since it was submitted in 1973 and I have come to regard it with as much detachment as if it had been written by another.
�
Entitled, EDUCATIONAL THEORY AND PRACTICE IN LATE IMPERIAL CHINA: THE TEACHING AS A SPECIFIC CASE, it is, like its title, overly long, running to some 546 pages.� It is, mercifully, unpublished.� There was some hope for a time that one of the pharmaceutical companies would issue it as a soporific.� However, its LD50 (lethal dose 50; the dose at which 50% of experimental animals succumb) was three pages when read to laboratory mice.
�
More seriously, it began with a survey of writings on education and moral training from the late imperial period.� This followed by a lengthy discussion of the social context of education in the period.� A case study is presented of the prolonged effort made by a particular aspirant to official office to pass the imperial examinations.
�
In the fourth chapter, Basic Educational Theory, I expound my views on this topic on the basis of the writings of teachers and tutors, a major source being a longish essay entitled, “Methods for the Teaching of the Young.”�� A major theme of the chapter is� the contention that “environment” was the major determinant of educational and moral attainment, but that intellectual and moral development are also governed by an internal timetable, reminiscent in a loose way of the views of Piaget.
�
One interesting discovery was an explicit statement about� intellectual development� to the effect that the dominant intellectual faculty from about age 6 to 13 is memory, and it is only from about age 14 that “understanding” arises.� This appears to be the rationale for� the emphasis on rote memorization in� China and other Asian countries.�� Since as a� scholar, I felt I needed a theory to explain the development of this view,� I concluded that it was the nature of what had to be learned, that is,� philosophical texts beyond the understanding of young boys,� dictated what sort of theory of intellectual development would be elaborated.
The later chapters apply the educational theories I thought I found in these premnodern texts to the teaching of� literary composition, both prose and poetry, in late imperial China.
�
One China scholar felt that I had created a “sociology of literacy” in premodern China.�� This came as something of a surprise to me as I had not intended to do any such thing, and, if I happened to do so, it was quite by accident and I was not aware of it.
�
�Read the home page of the World Association of International Studies (WAIS) by simply double-clicking on:�� http://wais.stanford.edu/ Please inform us of any change of e-mail address.

Re: CHINA and Chingis Khan (Mike Bonnie) )

From China, Mike Bonnie writes: Regarding Xiao Liu’s comments on Chingis Kahn:� Your comments are greatly appreciated. I believe my family in China will agree. This is their reply:

“We admire every hero in the world,.We have wax statues of many famous foreign people in the musem. On the other hand, Chingis Khan was a member of Yuan Dynasty. The Forbidden City was built during the� Ming Dynasty.� The Yuan Dynasty was before the Ming Dynasty.The Yuan Dynasty is one party of China’s history although Chingis Khan was from Mongolia,.”

Interestingly enough, the wax museum on� Tienanmin Square has statues of several Emperors: of Chingis Kahn, Marx and Lenin, Cultural Revolution leaders,� political military and political leaders (of course including Mao), Michael Jordan, Pele, Charlie Chaplin, Ingrid Bergman, Bill Gates, Pablo Picasso, Yao Ming and Olympic stars; not to mention a long list list of scientists, musical performers, artists, traditional healers, and figures in native clothes spanning generations of Chinese culture. It’s is truly a celebration of diversity.
RH: Of which American presidents are there statues?

CHINA: Terrorists i Urumqi.

Mike Bonnie writes: I received this message from a friend in Urumqi, the Xinjiang Provincial capital… I haven’t researched it and am very pressed for time right now to do so. It’s an interesting topic, perhaps some others have more information� to share? Xinjiang in Chinese means “New Frontier.” Rumor has it that terrorists are planning to make some blasts during the National Holiday [Oct 1-5], which is also the 50 years anniversary of the foundation of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region. Some explosives were found by thr police; people there are warnings not to go to the crowds and to stay at home these days. http://www.janes.com/regional_news/asia_pacific/news/jir/ jir040303_1_n.shtml
This organization is called the East Turkistan Islamic Movement http://www.tkb.org/Group.jsp?groupID=3588

�

Re: CHINA and the US

Michael Bpnnie, who teaches in China, wrote: America will become like China, long before China becomes like America. It’s a matter of managing the economy of scale that only longevity can teach. Anyone who disagrees may be looking at America’s technology and not what’s behind it, a lot of disenfranchised people. At every step, China (again, generally) has the patience to watch, wait and choose its next moves. The people in control are much better at planning and negotiating than we are.

Robert Crow counters: Michael Bonnie should also reflect on the fact that part of China’s “managing the economy of scale that only longevity can teach” includes roughly 500 years of truly breathtaking ineptitude and that the Chinese are now trying to become as American as they can, subject to the government’s maintaining a political lid on the aspirations of its population.� Does he truly believe that the average Chinese worker is less “disenfranchised” than those in the U.S.?� “The people in control are much better at planning and negotiating than we are.”??!!� Does that include Chairman Mao’s Cultural Revolution and Great Leap Forward?� Once you get away from the bedazzlement of Shanghai and Beijing and see the poverty of the countryside and the rusty hulks of ill-planned factories, you get a much truer view of backward China truly is.
�

CHINA and the US

Daryl DeBell writes:� Unfortunately it is true that aggressive, nationalistic states spy on potential enemies. However, what do they learn of any importance? I would guess that the more China knows about our military power, the better. It truly puzzles me that China and the US could have any differences that would justify war. Taiwan is obviously the only serious issue over which we could fight, but still what is our stake in fighting� China over Taiwan’s independence? Democracy? It’s a great buzz word, but essentially none of our business. Iraq should teach us something, namely that democracy is something that must grow out of a population’s experience, not something that can be imposed. Communism, rightly understood and practiced would be a more pure democracy than our republican system, and perhaps we should encourage that for China. Letting the Chinese observe our culture might be an eyeopener for them, except that the greed of capitalism might well obscure the virtues of our democracy. Our freedom to criticise our leaders and their policies and actions must be frightening for the Chinese, who rely on fear and a cultural tradition of respect for elders and leaders to maintain power and order, but if they see that it does not lead to anarchy or rebellion, perhaps they might be emboldened to move a bit in that direction.

Science in China

Charles Ridley writes:This will be a brief reply to the comment that science did not present as severe a problem in China as it has in the Christian world of the West.
�
First, a distinction must be made between the introduction of Western science and Chinese traditional approaches to science in the premodern period.� As early as the Han Dynasty, there was a seismographic device in Beijing� that� gave information about the location, i.e., the direction from Beijing, of an earthquake, and its magnitude.� Herbal medicine was well developed,� there are� detailed records of astronomical phenomena, as they were felt to be predictive of the fates of dynasties, and much knowledge of practical chemistry came from the efforts the Daoists to find an elixir of eternal life.� Government officials assigned to coastal posts often took an interest in marine life and wrote detailed descriptions of the marine fauna in their regions.� This is to say that there was a tradition of empirical scientific observation in China dating back to very early times, with the result that there were no particular obstacles to absorbing what came in from the West.
�
By contrast with the Western world, which has been in the arms of the monotheisms of Middle Eastern origin, the dominant philosophy of China was Confucianism, which we might define, with objections from some China scholars, as a secular humanism.� However, unlike Western secular humanism, it was not and is not atheistic.� Confucius, in a dialogue with one of his disciples who asked about the spirit world, replied in effect that we have enough problems in the everyday world that we should attend to them first and worry about the spirits later.
�
Thus, Confucianism provides an ethic that is centered on the problems of ordinary life but that is not antagonistic� to religion.� This provides East Asians with ethical concepts that are not based in religion but which allow them to accept� religion without� conflict.� A person brought up in the Confucian tradition can be� Christian or Buddhist and there are Chinese Jews in western China.� Without the creation stories of the Bible to restrict them, there has never been an obstacle to accepting the theory of evolution.� And certainly, the Buddhist tradition, which was introduced into China and ultimately worked into Confucian thought, pictured a universe characterized by spans of millions of years. So, in my view, the marriage of the Chinese empirical tradition with the theoretical approach of Western science has been a natural process.
�

�Read the home page of the World Association of International Studies (WAIS) by simply double-clicking on:�� http://wais.stanford.edu/ Please inform us of any change of e-mail address.

CHINA: Financial ties with US.

Ross Rogers, Jr. forwards ”

China Unpegs Itself”
by Paul Krugman (New York Times, 7/22/05).� Here is an excerpt: Thursday’s statement from the People’s Bank of China, announcing that the yuan is no longer pegged to the dollar, was terse and uninformative - you might say inscrutable. There’s a good chance that this is simply a piece of theater designed to buy a few months’ respite from protectionist pressures in the U.S. Congress. Nonetheless, it could be the start of a process that will turn the world economy upside down - or, more accurately, right side up. That is, the free ride China has been giving America, in which the world’s richest economy has been getting cheap loans from a country that is dynamic but still quite poor, may be coming to an end. It’s all about which way the capital is flowing.

CHINA: Biowarfare and Cuba

Alberto Gutierrez forwards an article by Jos� Cadenas from La Nueva Cuba (7/19/ 05).� Here is an excerpt:
The next �9/11� is apt to be something most people don�t want to hear about,read about,or even think about.
I�m talking about biowarfare; and, unless I miss my guess,it is being studied-using human guinea pigs-by the People�s Liberation Army of China. They have succeeded in identifying a strain of �bird flu� , called H5N �RK7,that is extremely lethal to birds and to humans. ( It is just one of 10 strains they have been studying � via �controlled releases� into their own population ; and they are still looking for the �ideal strain�.) The goals seem to be threefold:

1. Develop a strain that will be lethal to humans and livestock, that can be spread by migratory birds.

2. Refine this strain so the birds selected can withstand it for 60 days or so: living just long enough to migrate;

3. Develop vaccines in secret that will protect their population,and that of certain useful �partner� nations ; eg: Cuba,Venezuela, Angola. ( The �discovery� can be announced after the world falls into panic, and an exceptionally high price can be charged � as China will be �in the catbird seat�.) This requires enormous experience in bio-technology: one of the items China �bought� when it signed extensive trade agreements with Cuba in November of 2004. We may be more familiar with Cuban cigars, but the fact is Cuba is one of the leading nations in the world in biotechnology � especially the arcane world of Recombinant DNA � which happens to be just what is needed when making viral superweapons. It is,perhaps, not odd this trade agreement calls for the Chinese to furnish teachers-so the Cuban people may learn Chinese.

RH: I have just posted a report by Siegfried Ramler on his tour of the US with a group of Chinese academics. I wonder if they discussed such sensitive topics? I have no idea how accurate the above report is, but Alberto would not have forwarded it unless he thought it worth our attention.

�Read the home page of the World Association of International Studies (WAIS) by simply double-clicking on:�� http://wais.stanford.edu/ Please inform us of any change of e-mail address.

Re: China Delegation in the US

Siegfried Ramler reports: I just returned from an intensive three-week journey with a group of 14 Chinese scholars, representing key universities throughout China.�� The program, under the auspices of Hawaii’s East-West Center, in collaboration with the Ministry of Education in Beijing and Peking University, aims at improving teaching and research about the United States in China and, reciprocally, offering similar opportunities to American scholars in China. The 2005 program aimed particularly at trends and issues in higher education in the United States.

We started the program in Beijing at the Peking University campus with a series of lectures on political, economic and legal issues pertaining to the US-China relationship.� We then flew to Washington, D.C. where briefings and discussions took place at the State Department (East-Asia Desk), at Capitol Hill at congressional offices, at the Supreme Court (hosted by Justice Kennedy’s staff), at the Georgetown University’s law center, as well as at NGO’s such as the Washington office of the Rand Corporation and the American Council on Education.� We were also hosted by the education division of the Chinese embassy in Washington.
After Washington we spent several days at Youngstown, Ohio and at Pittsburgh, both towns which had to face the demise of the steel industry and rise to the challenge of restructuring themselves socially and economically to meet the demands of the 21st century.� These were instructive examples for the Chinese delegation, since China now faces similar issues as state owned enterprises gradually give way to private enterprise.

In California the group became acquainted through site visits and lectures with the history and evolution of the Chinese American community, with the demographic and political impact of Latinos, and with such social initiatives as the Delancey rehabilitation project.� At Berkeley they learned about the Free Speech Movement in the 1960’s, an interesting topic for reflection!� As to education, California furnished interesting examples of the wide range of options and opportunities, from the egalitarian community colleges with access to all, to the elite research universities such as Stanford and Berkeley. The program concluded in Hawaii, with an experience of its multi-ethnic composition and its role as a bridge between the US and the Asia-Pacific region.
In 2006 American scholars will be given reciprocal experiences in China.

RH: Here is a note on the Delancey rehabilitation project: Not many people choose to spend their lives working with convicted felons and drug addicts. But Mimi Silbert, founder of San Francisco�s Delancey Street rehabilitation project, has committed her every waking hour to helping ex-cons become productive, welcome members of society. Silbert knows what gets results: in the first 26 years of the program, Delancey Street rescued over 11,000 former convicts, addicts, prostitutes, and alcoholics, without government funding and without a single act of violence. The foundation has grown to include 25 commercial enterprises run by 500 recovering addicts and convicts working out of a $30 million residential/ business complex on San Francisco�s waterfront. Taken together, Delancey Street�s enterprises generate enough revenue to keep the foundation fully self-sufficient.

RH: God bless Mimi Silbert and her project. Did Siegfried and his group talk about Chinese and American history textbooks?� It would be very relevant to our Learning History project. Berkeley’s Free Speech Movement was enough to give free speech a bad name.� We congratulate Siegfried on his work as a goodwill ambassador.

�Read the home page of the World Association of International Studies (WAIS) by simply double-clicking on:�� http://wais.stanford.edu/ Please inform us of any change of e-mail address.

CHINA; Zhong He’s voyages

From China, Michael Bonnie reports: I visited the Zhong He exhibit in the Historical Building on Tienanmen
Square with my family earlier in the week. It is truly a fantastic exhibit, with models of boats that once sailed under Zhong He’s command; a full wall video display of a movie telling about his exploits; numerous photos of the places he lived, his homes,and the grave sites of He and his father; artifacts from that period of history and an original rudder from one of the boats. I was pleasantly surprised to find an interactive computer display showing the routes taken on each of Zhing He’s seen voyages. I don’t believe there was any mention of Zhong He�s discovering the Americas, or even traveling further than the Sudan. I� hope paranoid people don’t take Galvin Medzies’ book to the level of anything more than fiction. You hit the mark perfectly Ronald by comparing with the Da Vinci Code.

RH: I find the animus against Galvin Menzies (”con man”, etc) extraordinary.� Is it that his “facts”� (eg the discovery of America) are rejected by historians?� Do people resent the success of his book?

CHINA, Taiwan, Tibet

Steve Torok writes: There was recently much publicity about Chinese demonstrations about Japanese non-repentance of� World-War II misdeeds. They were conveniently timedwith China’s attempys to block Japan’s claim for a seat on the UN Security Council. What was not publicised is that what triggered this was the first public support by Japan of Taiwanese interests. While I was a student in Kyoto, Taiwanese fellow students asked me to give them a lecture. The question was: how do you get the support of the Army in case of a revolution? We Hungarian students did that in 56, and the Taiwanese wanted to emulate us. Lee Teng Huai, former President, has recently visited Japan as a private citizen, some of his fellow students were still at Kyoto in 1961-62 when I was there. What triggered these thoughts is recent developments in Taiwan: the Kuomintang has a new chief, Mr. Ma, and there were several cross-straights contacts recently with the Chinese Government welcoming the new Kuomintang. Could it not be that the imperial Chinese model is alive and well, and that a political solution to re-unification is not far away in the old imperial tradition? The same thing could happen with Tibet as a last gesture by the Dalai Lama to the Panchen Lama, who used to be an imperial advisor. There would be imperial-style autonomy for both Taiwan and Tibet achieved and at the same time a post-communist transformation in China, with three political parties as was achieved in Central Europe? These parties could be the reform-communists of the current Government, the new Kuomintang and perhaps, a “falungong” led by the Panchen Lama, similar to the Soka Gakkai in Japan? The recent attempt by the Chines to acquire UNOCAL supports such developments . This is necessitated by Chinese dependence on overseas oil acquired commercially which was a stated aim as early as the 90s when I visited there with a UN team and was given a book on World Oil Reserves in Chinese by a Chinese professor who over dinner jokingly suggested we should visit Yakutia together as the next source of China’s oil,

RH: How would im`perial-style autonomy differ from the present status of Hong Kong?

CHINA: Galvin Menzies and his critics

Bill Ratliff writes: Good for Gavin Menzies. So much to-do, so many stabbing put-downs, so many raging tempers, so much he’s-all-wrong-while-I’m-all-right. The fires, furnaces, hammers and chains that have been produced to beat Menzies back into his submarine in the sea call to mind the vivid images and spectacle of Blake’s Tiger. I attended Menzies lecture at Stanford a couple of years ago and, like Maria Cristina Marques Pedroso Malh�o Pereira, found him to be a soft-spoken gentleman, which of course doesn’t mean he is right or wrong in his thesis.���

I have been stamping around in Chinese studies personally and professionally here and in China since I was in my late teens many decades ago, and I have frequently lectured on Zheng He for more than twenty years. (I fully endorse Ross Rogers Jr.’s recommendation that those who are interested in this fascinating adventure read When China Ruled the Seas, by Louise Levathes, though I suggest you read that book first, to get the basic facts as we know them, and then go to Menzies.) Menzies has set off a storm because he tried to answer the question all of us who have long known of Zheng He (not many here or in China, until recently) have always had: why didn’t he or others under his command go farther? Why stop in the Middle East and NE Africa? His fleets were far larger than any in the west until the 20th century and the technology of the Chinese ships far surpassed what was then or for a long time available in the West. (If he couldn’t have sailed at just the time or route Menzies claimed, as one writer asserts, he could have waited a few months, taken a different route, whatever. Zheng could have figured that out if he had wished to go on and Menzies may be wrong there only in specifics.) Doing as much as he did, he had broken the old Confucian barrier that discouraged or prevented Chinese from engaging in this kind of exploration, certainly with the support of the emperor. Indeed one of the main reasons the fleets stopped after a couple of decades was that the old Confucians in court pretty quickly gained the upper hand after Emperor Zhu Di’s death, turned China in on itself and in large degree wiped out the record and advances of Zheng and the emperor. The Ming was not one of China’s great dynasties, though it lasted a long time, but Zhu Di was awesome: brutal, but also extraordinarily imaginative. (If China had more nearly followed his and Zheng He’s lead it almost certainly never have become so out-of-touch and had to endure the humiliations of the 19th and 20th centuries, or had to play such “catch-up” today.)

Still, I don’t know of any historian of China who buys Menzies’ argument. So what? He has investigated a lot of the “little leads” that do exist all over the world, things that obviously are or seem to be China-related, collected masses of circumstantial evidence. Sometimes he is off the mark. But if he has drawn what still seem to be extravagant conclusions from his evidence, well he isn’t the first to do so, and who can say for sure what evidence may show up later? Many, many very distinguished scholars and others in many fields have speculated or drawn conclusions far beyond what they could “prove” with their evidence. Some of the things some of his critics reportedly said are at least as ridiculous as anything in Menzies’ book. Maria Cristina Marques Pedroso Malh�o Pereira reports that a Chinese scholar in Portugal asked how Menzies “dared to think he knew more about Chinese history, than the billions of Chinese do.” Good grief! That is so silly it hardly deserves a response, but I will give one. Most of my American colleagues who have seriously studied Chinese history know a lot more about massive periods of Chinese history than “billions of Chinese” (which must be reaching back for many generations and include almost every peasant who ever lived since the Ming to add up to that number), and for a bunch of reasons, among them: (1) most Chinese throughout most of Chinese history had no serious education, (2) under the communist government these recent decades many things could not be said or said widely and much that was/is claimed (all that “semi-feudalism” jazz, which I have heard as recently as last month from intelligent Chinese guides) was/is pure ideological garbage, and (3) on the specific topic of this commentary, for centuries few Chinese were even aware of Zheng He, not least because until very recently for he was a non-person.�

The theme of Menzies book begged to be explored, his thesis is challenging and though it probably will not stand up in most respects in the end, it is fun to pursue a bit with a tolerably open mind. The spin-off information is interesting. Take what you like from it and leave the rest. And relax.

RH: Zheng He was born a Muslim. How did the Han Chinese view that? Why would Confucius oppose these explorations? When his fleet was near Mecca, did Zheng He go there on the haj? Of so, he might have felt that his journey was complete. How widespread is Bill’s deprecation of the Ming dynasty? Is Bill quoting Blake’s “Tiger” favorably? A good god would never make a nasty brute like a tiger.� Don’t get angry, Bill.� I am just an illiterate Chinese peasant.

�Read the home page of the World Association of International Studies (WAIS) by simply double-clicking on:�� http://wais.stanford.edu/ Please inform us of any change of e-mail address.

Re: CHINA: When China Ruled the Seas, by Louise Levathex

Ross Rogers, Jr. writes: In addition to Galvin Menzies’� book 1421,� the earler, 1994, When China Ruled the Seas, by Louise Levathes (Oxford University Press), should also be read.�� Louise Levathes� had been
astaff writer for National Geographic for 10 years.� Copies of this book made wonderful gifts to my friends in China� 8 and 10 years ago.
�

China: Re: Galvin Menzies, 1421 The year China discovered the world

Mendo Castro Henriques writes: Like any academic researcher,� I dislike popular historians like Galvin Mezies, Gunnar Thompson and their 1421 team; see their Hollywood-style sites http://www.1421.tv/ and� http://www.marcopolovoyages.com/ . Yet, popular historians can deconstruct conventional wisdom. They do not revolutionize knowledge. They just shake fragile foundations.
�
The issue in Menzies’ book 1421 The year China discovered the world is not a confrontation between a fifteenth-century China vs. sixteenth-century Portugal’s discovery of the world. As anyone knows, there was a painful process of discoveries, made up of successes and failures, by people from almost every Mediterranean and North European country sailing into the Atlantic. (See Samuel Elliot Morrison, The discovery of America).�
The French historian Pierre Chaunu spoke abundantly about the Chinese coming to South America.� Now Menzies and Co say the Chinese went all around the world. Even to Europe. They are not dealing with dimes…those “history dealers” If you see their sites, they even boast that the Chinese introduced perspective drawing and printing moving blocks in 1430 to Holland. They make crazy assertions as if they were selling a product, a sort of historical elixir.
�
That is not history. The discoveries were never a straightforward “project”, like the one attributed to Prince Henry the Navigator by the romantic Englishman Henry Major. Recently, ib 2001, Peter Russell’s long-awaited biography of Prince Henry of Portugal denounced this. The Portuguese historian who performed the same deconstruction is Duarte Leite, 1925. The scientific issue here is that generalizations do no good in human sciences. Menzies is a conman because he insists he has an alternative vision; He could be a good fellow if he were wise enough to recognize that he came out with some good footnotes to the history of discoveries.
�
To prove my point I introduce a quotation of Gunnar Thompson. See how they flatter the Portuguese way in order to promote their crazy anti-Columbus and pro-Chinese “discovery of America”. Marco Polo, Cristoforo Colon and Amerigo Vespucci. It seems “la cosa nostra” mamma mia…
�

HOW THE PORTUGUESE MISLED COLUMBUS by Gunnar Thompson

�Summary

When Columbus reached Cuba in 1492, he actually believed that he had arrived in Asia.� Why not?� After all, he had found land precisely where it was indicated on his Portuguese maps.� His enthusiasm for achieving the impossible�finding a western shortcut to the Orient�so impressed the Majesties of Spain that they promptly applied to Pope Alexander VI for a monopoly to preserve this �priceless� avenue of commerce.

Secretly, King John II of Portuguese was overjoyed.� Thanks to the efforts of English Franciscans and the pioneering expeditions of Prince Henry, his explorers had already charted New World coastlines from Labrador to Brazil.� Alone among European sovereigns, he already knew that the coast of Asia was several thousand miles beyond the shores of the new western continent.�

As the misguided pageant of New World discovery continued to unfold,� the rivals of Portugal squandered their maritime resources in a futile effort to find an ephemeral passageway through the western mainland.� First the Spaniards, then the English and the French chased after non-existent �straits� to the Pacific Ocean .� Meanwhile, Portuguese mariners continued on their merry way sailing unhindered around the Cape of South Africa � the only practical route to the Spice Islands.

A reassessment of historical documents reveals the success of a grand Portuguese scheme to mislead commercial rivals.� Loyal agents prepared a banquet of deception that included fake maps, secret expeditions, and well-groomed turncoats who led competing nations down the wrong pathways to glory.�

RH: This is a very complicated subject, The Portuguese were indeed excellent cartographers, and, according to “the theory of the secret”, they knew that Brazil bulged out into the Atlantic, which the Spaniards did not.� This is why they agreed to the papal division of the world into two parts: half for Spain and half for Portugal.� Only the Portuguese realized that this would give Portugal a good foothold in the Americas. I am puzzled by the above reference to� English Franciscans. The theory that the Chinese went around the world and discovered America is related to the story that Christ came to the Americas and converted the Indians.� Has any historian taken this seriously?

You and I may prefer faction to fiction, but not the public. Historically The Da Vinci Code is fantasy, but it is� a best-seller, while serious books on the same subject would have difficulty finding a publisher.� The incredible success of the Harry Potter series show that children love magic, whereas reality bores them.� Lovers of fiction have a protracted childhood.

China and US: Early Chinese migrations to America

Tim Brown says: Reference the message on 1412. While doing research for my book on the Nicaraguan Contras I catalogued more than 85 comandos who had Chino (Chinese) as part of their nom de guerre. Essentially it’s a nickname for someone with a partial epicanthic fold. The theory that the America’s were populated across the sea is not French by a long shot, nor do all top American anthropologists deny it. In fact, Bill Solheim, one of the grandees among American� anthropologists that have specialized in Asia, theorized long ago that the America’s were populated by descendents of the Nu San Tao, not Chinese, and the genome appear more and more to support his hypothesis.

RH: I remember clearly the debate, a long time ago, between the French, who supported the trans-Pacific theory and the Americans who denied it. Tim confuses the argument.

Re: CHINA: Galvin Menzies, 1421 the Year the Chinese discovered the world

From China, Michael Bonnie answers “The Book By Menzies Is A Grotesque Fraud!” by Maria Cristina Marques Pedroso� Malh�o Pereira: I’m neither a navagiator or naval historian, nor do I wish to become one. However, 1421 the Year the Chinese discovered the world is a GREAT read. fiction or not.� It rocks my admittedly ethnocentric American/Eurpoean understanding of China and the “rediscovery” of America” by Chris Columbus. I’ve never understood so well how some Native Americans look totally Asian and some Asian people look totally Native American. I’ve heard from other sources in the past that the time it took for villages to pop up in Central and South American did not support the theory Asian people migrated across the Beiring Strait to populate the Americas, there had to be naval travel involved. Perhaps, more truth can be found by underwater archeologist? The levels of oceans have risen over the years, coast lines have changed, and possibly submerged villages in the process.

I was happy to find a copy of 1421 at the Foreign Language Book Store on Wangfujing Street last week. The store worker told me she can’t keep copies on the shelf, they’re selling that fast. I find most important about the book is the way it is raising people’s spirits here in China. I’m told the exhibit in Nanking is outstanding. A long editorial in the China Daily begins with the headline, “Voyages reflect desire to grow peacefully.” Good job Galvin Menzies, you’ve frauded us all into a better place.

RH: The French put forward the theory that the Asian colonization of the Americas must have been partly by sea. American anthropologists denied this.� Now it seems the French were right.

Re: CHINA: Book by Galvin Menzies and comment by Jin Guo Ping

From Portugal, Mendo Castro Henriques sent a commentary on Galvin Menzies’ book 1421 the year the Chinese discovered the world, titled “The Book By Menzies Is A Grotesque Fraud!” by Maria Cristine Marques Pedroso Malh�o Pereira. It was a commentary on a debate when Galvin Menzies came to Portugal to present his book. I said: We� respect Maria Cristina Marques Pedroso Malh�o Pereira’s devotion to her husband. The point seems to be that the Chinese voyages could downgrade Portugal’s great navigator Vasco da Gama. Mendo says: Ah ah!.. you could be right about Maria Cristina being just nice to her husband. But No. Just read what the Chinese Prof.� Jin Guo Ping said about Menzies. It is not about downgrading da Gama.�
�
Maria Cristina said: When the charming Menzies finished his presentation, the Chinese professor started commenting, and he was horrible, awful, terrible, to my hero. He even said that the author, without knowing a word of Chinese,was so stupid, he didn�t even know what Malayam (the language spoken by thousands of Indians around� Calicut ) is. He dared to think he knew more about Chinese history, than the billions of Chinese do. He wonder how could a foreigner, with no knowledge of China, not speaking Chinese, without studying� old Chinese manuscripts, pretended to know more about� the Chinese� Eunuch Admiral Zheng He,� than do the millions of Chinese historians,� who are this year commemorating the 600 years of his seven well documented voyages. He also spoke about the DNA proof referred by Menzies, saying that as everybody� knows, the DNA can say that Chinese blood exists in somebody veins,� but cannot say, in what year it appeared in that person. And he laughed in Menzies own presence. Well, he went on, and on,� being so� nearly rude to my hero, that he even called him a liar,� to Menzies own face. I must say I was appalled!

Then it was my husband�s� turn to speak. I nearly pulled his coat, to prevent him from saying one more word against the poor gentlemen. But nothing could stop him. Thanks goodness, he was always very polite, nearly deferent to the older naval officer, but he went on, and on,� commenting page after page, showing maps, saying that Menzies had distorted them to serve his own fraudulent purposes, saying that it was completely impossible that huge junks could ever sail against currents and specially against the monsoon.�

As I had accompanied my husband to Calicut to study the possible anchorage of Vasco da Gama’s fleet, and to document my husband�s book, I know for sure� that no sailing ship can anchor in those waters during the monsoon or can sail against that predictable huge climate phenomenon (particularly an ancient boat that couldn�t sail against the wind). So I looked at my hero�s face�.he was very serene showing no sign of even listening to what was being said. There he was, playing with a pen,� endlessly turning� in his fingers�� I was intrigued.
�
You may follow everything in
http://www.dightonrock.com/thebookbymenziesisagrotesquefrau.htm

RH: This is a highly technical subject about which I know nothing. The book was widely praised. Maria Cristina Marques Pedroso Malh�o Pereira seems to have two heroes, her husband and Galvin Menzies, Too bad Jin Guo Ping Doesn’t make the grade. I suspect his own books were less successful than that of Galvin Menzies, which should have pleased him since it extols Chinese exploits.
�

US: The China Lobby

Tim Ashby writes: One the China’s staunchest advocates in the Bush administration is Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao, a Taiwan-born former Heritage Foundation Asia Fellow who’s spent much of the last decade boosting U.S.-China trade. Chao, who served as deputy Maritime Commissioner in the Reagan Administration’s Department of Transport, has been a persuasive force for so called “normalized” relations with China.

Chao led a Heritage foundation delegation of major donors to the Hong Kong reunification ceremony in 1997, and by several accounts has done her bit to erode anti-China sentiment among an influential segment of congressional conservatives.� She and her husband, Senate foreign relations leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) mustered Republican support for granting the People’s Republic of China permanent Most Favored Nation (MFN) status in 2000.

The couple has met in person with Chinese leader Jiang Zemin. Chao’s father James Chao and Zemin were schoolmates, they’ve met on several occasions, and Mr. Chao owns a shipping company that built ships in Shanghai’s state-owned shipyards, and does business with the Chinese government.

Chao’s father James owns Foremost Maritime Corporation. Formerly based in Hong Kong, now New York, Foremost ships goods to and from the United States and Asia. One of Foremost’s clients, China Ocean Shipping Company or COSCO, is a Chinese state-controlled company which belongs to the Pacific Maritime Association.

James Chao has given generously in the past to his son-in-law’s Kentucky election campaigns.� In fact, for a senator in a land-locked state, McConnell receives a lot of shipping money.� McConnell chairs an appropriations subcommittee that deals with foreign policy.� He’s a Republican leader, not least on issues pertaining to trade, and for this and other reasons he’s received strong support from pro-China lobbyists.

One of the biggest is a former patron of his wife, Maurice “Hank” Greenberg. One of the Heritage Foundation’s largest donors, Greenberg is CEO of American International Group (AIG) an insurance company that does business with China. Greenberg has donated generously to Sen. McConnell’s campaigns in the past — especially in the pre-2000 years, when the Most Favored Nation votes were not yet in.

McConnell and Chao have been cagey when it comes to who funds their China-related activities.� The Senator raised $2.4 million to set up a think tank at the University of Louisville that sponsors six-week, all-expenses paid trips for students to China.

RH: IS it legal for a foreigner to contribute campaign funds to an American poiitician?

�Read the home page of the World Association of International Studies (WAIS) by simply double-clicking on:�� http://wais.stanford.edu/ Please inform us of any change of e-mail address.

Re: CHINA: Greetings from Beijing….

I said I could not find Kuitun on the map of China. Michael Bonnie explains: I’ve seen Kuitun also spelled Quitun on some maps. Kuitun is a small but growing agricultural and industrial city about four hours bus ride north of Urumqi (pronounced “wu lu mu chi”), the provincial capital of Xinjiang. Urumqi, as is much of Xinjiang, is heavily influnced by Middle Eastern culture. In the courtyard of the train station is a 60′ tall statue dedicated to the “Silk Raod.” Xinjiang (New Frontier), known as the “Land of Minorities,” is made up of nearly 35 seperate groups: Uyghur (the Native People), Kosaka and, Han Chinese being the largest.

Summer last was spent as a guest ESL teacher in one of Kuitun’s middle schools. I found the people there very friendly and open about discussing China’s prosperity and optimism, as well as, shortcomings. Perhaps the most
significant bench-mark of economic growth is the upcoming annexation with the city of Dushanzi, which is aptly nicknamed “Petroleum City.” Most of Dushanzi sprang up around a huge petroleum processing plant. Like most of
China, new buildings are springing up everywhere in Kuitun and Dushanzi. The National Bird ought to be a “construction crane.”

Kuitun itself has had its ups and downs. The major industries are three tomato processing plants, a cigarette factory, cotton growing and processing. I was amazed to find on one of my morning walks, trucks lined up for one plant, loaded with tomatoes waiting to be processed. The line stretched from horizon to horizon and, on the edge of the Gobi Desert, that’s a long way. As would be expected in this part of China, the temperatures are extreme. 100+ degree heat in the summer and -50 in the cold Siberian winds during the winter. The heat of summer failed to melt snow on the peaks of the Marmot Mountains overlooking Dushanzi and I along with my colleagues got to cool our feet in the melting run-off. Needless to say, I had a great time visiting and look forward to returning for a short while this summer.

�Read the home page of the World Association of International Studies (WAIS) by simply double-clicking on:�� http://wais.stanford.edu/ Please inform us of any change of e-mail address.

CHINA: Greetings from Beijing….

Michael Bonnie writes:From all outward appearances, it seems I’ve found my way to Beijing. The flights were somewhat uneventful except for their length. To save nearly $700 on tickets, I made two stops along the way. The first hop was to George Bush International Airport in Houston, Texas.� All the indignities must have been due to sins in a previous lifetime, I ended� up spending the night there. I did get to talk with a couple of securtiy� guards, workers on a construction crew renovating a small shop, and a� small group of men from various back grounds who spontaneously came together the solve all the world’s problems (if only for an hour). We sought out and uncovered the root of terrorism in the world. Someone brought up the re-named School of the Americans in Fort Benning Georgia.� I recalled a class speech I gave� at the University of Wisconsin-LaCrosse back in 1970 on chemical-
biological weapons, and the concerns of residents in Denver over leakage due� to unstable land conditions and earthquakes. I wonder where I would be today if I’d perscued a career in politics or chemistry.

The construction crew was most interesting. Prior to being allowed the contract to renovate the small shop, they needed to pass an airport security background inspection, including watching a film on airport security.� Despite all that, it took them 45 minutes to pass the TSA inspection with all their construction tools. Even though he had no prior knowledge of it, the security screener insisted he must have a pin in his leg, or he’d never set off the metal
detector the way he did. If I� were a 55 yar old Hispanic laborer, I wonder if I’d have his patience?� i I couldn’t
leave Houston soon enough.

The flight to Newark passed somewhat uneventfully and a quick dash across the airport was fortunate. For some reason the Continental flight to Beijing left an hour early. I found my seat at a window; the ticket agent in Milwaukee, fascinated with my itinerary, booked window seats all the way. In the row between me and the next passanger, a set sat empty. My section of the plane was mainly filled with Americans. I soon found out this was only the second flight Continental had flown on a new Polar route. We followed the sun for 17 hours flying directly north to within 300 miles of the North Pole, where I was able to capture some nice photos of absolutely nothing but miles of ice; nary a polar bear to be found. Much to the chagrin of people sitting around me, I found myself opening and closing the window shade, searching the skies for an escort of fighter jets as we entered Russian airspace. I was disappointed but not so much as I would have been to find a not-so-friendly escort of North Korean jets, had the plane taken the route flown past that country. Again, U.S. media reports of discord between President Putin and Our Shrub has raised doubts in my mind of harmony between humans in our countries.

The flight to Beijing went very fast. I struck up conversation with the young man sharing the row. He disclosed that he was an anesthiologist from Newark on his way to be married in Harbin. He’d found a beautiful young doctor, both fell in love and decided to tie the knot. He proudly told me how he’d found a bargain on cigarettes and a bottle of Bailey’s Bristol Cream at a Duty Free shop for the wedding ceremony. I cautioned him on the importance of purchasing a new pair of shoes for the ceremony and that he must walk around the dining hall carrying his wife on his back ringing a bell and chanting, “I am marred now!” He seemed willing to do that and I decided he would be a good Lao Wie, Lao Gong. Figuring his reason for disclosing all his plans was the need for a Safety Net, I agreed to call
him on my return to Newark so he could share his experiences and photos. We exchanged e-mail addresses and bid each other well wishes after passing through Customs in Beijing.

Beijing Airport was the usual hub of activity. Nationals, foreigners and tour groups from Italy lined up in rows like cattle to have passports and visas inspected and stamped. Marching up and down stairs and riding moving sidewalks I did manage to snap a photo of a 30′ tall painting of historic and modern landmarks throughout China that has fascinated me on previous visits. The rows of people and moving sidewalks had made it impossible to stop and admire. My only true concern of the trip came near the exit of the area restricted from visitors to the airport - the final Customs inspection. As I neared the door, a Customs official spotted the two boxes of books I had lashed together on a cart. Suspiciously, he indicated he wanted to inspect the boxes. In angst of the thought of having to take apart the mile of strapping tape holding the boxes together, the possibility that the titles would violate some perceived moral or political code, I left the line and followed him to an inspection area. As it turned out, our language barrier did not matter. I explained that I was a teacher and that the boxes contained books I was bringing for the students to improve their English. He listened and watched patiently, directed me to a scanning device, then allowed me to pass, with a smile.

Following a 45 minute taxi ride, shower, dinner of my favorite food -dumplings and a walk, I began to sleep off my jet lag. I woke at 3:45 this� morning to the sounds of crickets. An hour later, and three chapters of reading, the crickets all ducked for cover as the birds began to sing. Today, lunch is planned with new friends, who’ve graciously accepted the suggestion of lunch and a celebration of Father’s Day together. I’m certain the next five weeks will pass quickly but not before a tour of south China and a visit planned to Kuitun to re-bond with friends from last summer. Everyone here is well, happy, healthy and delighted once more� that I would bring treats: coffee, shampoo, skittles and “real” vitamins� as gifts.

Peace and happiness!

RH: Kuitun? I don’t recognize it. It must have another spelling.

�Read the home page of the World Association of International Studies (WAIS) by simply double-clicking on:�� http://wais.stanford.edu/ Please inform us of any change of e-mail address.

RE: Kissinger: China Containment Won’t Work

It was suggested that Kissinger’s promotion of trade with China was due to his personal involvement in it.? China expert Bill Rstliff writes: Even if Kissinger were writing on China for business advantage, which I don’t believe to be so, his analysis is correct.

?Read the home page of the World Association of International Studies (WAIS) by simply double-clicking on:?? http://wais.stanford.edu/ Please inform us of any change of e-mail address.

China: Kissinger: China Containment Won’t Work

It was suggested that Kissinger’s promotion of trade with China was due to his personal involvement in it. Randy Black writes: I found this comment about Kissinger’s China connections:
?L. Paul Bremer, an associate of New York-based Kissinger Associates, said, “Dr. Kissinger’s views on China are not for sale and never have been for sale. We are a strategic consulting firm. China is not a major part of our business. We advise businesses. We don’t make investments in China.”
http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm?include=detail&storyid=209729
And this:
“Kissinger Associates and its affiliate, Kissinger McLarty Associates, provide strategic advisory and advocacy services to a select group of U.S. and multinational companies. The firms provide high-level intervention regarding special projects, assist their clients to identify strategic partners and investment opportunities, and advise clients on government relations throughout the world. KAI was founded in 1982 by former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. In 1999, former Clinton Chief of Staff and Special Envoy for the Americas Thomas F. McLarty joined KAI as Vice-Chairman, and established a Washington office of KAI known as Kissinger McLarty Associates (KMA). The firm does not, however, lobby the United States government or engage in conduct that would require us to register as foreign agents under US law, nor do we accept fees from foreign governments.”[2] (http://www.americas-society.org/coa/membersnetwork/Kissinger.html)
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Kissinger_Associates%2C_Inc.

RE: Kissinger: China Containment Won’t Work

Jon Kofas comments on Henry Kissinger’s article “China Containment Won’t Work”: Very interesting article on the leverage that China has in the world and the limits of U.S. containment strategies. I just would like to ask if any WAISer knows whether Kissinger’s firm does any consulting work for the Chinese government? Not that this would color Kissinger’s views in a way. And I find myself agreeing with much of what he has to say regarding China’s global ascendancy, though I would hardly make any comparisons with early 20th century imperial Germany. There is also the whole issue of� the degree to which China as a legitimate national security threat to the U.S., a line that Rumsfeld and the neo-cons have tried to peddle.� Why would China risk so much to its own security and economy by adopting a hostile course toward the U.S. either in the short or intermediate term? While no one has a crystal ball, and I would agree that it pays to be cautious about the geopolitical ambitions of all great powers,� it still seems to me that anachronistic Cold War thinking continues to dominate among conservatives who refuse to accept the realities of the world as currently constituted. Such hawkish thinking has the U.S. facing serious challenges in the Persian Gulf where it seems with the passing of each day that in the long-term Iran will dominate the region, largely because the U.S. made it possible by invading Iraq.

��������

CHINA: Return of US spy plane from Hainan

Randy Black writes: Pertaining to Ross Rogers, Jr’s? comments about the world’s largest aircraft, etc., I believe that the plane that ferried the U.S. spy plane to Georgia was a Antonov An-124-100, owned by Polyot Air Cargo. The deal was brokered out of the U.K and I believe the plane (actually two An-124s were rented for the task), is owned by a Siberian firm.
?
The U.S. wanted to use a C-5 for the task but the Chinese would not allow the U.S. plane to land on the island, opting for the Russian aircraft even though the two planes are similar in size. That trip back to the Atlanta area was exceptionally well-covered by CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, Time Magazine, the NY Times, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and other major US media.
?
Sources: http://www.polet.ru/EN/releases1.shtml
http://www2.hickam.af.mil/pacaf/newsarchive/2001/2001140.htm
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/07/05/spy.plane.return/index.html
http://www.af.mil/news/Jun2001/n20010620_0833.asp

”

China: Kissinger, China Containment Won’t Work

Ross Rogers, Jr. sends a Washington Post article. here excerpted, “China: Containment Won’t Work”? by Henry A. Kissinger
?
The relationship between the United States and China is beset by ambiguity. On the one hand, it represents perhaps the most consistent expression of a bipartisan, long-range American foreign policy. Starting with Richard Nixon, seven presidents have affirmed the importance of cooperative relations with China and the U.S. commitment to a one-China policy — albeit with temporary detours at the beginning of the Reagan, Clinton and George W. Bush administrations. President Bush and Secretaries of State Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell have described relations with China as the best since the opening to Beijing in 1971. The two presidents, Bush and Hu Jintao, plan to make reciprocal visits and to meet several times at multilateral forums.? Nevertheless, ambivalence has suddenly reemerged. Various officials, members of Congress and the media are attacking China’s policies, from the exchange rate to military buildup, much of it in a tone implying China is on some sort of probation. To many, China’s rise has become the most significant challenge to U.S. security.
?
Before dealing with the need of keeping the relationship from becoming hostage to reciprocal pinpricks, I must point out that the consulting company I chair advises clients with business interests around the world, including China. Also, in early May I spent a week in China, much of it as a guest of the government. The rise of China — and of Asia — will, over the next decades, bring about a substantial reordering of the international system. The center of gravity of world affairs is shifting from the Atlantic, where it was lodged for the past three centuries, to the Pacific. The most rapidly developing countries are in Asia, with a growing means to vindicate their perception of the national interest.
?
?China’s emerging role is often compared to that of imperial Germany at the beginning of the 20th century, the implication being that a strategic confrontation is inevitable and that the United States had best prepare for it. That assumption is as dangerous as it is wrong. The European system of the 19th century assumed that its major powers would, in the end, vindicate their interests by force. Each nation thought that a war would be short and that, at its end, its strategic position would have improved.?? Only the reckless could make such calculations in a globalized world of nuclear weapons. War between major powers would be a catastrophe for all participants; there would be no winners; the task of reconstruction would dwarf the causes of the conflict. Which leader who entered World War I so insouciantly in 1914 would not have recoiled had he been able to imagine the world at its end in 1918?
?
?Another special factor that a century ago drove the international system to confrontation was the provocative style of German diplomacy. In 1900 a combination of Russia, France and Britain would have seemed inconceivable given the conflicts among them. Fourteen years later, a bullying German diplomacy had brought it about, challenging Britain with a naval buildup and seeking to humiliate Russia over Bosnia in 1908 and France in two crises over Morocco in 1905 and 1911. Military imperialism is not the Chinese style. Clausewitz, the leading Western strategic theoretician, addresses the preparation and conduct of a central battle. Sun Tzu, his Chinese counterpart, focuses on the psychological weakening of the adversary. China seeks its objectives by careful study, patience and the accumulation of nuances — only rarely does China risk a winner-take-all showdown.
?
?It is unwise to substitute China for the Soviet Union in our thinking and to apply to it the policy of military containment of the Cold War. The Soviet Union was heir to an imperialist tradition, which, between Peter the Great and the end of World War II, projected Russia from the region around Moscow to the center of Europe. The Chinese state in its present dimensions has existed substantially for 2,000 years. The Russian empire was governed by force; the Chinese empire by cultural conformity with substantial force in the background. At the end of World War II, Russia found itself face to face with weak countries along all its borders and unwisely relied on a policy of occupation and intimidation beyond the long-term capacity of the Russian state.
?
?The strategic equation in Asia is altogether different. U.S. policy in Asia must not mesmerize itself with the Chinese military buildup. There is no doubt that China is increasing its military forces, which were neglected during the first phase of its economic reform. But even at its highest estimate, the Chinese military budget is less than 20 percent of America’s; it is barely, if at all, ahead of that of Japan and, of course, much less than the combined military budgets of Japan, India and Russia, all bordering China — not to speak of Taiwan’s military modernization supported by American decisions made in 2001. Russia and India possess nuclear weapons. In a crisis threatening its survival, Japan could quickly acquire them and might do so formally if the North Korean nuclear problem is not solved. When China affirms its cooperative intentions and denies a military challenge, it expresses less a preference than the strategic realities. The challenge China poses for the medium-term future will, in all likelihood, be political and economic, not military.
?
?With respect to the overall balance, China’s large and educated population, its vast markets, its growing role in the world economy and global financial system foreshadow an increasing capacity to pose an array of incentives and risks, the currency of international influence. Short of seeking to destroy China as a functioning entity, however, this capacity is inherent in the global economic and financial processes that the United States has been preeminent in fostering.

For the full text, go to http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/emailafriend? contentId=AR2005061201533&sent=no&referrer=emailarticle
?

CHINA: Shanghai and education

From Greece, Harry Papasotiriou writes: I just returned from two weeks of lecturing on American politics at the East China Normal University of Shanghai, in the context of its brand new American Studies program.? The Chinese students were unbelievably wonderful in their hospitality.? But they need to do much work academically - highly simplistic notions about America abound.? They are also virulently anti-Japanese, to an extent that surprised me.? It is indicative of a parochial nationalism that is at odds with Shanghai’s integration in the global economy.? Still, the very fact that an American Studies program was just created is evidence that Chinese universities are opening up to the world in politically sensitive fields.? (You can hardly study American politics without studying democracy, civil rights and liberties etc).
?
Shanghai is truly bursting with new construction, as is usually reported.? What I found particularly fascinating was the intermixture of new and old, which was almost absent from Hong Kong (where I stayed for three days).? Even in downtown Shanghai, you see whole blocks of the crowded old tenements right next to super-modern hotels and corporate headquarters.? In spite of the vast wealth disparities that such an intermixture brings out in sharp relief, the prevailing mood in the city seems sunny and optimistic.? I have particularly vivid memories of crowded traditional markets, where shoe-makers occupying stores hardly larger than ten square meters make shoes to custom (deliverable in less than a week), right next to similarly tiny spice stores and food shops.?

RE: CHINA: Property. Education

Cameron Sawyer writes: I was unable to find anything on the ruling Hank Levin refers to.? Perhaps he would post the China Review article, which is not available online.
?
What I was able to find is the following.? There are 60,000 private schools in China (source:? National Center for Policy Analysis).? The authorities routinely register private companies which operate schools, and grant licenses to these companies to operate as schools; there is no information about any dispute about the property rights of the shareholders in these companies.? In fact, there is a sizable Chinese corporation called “South Ocean Education Group” which as early as 2000 was earning a 30% profit on revenues of $36 million.
?
Private companies in China operating as schools lease land and own their buildings, and there does not seem to be any dispute about those property rights, although apparently school buildings cannot be mortgaged (South Ocean was raising capital by issuing “education debentures”).? There is apparently some question about the extent to which private schools are allowed to earn profits, but the 2002 law on private education attempts to clarify this by guaranteeing the right to a “reasonable return on capital” to the owners of private schools.
?
So how can a registered private company with registered shareholders and a license to operate as a school be considered “public property”?? Perhaps some Chinese bureaucracy or court declared some kind of public interest in private education (such declarations have been made in the west as well), but this should not be confused with disputing the property rights to the school.? In order to do that, the Chinese would have to confiscate or nationalize those 60,000 schools (either the shares, or the buildings — the particular subjects of property rights), which as far as I know has not happened.
?
We should keep in mind what property is — property is a bundle of rights in relation to some thing or land plot which are never quite unconditional no matter what country we are talking about.? Property rights are only as good as the government which enforces them — a beautiful gilt-edged certificate of property rights is no good to you, for example, if the government of the country in which the property is located has just confiscated that property, or refuses to enforce your rights as against a third party, or regulates away your right to do something useful with that property.? Property rights in land, for example, may be nominally unconditional but in every country are subject to regulations about how the land can be used.? And this is often the critical question — what good are property rights in a land plot which is then declared a wetland, for example, upon which it is forbidden to build anything?? Only with great difficulty did we in the U.S. finally start to develop a legal doctrine of regulatory taking — the idea that if regulations interfere with the full exercise of property rights, this can be construed as a “taking” of property by the state, requiring compensation according to the Constitution, and this is fairly unique in the world.? But the concept of regulatory taking does not nearly make property rights absolute even in the U.S.? The corollary to this is that a different bundle of rights which do give you what you need with regard to a plot of land may be just as good as property rights.? For example, in Russia, any Russian or foreign person or company can own land outright anywhere but in Moscow.? But Russian law provides that property rights in buildings are not derived >from or conditional upon rights in land (unlike most of the rest of the world, where buildings are considered mere appurtenances to land which have no independent legal existence).? So in Moscow, you may get a 49-year lease in land as part of the bundle of development rights you need to build a building.? But the building, after construction, becomes your property in fee simple.? So what do you care about the land?? And even in countries where buildings follow land and are subject to the interests of the underlying land owner, a land lease is a perfectly normal form of land tenure having all the features of ownership except for the limitation of time.
?
It is extremely important not to confuse a regime of property rights which is different, from a regime of property rights which does not exist.?? Blanket statements like “private property is forbidden in China” are not useful, even, deceptive.? It may be that rights of private persons and companies in agricultural land in China are not called “property”.? But a bundle of rights not called property may be exactly the same as property or close enough — for a time in the 1990’s in Russia there was a form of land tenure called “bezsrochnoe polzonanie” — “eternal use” — which other than some limitations on marketability was exactly the same as property (and which was later converted to property under the new Land Code).? In China, the regime of land tenure with regard to agricultural land is not called property, but is practically the same as long-term land lease rights.? The regime of land tenure with regard to urban land is long term land lease rights which are identical to those which one might have in a western country.?
?
The main question is not of form, but of substance — can you buy (and sell) rights to a piece of land which give you the right to build a building?? And keep all the profits (subject to paying taxes) from selling or leasing that building?? In a real Communist country the answer is no.? But in China today, the answer is yes.? It may be that some legislation concerning some types of property rights in China is “ambiguous or contradictory”.? One example of an important detail which needs to be worked out: in China, as in Russia, building have separate a separate legal existence, and therefore, separate title, from land.? But unlike in Russia, the legislation does not establish which rights are superior — land, or building?? This is causing problems in the many condemnation cases in Chinese cities where single family houses are condemned so that the land can be redevelopment for office buildings or multifamily residences.? But look at the substance of the situation, not the form.? Are the Chinese secure in their property?? Secure enough to invest billions and billions of dollars into the development of office buildings, shopping malls, and private housing developments.? Secure enough to invest billions into the development of 60,000 private schools.

Hank Levin writes: In response to Cameron Sawyer, any university library of a reasonable size receives The China Review , one of the mainstream journals on China published in English and available from the Chinese University Press of the Chinese University of Hong Kong. It is available online via ProQuest Reference Asia. The article in the Spring 2005 number is: ?Trust Ownership, and Autonomy: Challenges Facing Private Higher Education in China? by Jing Lin, Yu Zhang, Lan Gao, and Yan Liu. The ambiguity seems to arise when founders retire and try to sell their interests. Governments have refused to let them do this and have succeeded in having the institutions declared to belong to the state. The authors point out that as more and more of the original founders retire, this issue will emerge more fully. Beyond that these institutions are heavily controlled in terms of degrees, fields of study, and admissions. For example, they must wait until the public institutions make their admissions choices before being able to choose >from the remainder of the student pool.

For those WAIS members who read Chinese, the latest Peking University Education Review, Vol. 3, No. 2 is devoted to ?For-profit Nature and For-profit Behavior of Higher Education: Comparisons and Lessons? with many articles As these articles suggest, the issues are much less settled than your recent correspondents seem to assert. As a member of the Faculty of the Institute of Economics of Education at Peking University, I have been involved considerably in the work on private education in China. Those who are interested in the overall issues surrounding privatization in education should peruse the research papers of the National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education (NCSPE) at Columbia. www.ncspe.org.

As a follow-up to Harry Papasotiriou’s report on this teaching in Shanghai, Siegfried Ramler writes: Having done some research on private education in China, including making presentations at recent conferences organized by the Beijing Normal University, I may just add that the Ministry of Education, representing government policy, encourages the development and growth of private initiative in acquiring land and setting up schools. The official position is that private education, offering special and innovative opportunities in curriculum, learning environment, and facilities, serves a need and benefits the nation, very much consistent with China’s market economy. With growing prosperity, especially in the large cities, substantial numbers of families can now afford the tuition and boarding costs which could range from the equivalent of $5000 to $10000 per year, very high when considered from a Chinese perspective. In a family’s budget, the Confucian key role of education still applies. And keep in mind that the one-child policy means that the incomes of six individuals - two parents and two sets of grandparents - can be pooled to benefit the one child. The case of the South Ocean Schools, which has established private schools in many parts of China, is of note. The founder and president of this company is a real estate developer, who realized that an attractive school plant in the suburbs of a city becomes a magnet to induce families to purchase homes in the school’s vicinity.

Though many private schools offer good educational value, they do not rank among the top secondary or middle schools in China. The elite or “key” secondary schools, with highly competitive admission standards, are public and function as feeder schools to good universities. Such schools receive generous government subsidies and can afford good facilities.

Private education, termed in Chinese “min ban” schooling, has a long tradition going back centuries.
Today, it is estimated that close to 10 million students, ranging from pre-school to university attendance, are enrolled in private institutions.

?

RE: CHINA: and Russia: Property Rights

Cameron Sawyer writes:The fact that much land in China may still be held by the state in fee simple does not mean that no one has any property rights.? There are many species of property rights besides underlying fee interests — long term land leases, long-term rights to use, and so forth.? Chinese farmers have since even before the 1988 reforms had the right to conclude long term “use contracts” with the local authorities (the “rural collectives”) which are effectively long term land leases.? The basis for this was the “Household Responsibility System” which started to be implemented already in the late 1970’s, and which was intended to decollectivize Chinese agriculture.? This was an excellent reform — would that Russia had done the same thing in those days.? The HRS allowed the Chinese government to smoothly and gradually marketize agriculture — reducing and eventually eliminating the production quotas in parallel with reduction and elimination of supply of equipment and materials through the central planning apparatus.
?
The initial 20-year term of these contracts was extended to 30 years in 1993.?? With the Rural Land Contracting Law of 2002, these contracts gained more features of long term land leases so that they are now, for all practical purposes, that.? They can be bought and sold.? So Chinese farmers do not own total property rights, but they are legally secure long term tenants of land with the right to buy and sell their lease rights, so they are owners for all practical purposes.
?
Note that a 30-year lease represents at least 75% of the full economic value of fee simple ownership (depending on the “cap rate” applied).? Something like 80% of London is built on the basis of land leases, and it would be just as inappropriate to say that there is no land ownership in London as it is to say that there is no land ownership in China.
?
Urban land in China is given into commercial exploitation by long term land leases, which can be held by foreigners as well as Chinese, and which can be freely bought and sold and which have more or less all the features of long term land leases in the West.? This is a completely normal market economy system, which has allowed a booming commercial real estate market, as noted by Ronald.
?
The system of land tenure in Russia is somewhat more liberal and more straightforward than in China — most rural land is private property, as is most urban land except in Moscow, where the city authorities prefer to sell 49-year leases.? Because of the time value of money — the present value of rent accruing today is much greater than the present value of rent accruing 50 years from now — there is practically no difference in the economic value of a 49-year lease compared to fee simple ownership.? One 2400 square meter site (a little more than half an acre) on Tverskaya Street in Moscow was sold for $45 million recently, a price rivalling Manhattan levels.? The fact that the land tenure was in the form of a 49-year lease, rather than fee simple ownership, did not seem to have much effect on the price.?
?
It is greatly misleading to represent the Chinese real estate market with one story about one tycoon’s villa.? Property rights — of various kinds, but no less legitimate than what we have in the U.S. — are alive and well in China, evidenced by China’s enormous and highly developed real estate markets.? Shanghai, in fact, has the highest rate of new housing construction of any city in the world.? Moscow, another post-Communist capital, has the second.? Tycoon’s villas make up a tiny fraction of the tens of millions of square meters [hundreds of millions of square feet] of new housing development in Shanghai.? The vast majority of new housing development in both Shanghai and Moscow is for average people, which is greatly improving their standard of life.
?
?

RE: CHINA: and Russia: Property Rights

Cameron Sawyer writes:The fact that much land in China may still be held by the state in fee simple does not mean that no one has any property rights.? There are many species of property rights besides underlying fee interests — long term land leases, long-term rights to use, and so forth.? Chinese farmers have since even before the 1988 reforms had the right to conclude long term “use contracts” with the local authorities (the “rural collectives”) which are effectively long term land leases.? The basis for this was the “Household Responsibility System” which started to be implemented already in the late 1970’s, and which was intended to decollectivize Chinese agriculture.? This was an excellent reform — would that Russia had done the same thing in those days.? The HRS allowed the Chinese government to smoothly and gradually marketize agriculture — reducing and eventually eliminating the production quotas in parallel with reduction and elimination of supply of equipment and materials through the central planning apparatus.
?
The initial 20-year term of these contracts was extended to 30 years in 1993.?? With the Rural Land Contracting Law of 2002, these contracts gained more features of long term land leases so that they are now, for all practical purposes, that.? They can be bought and sold.? So Chinese farmers do not own total property rights, but they are legally secure long term tenants of land with the right to buy and sell their lease rights, so they are owners for all practical purposes.
?
Note that a 30-year lease represents at least 75% of the full economic value of fee simple ownership (depending on the “cap rate” applied).? Something like 80% of London is built on the basis of land leases, and it would be just as inappropriate to say that there is no land ownership in London as it is to say that there is no land ownership in China.
?
Urban land in China is given into commercial exploitation by long term land leases, which can be held by foreigners as well as Chinese, and which can be freely bought and sold and which have more or less all the features of long term land leases in the West.? This is a completely normal market economy system, which has allowed a booming commercial real estate market, as noted by Ronald.
?
The system of land tenure in Russia is somewhat more liberal and more straightforward than in China — most rural land is private property, as is most urban land except in Moscow, where the city authorities prefer to sell 49-year leases.? Because of the time value of money — the present value of rent accruing today is much greater than the present value of rent accruing 50 years from now — there is practically no difference in the economic value of a 49-year lease compared to fee simple ownership.? One 2400 square meter site (a little more than half an acre) on Tverskaya Street in Moscow was sold for $45 million recently, a price rivalling Manhattan levels.? The fact that the land tenure was in the form of a 49-year lease, rather than fee simple ownership, did not seem to have much effect on the price.?
?
It is greatly misleading to represent the Chinese real estate market with one story about one tycoon’s villa.? Property rights — of various kinds, but no less legitimate than what we have in the U.S. — are alive and well in China, evidenced by China’s enormous and highly developed real estate markets.? Shanghai, in fact, has the highest rate of new housing construction of any city in the world.? Moscow, another post-Communist capital, has the second.? Tycoon’s villas make up a tiny fraction of the tens of millions of square meters [hundreds of millions of square feet] of new housing development in Shanghai.? The vast majority of new housing development in both Shanghai and Moscow is for average people, which is greatly improving their standard of life.
?
?

RE: CHINA: Property. Education

Hank Levin writes: The laws applying to private property in the PRC are often contradictory and ambiguous.� If WAISERS want a concrete case, they can examine the situation of higher education.� See the article in The China Review (April 2005) on this subject.� Private education at all levels is a rapidly expanding industry in China, mainly because of shortages of spaces at the upper levels of secondary school and in post-secondary education.� Most of these schools are inferior to their public counterparts, but they are alternatives for those who cannot secure places in government schools. However, the property rights of those who establish such institutions are unclear with the official ruling that the property belongs to the “people” based upon the 2002 law.� Even so, I have met Chinese who have got rich from establishing and operating these institutions as a highly lucrative business, despite the fact that they are not considered to be private property.� The real question is how they are able to exploit private property rights to these institutions when they are considered to be public property.� Perhaps a WAISER from China will tell us the secret.

Cameron Sawyer writes: I was unable to find anything on the ruling Hank Levin refers to. Perhaps he would post the China Review article, which is not available online.

What I was able to find is the following. There are 60,000 private schools in China (source: National Center for Policy Analysis). The authorities routinely register private companies which operate schools, and grant licenses to these companies to operate as schools; there is no information about any dispute about the property rights of the shareholders in these companies. In fact, there is a sizable Chinese corporation called “South Ocean Education Group” which as early as 2000 was earning a 30% profit on revenues of $36 million.

Private companies in China operating as schools lease land and own their buildings, and there does not seem to be any dispute about those property rights, although apparently school buildings cannot be mortgaged (South Ocean was raising capital by issuing “education debentures”). There is apparently some question about the extent to which private schools are allowed to earn profits, but the 2002 law on private education attempts to clarify this by guaranteeing the right to a “reasonable return on capital” to the owners of private schools.

So how can a registered private company with registered shareholders and a license to operate as a school be considered “public property”? Perhaps some Chinese bureaucracy or court declared some kind of public interest in private education (such declarations have been made in the west as well), but this should not be confused with disputing the property rights to the school. In order to do that, the Chinese would have to confiscate or nationalize those 60,000 schools (either the shares, or the buildings — the particular subjects of property rights), which as far as I know has not happened.

We should keep in mind what property is — property is a bundle of rights in relation to some thing or land plot which are never quite unconditional no matter what country we are talking about. Property rights are only as good as the government which enforces them — a beautiful gilt-edged certificate of property rights is no good to you, for example, if the government of the country in which the property is located has just confiscated that property, or refuses to enforce your rights as against a third party, or regulates away your right to do something useful with that property. Property rights in land, for example, may be nominally unconditional but in every country are subject to regulations about how the land can be used. And this is often the critical question — what good are property rights in a land plot which is then declared a wetland, for example, upon which it is forbidden to build anything? Only with great difficulty did we in the U.S. finally start to develop a legal doctrine of regulatory taking — the idea that if regulations interfere with the full exercise of property rights, this can be construed as a “taking” of property by the state, requiring compensation according to the Constitution, and this is fairly unique in the world. But the concept of regulatory taking does not nearly make property rights absolute even in the U.S. The corollary to this is that a different bundle of rights which do give you what you need with regard to a plot of land may be just as good as property rights. For example, in Russia, any Russian or foreign person or company can own land outright anywhere but in Moscow. But Russian law provides that property rights in buildings are not derived >from or conditional upon rights in land (unlike most of the rest of the world, where buildings are considered mere appurtenances to land which have no independent legal existence). So in Moscow, you may get a 49-year lease in land as part of the bundle of development rights you need to build a building. But the building, after construction, becomes your property in fee simple. So what do you care about the land? And even in countries where buildings follow land and are subject to the interests of the underlying land owner, a land lease is a perfectly normal form of land tenure having all the features of ownership except for the limitation of time.

It is extremely important not to confuse a regime of property rights which is different, from a regime of property rights which does not exist. Blanket statements like “private property is forbidden in China” are not useful, even, deceptive. It may be that rights of private persons and companies in agricultural land in China are not called “property”. But a bundle of rights not called property may be exactly the same as property or close enough — for a time in the 1990’s in Russia there was a form of land tenure called “bezsrochnoe polzonanie” — “eternal use” — which other than some limitations on marketability was exactly the same as property (and which was later converted to property under the new Land Code). In China, the regime of land tenure with regard to agricultural land is not called property, but is practically the same as long-term land lease rights. The regime of land tenure with regard to urban land is long term land lease rights which are identical to those which one might have in a western country.

The main question is not of form, but of substance — can you buy (and sell) rights to a piece of land which give you the right to build a building? And keep all the profits (subject to paying taxes) from selling or leasing that building? In a real Communist country the answer is no. But in China today, the answer is yes. It may be that some legislation concerning some types of property rights in China is “ambiguous or contradictory”. One example of an important detail which needs to be worked out: in China, as in Russia, building have separate a separate legal existence, and therefore, separate title, from land. But unlike in Russia, the legislation does not establish which rights are superior — land, or building? This is causing problems in the many condemnation cases in Chinese cities where single family houses are condemned so that the land can be redevelopment for office buildings or multifamily residences. But look at the substance of the situation, not the form. Are the Chinese secure in their property? Secure enough to invest billions and billions of dollars into the development of office buildings, shopping malls, and private housing developments. Secure enough to invest billions into the development of 60,000 private schools.

As a follow-up to Harry Papasotiriou’s report on this teaching in Shanghai, Siegfried Ramler writes: Having done some research on private education in China, including making presentations at recent conferences organized by the Beijing Normal University, I may just add that the Ministry of Education, representing government policy, encourages the development and growth of private initiative in acquiring land and setting up schools. The official position is that private education, offering special and innovative opportunities in curriculum, learning environment, and facilities, serves a need and benefits the nation, very much consistent with China’s market economy. With growing prosperity, especially in the large cities, substantial numbers of families can now afford the tuition and boarding costs which could range from the equivalent of $5000 to $10000 per year, very high when considered from a Chinese perspective. In a family’s budget, the Confucian key role of education still applies. And keep in mind that the one-child policy means that the incomes of six individuals - two parents and two sets of grandparents - can be pooled to benefit the one child. The case of the South Ocean Schools, which has established private schools in many parts of China, is of note. The founder and president of this company is a real estate developer, who realized that an attractive school plant in the suburbs of a city becomes a magnet to induce families to purchase homes in the school’s vicinity.

Though many private schools offer good educational value, they do not rank among the top secondary or middle schools in China. The elite or “key” secondary schools, with highly competitive admission standards, are public and function as feeder schools to good universities. Such schools receive generous government subsidies and can afford good facilities.

Private education, termed in Chinese “min ban” schooling, has a long tradition going back centuries.
Today, it is estimated that close to 10 million students, ranging from pre-school to university attendance, are enrolled in private institutions.

Hank Levin writes: In response to Cameron Sawyer, any university library of a reasonable size receives The China Review , one of the mainstream journals on China published in English and available from the Chinese University Press of the Chinese University of Hong Kong. It is available online via ProQuest Reference Asia. The article in the Spring 2005 number is: �Trust Ownership, and Autonomy: Challenges Facing Private Higher Education in China� by Jing Lin, Yu Zhang, Lan Gao, and Yan Liu. The ambiguity seems to arise when founders retire and try to sell their interests. Governments have refused to let them do this and have succeeded in having the institutions declared to belong to the state. The authors point out that as more and more of the original founders retire, this issue will emerge more fully. Beyond that these institutions are heavily controlled in terms of degrees, fields of study, and admissions. For example, they must wait until the public institutions make their admissions choices before being able to choose >from the remainder of the student pool.

For those WAIS members who read Chinese, the latest Peking University Education Review, Vol. 3, No. 2 is devoted to �For-profit Nature and For-profit Behavior of Higher Education: Comparisons and Lessons� with many articles As these articles suggest, the issues are much less settled than your recent correspondents seem to assert. As a member of the Faculty of the Institute of Economics of Education at Peking University, I have been involved considerably in the work on private education in China. Those who are interested in the overall issues surrounding privatization in education should peruse the research papers of the National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education (NCSPE) at Columbia. www.ncspe.org.

CHINA: Property

Tim Ashby said private property ownership is illegal in the PRC.� I asked: Then who owns all the new buildings going up, especially in Shanghai? Cameron Sawyer said Tim’s information was dated. Tim responds: Private ownership of land is illegal in China.� Under article 10 of the 1982 Constitution, urban land belongs to the state, with rural land owned by the collectives.� Since the rural collectives are administratively subject to the leadership of the central and local governments, all land is de facto owned by the state.� The new class of oligarchs have found ways to circumvent this.� For example, the land on which a $50 million mock French chateau sits, built by a real estate developer (a Communist Party member and former senior official at Beijing’s municipal construction bureau whose fortune was founded on bribes), is not technically owned by him.� The property � a former mechanized wheat farm tilled by 800 farmers � was acquired in a deal under which the developer bribed the District Council to convert it from farmland to a conservation zone.� The millionaire leased the land for an annual rent of $300 per acre, provided it mostly remained green space. The developer was then granted one easement for his chateau and a second for a community of 1,000 luxury homes covering 170 of the 1,000 acres.� High walls, steel gates and security guards keep ordinary Chinese from trespassing on the conservation zone. RH: This does not seem to explain the cheek by jowl high roses in Shanghai.� I think Cameron’s posting covers that.

CHINA: Property

Cameron Sawyer writes:Tim Ashby’s information about private property in China is rather dated.? Private property is not only not illegal in China, since last year it is constitutionally protected — in March, 2004, the Chinese constitution was amended to include these words:? “A citizen’s lawful private property is inviolable.”? A new Property Law is being mooted to modernize real property relations.? But significant private property rights — including the right to form private companies — have existed in China since 1988.? In 1988, Chinese got the right to acquire transferable — marketable — rights in real estate in those days not called ownership but the same as ownership for all practical purposes.? Since then, more than 80% of all public housing in China has been privatized, and a similar proportion of Chinese are homeowners.? Unlike in Russia, the mortgage system is highly developed.? Anyone has the right to buy land and build an office building, for example, if he has the money and can get planning permissions, and is free to lease out the space and earn profits.? No, Tim, private property is alive and flourishing in China.
?
?
?