China's Uighur problem

[Double Edge]

https://www.vox.com/identities/21579...ion-after-2020

Very interesting article. There was a demand for news that was not bashing Trump all the time even in other languages.

This survey caught my eye. Been looking for something like this for a while.



Other than the Viets the spread is similar for the other groups at 1:2

No, not because Nathan Rich says so.

https://www.vox.com/identities/21579...ion-after-2020

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-.../12442518?nw=0

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-ne...epoch-n1044121

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/24/t...alun-gong.html

Not in China's pocket :smile:

How much of western and by extension global media has to tow China's line or lose funding ?

Chris Chappell has repeatedly said there isn't a lot of money to be made doing what they do.

Same goes for those 28 Trump administration officials that got sanctioned by China for "seriously violating" its sovereignty.

Happened the day after Pompeo put out that genocide statement.

They see it as badge of honour.

They won't be joining any China sponsored orgs for generous pay to do its bidding.

“It’s primarily a signal meant for the outgoing Trump administration, and a settling of accounts. But at the same time, it’s a warning for future US politicians,” said Wu Xinbo, dean of the Institute of International Studies at Fudan University and a government adviser. “Broadcasting their names is a form of insult and humiliation.”

The move could make it more difficult for some former officials to get certain jobs in the future. Company boards and advisory groups may be reluctant to hire individuals on the list to avoid negative impact on their business.

The warning to companies was designed to “deprive outgoing officials of earning opportunities and to try to deter future officials from advocating policies that could undermine their post-government employment options”.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/24/t...alun-gong.html

Falun Gong, which Mr. Li introduced in China in 1992, revolves around a series of five meditation exercises and a process of moral self-improvement that is meant to lead to spiritual enlightenment. Today, the group is known for the demonstrations it holds around the world to “clarify the truth” about the Chinese Communist Party, which it accuses of torturing Falun Gong practitioners and harvesting the organs of those executed. (Tens of thousands across China were sent to labor camps in the early years of the crackdown, and the group’s presence there is now much diminished.)

Sound familiar ? nobody said anything back then.

What could Jiang do ? he was not popular in the party and needed to consolidate support.

Alarm bells go off when within a decade there are more FG practioners than CCP members (!)

That's what amazes me. How in hell is it possible to get to 100 million followers within a decade ??

 

[Double Edge]

Not just any Youtube channel. From what I've read, China Uncensored is connected to FLG, similar to a bunch of other media that some favour, such as New Tang Dynasty TV, Lude. The tendrils of FLG run deep.

None of the links mentions China uncensored. Only Nathan Rich has made that connection.

Even if they are FLG.

FLG, Tibetans, Mongolians, HK, Uighurs. What do they have in common ?

All persecuted for who they are and what they believe in..

 

[hboGYT]

None of the links mentions China uncensored. Only Nathan Rich has made that connection.

Even if they are FLG.

FLG, Tibetans, Mongolians, HK, Uighurs. What do they have in common ?

All persecuted for who they are and what they believe in..

Do a ctrl + F in the Vox article.

 

[DOR]

Very interesting article. There was a demand for news that was not bashing Trump all the time even in other languages.

This survey caught my eye. Been looking for something like this for a while.



Other than the Viets the spread is similar for the other groups at 1:2


Not in China's pocket :smile:

How much of western and by extension global media has to tow China's line or lose funding ?

Chris Chappell has repeatedly said there isn't a lot of money to be made doing what they do.

Same goes for those 28 Trump administration officials that got sanctioned by China for "seriously violating" its sovereignty.

Happened the day after Pompeo put out that genocide statement.

They see it as badge of honour.

They won't be joining any China sponsored orgs for generous pay to do its bidding.






Sound familiar ? nobody said anything back then.

What could Jiang do ? he was not popular in the party and needed to consolidate support.

Alarm bells go off when within a decade there are more FG practioners than CCP members (!)

That's what amazes me. How in hell is it possible to get to 100 million followers within a decade ??

You may not remember the reason Jiang Zemin cracked down on FaLun Gong back in mid-1999. The reason was that they were able to organize, in secret, in a way that scared the pants off of the CCP leadership. That's all.

There was a decade-long trend toward rediscovering Qi-gong and meditation that started in the 1980s, and eventually generated criticism in the media. When the news would denounce or make fun of FaLun Gong, groups of a handful to a few hundred people would show up outside the news office to protest. Their form of protest was to just stand quietly.

The criticism increased, and so, too, did the response. In April 1999, thousands of protesters showed up – totally unexpectedly – outside Zhong Nan Hai. The party had no idea that anyone could organize something on that scale without them being aware. More, there were senior government and military leaders sympathetic to this sort of spiritual / mental / physical practice. Far from being weak at the time, Jiang Zemin used the anti-FLG campaign to strengthen his hold on the CCP, and to purge a portion of the top leadership.

A year later, the group founded The Epoch Times, to spread their message – and anything anti-CCP – around the world. Zero scruples, zero respect for facts, and a deep, deep love of any hard-right politics.

 

[Double Edge]

Ofcom revokes CGTN's license to broadcast in the UK on the grounds it lacks editorial independence. A day later BBC is not allowed to broadcast in China

Feb 5

NGO that got CGTN's license revoked on the basis of forced televised confessions ? Safeguard defenders

Feb 12

'Their goal is to destroy everyone': Uighur camp detainees allege systematic rape

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55794071

This is the report that did it.

 

[hallo84]

Lotus eaters came out with this interview on Jan 5, they used the term genocide in the title. Pretty big, heavy word.

Just two weeks later the State dept. issued its statement :smile:

...I hope you are aware that China Uncensored is a FLG funded media smear campaign against China. Their actual funding comes from US NGOs that are funded by the US government. The host is a FLG practitioner...and have some pretty crazy ideas.

 

[Double Edge]

...I hope you are aware that China Uncensored is a FLG funded media smear campaign against China. Their actual funding comes from US NGOs that are funded by the US government. The host is a FLG practitioner...and have some pretty crazy ideas.

Tell me what is crazy in what they said in that clip ? listen and post the time codes

I thought it was a pretty good background on CCP politics along with events that took place there.

They are anti-CCP for sure.

Nobody denies the bad things that were done to FLG. All in line with what happened with other persecuted groups and forms a pattern.

FLG shows that even Han will not be spared.

 

[Double Edge]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-.../12442518?nw=0

I've heard this Anna story being mentioned in the YT comments.

To me, this isn't a FLG thing but tells you more about the two mothers who decided to put FLG over and above their own families well being.

The problem is these two women who got obssesed with a belief system. Not unique. Happens with other belief systems too.

I can give you examples from my country where people will prefer traditional remedies to allopathy. And best part is these are educated people that are sceptical about modern science.

My doctor was telling me the waiting line to see doctors that advocate these remedies is long and in some cases even they prescribe ordinary medicine which is a contradiction.

These people see doctors recommending too many tests, prescribing too many medicines and advising unnecessary surgical procedures and conclude its all one big money making racket.

Corrupt doctors, prescribing expensive medicines pushed by big pharma and colluding to make money for hospitals.

There are god men (and women) who perform magic tricks in villages and get people to follow them. Some times you get scientists trying to counter them by performing the same tricks and revealing the secrets. It's risky to do that as these people could kill you.

There was a god woman who told her village to refuse the govt workers when the pandemic began. The state had to send some cops over to arrest her. Posted this clip back then where she is waving this big sword at them and daring them to enter, later we see her being dragged out by the cops.

State had to open fire on some cult followers a couple of years back because they objected to their leader being arrested for rape. 30 dead. Never made the global news btw. Tell me when FLG do such a thing in China ?

I can give you an example from my own family where an aunt of mine died of breast cancer because she refused to see a doctor. And she started a school.

This was in the 70s so breast cancer screening was not there but still she could have lived a lot longer.

No FLG here is there.

 

[Double Edge]

You may not remember the reason Jiang Zemin cracked down on FaLun Gong back in mid-1999. The reason was that they were able to organize, in secret, in a way that scared the pants off of the CCP leadership. That's all.

We did not discuss FLG wrt to Jiang. But PLA and how Jiang did not have their assent.

There was a decade-long trend toward rediscovering Qi-gong and meditation that started in the 1980s, and eventually generated criticism in the media. When the news would denounce or make fun of FaLun Gong, groups of a handful to a few hundred people would show up outside the news office to protest. Their form of protest was to just stand quietly.

The criticism increased, and so, too, did the response. In April 1999, thousands of protesters showed up – totally unexpectedly – outside Zhong Nan Hai. The party had no idea that anyone could organize something on that scale without them being aware.

People assembled because they were told they had to go to Zhong nan Hai to ask the govt to free the ten or so people that were arrested. That was the reason to show up. The surprise was the numbers. CCP then had to make it out like they were about to attack Zhong nan hai.

More, there were senior government and military leaders sympathetic to this sort of spiritual / mental / physical practice.

In 1994 the state supported FLG because they said it would help fight for justice. They posted a news clip about it.

PLA was printing FLG books.

Doubt you will disagree with anything Shelly said on the subject.

Far from being weak at the time, Jiang Zemin used the anti-FLG campaign to strengthen his hold on the CCP, and to purge a portion of the top leadership.

If he's not weak why does he have to strengthen his hold. He has to strengthen his hold because he is weak, right ?

FLG was the way to do it and Jiang made the best of it.

Maybe weak is not the right word here. Control and consolidation might be more accurate.

Jiang has his factions in the present CCP and XJP has to fight them

A year later, the group founded The Epoch Times, to spread their message – and anything anti-CCP – around the world. Zero scruples, zero respect for facts, and a deep, deep love of any hard-right politics.

Sounds a lot like their opponent :wink:

 

[DOR]

The reason I posted was because of this mis-statement:

“What could Jiang do ? he was not popular in the party and needed to consolidate support. ”​

The second reason, is this mis-statement:

“If he's not weak why does he have to strengthen his hold. He has to strengthen his hold because he is weak, right ?”​

In Chinese elite politics, leaders at all levels always – without exception – seek to strengthen their hold, and reduce the influence of rivals.
There is no such thing as “why does he have to strengthen his hold;” the concept simply does not exist.


As for today's alignments, that's an entirely different subject from 1999.

 

[Double Edge]

It's not like I can claim I know. But you already pointed out with your imagine China in 2049 scenario. But I am more worried than this. I like to imagine the trend, project it out and imagine plausible worst case scenarios. Thats leads to a China that is the worlds largest economy sure, just look at their population, and develops a large sophisticated military that can match the USA, but thats not what really worries me.

One is that they develop leads in technolgies that the world has to have, especially in health and green tech. But I am most worried is if they make rapid breakthroughs in next gen tech in computing, such as quantum and Artifical Intellligence. These techs in combination may dwarf the nuclear weapons programs in importance, winning by a few years, may be like winning by a hundred if the progess is exponential there after. We can't risk China under the CCP winning that race. If they pick and choose between the best of the free market and the best of centralised state power, and we just choose profit, they will win.

As a result we need to think beyond the free markets, which is still our best tool and can't be abandoned, but we need to prevent chinese companies from suceeding outside of China where ever we can, starve them of growth. We need to massively fund and subsidize future tech industires (partially abandon our free market principles) and engage in a true tech race with China. They have already started.

Here's a simple idea for starters. Stop colluding with the enemy :smile:

Nobody listened to the paranoid security types because they're bad for business.

China builds advanced weapons systems using American chip technology | WAPO | Aug 10 2021

On Thursday, the Biden administration placed Phytium and six other Chinese firms and labs involved in high-performance computing on an export blacklist, blocking technology of American origin from flowing to those entities. The aim, Commerce Department officials said, is to prevent U.S. goods and know-how from aiding China’s military modernization, in particular its development of advanced weapons, including nuclear and hypersonics.

China could not buy western arms after Tianamen. So they had to develop them on their own.

Collaboration with Chinese military entities stopped two decades ago. But with Chinese private companies? That was mostly legal until recently and still is unless things change.

Private companies was the workaround to beat the arms embargo.

There is NO such thing as a PRIVATE Company in China!!!

Report Sheds Light on China’s Use of Military-Linked Researchers | WSJ | Jul 30 2020

Researchers in the U.S. have engaged in extensive collaboration with counterparts affiliated with the Chinese military, potentially boosting China’s potency as a rival, according to a new report published Thursday by Stanford University’s Hoover Institution.

The report, from the conservative think tank, identifies 254 papers in a publicly accessible Chinese government-backed academic database. They were written by researchers from 115 U.S. universities and government research labs working with counterparts from seven key research universities and institutes with ties to China’s People’s Liberation Army.

The report concludes that any collaboration and assistance that could boost China as a strategic and military competitor are inimical to U.S. interests “even if the relevant research is unclassified, considered basic or fundamental, and is ultimately published.”

The report, which studied papers published between January 2013-March 2019, details an apparent widespread effort by China to get access to U.S. research and technology by using Chinese researchers with links to the country’s military.

Now on to Australia

Australian universities are helping China's military surpass the United States | SMH | Oct 27 2017

Scientists at Australian universities are collaborating with China's top military technology universities on programs beneficial to the People's Liberation Army.

The scientists' work includes sophisticated computing seen as essential to China's ambition to eclipse the United States in advanced military technology.

The optics of Australian scientists working closely with researchers linked to the PLA are a matter of deep concern. The head of the ANU's National Security College, Rory Medcalf, notes that these PLA links may jeopardise future research partnerships with the US defence industry.

Among other applications, computer technology is essential to allowing China to improve its military aircraft, which have long lagged behind those of the US. Testing of new aircraft designs has traditionally relied on wind tunnels, but today's supercomputers allow accurate simulation that speeds up the process and cuts costs.

ok, you say that was 2017, surely things must have changed since right...not really.

Chinese military links inside University of Technology Sydney | The Australian | Aug 29 2020

A scientist feted at a Chinese ­university designated “high-risk” for its level of defence research and secret-level security credentials is a senior academic at one of Australia’s top universities.

The Weekend Australian has revealed several universities are effectively turning a blind eye to employees’ secondary employment at Chinese institutions, ­including when research and ­inventions are patented or used in China, where there is the potential for them to be misused for ­defence purposes under President Xi Jinping’s civil-military ­fusion.

On to Canada

Experts call on Canadian universities to close off China's access to sensitive research | CBC | Sept 15 2020

In Canada, the Commons Committee on Canada-China Relations heard similar allegations in testimony in the weeks leading up to prorogation — including the claim that some of the core technology behind China's surveillance network was developed in Canadian universities.

"I believe it's up to every citizen of Canada to be defending national security," said Margaret McCuaig-Johnston, who spent decades in some of the federal government's top scientific posts and served on the Canada-China Joint Committee on Science & Technology before joining the University of Ottawa, where she researches China's science and technology strategy.

She said AI and robotics are two areas of great interest to the Chinese military.

"They're really putting a big focus on artificial intelligence and developing lethal autonomous weapons. So that would be robotics in the field of war," she said.

"They're looking for help from Canada in artificial intelligence, biotechnology, advanced materials, quantum computing, all areas that can help their military and help other aspects of their economy as well.

"And what it means for Canadians is, if we're partnering with China on these areas, our R&D, government funded R&D often could be going directly to the Chinese military. And I've talked to scientists about that, including in artificial intelligence. And it's quite concerning that they often say, 'Well, I've been friends with these researchers for 20 years, they wouldn't do that kind of thing.'

"But in China, it's required that researchers partner with the military."

And the UK, this report references the article from the Times

UK academics investigated over China-linked research: Report | Al Jazeera | Feb 08 2021

Nearly 200 British academics at more than 12 universities in the United Kingdom are being investigated on suspicion of unwittingly helping the Chinese government build weapons of mass destruction, The Times newspaper reported on Monday.

The scholars are suspected of unknowingly breaching export laws designed to prevent intellectual property in highly sensitive subjects from being handed to hostile states, the newspaper said, citing an unnamed source.

The Times said that the government was preparing to send enforcement notices to the academics who are suspected of transferring research in advanced military technology such as aircraft, missile designs and cyberweapons to China.

Security services are concerned that the research could help Beijing develop weapons of mass destruction and be used in the repression of political dissidents and minorities including the Uighurs.

Research from Civitas, a civil society think-tank based in London, meanwhile, has alleged that 20 British universities had dealings with 29 Chinese universities and nine companies with military links, including with Chinese weapons conglomerates, the Times said.

Radomir Tylecote, the study’s lead author and a former Treasury official, expressed concern that research sponsored by Chinese organisations could have “inadvertent dual use” in a military capacity, the paper said. He highlighted potential problems with research into hypersonic technology at a time when Beijing is seeking to develop hypersonic missiles, and graphene research while the material is starting to be used in armoured Chinese helicopters.

The work served to “increase the prestige and business in general of Chinese military-linked universities and military or partially military conglomerates,” the paper quoted Tylecote as saying.

There you have it. Another fine example of how the west props up China.

China didn't arrive here by itself. They had help. Lots of it. Financial as well as tech.

Much agreement here again but It's potentially the case of closing the gate after the horse is gone.

Had XJP kept mum and bode his time as Deng advised for a decade longer then you'd have a good case.

The financial crisis of 2008 and the pandemic brought out the CCP's game plan sooner so I don't think its too late yet.

But we don't have time to dither.

 

[Double Edge]

In Chinese elite politics, leaders at all levels always – without exception – seek to strengthen their hold, and reduce the influence of rivals.
There is no such thing as “why does he have to strengthen his hold the concept simply does not exist.

As for today's alignments, that's an entirely different subject from 1999.

Jiang was the compromise candidate, the strongman of Shanghai CCP had to go with because Deng's anointed successor decided to throw his lot in with the students at Tianamen.

Yeah, *Jiang*is weak, had to win support. Weaker than any CCP leader since would be otherwise.

Funny. How each leader after Deng tried to whittle away what little freedoms he introduced and its not surprising China is in the state it is right now.

Now that XJP has declared himself leader for life things can't possibly get worse. China is rock bottom right now.

Small comfort for the people of China.

Update: fixed typo meant to say Jiang

 

[Double Edge]

The ignorance is strong in this one.

Little old Hong Kong invested over $500 billion in China directly, then raised even more on the stock market. Sound far fetched? Not if you pay any attention whatsoever to capital flows ... money coming in from outside (Hello, Wall St! Ni hao, Taipei!) and flowing right through to China.

But, who was taking the real risks, the people putting 0.1% of their investment funds into China, or the ones actually crossing the border and living inside the legal and political system? Of course, none of that would have had anything but an inflationary impact unless there was a way to channel goods to customers (marketing: Hong Kong companies own China's export customers) and surplus cash to outside investments (HK real estate, for example).

Got another for you. This one's from a policy brief.

China’s long and sustained growth has been characterized by a high investment rate, with aninvestment to GDP ratio exceeding 50 percent. By contrast, India’s growth was obtained at a considerably lower investment rate of about 30 percent of GDP. This means that India was faring better on allocating and using capital; India was getting higher return on capital invested as compared to China.

China was able to attract foreign direct investment on a large scale, as it developed special economic zones, where foreign companies could build production facilities and create jobs for locals while being largely immune to the difficulties of Chinese state institutions.

Between 1997and 2019, the cumulative FDI into China was 12.7 trillion USD.

By comparison, FDI to India cumulated to a meager 460 billion USD

That's from the west.

 

[DOR]

It might be better all around if the trite cliches about Chinese politics were left to Epoch Times, rather than being repeated as if they were fact here on the World Affairs Board.

• Deng Xiaoping shaped Chinese politics from the 1970s to the 2000s. “Weak”? Yeah, right.
• Jiang Zemin was most certainly not the “strongman of Shanghai."
• Jiang and Hu Jintao most certainly did not “whittle away what little freedoms” Deng introduced. Rather, they pushed, hard, to extend them even further. Maybe you had to actually see it for yourself to really understand the difference in people's lives from Deng to Hu. The transformation, from my first visit in 1981, to the 1990s was astonishing, and from then to the 2000s was absolutely mind blowing.

China is most certainly not at “rock bottom right now,” and things can most certainly get worse.

= = =
As for the policy brief, anyone who says China received $12.7 trillion in FDI is smoking something illegal in many parts of the world (the actual number is just over $2.3 trillion utilized, as per data.stats.gov.cn). As such, I tend to dismiss the rest of the analysis.

 

[Double Edge]

Still more on propping up China

Goldman, Citi Lead U.S. Banks Plowing Billions Into China | Bloomberg | Mar 17 2021

Neither Coronavirus Nor Trade Tensions Can Stop U.S. Companies’ Push Into China | WSJ | May 19 2020

“If you’re not active in this market, then China will come to your market. It’s better to battle them here than wait until they show up on your doorstep,” said Jörg Wuttke, president of the European Union Chamber of Commerce in China. Though some companies would halt China investments until the long-term picture becomes clearer, “we have to be optimistic about investing,” he said.

https://andmagazine.com/talk/2021/04...-fools-errand/

While the U.S. military is going about cobbling together a defense against the Chinese in the Indo-Pacific, Wall Street and U.S. businesses are pouring tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars into China each year.

This provides the ‘hard’ currency that keeps the Chinese regime afloat and able to carry out its global objectives – objectives that require payment in ‘real’ money. It also allows Beijing to acquire the talent, technology, and resources that keep its defense build-up improving and expanding at an alarming rate.

If current trends continue, in Asia the PLA will be able to deploy far more ships, aircraft, and missiles and in more places and more often than the U.S. (and its allies) can match. Indeed, the PLA is already more than a match for the U.S. military in some scenarios.

Unfortunately, there is no sign American bankers and businesses will voluntarily let up.

The other day the president of Boeing – a flagship American company and a major defense contractor – complained that he wished America could separate human rights and other disputes from trade relations with the PRC.

His point: Boeing just has to be in the China market. If not, rival Airbus gets the business.

Concentration camps? Genocide? Organ harvesting? Taking other nations’ territory? No problem.

Boeing jets sold to China potentially being used as military transports for the PLA? No problem. In fact, more, please.

If Congress and the Biden administration will not rein in Wall Street and America’s business class, they are not serious about taking on China. It can happen if they try. We saw a glimmer of what it could look like less than a year ago when the billions destined for China via a federal pension fund were blocked. But that was a rare win.

Message to Congress: You can either defend America or you can take Wall Street and big business cash in exchange for letting them continue strengthening America’s avowed enemy.

 

[Double Edge]

It might be better all around if the trite cliches about Chinese politics were left to Epoch Times, rather than being repeated as if they were fact here on the World Affairs Board.

• Deng Xiaoping shaped Chinese politics from the 1970s to the 2000s. “Weak”? Yeah, right.
• Jiang Zemin was most certainly not the “strongman of Shanghai."
• Jiang and Hu Jintao most certainly did not “whittle away what little freedoms” Deng introduced. Rather, they pushed, hard, to extend them even further. Maybe you had to actually see it for yourself to really understand the difference in people's lives from Deng to Hu. The transformation, from my first visit in 1981, to the 1990s was astonishing, and from then to the 2000s was absolutely mind blowing.

China is most certainly not at “rock bottom right now,” and things can most certainly get worse.

= = =
As for the policy brief, anyone who says China received $12.7 trillion in FDI is smoking something illegal in many parts of the world (the actual number is just over $2.3 trillion utilized, as per data.stats.gov.cn). As such, I tend to dismiss the rest of the analysis.

Meant to say Jiang was weak. Not Deng.

Jiang as strong man is Shelly's term. Because he cracked down on the students there.

Look, the point here is Jiang as a leader was weaker than his predecessor or any of his successors.

When you say each leader tried to consolidate i take that as taking away freedoms from the rest.

You only have to look at the effects of XJP's consolidation.

XJP does not out of the blue get to declare himself leader for life.

It's the cumulative result of consolidation by leaders before him.

China is most certainly not at “rock bottom right now,” and things can most certainly get worse.

Really ? in what ways can things get worse for China.

Excluding a war.

As for the policy brief, anyone who says China received $12.7 trillion in FDI is smoking something illegal in many parts of the world (the actual number is just over $2.3 trillion utilized, as per data.stats.gov.cn). As such, I tend to dismiss the rest of the analysis.

There's a longer version of that brief that will come out later. The source for that 12.7tr figure should be in there.

Your source is from the govt. of China ? even you don't believe what they say :smile:

The figure is definitely higher than $2.3 tr.

Assume US corps alone have been investing tens of billions in FDI in China annually. Two decades is 2 tr.

What about the rest of the world ?

 

[DOR]

One of the reasons Jiang Zemin was picked for General Secretary of the CCP in mid-1989 was precisely because of his soft approach to dealing with protests that year in Shanghai. So, either your source is ignorant of what actually happened in Shanghai in 1989, or he's trying to make a point, badly.

In May 1989, Mikhail Gorbachev visited China. After meeting Deng, he went to Shanghai just as the demonstrations expanded significantly (and, all around the country). He delayed his return to Moscow to see how they were going to be handled (he had advised Deng to allow more democracy in China). So, with the world press watching, Jiang's kid-gloves approach was quite appreciated in Beijing.


Was Jiang weaker than his predecessor? Yes, and that's true of everyone from Deng to Hu Jintao. What is your point? Was he weaker than his successor, Hu Jintao? Not according to any reputable analysis. Remember: Jiang kept the MAC chair, whereas Hu did not.

Consolidating power means taking power away from others? Again, this is CCP 101; what's your point? There has never been a leader of a Leninist organization who didn't achieve the top spot by taking power away from his rivals. None. Ever. It simply cannot happen.

Xi Jinping was selected by the top leadership of China to be the successor to Hu Jintao. What's your point?


How can things get worse in China? Another pandemic; mass unemployment due to international economic sanctions; a sharp rise in domestic unrest … use your imagination.

FDI: I've been tracking FDI since the mid-1980s, and while the actual numbers might be in dispute, there is no possibility that the real figure is six times as much as the official one. Why would they have down-played the data for decade after decade? Makes no sense. Your source is wrong.

You say “assume US corps alone have been investing tens of billions in FDI in China annually.” Why in the world would you think the US was a major investor in China? The official figure for the 30 years to 2015 was $77.2 billion, or $2.6 bn p.a., or 9.2% of what Hong Kong and Macau are credited with.

 

[Double Edge]

One of the reasons Jiang Zemin was picked for General Secretary of the CCP in mid-1989 was precisely because of his soft approach to dealing with protests that year in Shanghai. So, either your source is ignorant of what actually happened in Shanghai in 1989, or he's trying to make a point, badly.

In May 1989, Mikhail Gorbachev visited China. After meeting Deng, he went to Shanghai just as the demonstrations expanded significantly (and, all around the country). He delayed his return to Moscow to see how they were going to be handled (he had advised Deng to allow more democracy in China). So, with the world press watching, Jiang's kid-gloves approach was quite appreciated in Beijing.

ok

Was Jiang weaker than his predecessor? Yes, and that's true of everyone from Deng to Hu Jintao. What is your point? Was he weaker than his successor, Hu Jintao? Not according to any reputable analysis. Remember: Jiang kept the MAC chair, whereas Hu did not.

The only point i have to make about him weaker comes from you.

He did not have the support of the PLA.

PLA is the CCP's army and if the top guy does not have their support what other conclusion can you draw.

He did build up his support over time. He still has people in place.

CCP watchers never agree on weak CCP leader. None of the ones I follow agreed that XJP's position has become weaker. No evidence they say :frown:

Consolidating power means taking power away from others? Again, this is CCP 101; what's your point? There has never been a leader of a Leninist organization who didn't achieve the top spot by taking power away from his rivals. None. Ever. It simply cannot happen.

Xi Jinping was selected by the top leadership of China to be the successor to Hu Jintao. What's your point?

Sidelining rivals is fine.

Aren't they centralising power in the process ? this is what i mean by taking away freedoms. From other organs of govt.

How can things get worse in China? Another pandemic; mass unemployment due to international economic sanctions; a sharp rise in domestic unrest … use your imagination.

Sanctions so far have been party official targeted. Not directed at people of China. And that was for HK, Tibet & XJ

No sanctions over the pandemic which is costing the world's economies trillions.

The only way that happens is if war starts.

FDI: I've been tracking FDI since the mid-1980s, and while the actual numbers might be in dispute, there is no possibility that the real figure is six times as much as the official one. Why would they have down-played the data for decade after decade? Makes no sense. Your source is wrong.

You say “assume US corps alone have been investing tens of billions in FDI in China annually.” Why in the world would you think the US was a major investor in China? The official figure for the 30 years to 2015 was $77.2 billion, or $2.6 bn p.a., or 9.2% of what Hong Kong and Macau are credited with.

So the discrepancy is $10 tr. How to make $2 tr into $12 tr ?

Compounding :smile:

Between 1997and 2019, the cumulative FDI into China was 12.7 trillion USD.

How do you interpret the word 'cumulative'. They must be allowing for compounding. That is my guess how they arrived at that figure. Without seeing the full report.


Let's go with their official figure of $2.7tr

DOR correction factor for any China govt economic data is 25%

So $2.7 tr +/- 25%

Quick way to figure out doubling is divide rate of return by 72

So if the rate is 7% then the investment doubles in 10 years. This is for simple interest. Compound will be more but this works for quick estimate.

Two decades is two doublings

3 becomes 6 becomes 12.

I know that it is ~$3 to date but i mean previous investments have all accrued over the two decades.

Goldman opened their Beijing office in 94. So this has been going on at least a decade longer.

China had two decades of double digit growth that is how they grew to their present size.

Those that invested got good returns as well and they continued.

So $12 tr is plausible and possibly conservative

 

[DOR]

Jiang Zemin took a mild line toward Taiwan in the early 1990s, and many conservatives didn't like it. The PLA initiated the Third Taiwan Crisis in 1995, and the next year kept up the pressure in a failed effort to sway the Taiwan presidential election. It backfired, and embarrassed the PLA high command. A year later the Chinese media celebrated the one-year anniversary of Jiang's offer to Taiwan … showing who was really in charge.

= = =

Centralization and decentralization are common themes in Chinese politics, and have been since the 1950s. Mao went both ways; Deng mainly decentralized, but occasionally had to rein in the provinces because of pressure from conservatives. Jiang faced similar pressure post-June 4, but following Deng's Southern Tour he was relaxing control again. Hu didn't really have to do that much, since Jiang managed things from behind the scenes in his first term, and in-fighting between Bo Xilai and Xi Jinping (and the anti-corruption campaigns) dominated his second term. Xi Jinping has been a centralizer.

None of which has anything whatsoever to do with “taking away freedoms.” The last time sub-province leaders had real authority was in the late 1970s and early 1980s.

= = =

The $2.7 trillion FDI figure is cumulative: i.e., the sum total of all FDI from each year, added together. There's no such thing as compounding FDI (that's for interest-bearing instruments, not bricks-and-mortar investments, which depreciate).

All criticism of FDI into China starts and finishes with over-counting, generally in one of two ways: round tripping (PRC sourced money going out to, say HK, and then coming back in again to win FDI concessions), or inflated local contributions. In the latter case, which died out in the 1990s, the foreign investor would agree to a 50/50 JV (no longer required), and put up his half, say $10 million. The local partner would offer land, which just happens to be worth $10 million. The foreign partner says “let's make it a $50 million total. Here's my $25 million.” The local partner announces that, surprise! That same land is now worth $25 million.

In other words, there has never been any serious analysis that says China under values FDI. Quite the opposite. So, $12 trillion is neither plausible nor possibly conservative.

It's fiction, or an error.

 

[Double Edge]

Something i missed back in Jan

Twitter locks account of China's U.S. embassy over its defense of Xinjiang policy | Reuters | Jan 21 2021

We're in May and ChinaEmbassyUS is still locked

Comments such as these from their embassy IN THE US of all places only strengthens the testimony of Uighurs.