China- handle with care

Some valid criticisms of yesterday’s programme here, and some i don’t agree with. I’ve invited Xujun on to the programme.

17 Responses to “China- handle with care”

  1. 1 Xie_Ming
    April 23, 2008 at 12:43

    The invitation was a good move, but who will be Xujun’s interlocutor?

    The BBC program and WHYS blog does have certain dilemmas, e.g.:

    (1) How to match intelligent analysis with
    (2) raw emotion
    (3) children/students with experienced adults
    (4) propagandists with indoctrinated automatons
    (5) quiet questioners with the assertively stupid

    Of course, those handling call-ins are not John Simpsons and Lise Doucettes. (but they might become such).

    There are usually a few pearls and nuggets among gravel and thus the blog, at least, is more than worth it.

  2. 2 xinyuan
    April 23, 2008 at 13:13

    I listend the programme yesterday, have to say that I am not impressed by the presenter at all!

    He gave more chances to the Tibean students and Grace Wang, while tried to bash down Chinese students.

    He didn’t mentioned that there had four thounsands chinese studens demonstrated in London on 19th of April to show their angers on unbalanced reports. These are the students what have comprehensive access to both sides of arguments, and came to conclusions themselves that Chinese were not treated fairly in West media.

    I am very very disappoitned with the BBC and their so call ‘fair’ reports on Tibet.

    Well done Alastair Campbell that suceesfully sent BBC reporters to journlist school and they deserve further education!

  3. 3 ZK
    April 23, 2008 at 13:41

    Typical Chinese nationalism will creep in any time this is discussed, so is it really worth it continuing to talk about it? Let’s move on today.

  4. 4 Mark Sandell
    April 23, 2008 at 13:43

    Just to say i did post on Xujun’s blog but it hasn’t been published , so in the interests of transparency i said that i agreed with some of her criticisms but not all, that some students we approached to be on the programme were “uncomfortable” and in two occasions “too frightened” to appear on a global radio programme (just to point out this was not a fear of live radio, it was a fear of the consequences – up to you what you make of that), which restricted our cast. I also pointed out that the students we did have on were last seen in the reception of Bush House swopping e-mail addresses as they wished to continue the dialogue. I don’t think, i said, that that’s a bad thing.

  5. 5 xinyuan
    April 23, 2008 at 14:11

    ZK & co,

    If some chinese disagree with you, you just call them ‘Typical Chinese nationalism’, I don’t think that will encourage dialogues between china and the west!

    I am a Chinese lives in UK for more than 10 years, listen to Raido 4 and World Service every day. In my ten years living in this country, I do feel strongly that whenever China is discussed in the news, 80% of the reports are negative and the remaining 20% are at best neutral. I have yet to find any really good and positive reports on China – that tell general British people that China is walking steadily towards a more open, happier and fairer society. Such a pity!

    The Dalai Lama sounds reasonable when saying that he does not seek independence from China, but do you know he also included demands that are rarely mentioned: demands that I doubt the UK government would accept from Scotland or Wales – for example:

    · to lay claim to territories that extend well beyond the current Tibet provincial boundaries, – amounting to about one quarter of the entire China territory. These areas have, for generations, contained a mixture of Tibetan, Han Chinese and Hui (Muslim) Chinese living together – however the Dalai Lama’s demands include moving all the non-Tibetan residents out of those regions.

    · to send their own representatives to various world organizations, which makes the Chinese government very suspicious about their true motivation – is this consistent with the statement of ‘not seeking independence’!

    We don’t need to discuss how to handle China with care, we just need to know how to handle China with equal respect and basic history knowledge!

  6. April 23, 2008 at 14:30

    Mark, my blog does not have any restriction or approval process for reader comments – anyone could post there and be published immediately. I don’t know why your post did not show up. Google does require word verification for posting. I’d love to see your comments.

    BTW, thanks for the link. That’s very gracious of you.

  7. April 23, 2008 at 15:47

    I hope that more analysis of facts rather than opinions on this very important issue will eventually be heard. But, the fact that there is at least some debate is very encouraging, and quite new. Congratulations on setting it in motion.

  8. 8 ZK
    April 23, 2008 at 16:16

    xinyuan: 让我问你,你真的相信北亰说的每一句话吗?
    Let me ask you this, do you really believe every single thing Beijing says? It seems to me, even if you do not, that a lot of people do.

    I’m not pro-Tibetan independence. But it gets sickening to see Chinese citizens, mostly (not always) seemingly brainwashed by Beijing, jump to the defence of China without considering both sides and immediately accuse the western media — banned from reporting from Tibet, remember — of being biased.

    I’m personally of the same view as most world leaders — Tibet is a part of China but Beijing needs to have direct dialogue with the Dalai Lama.

    But, as I said, the blind nationalism of some Chinese contributors is getting old. Or maybe it’s just because they don’t dare to take a line different from the CCP…

  9. 9 Xie_Ming
    April 23, 2008 at 16:39

    On Xujun’s website, I saw nothing at all in the “visual identification” box!

    She should be encouraged to post here and also to list here her blog on WHYS!

  10. 10 Mark Sandell
    April 23, 2008 at 16:46

    Dear Xujun, i wasn’t suggesting it had been deliberately not published, but i know sometimes from our blog it can take some time.
    Thanks for responding on our site- and my offer to appear on the programme with your criticisms of course still holds.
    all best

  11. 11 tenor
    April 23, 2008 at 17:38

    Dialogue is the way to resolve any problem. I have read blogs and heard this program. Both sides are pointing finger instead of listening to each other. Differences are there, that’s why we have a dialogue. I am a Tibetan living in the west and have been to Tibet and still have family there. I think we have a serious problem in Tibet and needs to be addressed and find solution instead of vilifying each other and trying to cover the problems with guns, imprisonment, repression and total shutting down of the entire population of Tibet from outside world. Such action will only breed hatred and deeper mistrust. Dalai Lama has already played his entire card by openly declaring that he is seeking meaningful autonomy and not independence from China. He is even facing opposition from some of the Tibetans in exile over is position of Tibetans issue. PRC must reciprocate with sincerity and not calling all sorts of names and forcing Tibetans to denounce him. Chinese people must understand that Dalai Lama is soul of Tibetans and that will never change.

    My conclusion is we are still very far from achieving this and will be very difficult one. In order to achieve this both sides must be sincere and willing to compromise. . But the good news is few people are trying.

  12. 12 selena
    April 23, 2008 at 20:19

    Can someone clarify who is Grace Wang?

    I listened to the tape of the WHYS program and it was not clear whether Grace was Chinese or Tibetan. On the one hand, she made reference to her parents in China and on the other hand she seemed to talk as though she was from Tibet.

    I must confess, rightly or wrongly, I was not convinced that she and her family are in any real danger.

  13. April 23, 2008 at 20:26

    All Media except CCTV and China Daily is biased. The world knows it.

  14. April 24, 2008 at 20:24

    China, handle with care?
    Absolutely not. Common sense, sensitivity, insight do need to be there though.
    If democarcy is that essential, why didn’t it get implemented in Hong Kong till it was on the eve of handover?
    Human rights abuses happen in every where, regardless of whether the nation concerned is democratic or not, whether there is freedom of speech or not. I listened to the MY Lai Tapes( Part 1), the descriptions of the murderous scenes of utter merciless intents were sheer hell. ( I know, I know. It happened 40 years ago. Has history been learn?)
    Freedom of expression and speech, unfettered? I bet those journalists who seemed to speak through their nostrils and opinions expounded from the lower half of their bodies would really love it. Those professional protesters who uttered slogans often display narcissitic arrogance.
    Don’t get me wrong. I love peace, non-violence even love and care. Until every one of us really practise WISDOM AND COMPASSION, reflecting on our very own shortcomings each day, the aggression, the ego, the defensiveness are going to get into the WAY.
    Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd could teach the leaders of the so-called advaned nations a few lessons on how to handle China.

  15. 15 ZK
    April 25, 2008 at 01:13

    …By going to China and pissing his hosts off by telling students at a top university, in Mandarin, that China’s abusing human rights in Tibet? Smart move that would be.

  16. 16 Tom
    April 30, 2008 at 04:11

    When sweeping words like “typical Chinese nationalism” and “brainwashing” is used any sense of a level, civil discussion is thrown out of the window. These words are laced with superiority complex they only serve to alienate the other side. This is what Xinyuan means when he says knowing “how to handle China with equal respect”. In fact, one should handle ANYONE with equal respect.

    Q: “你真的相信北亰说的每一句话吗?” (“Do you really trust every word Beijing says?”

    A: Absolutely not. Neither do I trust every word western leaders say. Again, this question implies that the addressee is a puppet of the country. Asking this question seems like a desperate attempt when one has nothing more to support his/her case.

    Otherwise, I agree that the Chinese leaders and the DL need to talk. They must also improve its governance, listen to the concerns of its people, and partake in concrete long-term nation building to entrust and empower its people regardless of ethnicity. Otherwise the nation will remain weak and the party’s credibility in the eyes of the people will continue to suffer.

  17. 17 kchoedon
    May 27, 2008 at 07:03

    As the Tibetans in the program said, I have always considered myself Tibetan, never a Chinese. So, when Grace or anyone else says I am “really” Chinese it really upsets. Furthermore, I have evidence in my own home that the occupation of Tibet was absolutely forceful not only to noble, but to serfs. My grandpa and beloved Grand-mother had to smack him in the head, a person they had so much respect for otherwise they would gotten killed. Do you think that is liberation?No…my grandpa had to watch kids in his village being forced to kill their own parents. He was a serf yet his animals were still taken away. As a Tibetan under the Tibetan government before the invasion I am 100% sure it was not easy, but in China their people had a chance to liberate themselves. But in Tibet, Chinese came in, took away our tradition, our way of living because they thought they know what was best for us.

    On another topic, when the Chinese government is constantly torturing our monks, nun and citizens to Tibet simply because they are calling for what is right fully theirs, because they are not being allowed to practice there religion freely. I think that shows what kind of government China has. And I think citizens of China should speak up and say that this is not the the government should running themselves. No matter what I believe, Right now Tibetans in Tibet are Citizens of China and they should have the right to speak their mind without being watched. They should be able to live their life, as recently Nomads are being forced to settle in camps where there are no opportunities for jobs, no hospitals near why, and they are always under the supervision of the PRC. How can Chinese expect the Tibetan people to just suck it up and pretend it never happened.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: