Tag: China

Categories
Mediawatch

Like China in their hands

china_akkuza

 

Prime Minister Muscat has constantly shot down all criticism of his well-rooted tryst with all matters Chinese. The tryst goes a long way and includes the now-you-see-it-now-you-dont consulate in Shanghai manned by ‘person of trust’ and wife of Minister Consul-non-Consul Sai Mizzi. In his latest attempt at belittling any form of criticism Muscat referred to the fact that while people in Malta criticised his sale of Malta’s power source to China, the very next day George Osborne was parading a similar investment in the UK, also by the Chinese. The peddler of words is brilliant at yelling out slogans and words in controlled circumstances – such as a parliamentary monologue – and his Clever Hans effect spurs him on to entertain the gullible public. Any naysayer will  immediately be shot down with brilliant repartees such as “You’re obviously nationalist” or as I have been told recently by an arse-licking political appointee “You’re finally out of the closet”.

But back to the Chinese and Osborne. First of all the Chinese investment in the UK is not all over the place and not dependent on government guarantees, nor is it a sale on the cheap of public land. Our National Salesman is only brilliant in the way peddlers of knock on fakes in the street are brilliant. He sells because his product is sold cheaply or on the border of legality. In the UK a special economic set up was made to cater for the Chinese investment – nothing of that here in Malta were we are slaves to the sons of Ming in every possible transaction.

Not just that. Questions are being raised in the UK as to whether the Chinese have not bought into more power than simply economic investments. The Independent reports that the UK has been “accused of doing China’s bidding” after a police raid into the home of a man who had survived the Tiananmen protests:

Chinese democracy activist and Tiananmen Square survivor Shao Jiang, 47, was arrested in the street outside London’s Mansion House where a reception was being held for visiting Chinese Premier Xi Jinping.

Campaigners say Dr Jiang was “brutally manhandled” by police officers after he attempted to block the motorcade by standing in front of it – in a scene reminiscent of a famous image of a lone protestor standing in front of Chinese tanks used to crush peaceful protests in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square in 1989.

He was holding two banners, which read “End autocracy” and “Democracy now”.

There are now strong accusations that British police and Scotland Yard are bowing to pressure from China. It’s no laughing matter when the police of a nation are subject to the whims and fancies of another nation – and one that is not too fond of liberal democratic methods to boot.

Muscat might have little reason to laugh now, especially when events similar to those that went on in London have occurred closer to home. The dossier of Chinese Slave Labour is not yet closed yet in Malta though little seems to be done about what appears to be China government sanctioned activity in the matter. The Times of Malta reported on the 20th October that a Chinese man who had reported a case of abuse and exploitation at work had been arraigned on charges of assault.

It’s not funny. Not funny at all Prime Minister Muscat. There is a limit to the lack of accountability to the public when engaging in dealings with nations that are, let’s say, not too happy with democratic methods. One can only hide for so long behind the spurious excuse of economic sensitivity. The charades of budget speeches that are only extended monologues of cool-aid distribution peppered with antiquated FEMA catchphrases can only impress the accolytes and the gullible in much the same way that a hypnotist has his way with those who are easily impressed.

The fourth estate has a huge responsibility here in keeping up the pressure and asking more and more questions of this government and its dealings until it gets the answers that are required.

 

Categories
Mediawatch Politics

Sino-Maltese

sino_maltese_akkuzaSino- is a prefix that we get from Latin, Arabic and Sanskrit. In all three of these classical languages it refers to the land of the rising sun. In Latin they were referred to as Sinae, the Arabs call them Al-Sin and for the Sanskrit it is Cina. The prefix was quite the vogue in the cold war years when we would often read of Sino-Soviet, Sino-Cuban or Sino-Korean (DR) relations. It’s funny how we do not come across it that much now – nowadays we are more prone to read something like “Chinafication” which is the title of a new facebook group arguing against the growing influence of China in Maltese matters.

Cargolux is an important Luxembourg company that deals with air freight and traffic in Luxembourg. Back in 1982 (The Dark Ages when the Wall was still in place) China Airlines became one of the first strategic partners of CargoLux. In 2014 Henan Civil Aviation Development and Investment, a Chinese company, acquired a 35% stake in Cargolux. A strategically important company for Luxembourg was now 1/3 China owned (read all about Cargolux here).

Chinese investment is not limited to the Grand Duchy. Sino-funds are being invested all across the globe. It’s all about business and money. It should be. It’s not about “Chinafication”. Prior to the Chinese there were petro-dollars that were an easy investment. The US and Russia too were previously the source of much foreign investment. So when is Chinafication wrong?

Well the problem with Sino-Maltese relations is the lack of transparency. Complete, absolute, total lack of transparency. The Labour government very evidently struck some strange deals with Chinese counterparts before it got elected. Now, the nation that has its Cultural Centre bang behind Castille and that has just purchased a huge chunk of land at a very cheap price seems to have its finger in almost every pie (or iced bun) that the Labour party got its hands onto when it got into government.

The Leisure Clothing scandal as chronicled elsewhere in the nationalist party media is a clear example of the wrong kind of “investment” turning foul. It’s less sino- and much more sinful. While other nations are striking smart deals with China taking advantage of the liquidity that is on offer, Malta’s government turned the nation into one giant souk (that’s suq) in Maltese selling off such vital necessities as our main source of power without as much as a system of checks. Meanwhile our dealings with the Chinese look shadier than ever. Minister Mizzi’s wife is being paid the same salary as an ambassador with the same conditions and yet we are still in the dark as to her operations.

Labour decided to turn into a pimp that is whoring the nation away to the darker side of China’s dealings. China is a behemoth, an enormous giant, and it would take little or nothing for Labour and its band of inept “diplomats” to have touched on a wrong, corrupt, vein that is unable to bring any possible benefits to Malta under than a hypothetical quick buck. Labour’s willingness to play along with the lack of transparency is shameful (though barely unpredictable giving the tune to which they have always played).

The problem is not Chinafication. The problem is that our dealings with China are being managed by incompetent, greedy persons who are unable to fathom the consequences of their hapless arrangements. Worse still, even if they did fathom the consequences they would not care less. Which is why they probably end up dealing with the wrong kind of Chinese and probably why their “bargains” are really a ticking time bomb that will explode in all our faces.

At our expense.

 

Categories
Mediawatch Politics

Institutes of Confusion

confucius_akkuzaChina Today. It’s all about China isn’t it? The latest very superficial Memorandum of Understanding to be signed with what Saviour Balzan in his infinite wisdom terms a “former communist giant” was the subject of discussion in parliament tonight. The opposition raised some valid questions about a number of matters mentioned in the Memorandum – o as the case may be, about a number of matters not mentioned in the memorandum. One matter that both parties seem to be warm about is the benefits of cultural exchange with the global behemoth – in particular the setting up of the Confucius Institutes. Many seem to labour under the impression that this kind of centre of cultural enlightment has the same value as, say, the Alliance Francaise or the Istituto Culturale Italiano. Only it doesn’t does it?

Confucius Institutes have been set up the world over by China in an effort, true, to spread its cultural enlightenment to the world. These institutes though are not totally bereft of controversy and this mainly because of the very nature of their backer. Alas Chinese culture includes a dark void in such subjects as democracy and human rights. Don’t expect the institutes to be a shining example or learning center where these subjects are concerned. Last year a number of Canadian Universities were up in arms and sought to eliminate all ties to their Confucius Institutes precisely because of behaviour that was not fitting for liberal democracies:

Here’s The Times’ educational supplement (no not the Times that accepted the trip to be part of the Potemkin group selected by Muscat – the real Times):

The most recent controversy over the Confucius Institutes has flared up in Canada, where one university is shutting down the programme on its campus because of a human rights complaint and two more have declined to serve as hosts.

McMaster University in Hamilton, near Toronto, will close its Confucius Institute when the current term ends this summer, citing the institute’s requirement that its instructors have no affiliation to organisations that the Chinese government has banned, including the spiritual movement Falun Gong.

In the past few years, too, the University of Manitoba and the University of British Columbia have turned down proposals for Confucius Institutes to open on their campuses.

The Confucius Institutes are under the control of Hanban, a branch of China’s Ministry of Education. They supply money, teachers and Chinese- language instruction to universities.

The network has grown from one campus in Seoul in 2004 to more than 400 today, including 11 in Canada, 70 in the US and 11 in the UK. According to reports in the Chinese media on 11 March, the head of the Confucius Institutes, Xu Lin, has said the institute plans to expand to 500 branches worldwide by 2020. (Link)

There’s more in this article in the New York Times also highlighting all the strings that are attached to setting up a China funded institute within a Western University. In the article the difference between Confucius Institutes and the Alliance Francaise is stressed:

The British Council currently operates in more than 100 countries; the Alliance Française and the Goethe Institute, in Germany, all run on similar lines. And though the United States Information Agency library program has wound down considerably with the end of the Cold War, the State Department still makes an effort to promote American culture overseas.

However, none of these programs are based on university campuses. And according to Mr. Davidson, none adopt the same homogenous approach to their native cultures found in Confucius Institutes. “No one would regard Zadie Smith or Grayson Perry as someone controlled by the British Council,” he said.

“The Chinese are very clear on what they are trying to achieve,” said Mr. Davidson. “They want to change the perception of China — to combat negative propaganda with positive propaganda. And they use the word ‘propaganda’ in Chinese. But I doubt they have to say, ‘We’ll only give you this money if you never criticize China.’ The danger is more of self-censorship — which is a very subtle thing,” Mr. Davidson said.

Wikipedia, the site censored in the People’s Republic, has an article dedicated solely to Criticism of Confucius Institutes – such is the extent of controversy surrounding these units of Chinese propaganda abroad.  Academics find the idea of the institutes abhorrent because they symbolise the stifling of academic freedom – and they insist on being intrinsically linked to university campuses. Their use as a tool of propaganda while censoring controversial parts of the Chinese story (the three T’s are blacked out: Tiananmen, Tibet and Taiwan) makes them stick out like ugly warts within the Western concept of liberal seats of learning that is supposed to underlie the very basis of academic development.

On March 28, 2012, the United States House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held a hearing on “The Price of Public Diplomacy with China,” focusing upon Chinese propaganda efforts in the U.S., including Confucius Institutes on university campuses. Representative Dana Rohrabacher said, “The two pillars of America’s status as an open society are freedom of the press and academic freedom. Communist China, which does not believe in or allow the practice of either type of freedom, is exploiting the opportunities offered by America to penetrate both private media and public education to spread its state propaganda.”Steven W. Mosher testified, “there have been allegations of Confucius Institutes undermining academic freedom at host universities, engaging in industrial and military espionage, monitoring the activities of Chinese students abroad, and attempting to advance the Chinese Party-State’s political agenda on such issues as the Dalai Lama and Tibet, Taiwan independence, the pro-democracy movement abroad, and dissent within China itself.”Responding to Mosher’s testimony, Rohrabacher argued, “It appears as though Beijing is able to expand its campaign against academic freedom from China to America when U.S. universities value Chinese favors and money more than truth and integrity.

That’s it really. It’s not just the US universities. Dealing with China means that sacrifices have to be made and reaching ugly value conclusions. Dealing with China brings in Chinese favors and money but the ultimate result is that what suffers are truth and integrity.

The object of the superior man is the truth. – Confucius

Categories
Mediawatch Politics

Our missionary position

missionary_akkuzaThis is a guest post sent in by a J’accuse reader. 

While everyone this side of the Great Wall is falling over themselves to figure out how much of our taxes are being used to remunerate “our” emissary in the Far East, one simple fact from the horse’s mouth seems to have been missed.

I, for one, could not care less if the salary Hon. Mizzi’s wife is supposedly on is €3,000, €13,000 or €130,000 per month if it means the overall economic boost to our nation’s coffers results in a net gain from this promotional mission. However, what is most striking, is that for all the hard work she is meant to have done in the past year, all she has to show for it is interest from a ‘top digital company’ to come to Malta and set up a ‘free trade zone centre’.

Sai Mizzi’s quote to Times of Malta reporter Ariadne Massa:

“This company is looking to set up a showcase for all Chinese products in Malta so that European countries will not need to travel to China to see their goods but they can just go to Malta, which is on their doorstep”

That sounds like top work to me, but only if your remit was to bring China and Chinese products to the EU. Does Ms Mizzi not know which side of her bread is being buttered? Apart from saving a little airfare for our EU brethren I fail to identify any benefit that this may bring to our economy. Even the trade zone centre is “free”!

A Nonny Moose

Categories
Mediawatch Politics

(All that) Bull in a China shop

allbull_akkuzaThis must be the year of the bull. I know it isn’t (it’s the year of the horse and there’s no bull in the Chinese zodiac) but there’s so much bull in the year that it’s hard to miss it. Only the other day Malta’s ex-Commissioner to the EU now turned “I’ll never bend over to the Europeans” repeatedly referred to a Dr BS in one of his apologias to the world. Must be the summer sun.

Anyways. Today’s Times of Malta reports a government spokesman as saying that Malta’s newly signed medium-term cooperation agreement with China has “sparked interest from other European countries seeking to tap similar deals”.

Malta will be the first EU country to sign a medium-term cooperation agreement with China when the Prime Minister flies to Beijing on Tuesday. According to the government, the five-year memorandum of understanding announced on Thursday has already sparked interest from other European countries seeking to tap similar deals. “We have been approached by four other European countries asking what this deal will entail to see how they can follow suit,” a government spokesman said when contacted. (Times of Malta)

The ambiguity of the phrase regarding interest is such as to raise a couple of questions. First of all, the minor detail, I believe that it is safe to assume that for once the government’s spokesman remembered we are part of Europe and therefore the “other” in that phrase means “other than Malta” (the alternative interpretation would be a sad condemnation on government spokesman’s geographical proficiency).

The second bit of ambiguity concerns the deal that is being asked about. Are other European countries interested in the same kind of agreement with Malta? Or are they genuinely asking Konrad Mizzi and co. for advice on how to deal with China? Both alternatives stink of stercus taurinum. The first alternative (European countries inquiring about a possible cooperation agreement with Malta) tends to ignore the fact that we are currently very strongly partnered with 27 member states of the European Union. Are these extra-EU European states? All four of them? Highly unlikely.

So chances are that the government spokesman was actually referring to the second option, namely that Malta’s government was being asked for advice on how to clinch great deals with the Chinese. Which is interesting and also stinks of bovine excrement. The statement implies that the poor European states (all four of them) are living in a sort of Martian isolation from the rest of the world and had hitherto never made contact with the Chinese empire beyond the cave. In this day and age when the Republic of Ghana has the remnimbi in circulation alongside the national currency it is hard to believe that there are European countries (presumably members of the European Union) that need the Labour government’s assistance in establishing ties with China.

Or maybe (just maybe, as Louis CK would say) they need to find out how Labour pulled off a very particular kind of relationship with the Chinese. The kind of agreement that makes use of the public good in order to pay off an inordinate amount of IOUs and commitments that were made BEFORE it was even a government. THAT kind of understanding where the contents of agreements are rarely public but where you can smell certain beneficiaries from a mile away. Who knows there may be Energy Ministers in European countries who have woken up and smelled the coffee and are planning a posting for their companions in far off Shanghai (remunerated by the public purse).

In the end it’s not the deals with China that are a problem. Sure, the whole world is currently rushing to benefit from China’s huge reserves that are waiting to be spent and invested in every corner of the planet. What remains a problem are the clouds hanging on the not too fine line of distinction between Labour as a party (and its favourites) on the one hand and the public assets that are entrusted in the hands of the executive for a good administration in the best interests of us all.

In that department at least I strongly doubt whether Labour has any good lessons to impart to any other nation, let alone European partners.

Categories
Mediawatch Values

How they see dead people

death_akkuzaListening to French radio this morning (it could have been any radio really) I heard about the gigantic efforts deployed by China in order to locate the lost Malaysian airlines plane. At one point the Chinese PM was reported as saying how important it was for China to find the lost plane – because “we value human life”. I needed to stop and take this in. To me China and the Chinese government has always been a gargantuan entity that operates far beyond the value of human life. I mean this in the sense of what we have been used to read about in the news – huge projects that wipe away swathes of the population in certain regions without too much batting of eyelids.

The authoritarian attitude to human life was reflected in the run up to the Beijing  Olympics (as it has been, for what that matters, reflected in the Sochi run up as well as the Brasil World Cup). To hear the Chinese PM speak of the value of human life was new to me and a sort of reality check. Then there is the matter of the huge amount of resources being deployed (including satellites) to locate a wreck  (with all the respect that is due to those who passed away). There is a huge irony in all this – the Chinese megastate mobilising expensive resources to search for the dead because it apparently respects human life.

Taken from a wider angle there is also the matter of how long news can dwell on the death of a particular set of people because of the nature of their death – an airline tragedy – when in the event of deaths in similar numbers in other corners of the earth the news is reported as though it is routine. The currency of life and death in news value is certainly one that fluctuates.

end note: The accompanying image is a famous photo of Otto von Bismarck snapped surreptitiously while he was on his deathbed. It is believed to be one of the first paparazzo photos ever – as the morbidity of death makes the news. Read more about this here.