Menu
close
Anonymous.
AnonymousTrump recently ignored the One China Policy in which the U.S. abides by a set of protocols “acknowledging China’s claim that there is one China.” This is their way of saying if you want to do business with us you deal with us and only us. By calling Taiwan and circumventing their protocol – something the U.S. has honored since 1979 – Trump essentially maybe be viewed as thumbing his nose at China. Now whether this is true, or he just is not savvy on international relations is not the point. China may view this as a hostile act because of the promise of a hostile relationship created by Trump’s campaign, which promises to target Chinese businesses and business interests in the U.S.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/02/politics/donald-trump-taiwan/
To make matters even stickier is that Trump did not inform the white house of that call (before or after) and the current administration now has to address China’s concerns even though they did not cause them. Trump’s presidency promises to be a roller coaster ride, but I don’t like roller coaster rides and am not looking forward to the free fall (out) with one of our largest and most heavily armed allies.
edited by rcharles on 12/2/2016
AnonymousAs a rule I am generally not one to go with twitter or e-mail style abbreviations, but OMG!!!!! (Translate as Oscar Mike Golf). After learning through this course of study about the One China Policy that has been in place since 1979 I was horrified to learn that today, our ersatz-president-elect, Donald Trump, called the President of Taiwan and spoke to her directly, for ten minutes, about America's close defense ties with that nation. Where the hell is the leash? Can't someone in the White House or State Department reign this guy in?
Naturally, the government in Beijing is livid. For almost forty years we have danced carefully around the issues involving the Chinese and Taiwanese governments in order to maintain some semblance of diplomacy with both nations and minimize confrontations that might force one or the other side to push hard enough to create a crisis. Now, in just 10 minutes, Mr. Trump has managed to shatter this carefully crafted quid-pro-quo. Wars have been started over less!
I hope that the State Department is up to the large scale damage control that this gaff will require. This issue might be worth some class time discussion in our next session if the time can be spared. The implications are nothing short of a 6.0 on the diplomacy Richter Scale.
AnonymousThe Opening of China
I did not know a lot about the opening of China and the changes brought about by Deng Xiaoping back in the 70’s. I graduated from high school in 1988--so the China that is most vivid in my mind comes from the images from Tiananmen Square in 1989. As a result, I have a definite distrust of China (don’t judge--just being honest). The class lecture was interesting and I enjoyed watching the video link “China--Opening up”. Even though much of Nixon’s visit was staged--what he was allowed to see while there--it did a lot to open up minds and hearts to the Chinese people. The follow up visit of Deng Xiaoping in America was also groundbreaking. Watching the video of Deng Xiaoping at the rodeo receiving the gift bull, waving his hat “cowboy style”, and riding in the stagecoach softened my view of China.(I know the video was taken prior to Tiananmen Square--however, I was able to put myself into the place of Americans in the 1970’s because of my feelings of distrust for the Chinese government.) There is something very charming about the way that Deng’s visit was portrayed. I felt a shift in my views while watching. They say a picture is worth a thousand words--I think the videos of the two leaders visiting each others’ countries were definitely worth more that a million words. The videos softened the hearts of many towards what was formerly considered the enemy.
It was also interesting to hear how the reporters on the video and Chinese representatives talk of how intelligent and deep thinking Deng was. Looking at the two visits and how casual they appear--I wonder how much, work, stress, etc. was done behind the scenes to make it look so casual. I can’t imagine what it took behind the scenes for the logistics, safety, etc. of these two world leaders. Knowing how wise he was, I can say that he did a great job putting out the new image of China and it worked--until the situation at Tiananmen Square.
AnonymousThe Opening of China--reporters’ views
Another interesting aspect of the video on the opening of China, is the perspective of the reporters. I found it enlightening to hear the reporters look back on the opening of China and what they were allowed to film. Regarding the beginning of this period Ted Koeppel stated, “You shot what the Chinese wanted you to shoot.” Sandy Gilmore, the NBC correspondent, related that it got to the point where they could shoot street scenes anytime they wanted, however, if they wanted to shoot inside factories or have specific locations inside of places it took weeks of phone calls to set it up and receive permission.
Before China was opened up to foreign correspondents the closest they could get was having reporters stay in Hong Kong. These reporters could interview people who escaped from China, or try to infer information from the little bits and pieces that trickled out of the country. Because of this, the foreign press was excited when they were finally allowed access and a group was set up to stay in Beijing. However, if the reporters wanted to leave Beijing, they would have to contact the office of foreign ministry for a travel permit--so things were still not completely open.
Yao Wei argued from the Chinese government side to loosen the restraints, but noted that it was hard to change the years of control. He felt that the reason the government was still struggling with this was not so much about secrets--but about wanting to hide the poor conditions in some areas. Whatever the reason, the Foreign Press Corps started to call the information department, the “lack of information department.”
It was interesting to hear ow the reporters discussed trying to tell the story of the people without wanting to get the people in China in trouble. They tried to disguise their sources the best they could--so the government couldn’t figure out who was talking. A few of the reporters that were interviewed shared experiences when they didn’t do a good enough job--and the guilt they still feel for not being careful enough because their sources ended up getting arrested.
This video reaffirmed the power of the story. Hearing the real experiences of the people--and even being able to see their faces and hear their voices have a larger impact on me than a list of names and dates. This is the same for my students--I will continue to search for things like this to help hook my students' attention and bring them into the curriculum.
AnonymousChina’s Environmental Ethics
Now that 50% of the world’s manufacturing is centered in China--the pollution of the air and water is getting much worse. In this video the locals complain about the difficulty to breathe, the corruption of big companies that don’t care about the people, etc. The small organization formed by Ma Jun is trying to change that. He formed a no government group called the IPE--Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs. Since the government won’t crack down on pollution, he and his organization go to factories and test the pollution put out by them. He found a textile facility that was producing 60,000 tons of waste water that was not being treated correctly. He went public with it--and the company spent millions of dollars to fix the problem. The power of IPE is that they will go to the companies that purchase from China--big names like Nike--and tell them about the pollution issues. Because these big companies want to keep their name “clean” and their standard high--the companies refuse to purchase from those Chinese factories until the problems are fixed. It has worked--many of the factories post their emissions in “real time” so that anyone can see how the factory is doing. Also, large retailers like Target use the date as a resource to decide what they will buy.
It is interesting to see the change in the companies’ perspective. The amount of money they made used to be the sole source of pride, but now they are factoring in their carbon footprint. Since the world buys what China sells, the video brought out the idea that it is our responsibility to buy green.
AnonymousThis session went into China’s relatively modern political scene. As a child in the early 1990’s I did not remember the specific events leading to a more open China. These classes were a good reminder of how far we have come and how much further we must go. I think to bring in current events, I will have a lot of students asking why the Trump/ Taiwan phone call is such a big deal. I think it is our job to make sure the relevance translates to the next generation. How this is a question of policy vs. politics and why we, as citizens, need to be informed.
AnonymousAs an educator and someone who used to work in television news I found this documentary fascinating. With a clear and compelling narrative, it is a comprehensive look at the 1989 Tiananmen Square uprising. While I remember watching the news coverage at the time, I never took the time to ingest the whole story of what happened between April and June of 1989. Having been a cameraman for nearly 18 years, I found the role of the American press corps particularly interesting. I never realized the reason American media outlets had such good access to the Tiananmen protests was because they were already in place for the historic Sino-Soviet summit. Had this not been the case, the outside world would have never been privy to what happened inside of China’s closed society. The role the media played before and during the event is also explored in the video. Many protesters had been receiving uncensored news courtesy of Voice of America, and most foreign journalists got swept up in the “pro-democracy” euphoria preceding the crackdown. The American press did influence the outcome by incautiously supporting the protestors who were playing to their cameras. No doubt the Goddess of Democracy statue was a bit of political theater aimed at engendering Western sympathies. However, the video documents the tenacity of reporters and photographers like Jeff Widener, Richard Roth and Derrick Williams, who risked life and limb to get the story out to the rest of the world. These people should be applauded for their dedication to their craft and commitment to documenting such an important story in the face of adversity. In fact, it highlights the continuing need for foreign correspondence and the commitment of news agencies to deliver competent coverage from all over the globe. Unfortunately, the trend over the last forty years has been less and less foreign news. It is possible that in the future, important events will go unnoticed because there was no one there to witness and document them. In his lecture, Mr. Dube stated that in China this is already the case with Tiananmen Square. The young have no recollection of the event because the memory of it has been suppressed.
AnonymousThis article by Christopher Johnson discusses the measures taken by China since 1949 to grow its economy, which involves a mixed economy moving away from the command end of the spectrum in many areas of the economy. Johnson begins by explaining why China was so keen on the one-child policy, “By controlling population growth, China does at least ensure that increases in output are not swallowed up to any extent by the growth of population.” Johnson goes on to describe various reforms aimed at increasing output in agriculture and industry. In agriculture, China decentralized production away from the large-scale collectives envisioned by Mao. Its success, however, hinged on price increases for agricultural produce, which stimulated supply. Next the government had to tackle the inflation caused by price increases in agriculture and in potential inflation that would occur when goods that had been in short supply were subjected to market forces. They developed a three-tier system to address this: the first tier involved major industries which the government still kept tight control over; the second tier allowed for “floating” prices in less important industries; and finally, the last tier, which consists of the service sector, was highly liberalized. The hope was that this sector would provide the engine of economic growth as long as China could upgrade its transportation system to keep up with it. Also, to incentivize the entrepreneurial sector the Chinese government allowed many firms to keep their profits after taxes. To attract foreign investment China created Special Economic Zones such as Shenzhen, Zhuhai, Xiamen, and Shantou. These industrial zones would be a laboratory for finding the right mix of command and market economic policies to create maximum growth.
AnonymousThe following is a story I remember hearing about on the local news. At the time I didn’t pay close attention to this story as it unfolded but this course has jogged my memory and I found a few articles to flesh it out. It is an example of how China’s one-child policy reached into my own community.
Early in the morning of June 6, 1993, a 147-foot-long cargo ship ran aground near Rockaway Beach in New York City. The vessel, called the Golden Venture, had a cargo of 286 undocumented immigrants from the People’s Republic of China, ten of whom perished in the 53 degree water trying to reach the shore. Those who remained were taken into custody by the United States Immigration and Nationalization Service (INS) and held in various facilities around the country. Two years later, 76 immigrants had been released, 47 deported back to China, and 147 were still behind bars. 33 of these refugees, including 35-year-old Dai Bo Mei, were held in the county jail facility in my hometown of Bakersfield.
Dai Bo Mei came from the mountain village of Wenzhou in southeastern China. According to a Los Angeles Times article, Dai had been the victim of forced sterilization—presumably for having a second child in violation of China’s official “one-child” policy. The operation, performed without anesthesia, was botched and became infected. Dai became weak, unable to help her husband work, and he became abusive. They divorced four years later and Dai embarked on a perilous one-year journey from China to Thailand, Kenya, and finally, the United States.
Incredibly, Dai was not granted asylum. A 1989 ruling by the Board of Immigration Appeals called “Matter of Chang” makes it extremely difficult for people like Dai to qualify for political asylum based on forced-sterilization. With no legal recourse and facing imminent deportation, the Lerdo Jail asylum-seekers languished, some even attempted a hunger strike. Fortunately, help arrived in the form of anti-abortion activists who raised funds and otherwise lobbied on their behalf. Thanks to their efforts a total of 26 asylum-seekers were freed, some after nearly five-and-a-half years in Lerdo Jail.
edited by jdoll on 1/2/2017
AnonymousI recently discussed this with my students. They were interested but they definitely need a lot of background information before we can have productive discussions on US-China relations. However, an important question was raised; Is it detrimental and problematic to have an incoming administration essentially laying the groundwork for policy before January 20th?
AnonymousI thought this article about the journalists during the political protests in 1989 was very interesting and important for this point in our history as well. Journalist that are free to report on the environment in the country are marks of a free society. I may use a shortened version of this article in my world geography class to tackle how important journalism is in a free society.
AnonymousCorruption is a disease that affects all human beings; naively, I had thought that in a communist country would not exist and if it did it wouldn’t be so bad. After all, greediness is a human condition and does not know race, color or frontiers. Sadly.
AnonymousThanks for sharing such a touching story. I am glad it had a positive outcome for some of those immigrants. . As an immigrant myself, I feel sympathy for those who have embarked themselves on such treacherous journeys to break away from abuse.
AnonymousAs an undergrad, I remember writing a research paper for one of my classes about this topic: exploitation of migrant laborers in Latin America. Little did I know that in China young people are being victims on the so called “globalization.” It is sad to see that many youngsters seeking employment end up victims of exploitation. Having low or not education forces them to accept such low paid jobs. I would like to see people here in the U.S stop buying/wearing jeans that are not made here. There are many companies exploiting workers in different parts of the world. For example, in Guatemala, Koreans, Taiwanese, and Chinese own factories who are paying under the minimum wages and making their employees work for very long hours, some up to 14 hours a day. Workers are being exploited even here in L.A and we consumers are greatly contributors of such laborer abuse.
AnonymousYeah, I did my undergrad in International Relations and I feel supremely qualified in comparison. I think we should all be watching the situation. The fact that someone has so little concern for past history and relationships. I had the same thoughts after the Taiwan phone call, and then I heard about the hotel situation. I'm glad I took this seminar to become better equipped to deal with the future.