China World
Is China Resisting the West? (Asia Carousel Live Event)
Where will the rise of China take the country in the 21st century? Will China confirm to the Western world order, or will it create a new world order? What is the ‘China dream’ (中国梦)? These questions will be addressed at today’s Asia Carousel at the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Event: Asia Carousel, “China Resisting the Western World Order?”
Date: June 9, 2016
Place: Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The Hague
During this edition of the ‘Asia Carousel’, an initiative launched by the Dutch government to enhance knowledge and understanding of Asia, all focus will be on China and its role in international society today.
Today’s speakers are sinologist and author Henk Schulte Nordholt, Leiden Asia Centre director Frank Pieke, and Arjen van Dijkhuizen, Senior Economist Emerging Markets at ABN AMRO. The discussion will be led by Arjen Schutten (China Expertise Centre).
An Economic Perspective (Van Dijkhuizen, 11.05 CET)
Today’s first speaker, Arjen van Dijkhuizen, starts his talk by addressing the audience to ask people whether or not they think the rise of China and its influence on the world economy is a cause for concern. Although the majority of people in the room raise their hand for being ‘not too worried’, Van Dijkhuizen says that there might actually be more cause for concern than today’s attendants might think.
“Improving communication is one of the biggest challenges that China is facing in its transition to the world economy.”
China is often at the focus of attention in today’s global financial markets. This, on the one hand, has to do with the rising importance of China’s economy, and, on the other hand, also relates to the country’s lack of transparency and communication. According to Van Dijkhuizen, opening up this communication is one of the biggest challenges that China is facing in its transition to the world economy.
But there are also other various issues that play a big role. Debts are one of China’s bigger problems- “although this might be more of a domestic problem than an international one”, Van Dijkhuizen says.
He continues: “The World Bank might be too bureaucratic for China – it is not fast enough, and too focused on the USA. It is therefore not surprising that the PRC is now setting up its own initiatives like the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, which we will hear much more about.”
“All in all, there are many hurdles to come”, Van Dijkhuizen says. The rising debts are one major point of concern. But China won’t try to turn around the global financial market: “The country is reforming, but stabilization will be the number one priority – which is something that the whole world will profit from.”
Looking at China’s Nationalism (Schulte Nordholt, 11.25 CET)
Speaker Henk Schulte Nordholt is all too familiar with today’s topic, as he is the author of the China and the Barbarians: The Opposition Against the Western World Order (2015) that is also focused on the theme of the rise of China.
“Maintaining the single-party state is a central aspect of nationalism in today’s China,” Schulte Nordholt says. One way to preserve this system is focusing on territorial issues – the Party suggests that without China’s single-party system, the country’s “territorial integrity” will not be maintained or reached. Where the borders of this “complete China” exactly are, Schulte Nordholt says, is not really clear.
“The main problem in China-US relations is a lack of trust.”
So except for the economic perspective, it is important to focus on military aspects when talking about the rise of China and its attitude towards the Western world order, according to Schulte Nordholt. The question “Who will dominate the Pacific Ocean – China or the US?” is an important one in this matter.
Could China and the US clash? “The main problem is a lack of trust,” Schulte Nordholt says. There are consistent strategic talks between the two nations, but the tensions continue. For China, economic development, sovereignty, and social safety/stability are three major issues – and they do not necessarily benefit from closer ties with the US.
These are exciting times, according to Schulte Nordholt. In the long run, he is optimistic – no one will be able to stop China’s rise to the world order and its integration in the world economy, it has already passed the “point of no return” in 2001. Continuing dialogues, Schulte Nordholt says, is crucial.
China’s Neo-Socialism (Frank Pieke, 11:45 CET)
“China is a country where nothing is allowed, but everything is possible,” says Frank Pieke. A country like the Netherlands might very well be the other way around, Pieke smilingly points out – and it is not necessarily better that way. For Chinese people, and foreigners alike, there are many possibilities for individual development in today’s China.
“Neosocialism”, is what Pieke calls China’s current political system. It is a continuing process. The Party is getting increasingly powerful – and its demonstration of power changes from year to year, from month to month, and from day to day. It also varies per theme, where some things might become more free, whereas others are more limited, like the recent restrictions on religion.
“The single-party state and China’s sovereignty is now emphasized more than ever,” Pieke says. We now first see that the Party and the government has a plan that they are creating. This was different in Hu Jintao’s era; now it is clear that the Party leaders have a clear vision of where they are going and how they will reach this. It is almost like a grocery list that they are completing.
“It is not a renewed ‘maoism’; you could compare it to nazism.”
There is also a sense of completing this within the coming 6-7 years, Pieke says, so there is a new sense of power and urgency that is making Xi Jinping’s reign different from that of his predecessors. “The Party and its leaders will become more dominant,” according to Pieke. The role of the Premier Li Keqiang is seemingly becoming less important, as all eyes are on President Xi Jinping.
This growing importance of the President will not lead to a renewed ‘maoism’, according to Pieke: “China is not going back in time. This is much more managed and the plans are different from Mao’s era. If you want to compare it to anything”, Pieke says, “then you could compare it to nazism” – cultivating not only the Party, but also the leader: “Its background is aggressive, nationalistic and based on a history where China was victimized.”
“What worries me most is not a revival of state-socialism”, Pieke argues: “but that the Party dictatorship will become more like a fascist regime.” Pieke sees this as a potential danger within the rise of China and its attitude to the West, as he also speaks of China’s route of ‘Lebensraum‘.
Dialogue is therefore crucial, Pieke says – reiterating the views of the previous speakers. The dialogue has to be constructed and maintained with several layers in Chinese society; keeping communication alive with the various institutions and government bodies. “We cannot close the door to China,” Pieke says: “But we also cannot accept a Chinese hyper-nationalistic agenda to grow.”
Discussion & Questions (12.25 CET)
“It is a worrisome trend that China’s image in the west is not getting more positive, while the country is growing,” Schulte-Nordholt says: “If China is indeed continuing with a neosocialist system that has some fascist features [as suggested by Pieke], then this doesn’t do much good for its future international image.”
“We shouldn’t see ‘China’ as one entity,” Frank Pieke comments: “When I was talking about the fascist regime, I am talking about something that finds its roots in an aggressive form of nationalism that is alive at multiple layers in society – from top to bottom – but it is not that this nationalism applies to the entire society. This growing, and potentially dangerous, group is not representative for all of China.”
Pieke does not see a strict division between Party and society, as there are movements in the Party that can be traced back to what is happening at grassroots movements. But Schulte Nordholt does not necessarily agree with Pieke’s view when it comes to this Party & society symbiosis: “There really is a clear division,” according to Schulte Nordholt.
Yet Pieke says: “A Party separate from society is fundamentally non-Chinese. Social government and social management are essential in understanding China,” – suggesting close ties between state, government and society in China today.
Audience participant Ingrid d’Hooge has a question for the panel. She says that there are many of her friends in China who worry about the growing dictatorial regime in China, as it paralyzes the people to some extent. “How do you see this?” she asks the panel.
“2002-2006 were China’s golden days with relative freedom and endless possibilities.”
“I understand your friends,” Pieke says: “But we should not forget that there are many people, both inside and outside the Party, who are happy that a ‘real’ leader has stood up who has the guts to watch the West in the eyes and show China’s limits.” In the end, Pieke says, a regime can only change when internal forces want it to change – “I’m fairly pessimistic about this,” he concludes.
One other audience participant, China Analyst Mr. Hofman, wonders if the significance of China’s previous President Hu Jintao (2002-2012) is not undervalued in discussions such as these – even 4, 5 years ago, people never spoke too highly of him. “He indeed did not get enough credit for what he did,” Pieke answers: “Perhaps he was less media-genic, but I think 2002-2006 were China’s golden days with relative freedom and endless possibilities. I want to emphasize that Xi Jinping cannot be blamed for today’s fascistic changes in China – it is part of a movement that is larger than the President.”
Audience participant Fred Sengers (@blogaap) wonders if there might be international consequences to China taking a route of ‘Lebensraum’, as Pieke previously mentioned.
“Of course it has international consequences. It is not all about creating trade routes, it is more than that. It is project of expanding China’s [economic] influence. It is not necessarily bad, but we have to set limits when we no longer profit from it. There is major diplomatic influence of China within today’s Europe. Let alone in Africa. Europe is more and more influenced by China, and we should set a limit to how much it will influence us.”
This live blog is now closed.
– By Manya Koetse
Follow @WhatsOnWeibo
[rp4wp]
©2016 Whatsonweibo. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce our content without permission – you can contact us at info@whatsonweibo.com.
China Memes & Viral
“The Frog in the Well”: China’s Condemnation of the G7 Summit
The most noteworthy criticism of the G7 summit came from Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying, who started the frog analogy.
There has been a lot of talk about frogs in Chinese online discussions following the G7 summit. Over the past week, the G7 summit, that was held in Hiroshima from 19 to 21 May, was criticized in Chinese newspaper headlines and by official media accounts, while China’s ministry of foreign affairs accused the G7 of “smearing” and “attacking” China.
The G7 was called a “failure” on the China Daily front page of May 22. On the same day, Global Times called the summit “manipulative” in its front page headline and suggested the Group of Seven had descended into an “anti-China workshop” in its op-ed, which featured an illustration by Liu Rui that showed the seven nations in a boat, not cooperating and barely moving.
The Global Times op-ed, including the cartoon by Li Rui. Source: Global Times.
But perhaps the most noteworthy criticism on the G7 summit came from Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying (华春莹).
On her official Twitter account (@SpokespersonCHN) Hua lashed out against the G7 and its participating nations in a series of tweets in which she condemned the summit as hypocritical, deceptive, and biased, while highlighting China’s contributions to global economic growth.
Some of the tweets posted by Hua Chunying in response to the Group of Seven “attacking” and “slandering” China.
The Chinese condemnation of the G7 is a direct response to the G7 Communiqué and to the summit’s supposed “hype around China-related issues.”
During the G7 summit in Hiroshima, the participating nations expressed growing concerns about China’s expanding global influence. The summit’s official statement emphasized the need to “de-risk” rather than “de-couple” from China in their relationship. The statement mentioned China 20 times, a significant increase from the 14 mentions in 2022.
The discussions focused on various aspects related to China, including its relations with Taiwan, human rights issues in Xinjiang and Tibet, interference in democratic institutions, and responses to Russia’s military aggression.
Prior to the summit, President Emmanuel Macron of France made it clear through one of his advisers that the G7 was not an ‘anti-Chinese’ coalition. However, Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak of the United Kingdom went beyond the official statement, emphasizing the significant threat posed by China to global security. Speaking to reporters at the G7 meeting, Sunak stated that “China poses the biggest challenge of our age to global security and prosperity. They are increasingly authoritarian at home and assertive abroad.”
From China’s perspective, the Group of Seven is unwilling to go beyond their own distorted world view in which China is labeled a threat. And so, in one of Hua’s tweets, she posted an image showing a frog on the bottom a well, looking up to the sky and wondering: “G7 = world?”
The image tweeted out by Hua Chunying on 22 May, 2023. Source: Twitter.com.
The depiction of a frog in the well is a direct reference to the well-known fable by philosopher Zhuangzi about a frog in a well who does not believe it when a turtle tells him that the world is bigger than the view from the well. The frog stubbornly denies the existence of the wider world and asserts that nothing lies beyond what he can see. The fable has given rise to Chinese idioms such as “the frog at the bottom of the well” (井底之蛙) and “looking at the sky from the bottom of the well” (坐井观天). These idioms are commonly used to describe those who exhibit ignorance and resist broadening their understanding beyond their limited perspective.
Hua’s frog-tweet and others were also shared on Weibo by state media outlet China Daily, which initiated the hashtags “Hua Chunying Fires Back with Series of Tweets to Counter G7’s Smear Campaign Against China” (#华春莹连发多条推特回击G7抹黑中国言论#) and “Hua Chunying Uses Frog at Bottom of Well to Hit Back at G7’s Smearing Remarks” (#华春莹用井底之蛙回击G7抹黑言论#).
One nationalistic Weibo blogging account (@大大大餅乾丶) shared additional images of frogs, including one with a frog adorned with an American flag and the word “independence” written on its forehead. The blogger pointed out that some groups in Taiwan believed that Hua’s frog tweet was directed at Taiwan, stating: “It seems like their self-awareness is right on point.”
Post by Weibo account @大大大餅干丶, including the frog image. (Source: Weibo.com).
The connection between the frog idiom and Taiwan is not unfounded. In August 2022, during Pelosi’s controversial visit to Taiwan, an illustration depicting a frog leisurely relaxing in a hotpot while the US increased the heat and mainland China held the lid also went viral online.
Illustration by Kokita Chang, circulating on Weibo in August of 2022.
Meanwhile, on Weibo, many praised Hua’s sharp criticism of the way in which China was targeted during the G7 talks and embraced the frog analogy. “One a frog, always a frog,” some wrote.
Other state media outlets, including Global Times, also reported about Hua’s tweets and argued that that the G7 is purposely hyping the “China treat” theory (中国威胁论). The louder their anti-China rhetoric is, the less impact it has, the article argues.
Other commenters, however, seemed to note some irony in the frog analogy. One blogger argued that since the frog in the image himself wonders if the G7 is really the entire world, he actually already does not have such a limited worldview. Several Weibo users wondered who the frog actually represented, suggesting it could either be the G7, Taiwan, or mainland China itself.
Within this context, some individuals expressed curiosity about Hua Chunying’s choice to post the original message on the American Twitter platform, which is inaccessible within mainland China. They humorously remarked, “Twitter? What is Twitter?”
By Manya Koetse & Zilan Qian
Get the story behind the hashtag. Subscribe to What’s on Weibo here to receive our newsletter and get access to our latest articles:
Spotted a mistake or want to add something? Please let us know in comments below or email us. First-time commenters, please be patient – we will have to manually approve your comment before it appears.
©2023 Whatsonweibo. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce our content without permission – you can contact us at info@whatsonweibo.com.
China Insight
“Can’t Watch the Fire Burn Across the River” – Xi’s Phone Call with Zelensky
China won’t “watch the fire from the other side of the river,” but it also will not “pour oil on the fire” of the Russia-Ukraine war.
On April 26th, Chinese state media outlet CCTV posted a lengthy post on Weibo about the much-anticipated phone call between Chinese leader Xi Jinping and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
According to CCTV, the main point of the conversation was to exchange views on China-Ukrainian relations – based on “mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity” – and the war in Ukraine.
The phone call is especially noteworthy because it is the first Xi-Zelensky conversation since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
The phone call came after a number of noteworthy international developments, including Xi’s visit to Moscow in late March, French President Macron’s China visit in April, and that of Von der Leyen, President of the European Commission.
The momentous conversation also took place shortly after comments made by Lu Shaye (卢沙野), the Chinese ambassador to France, caused controversy. Last week, Lu questioned the independence of former Soviet countries like Ukraine in an interview with French television network LCI. He commented on Crimea being Russian and suggested that former Soviet countries have no “effective status” in international law. The interview sparked controversy and anger among former Soviet countries Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia, and other European countries.
Meanwhile, on the Chinese side, the Foreign Ministry stated it respects the sovereignty of ex-Soviet states. Various voices argued that Lu Shaye’s words were taken out of context and were the effect of a certain Western media strategy (see the take by Chinese scholar Zheng Ruolin here and that of commentator Hu Xijin here). However, Lu Shaye’s remarks regarding post-Soviet nations could have increased the urgency for Xi to reach out to Zelensky via phone.
Putting Out the Fire
One sentence from the phone call that was highlighted by Chinese state media and which was turned into a social media hashtag was that of how China “will neither watch the fire from across the river nor pour oil on the fire” (#我们既不会隔岸观火也不会拱火浇油#).
While the sentence reiterates China’s supposed neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the conversation between Xi and Zelensky also signalled China’s desire to take on the role as a responsible global power and international peacemaker.
CCTV reported that China will insist on urging for peace and make its own efforts to stop the war. China reportedly will send an envoy (Special Representative of the Chinese Government for Eurasian Affairs/中国政府欧亚事务特别代表) to Ukraine and “other countries” to help seek a political settlement in the crisis through in-depth discussions with all parties.
Chinese official reports on the call also emphasized how Zelenskiy congratulated President Xi Jinping on his re-election and that Ukraine adheres to the one-China policy, hoping to “open a new chapter in Sino-Ukrainian relations and work together to maintain world peace and stability.”
Direct News headlined that the US was “sour” over China’s conversation with Ukraine.
News of the call was posted and promoted on Chinese social media by various media accounts. Direct News (直新闻) by Shenzhen Media Group even called the Xi-Zelensky call “the most significant international news of the entire week.”
The same media outlet also said that the U.S. response to the Xi-Zelensky call was “somewhat sour.” White House spokesman John Kirby called it “a good thing” but also said it was too early to know whether it would lead to “some sort of meaningful peace movement, or plan or proposal”.
Although most Chinese media accounts reporting on the phone call on Weibo had their comment sections turned off – leaving no room for online discussions, – pundit and former Global Times chief editor Hu Xijin also posted a lengthy commentary on Weibo about the issue on April 27th, which received over 900 (selected) replies.
Hu stressed the important role China has in a world where it is the only major country that maintains friendly relations with both Russia and Ukraine, with both leaders willing to listen to China’s views. Neverthless, Hu wrote that there is still a long road ahead for peace to be achieved.
Hu also suggested that Washington is playing a negative role in reaching a political settlement of the Russia-Ukraine crisis. The US has not shown “true willingness to push for a ceasefire” and moreover is also “utilizing the war for its own strategic objectives,” according to Hu.
In the comment section, many discussions were also focused on the role of the US. “They don’t want a ceasefire,” some wrote.
There were also other commenters who suggested that the key to solving the war in Ukraine eventually is not up to the US, nor to China, but to Russia and Ukraine alone.
Some still have the hope that China can make a difference in achieving peace: “China can do what other countries cannot. When it comes to it [reaching peace], we can do it.”
By Manya Koetse
Get the story behind the hashtag. Subscribe to What’s on Weibo here to receive our newsletter and get access to our latest articles:
Spotted a mistake or want to add something? Please let us know in comments below or email us. First-time commenters, please be patient – we will have to manually approve your comment before it appears.
©2023 Whatsonweibo. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce our content without permission – you can contact us at info@whatsonweibo.com.
Fandom Meets Matrimony: Sea of Brides at Roy Wang’s Concert as Female Fans Show Up in Wedding Gowns
Weibo Watch: China’s Farm Fever
Let’s Plant: China’s Variety Show “Become a Farmer” Is Harvesting Success Online
Meanwhile in Panda News: After More Than Two Decades, Yaya Returns to Beijing
‘Carpet Pacific’: A Timeline of the Cathay Pacific Scandal Through Weibo Hashtags
Hong Kong Police Find Head of Murdered Model Abby Choi in Soup Pot
What Went Wrong in Suzhou Acrobatic Show? Fatal High-Altitude Fall Triggers Discussions on Safety Measures
Meet Ren Xiaorong, People’s Daily AI Virtual News Anchor
BMW Ice Cream Gate: Three Reasons Why a MINI Story Became a Major Incident
Modern-Day Yugong or Greedy Wolf? Critical Discussions after Ningxia Land Owner Goes Viral Begging for Water
The Hottest Place in China: How Zibo Became a Popular Tourist Destination and an Online Hit
Outrage over Chinese Food Blogger Torturing Cat in Online Video
Chinese Online Discussions on the Origins of Covid-19 after FBI Statement on Wuhan Lab Leak
China’s Celebrity Diplomats: The Online Fan Culture Surrounding Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Wang Wenbin
Cyberspace Administration of China Lays Out Rules for Generative AI Content: “Should Reflect the Core Values of Socialism”
-
China Celebs3 months agoHong Kong Police Find Head of Murdered Model Abby Choi in Soup Pot
-
China Arts & Entertainment2 months agoWhat Went Wrong in Suzhou Acrobatic Show? Fatal High-Altitude Fall Triggers Discussions on Safety Measures
-
China Digital3 months agoMeet Ren Xiaorong, People’s Daily AI Virtual News Anchor
-
China Brands, Marketing & Consumers1 month agoBMW Ice Cream Gate: Three Reasons Why a MINI Story Became a Major Incident
Diandian GUO
June 9, 2016 at 2:47 pm
Since when “resisting the west” equals “developing into a worrisome regime”? Such linkage actually deems “not resisting the west” as moral and the opposite immoral.
I am against authoritarianism, whether it means direct intrusion in individual lives, or the monopoly over defining “authoritarianism” and its moral implications.
I always believe the presumption that “China has a big state and small society” is almost a “self-fulfilling prophecy”. The more scholars and media emphasize the “big state” of China, the less chance for the social forces to be discovered, nurtured and released. Even if when social forces are studied, they are studied with semi-autonomy: the public is only active when confronting and resisting the state, as if pure public initiation is non-existent or impossible. The more we look this way, the more we believe that China has a hopeless big state which suppresses an equally hopeless society.
It is not that there exists no autonomy in Chinese society. But they are often dismissed or ignored. What is needed is that more study be done on those initiatives from society, which are not necessarily taken to de-construct, but to construct from ground up. That way, we could avoid endless condemnation that is unlikely to cause change, and find some hope that can lead to some solutions.