Taiwan's high court has ruled on former President Chen Shui-bian's conviction for money laundering, corruption, falsifying documents and accepting bribes. The high court's ruling did not overturn Chen's conviction from a lower court but lessened the penalty of his crimes. The most obvious was to reduce his life imprisonment to 20years in jail. Instead of being deprived of his citizen's rights for life, it is now only ten years.
There were no explanation given for the reduction of penalty which left open the speculation that perhaps Taiwan's judiciary is still hoping to recover the rest of the funds Chen and his family had illicitly absconded and put in overseas accounts.
Chen's family has been remitting funds from various overseas accounts in drips and drabs back to Taiwan apparently as part of the negotiating strategy with Taiwan's judiciary.
The strategy seems to be working. Chen said in court that he can guarantee the return of the remaining 570 million NT dollars held overseas within one week of his release on bail. Nothing subtle about Chen. To him, money has always talked louder than rule of law.
In the court room, Chen's supporters went through the motion of protesting loudly because Chen did not get exoneration but a mere term reduction, albeit with big smiles on their faces.
In Taiwan's peculiar brand of democracy, who knows how many more remittances it will take for Chen to become a free man? He apparently has two more layers of the courts where he can take his plea and by judiciously parcelling out the return of his ill gotten gains, he just might be able to buy his way out of jail.
I am hardly the only person to point out the inconsistency of the latest ruling. See for instance a translation of an editorial of one of Taiwan's major newspaper.
Friday, June 11, 2010
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
How long will the Strategic Triangle remain strategic? - Part II
I missed the second day of the Stanford symposium which was to concentrate on the future of Taiwan and the dynamics of the triangle. The following are my own observations on the matter.
The dramatic change in the cross strait relations since the change in the regime from Chen to Ma could not be overstated. Chen feared opening Taiwan to tourists from the mainland. Ma went after them. Now, thousands arrive from different points of the mainland daily providing multi-billion dollar boost to Taiwan’s economy. In the most recent negotiations for direct cross strait flights, it was the Taiwan side that wanted more flights and more destinations while the Beijing side was more reluctant.
Barely noted at the Stanford symposium was the remarkable change in Taiwan’s ranking in World Competitiveness Scoreboard as measured by the Lausanne based IMD. For the current 2010, Taiwan has risen to No. 8 in ranking from No. 23 in the previous year. No other economy has made such a dramatic leap in one year. This can only be attributed to the more enlightened policies under Ma, countermanding many of the policies in effect under Chen and the extent Taiwan has already integrated with the mainland.
The current expectation is that the parties across the strait will conclude the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) in June. ECFA was something eagerly sought by Ma’s administration as the most crucial development that will enable Taiwan to enter the global trade on more equal footing relative to other countries. The potential benefits to Taiwan’s economy would be enormous. Yet, the greatest opposition is being mounted by DPP because to them, the threat of integration with the mainland trumps any economic benefits.
Of course, DPP’s fear is not groundless. Beijing, under the leadership of Chairman Hu Jintao, finally understood that the way to winning the hearts and minds of the Taiwan people was not with missile intimidation but to encourage more people to people exchanges. Taiwan’s business people already understand the benefits of closer ties with the mainland, but they represent less than 10% of the populace.
Since Ma came into office, there have been direct flights, bi-directional cross strait tourism, and increasing visits from government and non-government officials in both directions. I believe Beijing is seeking every opportunity to tell the mainland side of the story directly to the people in Taiwan.
The previous regimes under Lee and Chen did not permit free exchange of people across the straits. They did not want direct contacts that could alter the perceptions of distrust that Lee and Chen had so carefully cultivated on the island of Taiwan. Lack of access and interchange certainly can explain why the high percentage of Taiwanese prefer the status quo.
I frankly believe integration across the straits is inevitable. Taiwan’s economic health is dependent on integration with the mainland. Economic cooperation will be accompanied by more people to people exchange. Increasing exchanges will build trust across the straits.
Taipei will also need to do its part. It will be up to Ma to explain to the people of Taiwan of the up-side benefits of closer cooperation with the mainland. Taiwan has suffered severe loss of confidence and sense of who they are after Chen’s eight years of misrule had isolated Taiwan from the world community. Ma needs to explain to the Taiwan people that rather than fear, they can be proud that they share the culture and history with the mainland.
The offer to negotiate ECFA was a surprise gesture of goodwill by Beijing. I believe the next surprise move will be when PLA redirect the aim of missiles away from Taiwan, a largely symbolic but psychologically important gesture to the people on Taiwan. Eventually, polls in Taiwan will swing away from independence and even status quo will look less attractive then the intriguing possibility of unification.
Given the speed that cross strait relations has warmed, I am confident that by 2015 Taiwan will drop from the ranks of the hotspots of tension while the world will still be dealing with the likes of the Middle East, Afghanistan, Iraq, India-Pakistan-Kashmir triangle, and the two Koreas.
The dramatic change in the cross strait relations since the change in the regime from Chen to Ma could not be overstated. Chen feared opening Taiwan to tourists from the mainland. Ma went after them. Now, thousands arrive from different points of the mainland daily providing multi-billion dollar boost to Taiwan’s economy. In the most recent negotiations for direct cross strait flights, it was the Taiwan side that wanted more flights and more destinations while the Beijing side was more reluctant.
Barely noted at the Stanford symposium was the remarkable change in Taiwan’s ranking in World Competitiveness Scoreboard as measured by the Lausanne based IMD. For the current 2010, Taiwan has risen to No. 8 in ranking from No. 23 in the previous year. No other economy has made such a dramatic leap in one year. This can only be attributed to the more enlightened policies under Ma, countermanding many of the policies in effect under Chen and the extent Taiwan has already integrated with the mainland.
The current expectation is that the parties across the strait will conclude the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) in June. ECFA was something eagerly sought by Ma’s administration as the most crucial development that will enable Taiwan to enter the global trade on more equal footing relative to other countries. The potential benefits to Taiwan’s economy would be enormous. Yet, the greatest opposition is being mounted by DPP because to them, the threat of integration with the mainland trumps any economic benefits.
Of course, DPP’s fear is not groundless. Beijing, under the leadership of Chairman Hu Jintao, finally understood that the way to winning the hearts and minds of the Taiwan people was not with missile intimidation but to encourage more people to people exchanges. Taiwan’s business people already understand the benefits of closer ties with the mainland, but they represent less than 10% of the populace.
Since Ma came into office, there have been direct flights, bi-directional cross strait tourism, and increasing visits from government and non-government officials in both directions. I believe Beijing is seeking every opportunity to tell the mainland side of the story directly to the people in Taiwan.
The previous regimes under Lee and Chen did not permit free exchange of people across the straits. They did not want direct contacts that could alter the perceptions of distrust that Lee and Chen had so carefully cultivated on the island of Taiwan. Lack of access and interchange certainly can explain why the high percentage of Taiwanese prefer the status quo.
I frankly believe integration across the straits is inevitable. Taiwan’s economic health is dependent on integration with the mainland. Economic cooperation will be accompanied by more people to people exchange. Increasing exchanges will build trust across the straits.
Taipei will also need to do its part. It will be up to Ma to explain to the people of Taiwan of the up-side benefits of closer cooperation with the mainland. Taiwan has suffered severe loss of confidence and sense of who they are after Chen’s eight years of misrule had isolated Taiwan from the world community. Ma needs to explain to the Taiwan people that rather than fear, they can be proud that they share the culture and history with the mainland.
The offer to negotiate ECFA was a surprise gesture of goodwill by Beijing. I believe the next surprise move will be when PLA redirect the aim of missiles away from Taiwan, a largely symbolic but psychologically important gesture to the people on Taiwan. Eventually, polls in Taiwan will swing away from independence and even status quo will look less attractive then the intriguing possibility of unification.
Given the speed that cross strait relations has warmed, I am confident that by 2015 Taiwan will drop from the ranks of the hotspots of tension while the world will still be dealing with the likes of the Middle East, Afghanistan, Iraq, India-Pakistan-Kashmir triangle, and the two Koreas.
Monday, May 31, 2010
How long will the Strategic Triangle remain strategic? - Part I
Stanford University recently held a symposium to discuss the future of the strategic triangle between the U.S., China and Taiwan. The symposium was led and chaired by Larry Diamond, Director of the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law.
The invited participants consisted of Americans who at one time or another had been in government service and held senior positions directly engaged in the bilateral relations with Taiwan but have now joined the academic ranks. A typical but by no means the only one would be Richard Bush who was the de facto ambassador to Taiwan at the time Chen Shuibian came to power.
Participants from Taiwan had mirror image backgrounds, i.e., having served in the Taiwan government and now in the academia, including Dr. Su Chi who just stepped down as Ma Yingjeou’s senior advisor on national security. Remarkably and without exception all the speakers from Taiwan received their advanced degrees in the United States.
No one came from mainland China to present possible PRC perspectives on the three bilateral relations of the triangle, although there were academicians, originally from the mainland now working in America, who spoke at the symposium.
In general the American presenters tended to focus on how Taiwan had been the tail that wagged the U.S. China bilateral relations, sometimes to the endless exasperation of the White House that had many more pressing global issues to deal with. However they seemed ready to forgive and dismiss past actions because Taiwan’s actions were that of a democracy and not some unilateral actions of petty dictators.
As a reflection of their former diplomatic and official positions, their comments on the roles of the then presidents of Taiwan, Lee Tenghui and Chen Shuibian, were politely muted and simply called them “unique” personalities and hoped that Taiwan will not see the likes of any more like them.
No one was tactless enough to point out that Lee’s peculiar behavior could be explained by his innate bias in favor of his Japanese roots and upbringing. Iwasato Masao, Lee’s name at birth, did not particularly want Taiwan to become independent so much as using that as an interim step to becoming part of Japan’s colony again. As he came to the end of his term of office, he adroitly engineered a split of the ruling KMT party that enabled Chen leader of the ostensibly opposition party to back into the presidency with less than 40% of the votes cast.
Chen, of course, kept everyone guessing as to his true colors during his first term of office when he declared “three no and one don’t have”—one of the no’s being no declaration of independence. It was during his second term that his pro independence stance became public knowledge and not incidentally his rampant corruption also became common knowledge.
The speakers from Taiwan were not as ready to declare Taiwan’s experiment with democracy an unqualified success but quite modestly claimed that theirs is an immature democracy going through some growing pains. However, even they did not mention one of the on-going developments that baffle any observers of Taiwan politics, namely the machinations of Chen in trying to get out of jail.
Having already been convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment on the first series of charges, he has continued to demand to be released on bail so that he can defend himself against a second series of charges. Presumably, a third series of charges would be his get out of jail card if he were to be convicted on the current charges. This could be endless depending only on his skill in gaming Taiwan’s legal system.
After months of wrangling, his family has returned one million dollars of the twenty one ill-gotten millions stashed away in Switzerland into a pre-agreed designated government account. His son has hinted that at least 70% more of the accumulated payola would be forthcoming as soon as Chen is released from jail.
Needless to say, resorting to this kind of negotiations between a convicted felon and the government via the public media would be unheard of in any matured democracy.
Unlike the American contingent, the participants from Taiwan weren’t all political scientists but included an economist and a sociologist. The economist pointed out that from 1952 to 1987, Taiwan enjoyed the kind of economic boom that the mainland has seen in the last thirty years, namely annual average economic growth of 8.9%.
Under the KMT administration from 1993 to 1999, Taiwan continued to grow at the rate of 5.9% per annum and was the second best among the 8 major Asian economies. From 2001 to 2007 under Chen and his DPP party Taiwan’s economic growth rate fell to 4.2% per annum and came in last among the 8 Asian economies.
The legacy of Chen’s dismal performance on the economic front along with his blatantly corrupt practices has led to a disenchanted populace that greatly distrusts the government. According to recent polls taken in Taiwan by the economist, after two years under Ma Yingjeou, the people of Taiwan have more confidence in the KMT than DPP in being able to get along with Beijing. By better than 3 to 2, people of Taiwan believed KMT can better protect Taiwan’s interest with Beijing than can the DPP.
The sociologist from Taiwan then reported that integration between Taiwan and the mainland has proceeded to a degree far more extensively than has been generally understood. In the mid 1980’s the “unplanned” migration of Taiwanese businesses to the mainland may have been economically driven, but because of their socio-cultural affinity with the mainland, they have thrived. There are now more than one million Taiwanese business people in just the greater Shanghai area.
Another sign of integration not widely reported, he said, Taiwanese fishing boats off the Somalia coast have been routinely asking the PLA navy for escort service.
The second day of the symposium was to deal with the future of Taiwan and the dynamics of the triangle. Since I had to miss the second day, I felt unburdened by what was said to make my own observations in Part II of this blog.
The invited participants consisted of Americans who at one time or another had been in government service and held senior positions directly engaged in the bilateral relations with Taiwan but have now joined the academic ranks. A typical but by no means the only one would be Richard Bush who was the de facto ambassador to Taiwan at the time Chen Shuibian came to power.
Participants from Taiwan had mirror image backgrounds, i.e., having served in the Taiwan government and now in the academia, including Dr. Su Chi who just stepped down as Ma Yingjeou’s senior advisor on national security. Remarkably and without exception all the speakers from Taiwan received their advanced degrees in the United States.
No one came from mainland China to present possible PRC perspectives on the three bilateral relations of the triangle, although there were academicians, originally from the mainland now working in America, who spoke at the symposium.
In general the American presenters tended to focus on how Taiwan had been the tail that wagged the U.S. China bilateral relations, sometimes to the endless exasperation of the White House that had many more pressing global issues to deal with. However they seemed ready to forgive and dismiss past actions because Taiwan’s actions were that of a democracy and not some unilateral actions of petty dictators.
As a reflection of their former diplomatic and official positions, their comments on the roles of the then presidents of Taiwan, Lee Tenghui and Chen Shuibian, were politely muted and simply called them “unique” personalities and hoped that Taiwan will not see the likes of any more like them.
No one was tactless enough to point out that Lee’s peculiar behavior could be explained by his innate bias in favor of his Japanese roots and upbringing. Iwasato Masao, Lee’s name at birth, did not particularly want Taiwan to become independent so much as using that as an interim step to becoming part of Japan’s colony again. As he came to the end of his term of office, he adroitly engineered a split of the ruling KMT party that enabled Chen leader of the ostensibly opposition party to back into the presidency with less than 40% of the votes cast.
Chen, of course, kept everyone guessing as to his true colors during his first term of office when he declared “three no and one don’t have”—one of the no’s being no declaration of independence. It was during his second term that his pro independence stance became public knowledge and not incidentally his rampant corruption also became common knowledge.
The speakers from Taiwan were not as ready to declare Taiwan’s experiment with democracy an unqualified success but quite modestly claimed that theirs is an immature democracy going through some growing pains. However, even they did not mention one of the on-going developments that baffle any observers of Taiwan politics, namely the machinations of Chen in trying to get out of jail.
Having already been convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment on the first series of charges, he has continued to demand to be released on bail so that he can defend himself against a second series of charges. Presumably, a third series of charges would be his get out of jail card if he were to be convicted on the current charges. This could be endless depending only on his skill in gaming Taiwan’s legal system.
After months of wrangling, his family has returned one million dollars of the twenty one ill-gotten millions stashed away in Switzerland into a pre-agreed designated government account. His son has hinted that at least 70% more of the accumulated payola would be forthcoming as soon as Chen is released from jail.
Needless to say, resorting to this kind of negotiations between a convicted felon and the government via the public media would be unheard of in any matured democracy.
Unlike the American contingent, the participants from Taiwan weren’t all political scientists but included an economist and a sociologist. The economist pointed out that from 1952 to 1987, Taiwan enjoyed the kind of economic boom that the mainland has seen in the last thirty years, namely annual average economic growth of 8.9%.
Under the KMT administration from 1993 to 1999, Taiwan continued to grow at the rate of 5.9% per annum and was the second best among the 8 major Asian economies. From 2001 to 2007 under Chen and his DPP party Taiwan’s economic growth rate fell to 4.2% per annum and came in last among the 8 Asian economies.
The legacy of Chen’s dismal performance on the economic front along with his blatantly corrupt practices has led to a disenchanted populace that greatly distrusts the government. According to recent polls taken in Taiwan by the economist, after two years under Ma Yingjeou, the people of Taiwan have more confidence in the KMT than DPP in being able to get along with Beijing. By better than 3 to 2, people of Taiwan believed KMT can better protect Taiwan’s interest with Beijing than can the DPP.
The sociologist from Taiwan then reported that integration between Taiwan and the mainland has proceeded to a degree far more extensively than has been generally understood. In the mid 1980’s the “unplanned” migration of Taiwanese businesses to the mainland may have been economically driven, but because of their socio-cultural affinity with the mainland, they have thrived. There are now more than one million Taiwanese business people in just the greater Shanghai area.
Another sign of integration not widely reported, he said, Taiwanese fishing boats off the Somalia coast have been routinely asking the PLA navy for escort service.
The second day of the symposium was to deal with the future of Taiwan and the dynamics of the triangle. Since I had to miss the second day, I felt unburdened by what was said to make my own observations in Part II of this blog.
Friday, May 28, 2010
Shanghai World Expo Guide for Dummies
Shanghai World Expo is huge, grand, massive and crowded. There are other adjectives that might be appropriate to this venue but I spent only two exhausting days there and barely scratched the surface. I can liken my Expo experience to the group of mahouts milling around the elephant, each only getting a partial and possibly less than accurate view of the animal.
On my first day, I visited Zone C which consisted of pavilions from the Americas and Europe. Next day, I tour Zone A which included the China pavilion and others from Asia. I did not spend time in Zones B, D or E except passing though E on my way to the exit. I also did not visit any of the theme pavilions, entertainment venues and by-passed popular pavilions with a long queue of people waiting to get in. For sure, I did not see much of the gigantic beast known as the Expo. Nonetheless, I made some observations and generalizations that I want to share with my readers.
All the popular pavilions metered the admission of visitors by letting in one group at a time. In some cases, the frequency of admission was dictated by presentations on discrete time segments and in others the control of visitors was just to avoid congestion at the beginning of the exhibition hall. In the less popular pavilions, we simply walked in, looked and walked out.
In general, I found that most countries focused on presenting a striking external appearance but may not have exhibitions inside commensurate with their fancy exterior. UK was one that came to mind.
The exterior looked at a curled porcupine with thousands of acrylic rods sticking out. The inside consisted of the other ends of the same acrylic rods, the end of which had embedded seeds. One might have to queue for an hour or more to get inside the so-called chapel for a head-scratching bewildered “huh” response that could not justify more than a 3 minute stay.
Another enigma was the Spain pavilion. The outside of this pavilion was covered with overlapping rattan mats that gave the appearance of brown fish scales up close and intriguing mottled shades of brown at a distance,--all in all an interesting looking building. Alas, the promising allure of outside was unanswered inside. The visitor, after a long queue and finally being admitted, was visually assaulted with projection of images on the walls including that of a live flamingo dancer. The parade through the halls ended in a large area featuring a huge robotic statue of a sitting baby. The head of this baby turned, eyes opened and closed as did its mouth. I expected drool to come out which thankfully it did not.
There was no way to understand the point of the many times life-size and homely doll. My best explanation was that it was an attempt to encourage birth control—and darn effective a message at that.
Admission into the China pavilion, by far one of the most popular, was impossible. The visitor first had to obtain a ticket with an assigned time slot for queuing and then return to queue for admission at the assigned time. Most of the tickets were gone almost immediately after the door to the expo opened. I did manage to enter the ground floor of the China pavilion where the cluster of pavilions of the provinces was located. These provinces actually made some of the most creditable presentations, many emphasized the tourist attractions that resided within their provincial borders.
The 4D presentations at Jilin and Liaoning pavilions were quite entertaining. The 4th D consisted of blasts of air, rocking chairs and wires that whipped against the spectator’s legs designed to take his/her breaths away while viewing 3 dimensional projection. These special effects were significantly superior to the presentation at the U.S. pavilion, though the American presentation had a touching story line while the story lines of Chinese presentations were weak.
Here are some general guidelines I would recommend to would be Expo goers:
1. It’s not necessary to get to the venue early in the morning when the Expo first opens. Early arrival simply means you’ll run out of gas earlier in the day. If you arrive in mid afternoon, some of the early goers may already be too tired to last and in the process of leaving. This way you might have some stamina left to see the Expo under the lights and might be able to get into some pavilions when the lines are not too long.
2. The local paper, such as the English Shanghai Daily, will have a summary of events planned for the day at different venues. You might want to plan your schedule to take in some of those.
3. Tickets are readily available, perhaps even at your hotel or you can simply purchase the ticket at the kiosks by any of the entrances. The tickets can be used at any time and remain valid until machine punched at the gate. I did not see any provision for re-entering the fairgrounds once the ticket has been punched.
4. Read about various pavilions as much as possible so that you can decide as to which ones are worth your while to queue and which ones to skip. I heard (but did not try myself) that local tours include a selected number of pavilions where it is possible to join the group tour line and avoid the long queue for individuals.
5. I also heard that to encourage visits to less popular pavilions, the Expo authorities will allow a visitor to jump the line after collecting a certain number of stamps on their souvenir Expo passport from the otherwise unattended countries. Domestic visitors were enthusiastic collectors of foreign chops on their Expo passports.
6. Zones A, B and C are located in the Pudong side of the Huangpu River while Zones D and E are on the Puxi side. There are frequent ferries, free of charge, to take you from one side to other. There are also free buses that go from zone to zone.
7. There are 8 major gates into the Expo grounds. You should pick the gate closest to the area you want to spend your time. For example, No. 5 and 6 gates are closest to the China pavilion while No. 8 gate is closest to the U.S. pavilion. The taxi cab can usually drop you off closer to the gate while the metro will require a longer walk.
On my first day, I visited Zone C which consisted of pavilions from the Americas and Europe. Next day, I tour Zone A which included the China pavilion and others from Asia. I did not spend time in Zones B, D or E except passing though E on my way to the exit. I also did not visit any of the theme pavilions, entertainment venues and by-passed popular pavilions with a long queue of people waiting to get in. For sure, I did not see much of the gigantic beast known as the Expo. Nonetheless, I made some observations and generalizations that I want to share with my readers.
All the popular pavilions metered the admission of visitors by letting in one group at a time. In some cases, the frequency of admission was dictated by presentations on discrete time segments and in others the control of visitors was just to avoid congestion at the beginning of the exhibition hall. In the less popular pavilions, we simply walked in, looked and walked out.
In general, I found that most countries focused on presenting a striking external appearance but may not have exhibitions inside commensurate with their fancy exterior. UK was one that came to mind.
The exterior looked at a curled porcupine with thousands of acrylic rods sticking out. The inside consisted of the other ends of the same acrylic rods, the end of which had embedded seeds. One might have to queue for an hour or more to get inside the so-called chapel for a head-scratching bewildered “huh” response that could not justify more than a 3 minute stay.Another enigma was the Spain pavilion. The outside of this pavilion was covered with overlapping rattan mats that gave the appearance of brown fish scales up close and intriguing mottled shades of brown at a distance,--all in all an interesting looking building. Alas, the promising allure of outside was unanswered inside. The visitor, after a long queue and finally being admitted, was visually assaulted with projection of images on the walls including that of a live flamingo dancer. The parade through the halls ended in a large area featuring a huge robotic statue of a sitting baby. The head of this baby turned, eyes opened and closed as did its mouth. I expected drool to come out which thankfully it did not.
There was no way to understand the point of the many times life-size and homely doll. My best explanation was that it was an attempt to encourage birth control—and darn effective a message at that.Admission into the China pavilion, by far one of the most popular, was impossible. The visitor first had to obtain a ticket with an assigned time slot for queuing and then return to queue for admission at the assigned time. Most of the tickets were gone almost immediately after the door to the expo opened. I did manage to enter the ground floor of the China pavilion where the cluster of pavilions of the provinces was located. These provinces actually made some of the most creditable presentations, many emphasized the tourist attractions that resided within their provincial borders.
The 4D presentations at Jilin and Liaoning pavilions were quite entertaining. The 4th D consisted of blasts of air, rocking chairs and wires that whipped against the spectator’s legs designed to take his/her breaths away while viewing 3 dimensional projection. These special effects were significantly superior to the presentation at the U.S. pavilion, though the American presentation had a touching story line while the story lines of Chinese presentations were weak.
Here are some general guidelines I would recommend to would be Expo goers:
1. It’s not necessary to get to the venue early in the morning when the Expo first opens. Early arrival simply means you’ll run out of gas earlier in the day. If you arrive in mid afternoon, some of the early goers may already be too tired to last and in the process of leaving. This way you might have some stamina left to see the Expo under the lights and might be able to get into some pavilions when the lines are not too long.
2. The local paper, such as the English Shanghai Daily, will have a summary of events planned for the day at different venues. You might want to plan your schedule to take in some of those.
3. Tickets are readily available, perhaps even at your hotel or you can simply purchase the ticket at the kiosks by any of the entrances. The tickets can be used at any time and remain valid until machine punched at the gate. I did not see any provision for re-entering the fairgrounds once the ticket has been punched.
4. Read about various pavilions as much as possible so that you can decide as to which ones are worth your while to queue and which ones to skip. I heard (but did not try myself) that local tours include a selected number of pavilions where it is possible to join the group tour line and avoid the long queue for individuals.
5. I also heard that to encourage visits to less popular pavilions, the Expo authorities will allow a visitor to jump the line after collecting a certain number of stamps on their souvenir Expo passport from the otherwise unattended countries. Domestic visitors were enthusiastic collectors of foreign chops on their Expo passports.
6. Zones A, B and C are located in the Pudong side of the Huangpu River while Zones D and E are on the Puxi side. There are frequent ferries, free of charge, to take you from one side to other. There are also free buses that go from zone to zone.
7. There are 8 major gates into the Expo grounds. You should pick the gate closest to the area you want to spend your time. For example, No. 5 and 6 gates are closest to the China pavilion while No. 8 gate is closest to the U.S. pavilion. The taxi cab can usually drop you off closer to the gate while the metro will require a longer walk.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Changting in the heart of Hakka country
From Yongding (永定), the center of Hakka roundhouses in Fujian, it was a short hop and skip to Changting (长汀)—at least it was now with new super highways that bridged chasms and bore through mountains.
I had a sentimental reason to visit Changting; I was born there. My parents were teaching at Xiamen University and the university had moved inward in anticipation of the Japanese invasion. Indeed, Xiamen port was taken by the Japanese imperial troops early in the War but they were spread too thin to bother moving westward toward the remote region around Changting.
Changting now a city of around 6-700,000 was already an important city in the Tang dynasty known as Tingzhoufu (汀洲府). The city’s tag line was that Rewi Ally said that Changting ranked as one of two most beautiful ancient cities in China along with Fenghuang (凤凰) in Hunan. Now that I have been to both places, I’d say it’s a bit of exaggeration. Fenghuang had much more to offer as a tourist destination.
Just one comparison should suffice to illustrate my point. Both cities have a pretty river flowing through the center of the city. In Fenghuang, the visitor can skip across the river over carefully placed concrete blocks pretending to be stones and hire boatmen to pole them on bamboo rafts down the river while being serenade in ethnic Miao folk songs. Changting offered a scenic riverside park for strollers but no raft rides. We did see a fisherman sitting comfortably in the middle of the river casting towards deeper pools. Ms Chen, our guide, explained since a huge flood that occurred in late 1990’s, Ting Jiang (汀江) has been reduced to not much more than a creek. The flood must have swept the resident dragon king out to sea, she speculated.
I went to Changting partly to see Fujian’s version of a Fenghuang but more because I wanted to see if there was anything left of Xiamen University campus, where I spent the first six years of my life.
Our guide took us to the largest elementary school in Changting just as the school was letting students home for lunch. This No. 1 elementary school with over 2500 students was built over the grounds of the former university. The only building remained of Xiada (夏大) was the “Daxiongdian” (大雄殿) built in the traditional style of a Chinese temple. On prominent display by the front door was a sign commemorating the former site of the university from 1937 to 1946.
Practically next door to the school was a Confucius temple, Wen Miao (文庙). My mother had told me that we lived in a Confucius temple. Our guide was quite adamant that it was not possible for anyone to live in the side chambers of the main courtyard leading to the main temple.
Then my wife, May, spotted a wing of rooms in a dilapidated building in the back of the temple. A couple of rooms were still in use with beds. Others were for storing stuff and gathering mold and dust. Overall, the wing of rooms was just a slight upgrade from a manger. May and I agreed that we’ve found my likely place of birth. The feeling was personally gratifying.
Changting may not be quite ready for big time tourism—the best hotel in town did not even have a tourist map to give to the visitor, but did have an unusual local specialty called ba gan, i.e., eight dried edibles such as dried bamboo shoots, vegetable, bean curd, pork etc.
The one that caught my attention was dried field mice. The advertisement showed red roasted color but easily recognizable dried whole rodent, tail and all. I was disappointed that the actual vacuum blister package contained only diced pieces. Still for about $1.35 per package, I got myself a bargain for a conversation piece.
From Changting’s museum, we learned that the old Tingzhoufu was the center of Hakka country. The displays talked about the culture and customs of the Hakka people and their five major waves of migration beginning from the great turmoil of Western Jin dynasty around the fourth century AD when they fled south from what is now the Henan region to Fujian. From Fujian, subsequent waves took the Hakkas to other parts of China and then to Southeast Asia.
Before the Nationalists and the Communists agreed to unite and fight the invading Japanese and before the Long March, Changting was an important commercial base for the CCP.
In fact it was known as Red Shanghai, claiming that anything that was available in those days in Shanghai, it could be purchased in Changting. Jinggangshan (井冈山) where the main forces were stationed was just a short distance away on the other side of the Fujian-Jiangxi border.
If you are already going to visit the roundhouses of Yongding, then I would recommend a stop in Changting. The museum has excellent displays, albeit in Chinese only, that provide a thorough introduction of the Hakka people, culture and values. At the martyr monument for Qu Qiubai (瞿秋白) and the museum next to the statue of General Yang Chengwu (杨成武), one can find a lot of material describing the early days of CCP and its struggle against the KMT. Qu was an intellectual giant in the CCP’s early movement who was too sick with TB to join the Long March. He stayed behind, was captured and Chiang Kai-shek personally ordered his execution. Yang was a local who rose to become a three star general.
Going back to Xiamen from Changting only took a little over 3 hours on limited access toll road all the way. We counted 40 tunnels and probably as many viaducts in the 280 km span of the highway, from the mountainous western edge of Fujian to the seaport. Some of the tunnels were over 3 miles long. Some had serpentine curvature. Knowing that construction of the tunnels began from both ends, we marveled at the engineering skills involved and concluded that one by-product of its heavy infrastructure investment is that no one knows how to build bridges and bore tunnels better than China.
* * * * * *
Changting still has some alley sized streets that date back to Song dynasty
On this Song dynasty street, haircut still costs US 75 cents
Around the corner of the elementary school, a patient hawker was waiting for the children to look and buy his plastics toys.
The school gave the kids a 2.5 hour noon time break to give them time to go home for lunch.
A scenic view of Tingjiang River with part of the city wall visible on the right.
The riverside park just inside the city wall.
Changting also has a chenghuangmiao, a city god temple. In many cities in China, this temple is regarded as old superstition and has been torn down.
On one wing of the city god temple were arrays of small figurines that looked like depiction of historical or mythical figures revered in old China.
On the two sides of the main temple were ten murals depicting each of the ten magistrates in Hell that will review the sins committed by the new arrival and his orderlies then carried out the punishment to fit the crime.
I had a sentimental reason to visit Changting; I was born there. My parents were teaching at Xiamen University and the university had moved inward in anticipation of the Japanese invasion. Indeed, Xiamen port was taken by the Japanese imperial troops early in the War but they were spread too thin to bother moving westward toward the remote region around Changting.
Changting now a city of around 6-700,000 was already an important city in the Tang dynasty known as Tingzhoufu (汀洲府). The city’s tag line was that Rewi Ally said that Changting ranked as one of two most beautiful ancient cities in China along with Fenghuang (凤凰) in Hunan. Now that I have been to both places, I’d say it’s a bit of exaggeration. Fenghuang had much more to offer as a tourist destination.
Just one comparison should suffice to illustrate my point. Both cities have a pretty river flowing through the center of the city. In Fenghuang, the visitor can skip across the river over carefully placed concrete blocks pretending to be stones and hire boatmen to pole them on bamboo rafts down the river while being serenade in ethnic Miao folk songs. Changting offered a scenic riverside park for strollers but no raft rides. We did see a fisherman sitting comfortably in the middle of the river casting towards deeper pools. Ms Chen, our guide, explained since a huge flood that occurred in late 1990’s, Ting Jiang (汀江) has been reduced to not much more than a creek. The flood must have swept the resident dragon king out to sea, she speculated.
I went to Changting partly to see Fujian’s version of a Fenghuang but more because I wanted to see if there was anything left of Xiamen University campus, where I spent the first six years of my life.
Our guide took us to the largest elementary school in Changting just as the school was letting students home for lunch. This No. 1 elementary school with over 2500 students was built over the grounds of the former university. The only building remained of Xiada (夏大) was the “Daxiongdian” (大雄殿) built in the traditional style of a Chinese temple. On prominent display by the front door was a sign commemorating the former site of the university from 1937 to 1946.
Practically next door to the school was a Confucius temple, Wen Miao (文庙). My mother had told me that we lived in a Confucius temple. Our guide was quite adamant that it was not possible for anyone to live in the side chambers of the main courtyard leading to the main temple.
Then my wife, May, spotted a wing of rooms in a dilapidated building in the back of the temple. A couple of rooms were still in use with beds. Others were for storing stuff and gathering mold and dust. Overall, the wing of rooms was just a slight upgrade from a manger. May and I agreed that we’ve found my likely place of birth. The feeling was personally gratifying.Changting may not be quite ready for big time tourism—the best hotel in town did not even have a tourist map to give to the visitor, but did have an unusual local specialty called ba gan, i.e., eight dried edibles such as dried bamboo shoots, vegetable, bean curd, pork etc.
The one that caught my attention was dried field mice. The advertisement showed red roasted color but easily recognizable dried whole rodent, tail and all. I was disappointed that the actual vacuum blister package contained only diced pieces. Still for about $1.35 per package, I got myself a bargain for a conversation piece.From Changting’s museum, we learned that the old Tingzhoufu was the center of Hakka country. The displays talked about the culture and customs of the Hakka people and their five major waves of migration beginning from the great turmoil of Western Jin dynasty around the fourth century AD when they fled south from what is now the Henan region to Fujian. From Fujian, subsequent waves took the Hakkas to other parts of China and then to Southeast Asia.
Before the Nationalists and the Communists agreed to unite and fight the invading Japanese and before the Long March, Changting was an important commercial base for the CCP.
In fact it was known as Red Shanghai, claiming that anything that was available in those days in Shanghai, it could be purchased in Changting. Jinggangshan (井冈山) where the main forces were stationed was just a short distance away on the other side of the Fujian-Jiangxi border.If you are already going to visit the roundhouses of Yongding, then I would recommend a stop in Changting. The museum has excellent displays, albeit in Chinese only, that provide a thorough introduction of the Hakka people, culture and values. At the martyr monument for Qu Qiubai (瞿秋白) and the museum next to the statue of General Yang Chengwu (杨成武), one can find a lot of material describing the early days of CCP and its struggle against the KMT. Qu was an intellectual giant in the CCP’s early movement who was too sick with TB to join the Long March. He stayed behind, was captured and Chiang Kai-shek personally ordered his execution. Yang was a local who rose to become a three star general.
Going back to Xiamen from Changting only took a little over 3 hours on limited access toll road all the way. We counted 40 tunnels and probably as many viaducts in the 280 km span of the highway, from the mountainous western edge of Fujian to the seaport. Some of the tunnels were over 3 miles long. Some had serpentine curvature. Knowing that construction of the tunnels began from both ends, we marveled at the engineering skills involved and concluded that one by-product of its heavy infrastructure investment is that no one knows how to build bridges and bore tunnels better than China.
* * * * * *
Changting still has some alley sized streets that date back to Song dynasty
On this Song dynasty street, haircut still costs US 75 cents
Around the corner of the elementary school, a patient hawker was waiting for the children to look and buy his plastics toys.
The school gave the kids a 2.5 hour noon time break to give them time to go home for lunch.
A scenic view of Tingjiang River with part of the city wall visible on the right.The riverside park just inside the city wall.
Changting also has a chenghuangmiao, a city god temple. In many cities in China, this temple is regarded as old superstition and has been torn down.
On one wing of the city god temple were arrays of small figurines that looked like depiction of historical or mythical figures revered in old China.
On the two sides of the main temple were ten murals depicting each of the ten magistrates in Hell that will review the sins committed by the new arrival and his orderlies then carried out the punishment to fit the crime.
Monday, April 12, 2010
福建土楼, Hakka Roundhouses
At one time, these structures viewed from satellite appeared to be threatening missile silos, at least to some wary American officials. In 2008, UNESCO designated these uniquely Hakka construction as World Heritage buildings. Though generically known as Hakka Roundhouses, not all are round but can come in oval and rectangular shapes as well as in all sizes and configurations. The generic Chinese terminology is tulou (土楼) meaning earthen buildings and is more accurate. Increasingly these buildings are considered as ecologically sound architectural gems and are drawing the attention of professional architects around the world.
Figure １Bird's eye view of a round and square tulou
Though varied in size and shape, the tulous share certain common characteristics. The walls are made of rammed earth reinforced with bamboo strips, up to 2 meters thick at the base and gradually tapered as the wall rises to the roof, 3 to 4 stories high. Small windows begin on the third floor where inhabitants live. Most roundhouses have only one entrance, a thick solid wooden door heavily reinforced and protected by a water dousing system in the event of siege by fire.
Most of the community activity takes place in the central courtyard. Facing the entrance would be the altar to pay homage to goddess Guanyin (观音) and in the center of large tulous, there would be a community meeting hall. There would be at least one well in the courtyard and in many cases two on the east west axis, though never aligned for fengshui (风水) reasons. Abutting the sides of the meeting hall are pig pens and chicken coops, most of them no longer in use, as well as public bath facilities.
Figure ２5-storied Yuchanglou from 1308 AD
Many families can live in one building, usually all related with the same surname. Every family occupies a slice of the roundhouse, from first floor to the top. Ground level is for cooking and eating. Second floor is usually for storage and to do the daily chores and the upper floors for sleeping. Obviously all social activities take place in the central courtyard.
Figure ３Mahjong with kibitzers in the courtyard
The basic advantages of the Hakka buildings are low cost of construction and maintenance, the last one built in 1962 cost around $30,000, and long lasting for centuries. The buildings have proven to be earthquake proof, cool in the summer and warm in the winter.
Figure ４Qiaofulou, built in 1962 for RMB 90,000
The Hakka people are Han Chinese and not a distinct ethnic minority. Through successive waves of migration from the north to south starting from the days of turmoil and strife during the Western Jin dynasty in fourth century AD, they came to remote regions of Fujian and Guangdong provinces. Hakka is derived from Cantonese for kejiaren (客家人) or guest people. Feeling like unwelcomed guests wherever they go, they devised the easy-to-defend roundhouses for their communities. Known for their diligence and hard work, many important historic personages are Hakka including Sun Yat-sen (孙中山), the father of modern China.
I first learned about the tulous from Professor Bill Brown, teaching at the Business School of Xiamen University and writes humor laden tour books on the side. Bill and his wife, Sue, have raised their two young kids into adulthood while teaching in Xiamen and developing a personal fascination for the roundhouses. I believe the Browns are prototypical of exemplary American ‘hakkas’ living in China.
It’s possible to see the Nanjing (南靖) tulous on a day trip from Xiamen, but that would be missing a lot. There are said to be 20,000 tulous in Fujian. One should at least stay overnight and see the many tulous in Yongding (永定) as well as Nanjing. The Yongding tulous are older and more varied. According to the tour guide at Yongding, the tulous of Nanjing were built by folks that migrated from Yongding.
Better go sooner than later. Along the way, we can see massive investment underway for modern hotels and entertainment centers and “disneyfication” of the scenic countryside is a real concern. The following are some of the photos taken during our visit.
The most photographed cluster is undoubtedly the Tianluokeng (田螺坑) village, nicknamed “four dishes and a soup.” The road to Nanjing leads right up to scenic view. After the obligatory photo stop, we then walked downhill to see and enter each of the buildings.
Figure ５The 4 dishes, 1 soup cluster at Nanjing
This is a representative view of the upper structure of a roundhouse. Note the upper floor is cantilevered over the lower and the use of many bamboo baskets.
Figure ６Upper floor of a tulou at Tianluokeng
Despite beams that were “off spec” causing as much as a 15 degree tilt from vertical, the building has withstood rain, wind and earthquakes for over 700 years.
Figure ７Yuchanglou, mother of all tulous
The highlight of our visit was the opportunity to stay overnight at one of the tulous, Zhenfulou (振福楼) in the outskirts of Yongding. It was built during the turn of the 20th century; the third generation owner, Mr. Su and his family live in a two storied structure next to the tulou. We were their guests for the night.
Figure ８Zhenfulou, now a museum on Hakka tulous
The grandfather made his money from tobacco, still grown in the region and built this tulou. The inside courtyard of this roundhouse is particularly elaborate, no doubt a reflection of his wealth and a more modern times.
Figure ９The altar and meeting hall inside Zhenfulou
The first two floors of Zhenfulou has been converted into a museum on tulous and the Hakka culture. The area surrounding the building is being beautified and will become a future tourist destination as the heart of the Zhenfulou Scenic District.
Figure １０The stream by the Zhenfulou
Figure １１Four generations of the Su family
The next morning we headed for the Hongkeng (洪坑村) village and tulou group. Right away, we can see that this cluster is all set to exploit the commercial potential of the recent World Heritage designation. There was a young lady waiting to guide us, and parking for our car was free since we were returning to have lunch at the hotel built at the entrance to the village.
The first major structure to greet us was Zhenchenglou (振成楼) and its prominently displayed World Heritage logo. A contemporary of Zhenfulou, this building has some advanced designs.
Figure １２Zhenchenglou, Hongkeng village, Yongding
The owner, a Mr. Lin, had designed brick walls on the inside to mark off sections of the building and to act as fire breaks in case the wooden structure should catch on fire.
Figure １３Inside view of Zhenchenglou
Another advanced design involved the way smoke was led away from the ground floor kitchen to the roof top via channels built inside the wall.
Figure １４Kitchen smoke duct leading into the wall
Fuyulou (福裕楼 ) is also part of the Hongkeng cluster. This square shaped building is divided into three sections where, in a break with tradition, the youngest brother occupied the middle section while the two older brothers had the two sides.
Figure １５Inside view of a square tulou
Kuijulou(奎聚楼) built in 1834 is a multileveled building more like a palace; in somewhat of a stretch, the guide said like the Potala Palace in Lhasa.
Figure １６Kuijulou, Hongkeng village, Yongding
After lunch, we went to the nearby Gaobei (高北) cluster of tulous that included Chengqilou(承启楼), the “king” of tulous, with four concentric circles of buildings, four stories in the outer ring and a total of 400 rooms.
Figure １７Inside view of the huge Chengqilou
In the same cluster is a very old Wuyunlou(五云楼) that looks shaky even to long time residents of tulou. Most have vacated and now only three elderly citizens have remained. We were told that they love having the run of the place.
Figure １８Inside view of Wuyunlou, Yongding
A diagrammatic map of Fujian Tulou showed that there are more than 43 sites for tourists to visit, 8 of these are World Heritage sites and another dozen are designated as national treasures. So far availability of various Hakka roundhouse tours is not widely known to foreign tourists and that’s the best time to visit.
Figure １Bird's eye view of a round and square tulou
Though varied in size and shape, the tulous share certain common characteristics. The walls are made of rammed earth reinforced with bamboo strips, up to 2 meters thick at the base and gradually tapered as the wall rises to the roof, 3 to 4 stories high. Small windows begin on the third floor where inhabitants live. Most roundhouses have only one entrance, a thick solid wooden door heavily reinforced and protected by a water dousing system in the event of siege by fire.
Most of the community activity takes place in the central courtyard. Facing the entrance would be the altar to pay homage to goddess Guanyin (观音) and in the center of large tulous, there would be a community meeting hall. There would be at least one well in the courtyard and in many cases two on the east west axis, though never aligned for fengshui (风水) reasons. Abutting the sides of the meeting hall are pig pens and chicken coops, most of them no longer in use, as well as public bath facilities.
Figure ２5-storied Yuchanglou from 1308 AD
Many families can live in one building, usually all related with the same surname. Every family occupies a slice of the roundhouse, from first floor to the top. Ground level is for cooking and eating. Second floor is usually for storage and to do the daily chores and the upper floors for sleeping. Obviously all social activities take place in the central courtyard.
Figure ３Mahjong with kibitzers in the courtyardThe basic advantages of the Hakka buildings are low cost of construction and maintenance, the last one built in 1962 cost around $30,000, and long lasting for centuries. The buildings have proven to be earthquake proof, cool in the summer and warm in the winter.
Figure ４Qiaofulou, built in 1962 for RMB 90,000The Hakka people are Han Chinese and not a distinct ethnic minority. Through successive waves of migration from the north to south starting from the days of turmoil and strife during the Western Jin dynasty in fourth century AD, they came to remote regions of Fujian and Guangdong provinces. Hakka is derived from Cantonese for kejiaren (客家人) or guest people. Feeling like unwelcomed guests wherever they go, they devised the easy-to-defend roundhouses for their communities. Known for their diligence and hard work, many important historic personages are Hakka including Sun Yat-sen (孙中山), the father of modern China.
I first learned about the tulous from Professor Bill Brown, teaching at the Business School of Xiamen University and writes humor laden tour books on the side. Bill and his wife, Sue, have raised their two young kids into adulthood while teaching in Xiamen and developing a personal fascination for the roundhouses. I believe the Browns are prototypical of exemplary American ‘hakkas’ living in China.
It’s possible to see the Nanjing (南靖) tulous on a day trip from Xiamen, but that would be missing a lot. There are said to be 20,000 tulous in Fujian. One should at least stay overnight and see the many tulous in Yongding (永定) as well as Nanjing. The Yongding tulous are older and more varied. According to the tour guide at Yongding, the tulous of Nanjing were built by folks that migrated from Yongding.
Better go sooner than later. Along the way, we can see massive investment underway for modern hotels and entertainment centers and “disneyfication” of the scenic countryside is a real concern. The following are some of the photos taken during our visit.
The most photographed cluster is undoubtedly the Tianluokeng (田螺坑) village, nicknamed “four dishes and a soup.” The road to Nanjing leads right up to scenic view. After the obligatory photo stop, we then walked downhill to see and enter each of the buildings.
Figure ５The 4 dishes, 1 soup cluster at NanjingThis is a representative view of the upper structure of a roundhouse. Note the upper floor is cantilevered over the lower and the use of many bamboo baskets.
Figure ６Upper floor of a tulou at TianluokengDespite beams that were “off spec” causing as much as a 15 degree tilt from vertical, the building has withstood rain, wind and earthquakes for over 700 years.
Figure ７Yuchanglou, mother of all tulousThe highlight of our visit was the opportunity to stay overnight at one of the tulous, Zhenfulou (振福楼) in the outskirts of Yongding. It was built during the turn of the 20th century; the third generation owner, Mr. Su and his family live in a two storied structure next to the tulou. We were their guests for the night.
Figure ８Zhenfulou, now a museum on Hakka tulousThe grandfather made his money from tobacco, still grown in the region and built this tulou. The inside courtyard of this roundhouse is particularly elaborate, no doubt a reflection of his wealth and a more modern times.
Figure ９The altar and meeting hall inside ZhenfulouThe first two floors of Zhenfulou has been converted into a museum on tulous and the Hakka culture. The area surrounding the building is being beautified and will become a future tourist destination as the heart of the Zhenfulou Scenic District.
Figure １０The stream by the Zhenfulou
Figure １１Four generations of the Su familyThe next morning we headed for the Hongkeng (洪坑村) village and tulou group. Right away, we can see that this cluster is all set to exploit the commercial potential of the recent World Heritage designation. There was a young lady waiting to guide us, and parking for our car was free since we were returning to have lunch at the hotel built at the entrance to the village.
The first major structure to greet us was Zhenchenglou (振成楼) and its prominently displayed World Heritage logo. A contemporary of Zhenfulou, this building has some advanced designs.
Figure １２Zhenchenglou, Hongkeng village, YongdingThe owner, a Mr. Lin, had designed brick walls on the inside to mark off sections of the building and to act as fire breaks in case the wooden structure should catch on fire.
Figure １３Inside view of ZhenchenglouAnother advanced design involved the way smoke was led away from the ground floor kitchen to the roof top via channels built inside the wall.
Figure １４Kitchen smoke duct leading into the wallFuyulou (福裕楼 ) is also part of the Hongkeng cluster. This square shaped building is divided into three sections where, in a break with tradition, the youngest brother occupied the middle section while the two older brothers had the two sides.
Figure １５Inside view of a square tulouKuijulou(奎聚楼) built in 1834 is a multileveled building more like a palace; in somewhat of a stretch, the guide said like the Potala Palace in Lhasa.
Figure １６Kuijulou, Hongkeng village, YongdingAfter lunch, we went to the nearby Gaobei (高北) cluster of tulous that included Chengqilou(承启楼), the “king” of tulous, with four concentric circles of buildings, four stories in the outer ring and a total of 400 rooms.
Figure １７Inside view of the huge ChengqilouIn the same cluster is a very old Wuyunlou(五云楼) that looks shaky even to long time residents of tulou. Most have vacated and now only three elderly citizens have remained. We were told that they love having the run of the place.
Figure １８Inside view of Wuyunlou, YongdingA diagrammatic map of Fujian Tulou showed that there are more than 43 sites for tourists to visit, 8 of these are World Heritage sites and another dozen are designated as national treasures. So far availability of various Hakka roundhouse tours is not widely known to foreign tourists and that’s the best time to visit.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Are we losing China? Is China losing us?
The Committee of 100 just concluded their annual conference, held in San Francisco. Some significant speeches and gestures took place at this event that I will comment on in a later blog.
In the meantime, you can get one observer's point of view by going on the Andrew Ross' column in the SF Chronicle. Ross moderated one of the panel discussion and stayed to listen to other presentations dealing with US-China relations.
He also hosted and compiled brief commentaries from six disparate contributors, including Susan Shirk, who delivered the keynote speech to kick off the conference and three members of the Committee of 100. The title of this blog is the title Ross used to invite the responses in his compilation.
In the meantime, you can get one observer's point of view by going on the Andrew Ross' column in the SF Chronicle. Ross moderated one of the panel discussion and stayed to listen to other presentations dealing with US-China relations.
He also hosted and compiled brief commentaries from six disparate contributors, including Susan Shirk, who delivered the keynote speech to kick off the conference and three members of the Committee of 100. The title of this blog is the title Ross used to invite the responses in his compilation.
Monday, April 5, 2010
Famen Temple, where Buddhism meets Las Vegas
Famen Temple （法门寺） is the closest thing in China to Egypt’s discovery of King Tut's tomb. While not nearly as ancient as King Tut, the Tang dynasty treasures sealed in a vault under the pagoda at Famen also escaped the rapacious attention of tomb robbers and lain forgotten for over a thousand years. When the archeologists found the contents to tally perfectly with an inventory list, in a stone tablet found alongside, they concluded that the underground vault had not been disturbed.
The temple had a decidedly ragged history. It was the favorite place for early Tang emperors to go and pray to Buddha for bountiful harvest and a reign at peace. It then fell in disfavor during periodic anti-Buddhism movements. By Ming and Qing dynasty, being remotely located far away from any urban center, it was largely a forgotten place. At some point, lightening struck the pagoda and knocked off half of the tower.
It was not wholly forgotten, however. An old man in the nearby village, fearful of the invading Japanese troops that might break into the underground vault under the pagoda, had set himself on fire at the entrance. The resulting bad karma discouraged anyone that might have been curious.
In the 1980’s the rest of the pagoda toppled and the local authorities decided to investigate and make a determination as to whether the complex was worthy of the cost of restoration. They were thunderstruck by what they found in the sealed underground vault. They found ornaments, scepter, and vessels of silver and gold of exquisite craftsmanship, the best available during the height of Tang dynasty. These were personal tributes from Wu Zetian （武则天）, the only woman emperor and arguably one of the most powerful in China’s history.
The first time I visited Famensi it was around 1995 not long after Famensi reopened as a tourist attraction. It was a long drive and took nearly a half day to get there. I remember the priceless items on display and wanted to see them again. This time, it only took one and a half hours on expressway from center of Xian in the direction of Baoji.
On approaching Famen Temple, we noticed a massive, newly built complex of gray granite and faux gold facade. From the distance, we could see a giant golden, diamond-shaped edifice at the far end of the complex. As we approached, we could see that the diamond was formed by two somewhat abstract cupping hands joined at the wrists and fingertips. Nestled in the hands was a golden temple—a giant replica of one of objects found in the base of the original pagoda.
It turned out that this new complex was the new entrance to the Famen Temple. Visitors to the temple now walk through the new building. The enormous front façade contained three main entrances whose purpose seemed to be to make the visitor feel tiny. As we walked through the lobby, we could see as yet not completed areas for future shops. We then came upon a courtyard with two huge reflecting pools complete with plastic water lily pads with sun bleached but never wilting flowers. A row of stone lions stood on the side of one pool facing a row of stone elephants on the far edge of the opposite pool.
Walking in the middle walkway between the two pools—that felt more like a causeway, we entered an airy hallway, open to the sky. On the left of the hallway, we passed a restaurant zone. On the right facing the restaurants was a hotel for overnight guests. Opened since the 2009 Olympics, we could not tell if all the facilities were ready for business.
At the end of the courtyard, we came upon a long promenade leading to the new temple crowned by the aforementioned diamond. On the two sides of the promenade were huge golden statues of various major Buddha figures. In between the statues were golden pillars with Buddhist scripture in prominent black. For those not wishing to walk the length of the promenade, rides on electric cart were available for an extra fee.
At the end of the promenade, after a flight of stairs, the visitor would enter a new temple to be greeted by four heavenly guardians and the smiling Happy Buddha, all in gold color, and then enter the main hall, in a layout that followed the traditional layout of Buddhist temples but bigger and grander. On display in front of golden stature of Sakyamuni was the holiest relic in Buddhist religion, namely the original finger bone of Prince Gautama, found among the treasures under the pagoda.
The rest of the treasures were on display at the original grounds of the Famen Temple, to the right of the new complex. The museum built to house the objects was in neo-Tang dynasty style, far less flamboyant and blended well with the newly restored pagoda and temple. The main museum building in three floors were inspired by the same golden temple resting inside the diamond on top of the new edifice. The unique items of the Famensi were now properly displayed in a building of its own.
I am certain that there will be many visitors whose object is to see the original imperial gifts from Emperor Wu and could do without the ornate granite and gold and the implied ostentation. On the other hand, it will take a long time to forget Famen Temple again.
The temple had a decidedly ragged history. It was the favorite place for early Tang emperors to go and pray to Buddha for bountiful harvest and a reign at peace. It then fell in disfavor during periodic anti-Buddhism movements. By Ming and Qing dynasty, being remotely located far away from any urban center, it was largely a forgotten place. At some point, lightening struck the pagoda and knocked off half of the tower.
It was not wholly forgotten, however. An old man in the nearby village, fearful of the invading Japanese troops that might break into the underground vault under the pagoda, had set himself on fire at the entrance. The resulting bad karma discouraged anyone that might have been curious.
In the 1980’s the rest of the pagoda toppled and the local authorities decided to investigate and make a determination as to whether the complex was worthy of the cost of restoration. They were thunderstruck by what they found in the sealed underground vault. They found ornaments, scepter, and vessels of silver and gold of exquisite craftsmanship, the best available during the height of Tang dynasty. These were personal tributes from Wu Zetian （武则天）, the only woman emperor and arguably one of the most powerful in China’s history.
The first time I visited Famensi it was around 1995 not long after Famensi reopened as a tourist attraction. It was a long drive and took nearly a half day to get there. I remember the priceless items on display and wanted to see them again. This time, it only took one and a half hours on expressway from center of Xian in the direction of Baoji.
On approaching Famen Temple, we noticed a massive, newly built complex of gray granite and faux gold facade. From the distance, we could see a giant golden, diamond-shaped edifice at the far end of the complex. As we approached, we could see that the diamond was formed by two somewhat abstract cupping hands joined at the wrists and fingertips. Nestled in the hands was a golden temple—a giant replica of one of objects found in the base of the original pagoda.
It turned out that this new complex was the new entrance to the Famen Temple. Visitors to the temple now walk through the new building. The enormous front façade contained three main entrances whose purpose seemed to be to make the visitor feel tiny. As we walked through the lobby, we could see as yet not completed areas for future shops. We then came upon a courtyard with two huge reflecting pools complete with plastic water lily pads with sun bleached but never wilting flowers. A row of stone lions stood on the side of one pool facing a row of stone elephants on the far edge of the opposite pool.
Walking in the middle walkway between the two pools—that felt more like a causeway, we entered an airy hallway, open to the sky. On the left of the hallway, we passed a restaurant zone. On the right facing the restaurants was a hotel for overnight guests. Opened since the 2009 Olympics, we could not tell if all the facilities were ready for business.
At the end of the courtyard, we came upon a long promenade leading to the new temple crowned by the aforementioned diamond. On the two sides of the promenade were huge golden statues of various major Buddha figures. In between the statues were golden pillars with Buddhist scripture in prominent black. For those not wishing to walk the length of the promenade, rides on electric cart were available for an extra fee.
At the end of the promenade, after a flight of stairs, the visitor would enter a new temple to be greeted by four heavenly guardians and the smiling Happy Buddha, all in gold color, and then enter the main hall, in a layout that followed the traditional layout of Buddhist temples but bigger and grander. On display in front of golden stature of Sakyamuni was the holiest relic in Buddhist religion, namely the original finger bone of Prince Gautama, found among the treasures under the pagoda.
The rest of the treasures were on display at the original grounds of the Famen Temple, to the right of the new complex. The museum built to house the objects was in neo-Tang dynasty style, far less flamboyant and blended well with the newly restored pagoda and temple. The main museum building in three floors were inspired by the same golden temple resting inside the diamond on top of the new edifice. The unique items of the Famensi were now properly displayed in a building of its own.
I am certain that there will be many visitors whose object is to see the original imperial gifts from Emperor Wu and could do without the ornate granite and gold and the implied ostentation. On the other hand, it will take a long time to forget Famen Temple again.
Friday, March 19, 2010
Senators find China Bashing easier than Policy Making
Senators Lindsey Graham and Charles Schumer (Reuters called odd couple) are at it again. They are sponsoring a bill in Congress demanding that China adjust the exchange rate of their currency, Renminbi (RMB), to the dollar because, they claim, the “artificially” low rate is costing America jobs.
This time their arguments are bolstered by commentaries written by no less than Paul Krugman, Nobel winning economist, accusing China of mercantilist practices. Krugman as a columnist for the New York Times certainly has the soapbox to preach his version of global economics.
Fortunately, other equally credentialed, if not as well known, professional economists have stepped up to offer persuasive contrarian views exposing flaws in Krugman’s reasoning.
I found three conclusions particularly noteworthy in Stanford Professor Ron McKinnon’s rebuttal to Krugman. First, he points out that trade imbalance has nothing to do with currency exchange rates. A sudden increase in the RMB value to the dollar may actually increase and not lessen the trade imbalance.
McKinnon argues that fixing the exchange rate of 6.83 RMB to a dollar was essential to stabilizing China’s economy against the global economic downdraft caused by Wall Street. With a stable yuan, China was able to stimulate its economy replacing fallen export with huge boost in domestic consumption, which in turn meant increasing imports from China’s neighboring countries and thus stimulating those economies.
China has contributed to a fast worldwide recovery which would not have been possible without a stable yuan. McKinnon presents data to show that it is America’s “ultra-loose monetary policy” instituted since the 2008 crisis that is guilty of manipulation.
UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) has come out in support of China’s control of the exchange rate. According to UNCTAD, China has done more than any other emerging economy to stimulate domestic demand in order to mitigate the crisis and urges China not to cave in to the western pressure.
Dr. David Caploe, Chief Political Economist of online EconomyWatch largely echo McKinnon’s analysis but in more quotable sound bites. He points out that the US has run overall balance of payment deficit since 1959 and overall trade deficit since 1971 seemingly without doing any harm to the American standard of living. “Put bluntly,” Caploe says, “Both the US and the rest of the world have benefited greatly from a global political economy that is fundamentally unbalanced.”
Graham and Schumer haven’t said how and what jobs would return to America if China were to bow to pressure and make a substantial and sudden adjustment in the exchange rate.
In fact it has been obvious to all of us that the jobs that went to China by way of Mexico, Taiwan or Korea left the US long ago and would never come back. Nor would we wish for those low paying jobs to come back because it would mean a collapse in the American economy as it currently exists and return to a third world standard of living.
However, bashing China has always been easier than proposing a carefully thought out roadmap that would create well paying jobs and protect the current standard of living. In fact the challenge of a real plan seems to be beyond even the capability of a Nobel Laureate like Krugman.
Caploe says, “If the US is going to somehow manage to find a way out of the mess it’s in, it should stop blaming China, and admit the fault lies in ourselves.” He goes on to say, “But of course, that’s a lot harder than shifting the onus onto one of the few countries in the world that has a political leadership that actually knows what it’s doing when it comes to economic policy.” Ouch.
A more plausible argument for a stronger yuan is that it would make American exports more attractive but this argument doesn’t stand up to scrutiny either. China is already buying virtually all the lower-valued export such as agricultural products that America is selling. For higher-valued products, such as high tech equipment where the US has a comparative advantage, price has not been the issue. China has been willing to buy more than the US government is willing to sell under Washington’s anachronistic export control regulations.
Steve Forbes, publisher of Forbes magazine, reminds us, "We started in the 1970s to put pressure on Japan to change the value of the yen. The dollar today has fallen 75 percent against the yen, and we still have a trade deficit."
Maybe our problem is that we don't have leaders that can offer real solutions.
================================================
A shorter version appeared in the March 25 issue of the San Jose Mercury News.
This time their arguments are bolstered by commentaries written by no less than Paul Krugman, Nobel winning economist, accusing China of mercantilist practices. Krugman as a columnist for the New York Times certainly has the soapbox to preach his version of global economics.
Fortunately, other equally credentialed, if not as well known, professional economists have stepped up to offer persuasive contrarian views exposing flaws in Krugman’s reasoning.
I found three conclusions particularly noteworthy in Stanford Professor Ron McKinnon’s rebuttal to Krugman. First, he points out that trade imbalance has nothing to do with currency exchange rates. A sudden increase in the RMB value to the dollar may actually increase and not lessen the trade imbalance.
McKinnon argues that fixing the exchange rate of 6.83 RMB to a dollar was essential to stabilizing China’s economy against the global economic downdraft caused by Wall Street. With a stable yuan, China was able to stimulate its economy replacing fallen export with huge boost in domestic consumption, which in turn meant increasing imports from China’s neighboring countries and thus stimulating those economies.
China has contributed to a fast worldwide recovery which would not have been possible without a stable yuan. McKinnon presents data to show that it is America’s “ultra-loose monetary policy” instituted since the 2008 crisis that is guilty of manipulation.
UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) has come out in support of China’s control of the exchange rate. According to UNCTAD, China has done more than any other emerging economy to stimulate domestic demand in order to mitigate the crisis and urges China not to cave in to the western pressure.
Dr. David Caploe, Chief Political Economist of online EconomyWatch largely echo McKinnon’s analysis but in more quotable sound bites. He points out that the US has run overall balance of payment deficit since 1959 and overall trade deficit since 1971 seemingly without doing any harm to the American standard of living. “Put bluntly,” Caploe says, “Both the US and the rest of the world have benefited greatly from a global political economy that is fundamentally unbalanced.”
Graham and Schumer haven’t said how and what jobs would return to America if China were to bow to pressure and make a substantial and sudden adjustment in the exchange rate.
In fact it has been obvious to all of us that the jobs that went to China by way of Mexico, Taiwan or Korea left the US long ago and would never come back. Nor would we wish for those low paying jobs to come back because it would mean a collapse in the American economy as it currently exists and return to a third world standard of living.
However, bashing China has always been easier than proposing a carefully thought out roadmap that would create well paying jobs and protect the current standard of living. In fact the challenge of a real plan seems to be beyond even the capability of a Nobel Laureate like Krugman.
Caploe says, “If the US is going to somehow manage to find a way out of the mess it’s in, it should stop blaming China, and admit the fault lies in ourselves.” He goes on to say, “But of course, that’s a lot harder than shifting the onus onto one of the few countries in the world that has a political leadership that actually knows what it’s doing when it comes to economic policy.” Ouch.
A more plausible argument for a stronger yuan is that it would make American exports more attractive but this argument doesn’t stand up to scrutiny either. China is already buying virtually all the lower-valued export such as agricultural products that America is selling. For higher-valued products, such as high tech equipment where the US has a comparative advantage, price has not been the issue. China has been willing to buy more than the US government is willing to sell under Washington’s anachronistic export control regulations.
Steve Forbes, publisher of Forbes magazine, reminds us, "We started in the 1970s to put pressure on Japan to change the value of the yen. The dollar today has fallen 75 percent against the yen, and we still have a trade deficit."
Maybe our problem is that we don't have leaders that can offer real solutions.
================================================
A shorter version appeared in the March 25 issue of the San Jose Mercury News.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
In doing no Evil is Google doing any Good?
Google’s very public dispute with China has everyone confused. First Google accused China of hacking into their servers but wait Google did not necessarily mean China but that hackers were from China. In fact hacking was identified as coming from servers belonging to a couple of schools in Shanghai, but wait may be not, may be some clever hacker, who could be from anywhere, has disguised their origin by commandeering those servers.
Google then announced that they are going to stop censoring the contents flowing through their servers in China and would no longer obey China’s laws related to the control of information being access by China’s netizens. Testimony before Congress seems to indicate that Google will definitely get out of China. Well, maybe not said CEO Eric Schmidt because he was confident of a positive outcome from quiet negotiation with Beijing--negotiations that Beijing has denied taking place.
Bill Gates couldn’t understand what the fuss was all about. If a company is going to operate in China, the company is expected to obey Chinese laws. That’s the way it has been for Microsoft. If you don’t wish to obey the local laws, then yes, you better get out.
Somehow the issue seems more complicated from Google’s point of view. Whether at Google’s request or not, the US government seems ready to come to Google’s aid, by threatening to file a complaint with the World Trade Organization (WTO) accusing China of protectionism. Since China’s laws on cyberspace apply to all Internet enterprises and not just against Google or just foreign companies, it is a head scratcher as to how the U.S. can make such a complaint stick.
It’s possible, I suppose, for the US to insist on China opening the Internet to the same degree that the US is open so that Google can be more successful instead of being merely a distant second in market share in China. But that would be based on a rather dubious premise that having to filter the content puts Google at a disadvantage.
Finally Kai-fu Lee, former head of Google China, spoke up and shed some light to this matter. Lee was lured away from Microsoft in 2005 to right the floundering Google ship in China. By most accounts, he was going a good job as Google was slowly gaining on Baidu, the market leader in search in China. He unexpectedly resigned in September last year.
While attending the Abu Dhabi Media Summit last week Lee was asked about China’s Internet industry. While he would not comment directly on Google in China, he said, “For an American company to succeed in China, it needs to do the following: first, you have to have an empowered local team; second, you need to humbly listen to the local user; third, you need to move fast to give users what they want; and fourth you need to have a longer-term outlook and not be too greedy in wanting to make money on day one.”
Google isn’t the only one to stumble in China. Facebook, eBay, Amazon and Yahoo all did not achieve dominant market share in China comparable to their success in the US. I suspect that all suffered from the same drawback. Namely, their not understanding the local market and not trusting their China team to seize the moment and make decisions without having to go through the corporate bureaucracy back home.
Lee was too diplomatic to ever admit that the frustration of lacking local empowerment was what caused him to seek greener pastures. But he certainly does understand the China market and potential. He has established Innovation Works to harness the energy of entrepreneurs inside China and nurture them into next generation Google’s.
Lee’s incubated start-ups will be participating in a home market of 350 million web surfers and Internet users and 680 million mobile phone users, both largest in the world and growing at double digit rates. In another 7 to 8 years, Lee expects the by then 800 million mobile phone users to access the Internet with their smart phones and that’s the market he wants to play in.
Surely CEO Schmidt has to be agonizing over the dilemma: can Google afford to dither and watch the world’s most dynamic market zip by?
=========================================
After Google announced their move to Hongkong, I sent an updated commentary based on this blog to New America Media.
Google has just revealed that many countries have asked Google to remove contents. Of the countries that have asked Google to censor the contents, the United States came in 4th in frequency of requests.
Google then announced that they are going to stop censoring the contents flowing through their servers in China and would no longer obey China’s laws related to the control of information being access by China’s netizens. Testimony before Congress seems to indicate that Google will definitely get out of China. Well, maybe not said CEO Eric Schmidt because he was confident of a positive outcome from quiet negotiation with Beijing--negotiations that Beijing has denied taking place.
Bill Gates couldn’t understand what the fuss was all about. If a company is going to operate in China, the company is expected to obey Chinese laws. That’s the way it has been for Microsoft. If you don’t wish to obey the local laws, then yes, you better get out.
Somehow the issue seems more complicated from Google’s point of view. Whether at Google’s request or not, the US government seems ready to come to Google’s aid, by threatening to file a complaint with the World Trade Organization (WTO) accusing China of protectionism. Since China’s laws on cyberspace apply to all Internet enterprises and not just against Google or just foreign companies, it is a head scratcher as to how the U.S. can make such a complaint stick.
It’s possible, I suppose, for the US to insist on China opening the Internet to the same degree that the US is open so that Google can be more successful instead of being merely a distant second in market share in China. But that would be based on a rather dubious premise that having to filter the content puts Google at a disadvantage.
Finally Kai-fu Lee, former head of Google China, spoke up and shed some light to this matter. Lee was lured away from Microsoft in 2005 to right the floundering Google ship in China. By most accounts, he was going a good job as Google was slowly gaining on Baidu, the market leader in search in China. He unexpectedly resigned in September last year.
While attending the Abu Dhabi Media Summit last week Lee was asked about China’s Internet industry. While he would not comment directly on Google in China, he said, “For an American company to succeed in China, it needs to do the following: first, you have to have an empowered local team; second, you need to humbly listen to the local user; third, you need to move fast to give users what they want; and fourth you need to have a longer-term outlook and not be too greedy in wanting to make money on day one.”
Google isn’t the only one to stumble in China. Facebook, eBay, Amazon and Yahoo all did not achieve dominant market share in China comparable to their success in the US. I suspect that all suffered from the same drawback. Namely, their not understanding the local market and not trusting their China team to seize the moment and make decisions without having to go through the corporate bureaucracy back home.
Lee was too diplomatic to ever admit that the frustration of lacking local empowerment was what caused him to seek greener pastures. But he certainly does understand the China market and potential. He has established Innovation Works to harness the energy of entrepreneurs inside China and nurture them into next generation Google’s.
Lee’s incubated start-ups will be participating in a home market of 350 million web surfers and Internet users and 680 million mobile phone users, both largest in the world and growing at double digit rates. In another 7 to 8 years, Lee expects the by then 800 million mobile phone users to access the Internet with their smart phones and that’s the market he wants to play in.
Surely CEO Schmidt has to be agonizing over the dilemma: can Google afford to dither and watch the world’s most dynamic market zip by?
=========================================
After Google announced their move to Hongkong, I sent an updated commentary based on this blog to New America Media.
Google has just revealed that many countries have asked Google to remove contents. Of the countries that have asked Google to censor the contents, the United States came in 4th in frequency of requests.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Joseph Nye Swung and Missed
Many of you probably have heard of Professor Joseph Nye, now of Harvard and former U.S. assistant secretary of defense. I remember him as the very persuasive advocate of the effectiveness of the exercise of soft power in international relations. He stressed that properly applied soft power in the form of nuanced diplomacy can be far more effective than in-your-face display of raw military might.
It is therefore most disappointing that in his latest analysis of Sino-U.S. relations, which he called a "turn for the worse," that he completely missed the mark. Nye blamed China for failing to toe the U.S. line of imposing sanction on Iran. He did mention President Obama's meeting with Dalai Lama and agreeing to sell arms to Taiwan as sources of friction in the bilateral relations but he seemed to believe that with ample prior precedents, China should be accepting and not get hot and bothered.
Nye also mentioned that "many American congressmen" complain about American jobs being destroyed by China's maintenance of an artificially low yuan, but he failed to point out the ludicrous premise such complaint is based. Instead he accuse Beijing of making a serious miscalculation because the U.S. is not in decline but still ranks as the second most competitive economy in the world, after Switzerland.
I am not sure how World Economic Forum, an organization based in the West, gage economic strength, but I am not as sanguine as Nye about America's future. I fear that America is about to become a failed state.
Take the health care standoff. I do not find members of Congress talk about what's in national interest. I find members working diligently to make sure the other side do not score any popularity points.
Thanks to a protective coddling of Wall Street, we experienced a great economic meltdown and have incurred trillions in national debt. Our only prospect of getting out of debt is prayer and a pig in the poke, hope for the best some hazy years down in the future. No one has the political courage to say we need to cut spending and (gasp) raise taxes. Obviously a major cut in spending is to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan but we don't seem to know how to do that either.
Our collective aversion to paying taxes plus our preference for guns over books has led directly to a drive to bottom for our public education system, pioneered by California condemned to mediocrity with the enactment of Proposition 13. We are successful in not leaving "any child behind," instead just entire generations behind.
President Obama has said that we will pull out of the economic doldrums through an economy built on innovation. But where will future innovations come from, if we don't want immigrants, won't encourage foreign students to stay and depend on lousy schools to crank out poorly prepared graduates? On top of all that, we have a significant fraction of Americans that seriously believe the study of science is anti-Christ tantamount to devil worship.
Not to worry, some will say, because we have the strongest democracy in the world. Is that so? Thanks to the American invention known as gerrymandering (a manipulation of voting districts to favor a particular political party), members of state and national legislatures once elected are virtually guaranteed lifetime employment. To further enhance their job security, they raise money. The more the better. Once a politician wins an election, he or she immediately raises more campaign contributions because the politician knows full well that vulnerability is inversely proportional to the size of the campaign bank account.
America hasn’t been a democracy based on one person, one vote for decades. We used to go door to door campaigning for our candidates. No more, now we organize neighborhood gatherings for the purpose of collecting political contributions. America has become a democracy based on money. With rare exception, the one that raises the most money, wins. Guess what, most money come from special interest. Every politician rails against special interest—but, by the way, contributions gratefully accepted. Special interests love to make contributions because contributions get access and influence. Consequently, our politicians are not beholden to the voters, just the special interests.
Politicians are safe in their seats so long as they do not rock the boat. Thus they take the easy way out. Rather than exercise leadership and statesmanship and telling the American people of the hard tasks that lie ahead, they just blame China, for everything conceivable.
China in the meantime is building a network of high speed rail that will crisscross the country based on its own technology, i.e., not stolen from Los Alamos. They are proposing to build three trans-continental high speed rail systems: Two to Western Europe by way of Russia and central Asia and one south to Singapore.
China has the wealth to invest in infrastructure based on latest technology and they are sharing with their neighbors. The high speed rail will inevitably bring China closer to the community of nations that will share in the economic benefits. There may even come a day when bilateral relations with America will pale in importance compared to relations with rest of the world.
Nye reminded the readers that Deng Xiaoping would have “led China to the cooperative relations with the U.S. that marked the early of part of last year.” Alas, Nye did not seem to realize that it has been America that has changed from early last year and not China.
It is therefore most disappointing that in his latest analysis of Sino-U.S. relations, which he called a "turn for the worse," that he completely missed the mark. Nye blamed China for failing to toe the U.S. line of imposing sanction on Iran. He did mention President Obama's meeting with Dalai Lama and agreeing to sell arms to Taiwan as sources of friction in the bilateral relations but he seemed to believe that with ample prior precedents, China should be accepting and not get hot and bothered.
Nye also mentioned that "many American congressmen" complain about American jobs being destroyed by China's maintenance of an artificially low yuan, but he failed to point out the ludicrous premise such complaint is based. Instead he accuse Beijing of making a serious miscalculation because the U.S. is not in decline but still ranks as the second most competitive economy in the world, after Switzerland.
I am not sure how World Economic Forum, an organization based in the West, gage economic strength, but I am not as sanguine as Nye about America's future. I fear that America is about to become a failed state.
Take the health care standoff. I do not find members of Congress talk about what's in national interest. I find members working diligently to make sure the other side do not score any popularity points.
Thanks to a protective coddling of Wall Street, we experienced a great economic meltdown and have incurred trillions in national debt. Our only prospect of getting out of debt is prayer and a pig in the poke, hope for the best some hazy years down in the future. No one has the political courage to say we need to cut spending and (gasp) raise taxes. Obviously a major cut in spending is to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan but we don't seem to know how to do that either.
Our collective aversion to paying taxes plus our preference for guns over books has led directly to a drive to bottom for our public education system, pioneered by California condemned to mediocrity with the enactment of Proposition 13. We are successful in not leaving "any child behind," instead just entire generations behind.
President Obama has said that we will pull out of the economic doldrums through an economy built on innovation. But where will future innovations come from, if we don't want immigrants, won't encourage foreign students to stay and depend on lousy schools to crank out poorly prepared graduates? On top of all that, we have a significant fraction of Americans that seriously believe the study of science is anti-Christ tantamount to devil worship.
Not to worry, some will say, because we have the strongest democracy in the world. Is that so? Thanks to the American invention known as gerrymandering (a manipulation of voting districts to favor a particular political party), members of state and national legislatures once elected are virtually guaranteed lifetime employment. To further enhance their job security, they raise money. The more the better. Once a politician wins an election, he or she immediately raises more campaign contributions because the politician knows full well that vulnerability is inversely proportional to the size of the campaign bank account.
America hasn’t been a democracy based on one person, one vote for decades. We used to go door to door campaigning for our candidates. No more, now we organize neighborhood gatherings for the purpose of collecting political contributions. America has become a democracy based on money. With rare exception, the one that raises the most money, wins. Guess what, most money come from special interest. Every politician rails against special interest—but, by the way, contributions gratefully accepted. Special interests love to make contributions because contributions get access and influence. Consequently, our politicians are not beholden to the voters, just the special interests.
Politicians are safe in their seats so long as they do not rock the boat. Thus they take the easy way out. Rather than exercise leadership and statesmanship and telling the American people of the hard tasks that lie ahead, they just blame China, for everything conceivable.
China in the meantime is building a network of high speed rail that will crisscross the country based on its own technology, i.e., not stolen from Los Alamos. They are proposing to build three trans-continental high speed rail systems: Two to Western Europe by way of Russia and central Asia and one south to Singapore.
China has the wealth to invest in infrastructure based on latest technology and they are sharing with their neighbors. The high speed rail will inevitably bring China closer to the community of nations that will share in the economic benefits. There may even come a day when bilateral relations with America will pale in importance compared to relations with rest of the world.
Nye reminded the readers that Deng Xiaoping would have “led China to the cooperative relations with the U.S. that marked the early of part of last year.” Alas, Nye did not seem to realize that it has been America that has changed from early last year and not China.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Obama needs another playbook for China
Recent geopolitical activity suggests that President Obama is playing his China cards in a traditional way set by his predecessors, but we need to ask whether those cards are still valid.
President Obama came into office last year facing the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression. He knew he had to take swift and drastic actions and he did. He also knew he had to change the international image of the United States to a more humble and gentle one, and in concert with Secretary of State Clinton, he was largely successful.
In particular he dispensed with the usual antagonistic confrontations that his predecessor administrations indulged at the beginning of their relations with China. Instead he stressed the importance of collaboration between Beijing and Washington in solving the many challenges facing both nations.
Secretary Clinton’s first trip abroad after taking office was to China and she said all the right things. Secretaries Chu and Locke visited China more than once in the first year, partly because of the importance of their portfolios (energy and commerce) to the bilateral relations and partly because their ethnic Chinese background is regarded as useful for building goodwill. Defense Secretary Gates made overtures for military exchanges that China accepted and the relations between the Pentagon and the People’s Liberation Army began to warm.
Of course, as we would expect between the debtor and the creditor holding most of the notes payable, Treasury Secretary Geithner has devoted more face and phone time with Chinese officials than any other cabinet officer. He had to work hard to assure his counterparts in Beijing that the United States would control the deficit and protect the value of the dollar so that China would have reasons not only to hold onto the trillions of IOUs but would continue to buy Treasury notes and bills in the future.
For some reason the dynamics between the two countries changed after Obama came back from his trip to China in November. Since then the collegiality has been replaced by increasingly strident exchange of words, threats and counter threats. Obama’s administration has demanded that China revalue their Renminbi and open their market. Obama has announced the intent to sell arms to Taiwan and to meet Dalai Lama. It’s almost as if Obama had planned to build up a cache of goodwill with China in order to spend it in the second year.
Piling on is Pentagon’s latest Quadrennial Defense Review where they discussed potential military threats from China. Despite the protestations to the contrary, the U.S. military continue to look at China through cold war lens. They are obsessed with the "lack of transparency and the nature of China's military development and decision-making processes." They are fixated on the need to understand China’s military capability and intentions and to be able to measure against America’s own.
China on the other hand is unlikely to oblige. According to the Art of War, the classic tome on strategy written by Sun Zi, the weaker power will always cloak in deception and ambiguity and hide one’s vulnerabilities. The U.S. may have nothing but altruistic intentions in wishing to know China’s strength and plans, but it is not in China’s self-interest to make it easy for the U.S. to sleep at nights—certainly not when the U.S. comes across with so much hostility.
No one outside of Obama’s team can really know what prompted the White House to change. One obvious explanation is that with domestic political setbacks such as the loss of Ted Kennedy’s Senatorial seat as well as other potential losses looming, Obama felt the need to strengthen his ties to his core constituency, a key part of his support being well established China bashers.
If so, it would be disappointing because Obama should have the intelligence to see and the courage to tell the people of the United States that blaming the valuation of the Renminbi will not bring jobs back home—low paying jobs that nobody wanted for decades. Furthermore, since the financial crisis the bilateral relationship has undergone a fundamental change. China no longer sees itself as the 95 pound weakling that needs to absorb a periodic pummeling just to tag along and hang around with the big bully.
Having seen how China weathered the financial storm relatively unscathed, the people of China now believe that they have a system that works better than the West and they expected to be treated with the respect of a peer and not dismissed as a junior flunky. Right or wrong, this is increasingly their attitude. Given that, China’s leaders could hardly be seen to back down before hard nose demands from Washington.
Unilateral actions such as arms sales to Taiwan and meeting the Dalai Lama are particularly sensitive issues because China views those acts as direct interference into their internal affairs. In the past, Beijing might protest for a while and then let it fade away. This may no longer be possible because the Chinese now have heightened expectations consistent with their new self image. Their announced intention to impose sanctions on companies that participates in arms sales to Taiwan reflect the desire to back up rhetoric with real punishing consequences.
Similarly the confrontation over the valuation of the yuan could lead to mutually assured destruction of both economies with devastating global impact. Since a strengthening of the Renminbi is equivalent to a devaluation of the dollars in China’s possession, if backed to a corner, they may decide to walk away from supporting the dollar rather than be seen to acquiesce and do something against their own interest. Most recently, Vice Premier Wang Qishan rather ominously told Geithner not to bother making another trip to Beijing to explain the same tired U.S. position.
I hope cooler heads in Washington prevail before we get too close to the brink. As one columnist in Wall Street Journal recently asked, “How many enemies do we need?”
An edited version was posted on New America Media.
President Obama came into office last year facing the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression. He knew he had to take swift and drastic actions and he did. He also knew he had to change the international image of the United States to a more humble and gentle one, and in concert with Secretary of State Clinton, he was largely successful.
In particular he dispensed with the usual antagonistic confrontations that his predecessor administrations indulged at the beginning of their relations with China. Instead he stressed the importance of collaboration between Beijing and Washington in solving the many challenges facing both nations.
Secretary Clinton’s first trip abroad after taking office was to China and she said all the right things. Secretaries Chu and Locke visited China more than once in the first year, partly because of the importance of their portfolios (energy and commerce) to the bilateral relations and partly because their ethnic Chinese background is regarded as useful for building goodwill. Defense Secretary Gates made overtures for military exchanges that China accepted and the relations between the Pentagon and the People’s Liberation Army began to warm.
Of course, as we would expect between the debtor and the creditor holding most of the notes payable, Treasury Secretary Geithner has devoted more face and phone time with Chinese officials than any other cabinet officer. He had to work hard to assure his counterparts in Beijing that the United States would control the deficit and protect the value of the dollar so that China would have reasons not only to hold onto the trillions of IOUs but would continue to buy Treasury notes and bills in the future.
For some reason the dynamics between the two countries changed after Obama came back from his trip to China in November. Since then the collegiality has been replaced by increasingly strident exchange of words, threats and counter threats. Obama’s administration has demanded that China revalue their Renminbi and open their market. Obama has announced the intent to sell arms to Taiwan and to meet Dalai Lama. It’s almost as if Obama had planned to build up a cache of goodwill with China in order to spend it in the second year.
Piling on is Pentagon’s latest Quadrennial Defense Review where they discussed potential military threats from China. Despite the protestations to the contrary, the U.S. military continue to look at China through cold war lens. They are obsessed with the "lack of transparency and the nature of China's military development and decision-making processes." They are fixated on the need to understand China’s military capability and intentions and to be able to measure against America’s own.
China on the other hand is unlikely to oblige. According to the Art of War, the classic tome on strategy written by Sun Zi, the weaker power will always cloak in deception and ambiguity and hide one’s vulnerabilities. The U.S. may have nothing but altruistic intentions in wishing to know China’s strength and plans, but it is not in China’s self-interest to make it easy for the U.S. to sleep at nights—certainly not when the U.S. comes across with so much hostility.
No one outside of Obama’s team can really know what prompted the White House to change. One obvious explanation is that with domestic political setbacks such as the loss of Ted Kennedy’s Senatorial seat as well as other potential losses looming, Obama felt the need to strengthen his ties to his core constituency, a key part of his support being well established China bashers.
If so, it would be disappointing because Obama should have the intelligence to see and the courage to tell the people of the United States that blaming the valuation of the Renminbi will not bring jobs back home—low paying jobs that nobody wanted for decades. Furthermore, since the financial crisis the bilateral relationship has undergone a fundamental change. China no longer sees itself as the 95 pound weakling that needs to absorb a periodic pummeling just to tag along and hang around with the big bully.
Having seen how China weathered the financial storm relatively unscathed, the people of China now believe that they have a system that works better than the West and they expected to be treated with the respect of a peer and not dismissed as a junior flunky. Right or wrong, this is increasingly their attitude. Given that, China’s leaders could hardly be seen to back down before hard nose demands from Washington.
Unilateral actions such as arms sales to Taiwan and meeting the Dalai Lama are particularly sensitive issues because China views those acts as direct interference into their internal affairs. In the past, Beijing might protest for a while and then let it fade away. This may no longer be possible because the Chinese now have heightened expectations consistent with their new self image. Their announced intention to impose sanctions on companies that participates in arms sales to Taiwan reflect the desire to back up rhetoric with real punishing consequences.
Similarly the confrontation over the valuation of the yuan could lead to mutually assured destruction of both economies with devastating global impact. Since a strengthening of the Renminbi is equivalent to a devaluation of the dollars in China’s possession, if backed to a corner, they may decide to walk away from supporting the dollar rather than be seen to acquiesce and do something against their own interest. Most recently, Vice Premier Wang Qishan rather ominously told Geithner not to bother making another trip to Beijing to explain the same tired U.S. position.
I hope cooler heads in Washington prevail before we get too close to the brink. As one columnist in Wall Street Journal recently asked, “How many enemies do we need?”
An edited version was posted on New America Media.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Arms sales adds complexity to the U.S.-China-Taiwan Triangle
President Obama’s announcement to sell $6.4 billion of arms to Taiwan seems to have caught China by surprise. Some in Washington see Beijing’s reaction as a normal response when the U.S. raises the tension in the U.S.-China-Taiwan triangle while others are not so sure.
One thing is clear, however. Obama does not have the luxury of starting a confrontation with China. Many argued that coming into office facing the tsunami of a financial crisis, Obama needed China’s support of the dollar by continuing to buy and holding on to treasury notes. A soft, non-confrontational approach was the only way.
Thus Obama’s decision to sell arms to Taiwan can be read in at least two different ways. One is that Obama has established great rapport with the leaders of Beijing as a result of his November trip to China and arms sales was among the many subjects discussed, and that Obama’s announcement and Beijing’s response are orchestrated. In fact, some academicians inside China have been quoted as saying that Beijing’s official protest is for domestic consumption.
The other interpretation is that Obama’s trip to China was a failure as he did not come back with specific agreements that could be counted as wins. Obama, therefore, has decided to send the message that he, too, can play hardball. By offering only Black Hawk helicopters and Patriot missiles, but withholding advanced fighters and submarines, he is seen as saving a heavier punch for the future, in case he needs to ratchet up the tension by another notch.
This view, while fitting with the inclination of more hawkish analysts in Washington, seems to fly in face of what Obama has demonstrated from the oval office, namely, an intelligent leader who makes thoughtful and rational decisions. Furthermore, he continues to need China’s cooperation not only in the international arena such as Iran and North Korea but also to keep holding onto to the dollar. A confrontation with China does not seem to be in our national interest.
Official spokespersons from Washington justify the arms sales as a U.S. obligation “to ensure Taiwan’s self-defense capability.” This claim is a bit of an exaggeration. Compared to Taiwan, China has more than eight times the military personnel, five times more fighter aircrafts and 15 times more submarines, not to mention the thousands of missiles pointing at Taiwan. A few squadrons of helicopters are not going to tip the scale. (See a PLA analyst commenting on Taiwan's military.)
Obama’s announcement, coming on the heels of Taiwan president Ma Ying-jeou’s highly publicized diplomatic swing through Central America, including two transit stops in San Francisco and Los Angeles -- a privilege never accorded his predecessor -- is a win for Ma and probably intended for Taiwan’s internal consumption.
So the third interpretation of the arms sales and the following brouhaha can be read as staged for the benefit of the domestic audiences of all three countries in the trilateral relations. Ma’s political opposition has been attacking him for being soft on the mainland and leaving Taiwan defenseless. He can now claim to hold a stronger hand while he continues to engage Beijing on economic cooperation. Of course, Taiwan politics being what it is, the opposition is now complaining that the United State’s offer sets the price for the arms as much as 40% above market value.
Both Obama and Ma (in China they are referred to as two horses, “ma” being the word for horse) are hurting in their home approval ratings. While China’s President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao are not subject to popularity polls, strong approval at home is important to their ability to govern as well. Beijing’s pledged to retaliate against companies involved in the arms sale, no doubt, will make them popular at the home front.
It was only one administration ago that the White House spoke of containment of China. A significant part of the Washington establishment continues to regard China as an adversary. Selling arms to Taiwan may be politically necessary in response to domestic pressures, but such an announcement and possible future meetings with the Dalai Lama are not going to win China over as a partner in solving international crises.
Eventually, Obama will have to make up his mind whether to treat China as a friend or as a non-aligned third party, if not an outright adversary. A positive trip to China followed by offsetting moves on controversial issues such as arms sales to Taiwan will not accomplish the goal of gaining China as a valuable ally. And given the arrays of problems he is facing, Obama needs all the help he can get.
The above published by New America Media.
One thing is clear, however. Obama does not have the luxury of starting a confrontation with China. Many argued that coming into office facing the tsunami of a financial crisis, Obama needed China’s support of the dollar by continuing to buy and holding on to treasury notes. A soft, non-confrontational approach was the only way.
Thus Obama’s decision to sell arms to Taiwan can be read in at least two different ways. One is that Obama has established great rapport with the leaders of Beijing as a result of his November trip to China and arms sales was among the many subjects discussed, and that Obama’s announcement and Beijing’s response are orchestrated. In fact, some academicians inside China have been quoted as saying that Beijing’s official protest is for domestic consumption.
The other interpretation is that Obama’s trip to China was a failure as he did not come back with specific agreements that could be counted as wins. Obama, therefore, has decided to send the message that he, too, can play hardball. By offering only Black Hawk helicopters and Patriot missiles, but withholding advanced fighters and submarines, he is seen as saving a heavier punch for the future, in case he needs to ratchet up the tension by another notch.
This view, while fitting with the inclination of more hawkish analysts in Washington, seems to fly in face of what Obama has demonstrated from the oval office, namely, an intelligent leader who makes thoughtful and rational decisions. Furthermore, he continues to need China’s cooperation not only in the international arena such as Iran and North Korea but also to keep holding onto to the dollar. A confrontation with China does not seem to be in our national interest.
Official spokespersons from Washington justify the arms sales as a U.S. obligation “to ensure Taiwan’s self-defense capability.” This claim is a bit of an exaggeration. Compared to Taiwan, China has more than eight times the military personnel, five times more fighter aircrafts and 15 times more submarines, not to mention the thousands of missiles pointing at Taiwan. A few squadrons of helicopters are not going to tip the scale. (See a PLA analyst commenting on Taiwan's military.)
Obama’s announcement, coming on the heels of Taiwan president Ma Ying-jeou’s highly publicized diplomatic swing through Central America, including two transit stops in San Francisco and Los Angeles -- a privilege never accorded his predecessor -- is a win for Ma and probably intended for Taiwan’s internal consumption.
So the third interpretation of the arms sales and the following brouhaha can be read as staged for the benefit of the domestic audiences of all three countries in the trilateral relations. Ma’s political opposition has been attacking him for being soft on the mainland and leaving Taiwan defenseless. He can now claim to hold a stronger hand while he continues to engage Beijing on economic cooperation. Of course, Taiwan politics being what it is, the opposition is now complaining that the United State’s offer sets the price for the arms as much as 40% above market value.
Both Obama and Ma (in China they are referred to as two horses, “ma” being the word for horse) are hurting in their home approval ratings. While China’s President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao are not subject to popularity polls, strong approval at home is important to their ability to govern as well. Beijing’s pledged to retaliate against companies involved in the arms sale, no doubt, will make them popular at the home front.
It was only one administration ago that the White House spoke of containment of China. A significant part of the Washington establishment continues to regard China as an adversary. Selling arms to Taiwan may be politically necessary in response to domestic pressures, but such an announcement and possible future meetings with the Dalai Lama are not going to win China over as a partner in solving international crises.
Eventually, Obama will have to make up his mind whether to treat China as a friend or as a non-aligned third party, if not an outright adversary. A positive trip to China followed by offsetting moves on controversial issues such as arms sales to Taiwan will not accomplish the goal of gaining China as a valuable ally. And given the arrays of problems he is facing, Obama needs all the help he can get.
The above published by New America Media.
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Banana Republics and the U.S.
It would be overly harsh to say that the Central American countries are failed states. Based on two weeks touring through Belize, El Salvador, Honduras and mostly Guatemala, it may be too presumptuous to make any definitive conclusions but one cannot avoid the impression that these countries do not function very well.
Everywhere our tourist bus went in Guatemala, the national tourist police in massive black 4-wheel drive vehicles shadowed us. Although these visibly armed escorts were at the invitation of our tour guide, the need for their presence in order to reassure the tourists was, in itself, not too comforting.
We were taken to see schools in the hills. Despite entitlement of free public education to everyone up to 8th grade, we learned that the funds allocated to the school were dissipated along the way by leakage to greedy pockets of officials and very little reach the intended destination.
On the shore of Lake Atitlan, we saw a beautiful estate with its own heliport. On the outskirts of Guatemala City we saw districts of tin shacks and mud hovels. If there was any doubt, the diminutive, clearly undernourished Mayan women hawking their handicraft on the streets confirmed the existence of a great unequal distribution of wealth.
All the countries on our itinerary seemed to share a common characteristic, namely, a small wealthy ruling class of European stock and a vast general population of underclass consisted varying shades of darker skin tones. The ruling class has not shown any inclination to advance the economy of their nation by improving the lives and therefore productivity of their people.
Rather, the ruling class seemed to depend on suppressing the potential of their general population as their way of staying on top, politically and economically. Inevitably, this means the need to control the populace via the military resorting to customary tools of brutality. Inevitably the people rebelled with bloody consequences.
The governments promptly informed Washington that the ensuing civil war was actually counterinsurgency against leftist guerillas trained by the Cubans. Reflexively, Washington sent arms and local conflicts become massive conflagrations. People, many in the professional class with critical skills, emigrated out of their home country and another banana republic was born.
While these destructive internal conflicts have been resolved a decade or so ago, the surviving governments have not found their way to a more effective and perhaps enlightened rule. Most of the poor continued to be trapped in their cycle of poverty and seemingly no prospects for a better life.
One can argue that the America is becoming more like a banana republic than these Central American states becoming more like free and open societies that the United States once was. In America, power is now concentrated in the rich who can make big campaign contributions. The governments, local, state and federal, are doing increasing less for schools and students in the ghettoes are condemned to a future without hope.
Of course, the main reason for touring Central America was to learn about the ancient Mayan civilization. We learned that Mayan were very hierarchal with clear separation of classes and professions. One guide even suggested that the Mayan royalty practiced close kin marriages in order to breed giants as a distinction between royal class and the (figuratively) lowly commoners—and most Mayans were quite short, well under 5 feet in stature.
I suspect the use of complicated hieroglyphic form of writing was also consistent with a culture that prized privileges and exclusivity. The complexity was a way of keeping the ability to read from being widespread and limited to the handful in the learned class. Whether its astronomy or calendar or religious ceremony, the Mayans seemed to thrive on enveloping everything in mystery and secrecy.
Perhaps the very restriction of knowledge to only a handful of people in each generation ultimately led to the extinction of the culture when some miscalculation or accident snuffed out heirs to carry on the traditions.
Everywhere our tourist bus went in Guatemala, the national tourist police in massive black 4-wheel drive vehicles shadowed us. Although these visibly armed escorts were at the invitation of our tour guide, the need for their presence in order to reassure the tourists was, in itself, not too comforting.
We were taken to see schools in the hills. Despite entitlement of free public education to everyone up to 8th grade, we learned that the funds allocated to the school were dissipated along the way by leakage to greedy pockets of officials and very little reach the intended destination.
On the shore of Lake Atitlan, we saw a beautiful estate with its own heliport. On the outskirts of Guatemala City we saw districts of tin shacks and mud hovels. If there was any doubt, the diminutive, clearly undernourished Mayan women hawking their handicraft on the streets confirmed the existence of a great unequal distribution of wealth.
All the countries on our itinerary seemed to share a common characteristic, namely, a small wealthy ruling class of European stock and a vast general population of underclass consisted varying shades of darker skin tones. The ruling class has not shown any inclination to advance the economy of their nation by improving the lives and therefore productivity of their people.
Rather, the ruling class seemed to depend on suppressing the potential of their general population as their way of staying on top, politically and economically. Inevitably, this means the need to control the populace via the military resorting to customary tools of brutality. Inevitably the people rebelled with bloody consequences.
The governments promptly informed Washington that the ensuing civil war was actually counterinsurgency against leftist guerillas trained by the Cubans. Reflexively, Washington sent arms and local conflicts become massive conflagrations. People, many in the professional class with critical skills, emigrated out of their home country and another banana republic was born.
While these destructive internal conflicts have been resolved a decade or so ago, the surviving governments have not found their way to a more effective and perhaps enlightened rule. Most of the poor continued to be trapped in their cycle of poverty and seemingly no prospects for a better life.
One can argue that the America is becoming more like a banana republic than these Central American states becoming more like free and open societies that the United States once was. In America, power is now concentrated in the rich who can make big campaign contributions. The governments, local, state and federal, are doing increasing less for schools and students in the ghettoes are condemned to a future without hope.
Of course, the main reason for touring Central America was to learn about the ancient Mayan civilization. We learned that Mayan were very hierarchal with clear separation of classes and professions. One guide even suggested that the Mayan royalty practiced close kin marriages in order to breed giants as a distinction between royal class and the (figuratively) lowly commoners—and most Mayans were quite short, well under 5 feet in stature.
I suspect the use of complicated hieroglyphic form of writing was also consistent with a culture that prized privileges and exclusivity. The complexity was a way of keeping the ability to read from being widespread and limited to the handful in the learned class. Whether its astronomy or calendar or religious ceremony, the Mayans seemed to thrive on enveloping everything in mystery and secrecy.
Perhaps the very restriction of knowledge to only a handful of people in each generation ultimately led to the extinction of the culture when some miscalculation or accident snuffed out heirs to carry on the traditions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
