In the words of shameless rent-a-quote Mr. Andy Xie, ‘the pessimists predict China’s imminent collapse and the optimists hail China’s unstoppable rise, but in the end, China tends to muddle on through somewhere in between the two extremes.’

Recently words such as ‘collapse’ have been replaced with, for instance, ‘unsustainable’ and speculation that China’s stunningly successful economic formula of massive domestic investment, cheap money, use of existing technology, export-led growth, cunningly hidden protectionist policies, the hard-selling of the mythical ‘China market’ and huge amounts of FDI cannot last forever and is consequently starting to show cracks. After all, what goes up, must come down, or so says this *must read* article.

Despite “insatiable” domestic demand and government measures to curtail investment in overheating sectors, China now has an overproduction of, for example, steel, cement and cotton – all this during the biggest building boom in history. Likewise, China’s factories are churning out too many finished consumer goods like cars, mobile phones, textiles and clothes. Adding to the gloom includes higher manufacturing costs, sluggish domestic demand, anti-dumping quotas, razor thin profit margins, fierce competition, rampant intellectual-property theft and a weak legal system. Furthermore, fixed-asset investment (infrastructure projects, factories, apartment blocks, office towers etc.) will likely top a staggering 54% of GDP this year. Comparisons with the investment frenzy that led to the 1997 Asian Crisis are inevitable.

It’s no wonder that foreign companies are starting to look to cheaper Asian locations and disversify their investments (the World Economic Forum recently ranked China a disappointing 47th out of 116 countries for business competitiveness). South Korean companies follow a “Chindia” strategy, Japan’s a “China-plus-one” formula and Taiwanese firms are increasingly investing in Vietnam. During the first 8 months of this year, Taiwanese investment in China/Mainland dropped 18%.

The result of all this? An economic slowdown. This might cause a few sharp intakes of breath but Jim Walker, chief economist for investment bank CLSA, predicts China’s GDP growth at 5% in 2006 and only 3% in 2007. Harvard Business School’s Michael Porter adds “The bloom is starting to come off the rose in terms of China being this mecca for business“. I myself still need to see a bit more hard evidence before I’m completely convinced. After all, I’ve read hundreds of similar articles over the years. It’s also possible that any economic slowdown could be handled by the government. Still, with China’s already considerable amount of domestic problems and challenges, any drop in economic growth would have a wide-ranging impact right across society. At the end of the day, however, it’s a bit too soon for doomsday scenarios just yet.

I don’t have the time or the strength to write about this today, but luckily another blogger has done it for me. This is one of the most distressing of all China-related topics, as it amounts to nothing short of murder. When we know something is out there that can kill our people…when we know that knowledge and information can save their lives…and when we make a conscious choice to remain silent and do nothing (except lie)…and when, as a direct result, people suffer unimaginable misery and certain death…isn’t it murder?

From Jerome Keating:

To all,

Just a reminder that the Breakfast Club will be having its monthly meeting to share fellowship and discussion on topics that interest us all. (Side note, everyone pays for their own breakfast–there is no free lunch, nor is there a free breakfast!))

The Place is at Jukes (the name may be changed to Al’s Resataurant but the location is the same.) #48–6 HoPing East Rd. Sec. 3. Phone # is 8732–3667 That is 3 doors west of the Burger King at the Southwest corner of Tun Hua S. Rd and HoPing East Rd. (Easily accessible from the Liu Changli MRT station) or 285, 235, and numerous other buses.

Time: 9:30 AM.

Topic: Open, however since we have such a diverse group, Robin made an excellent suggestion last time–everyone bring a list of the five books that have most influenced your life and be prepared to expound on such.

Also to give everyone a chance to network and meet and find out each’s diverse interests etc. , switching places throughout breakfast is encouraged.

Some thoughts to ponder:

“Speech is civilization itself. The word . . . preserves contact–it is silence which isolates.” (Thomas Mann) Join us.

“Every man becomes, to a certain degree, what the people he generally converses with are.” (Philip Stanhope) That’s why we aim at diversity.

“Too much agreement kills a chat.” (Eldridge Cleaver) However leave your weapons at home.

“The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously.” (Hubert Humphrey)

“Hanging is too good for a man who makes puns; he should be drawn and quoted.” (Fred Allen)

“Practically anything you say will seem amusing if you’re on all fours.” (P.J. O’Rourke)

Having said that we hope to see you there; invite any friends you want and pass this on.

Jerome Keating

The Harbin water crisis is far from over, according to this article from the AP:

A top Russian environmental official tried to reassure the population Tuesday by drinking a glass of water on television. But a spokesman for the World Wide Fund for Nature said the river faced “ecological catastrophe” from the 50-mile-long slick of chemicals floating toward the Russian border from China.

“There will be an effect on nature plants and fish will die and economic damage,” said Ilya Mitasov, a Moscow-based spokesman for the global environmental organization.

The pollution will result in massive fish deaths and force city residents and industries to search for alternative sources of water, he told The Associated Press in a telephone interview.

The only way to get rid of the toxic chemicals including cancer-causing benzene is evaporation, but the water temperature would have to be 68 to start that process, Mitasov said. Currently it’s about 50 and there is ice on some stretches of the river, which ultimately feeds into the Sea of Okhotsk.

“The benzene will remain in the ice until spring, and the (situation) will be dragged out,” Mitasov said.

Meanwhile, Der Spiegel (via the invaluable Salon.com) features this grim summary of the evironmental costs of China’s economic miracle:

Even if water began flowing once again to the city’s residents on Tuesday, the horrific environmental catastrophe reveals the flipside of the socialist economic miracle. Secretiveness and sluggish crisis management highlight the price the Chinese are paying for their boom. And even as Westerners envy the half-communist, half-capitalist country for its impressive growth figures and endless backyard market, China is no longer merely the world’s factory. It is also the world’s toxic waste dump.

China’s rise as a global power, achieved with high economic growth rates, is reminiscent of the conditions in the era of early capitalism. Everything that drives production is good, and everything that slows it down — safety technology, for example, that prevents industrial accidents from leading to massive factory explosions — is harmful. The result is exploding tanks, burning factories, collapsing mine pits and all manner of toxic leaks. According to official statistics, 350 Chinese die each day in industrial accidents, but the unofficial figure is likely to be much higher. “Occupational safety is a serious problem, because the number of accidents and deaths remains high,” said Wang Dexue, deputy director of the State Office of Occupational Safety, commenting on the horrifying figures from the country’s manufacturing industries.

Adding to the problems are economic reforms that have made many businessmen greedy. China’s laissez-faire brand of socialism doesn’t prevent executives from spending their money on cars and villas instead of investing it in worker safety and environmental protection. Although the government is constantly vowing to monitor manufacturers more closely, local officials and party leaders are often in bed with the captains of industry in China. This Mafia-like alliance between the politically and economically ambitious is known as “local protectionism.”

Chen Bangzhu, an environmental expert on Beijing’s Parliamentary Council, says he recognizes an “irrational development” in his country. In an interview earlier this year, Pan Yue, the deputy minister of the government environmental agency, SEPA, predicted a bitter end to the economic miracle. “This boom will soon come to an end,” he said in an interview with Der Spiegel, “because the environment isn’t cooperating anymore.” The negative consequences of the boom are devastating. Five of the world’s 10 most polluted cities are in China. More than two-thirds of all Chinese rivers and lakes are turning into sewers — even before the recent accident, the Songhua River was hardly a model of cleanliness — and more than 360 million people have no access to clean drinking water. A toxic soup splashes through the country’s waterways, while people living along the banks die from cancer at above-average rates. Nowadays, the then 72-year-old former party chairman Mao Zedong’s legendary swimming outing in the Yangtze River in 1966 would no longer be seen as evidence of his strength, but more as a suicide attempt…

…The People’s Republic, which could soon surpass the United States as the world’s largest producer of greenhouse gases, has lost its ecological balance and is paying a heavy price as a result. About 400,000 people die prematurely each year because of the polluted air they breathe. Experts estimate the annual loss at 8 to 15 percent of the gross domestic product — or up to $250 billion — a figure that does not include the costs of treating cancer, skin conditions and bronchitis.

The Chinese leadership has become increasingly concerned about the possibility that environmental damage could jeopardize China’s industrial ascent. After the Harbin incident, even Prime Minister Wen Jiabao admitted that the environmental situation is “bleak” and called for “sustainable growth.” But many other party leaders see this kind of talk as nothing but Western social nonsense. They prefer to follow the lead of Mao, who summed up his take on the environment in 1958 when he said, “Make the high mountain bow its head; make the river yield its way.” Today’s comrades, profiting handsomely from industrial growth, believe it is cheaper to clean up in the distant future than to invest in protecting the environment today.

Of course, such attitudes aren’t unique to China. I could cite our current Administration in the US, with its disbelief in global warming and its infinite faith in the power of more drilling (and foreign wars) to solve our energy issues. Or, going back a couple of administrations, I could mention former Secretary of the Interior James Watt, who did not think we needed to concern ourselves overmuch with conserving resources for future generations, because in his words, “I do not know how many future generations we can count on before the Lord returns.” Such faith is touching, in a way, as is the faith of the Chinese Communist Party’s materialists, who believe we can innovate our way out of any crisis we create, or at least can leave the mess for our children to take care of – as opposed to the faith of the Bush Administration, which preaches that the mess simply does not exist. But the grownups in the room, in China, America and elsewhere, realize that the longer we wait, the greater the reckoning. Whether the grownups can take charge from the greedy, selfish children who all too often seem to be treating the world as their playpen, before that playpen collapses under the weight of its own filth, remains to be seen.

It’s clear that China-Japan relations are in a truly desperate state these days – and doesn’t look like improving anytime soon, if ever. China and South Korea have both taken a very hardline stance over, for example, the Yakasuni Shrine visits and it looks likely that Koizumi will be succeeded by an even more right-wing leader in the future.

It’s no surprise then, that Mr. Cui Tiankai, the head of the Chinese foreign ministry’s Asian affairs department, recently said that it was “impossible” for Premier Wen Jiabao to meet with Prime Minister Koizumi at the next ASEAN summit in December. Not only will a China-South Korea-Japan summit not take place for the first time in 6 years, but the rift is also making it almost impossible to set an agenda for the larger ASEAN meeting. The same goes for the ongoing territorial disputes involving oil and gas deposits in the East China Sea.

Despite the fact that relations between Asia’s 3 largest economies are clearly undermining broader regional co-operation, the U.S. ambassador to Japan, Mr. Tom Schieffer, also said yesterday that the U.S. was intending to ‘wash its hands’ of the poisonous China-Japan relationship, telling the two countries to sort it out between themselves:

“We are not the last arbiter of every dispute. I don’t think we have a direct role to play but the U.S. hopes that Japan and China can work out their differences. It’s important to the whole region that people get along out here. One of the reasons (the U.S.-Japan relationship) is extraordinary is that we were able to put our differences in the past behind us. We were able look forward. Sixty years is a long time and history didn’t stop 60 years ago, history has continued. And in that 60 years Japan has been a model international citizen people should take that into account when they try to resolve this whole historical issue.”

Although many people might agree with ambassador Schieffer’s comments, the chances of China and Japan sorting out anything remains remote. It’s also arguable that the current China-Japan rift provides the U.S. with it’s very own ‘Great Britain in Asia’ by pushing Japan even more closely to the U.S.

This was almost certainly why the ambassador described U.S. foreign policy in Asia as “the untold success story of the Bush Administration”. Pointing to the growing strategic trilateral relationship between the U.S., Japan and Australia that will almost certainly become a ‘linchpin of regional security’. It will also be interesting to see just how closely Taiwan will fit into this relationship. While many might baulk at the above quote about U.S. foreign policy in Asia, it’s fair to say that the U.S. is enjoying considerably more diplomatic success in Asia than the rest of the world.

That’s a hefty claim, but Randy Rummel, author of China’s Bloody Century, says it’s a fact in a post all you Chang and Halliday readers will want to see. Rummel, who boasts some extraordinary credentials, had originally discounted the 40 million or so who died during the great famine, believing they were unintentionally killed and thus didn’t meet his criteria for “democide.” Now he’s had a change of heart, thanks to that book we all need to read.

From the biography of Mao, which I trust (for those who might question it, look at the hundreds of interviews Chang and Halliday conducted with communist cadre and former high officials, and the extensive bibliography) I can now say that yes, Mao’s policies caused the famine. He knew about it from the beginning. He didn’t care! Literally. And he tried to take more food from the people to pay for his lust for international power, but was overruled by a meeting of 7,000 top Communist Party members.

So, the famine was intentional. What was its human cost? I had estimated that 27,000,000 Chinese starved to death or died from associated diseases. Others estimated the toll to be as high as 40,000,000. Chang and Halliday put it at 38,000,000, and given their sources, I will accept that.

Now, I have to change all the world democide totals that populate my websites, blogs, and publications. The total for the communist democide before and after Mao took over the mainland is thus 3,446,000 + 35,226,000 + 38,000,000 = 76,692,000, or to round off, 77,000,000 murdered. This is now in line with the 65 million toll estimated for China in the Black Book of Communism, and Chang and Halliday’s estimate of “well over 70 million.”

This exceeds the 61,911,000 murdered by the Soviet Union 1917-1987, with Hitler far behind at 20,946,000 wiped out 1933-1945.

For perspective on Mao’s most bloody rule, all wars 1900-1987 cost in combat dead 34,021,000 — including WWI and II, Vietnam, Korea, and the Mexican and Russian Revolutions. Mao alone murdered over twice as many as were killed in combat in all these wars.

If true, that’s quite a bit of blood to have on one’s hands. Hitler comes across as a two-bit amateur. And still, Mao’s creepy portrait looms over us at Tiananmen Square, and his statues adorn every university campus. What an eerie anomaly. But let’s not forget, he was 70 percent good.

Waldron writes for the reactionary Commentary magazine and is infamously anti-CCP. (I don’t exactly love the Party much myself, but Waldron has been banging the “China Threat” drum for years.) He got annoyed at a fellow blogger’s post;his response, and the bloggers response to the response, are well worth reading.

Via Jo B., and sent to me by rabid Bush-hating defeatists Gordon.(!)

Again the words ‘Guangzhou’ and ‘animal cruelty’ are all over the international media. I must admit, I wasn’t aware that dogs and cats in China were killed for their fur. However, last night, (Monday) the BBC’s Six O’Clock News in Britain broadcast a secretly taped film of animals being abused and killed (for their fur) at Guangzhou’s Fur Market – supposedly the hub for China’s cat and dog fur exports. The hidden camera footage was filmed by the organisation People For The Ethical Treatment Of Animals (PETA) and shows ‘extreme scenes on animal torture’:

Dogs and cats are shown being thrown from the top deck of a converted bus onto concrete pavements. In another piece of footage, cats are seen squirming inside a sack before being thrown into a vat of boiling water. Smiling, laughing workers are also filmed beating the animals to death.

One reason why the story made big news was because ex-Beatle, Sir Paul McCartney – well known for his strong stance against animal cruelty – was invited to a preview screening and was shocked by the footage, describing the Chinese industry as being ‘against every rule of humanity’:

“This is barbaric. Horrific. It’s like something out of the Dark Ages. They seem to get a kick out of it. They’re just sick, sick people. This is just disgusting. It’s just against every rule of humanity. I wouldn’t even dream of going over there to play, in the same way I wouldn’t go to a country that supported apartheid. I couldn’t go there. If they want to consider themselves a civilised nation they’re going to have to stop this.”

The Bushies manipulated the US media with phoney video news releases prepared by PR agencies, and then with the paid-for articles on No Child Left Behind by Armstrong Williams. Now it seems we’re pulling the same sneaky tricks in the land we’ve liberated.

As part of an information offensive in Iraq, the U.S. military is secretly paying Iraqi newspapers to publish stories written by American troops in an effort to burnish the image of the U.S. mission in Iraq.

The articles, written by U.S. military “information operations” troops, are translated into Arabic and placed in Baghdad newspapers with the help of a defense contractor, according to U.S. military officials and documents obtained by the Los Angeles Times.

Many of the articles are presented in the Iraqi press as unbiased news accounts written and reported by independent journalists. The stories trumpet the work of U.S. and Iraqi troops, denounce insurgents and tout U.S.-led efforts to rebuild the country.

Though the articles are basically factual, they present only one side of events and omit information that might reflect poorly on the U.S. or Iraqi governments, officials said. Records and interviews indicate that the U.S. has paid Iraqi newspapers to run dozens of such articles, with headlines such as “Iraqis Insist on Living Despite Terrorism,” since the effort began this year.

The operation is designed to mask any connection with the U.S. military. The Pentagon has a contract with a small Washington-based firm called Lincoln Group, which helps translate and place the stories. The Lincoln Group’s Iraqi staff, or its subcontractors, sometimes pose as freelance reporters or advertising executives when they deliver the stories to Baghdad media outlets.

It’s just more bullshit, the same tired shit of trying to spin as much as possible and at any cost. It’s always a big part of any president’s job to influence the media. But in the case of Commander Codpiece, it’s all about blatant deception, tomfoolery and dirty tricks. How can anyone not be cynical?