It’s nice to hear him talking sense to China. Even if it was a nudge-nudge, wink-wink moment.
President Bush, speaking days before a meeting with Chinese President Hu Jintao in Beijing, called on the communist nation’s leaders today to ease restrictions on free expression and religion, and cited Taiwan as a possible model.
But his remarks reflected more of a nudge than an ultimatum — underscoring the increasingly delicate balancing act of weighing China’s expanding influence in the world against demands by religious conservatives and human rights advocates at home, who want Bush to be more confrontational.
And the first comments from Chinese officials did not indicate great concern about Bush’s pronouncements.
“As the people of China grow in prosperity, their demands for political freedom will grow as well,” Bush said in a speech today in Kyoto, Japan’s ancient capital.
“I have pointed out that the people of China want more freedom to express themselves — to worship without state control — and to print Bibles and other sacred texts without fear of punishment. The efforts of China’s people to improve their society should be welcomed as part of China’s development. By meeting the legitimate demands of its citizens for freedom and openness, China’s leaders can help their country grow into a modern, prosperous, and confident nation,” Bush said.
He punctuated his comments by drawing an unusually direct parallel between China and Taiwan, an island democracy claimed by China that the U.S. has pledged to protect.
Bush did not mention China’s ongoing military buildup, viewed in the region as a signal of Beijing’s intention to fight for control of Taiwan. Nor did he alter U.S. policy backing “one China” that includes Taiwan, reiterating that stance at a brief news conference. But using potentially provocative terms, he said the island had fostered a “free and democratic Chinese society” that could be a model for the mainland.
“Taiwan is another society that has moved from repression to democracy as it liberalized its economy,” Bush said. “This opening to world markets transformed the island into one of the world’s most important trading powers. Economic liberalization in Taiwan helped fuel its desire for individual political freedom — because men and women who are allowed to control their own wealth will eventually insist on controlling their own lives and their future.”
Bush and other officials sought to balance the president’s relatively tough language with assurances that their overall relationship with China was progressing.
I like what he said about Taiwan. (It goes to show, if Bush says enough things, at least one or two of them might end up being right.) And I’m sure Hu Jintao is feeling totally apoplectic about it. Good.
No more posts today. Blogged out and overwhelmed with work. (Guest bloggers, are you listening?)
1
By ACB
What I find rather troubling is that Bush wasn’t just calling on China to have a more democratic society, he was openly contrasting China’s lack of democracy to JAPAN and TAIWAN of all countries.
Is it just me, or does this strike you as the stupidest and most culturally insensitive thing to do given the history between these countries?
“Hey, look at your arch enemy and historic tormentor, we like them WAY better than we like you. Why can’t you be more like them”
Bush either has absolutely no understanding of history, or he was deliberately trying to provoke China.
What is he going to do next, hold up Isreal as a possible model for Iranian democracy?
November 16, 2005 @ 3:58 am | Comment
2
By kazana
i totally agree with ACB on this one.
pointing out that china should give more freedom to its population is one thing, but making taiwan and japan role models for the chinese government is a plain provocation. even billy bush can’t be that stupid and/or ignorant.
November 16, 2005 @ 4:24 am | Comment
3
By kevin
Or… in my opinion, it’s just time to stop treating china like a fine piece of diplomatic porcelain that you need to take the utmost care in dealing with. really, taiwan and japan do have systems in place that are way better than china. i think it’s time that this was addressed.
generally if you talk about democratic political systems without mentioning a place a like japan or taiwan, tyranny-supporters will break into “oriental-orientalist” mode and start talking about “Eastern values” and how Bush and Americans just don’t understand.
So, while I’m not a diplomat, and bushy-boy sure isn’t much of one either, I think it’s time that other nations stopped treating China so delicaely, and started speaking truthfully and directly to China about its system. It’s certainly a nice change.
November 16, 2005 @ 7:02 am | Comment
4
By ACB
Kevin
Bush could have used Korea as a model. It might not be a model of democracy, but it’s far less of an insult.
Using Japan and Taiwan as models will only make China angry, and when China becomes angry it becomes very defensive, which is totally counter productive.
November 16, 2005 @ 7:12 am | Comment
5
By Johnny K
Counterproductive, but fun to see Hu squirm.
November 16, 2005 @ 11:37 am | Comment
6
By yandoz
Part of me want to say, well done, Bush. Isn’t democratization of China the primary precondition held on the part of Taiwan for any possible peaceful resolutions? Long before it become a news item, Taiwanese politicians have for years brandished “Taiwan model” in front of China. But mostly use it as a stalling tactic, knowing China is not about to change her political system anytime soon, if ever. Anything can hasten changes in China, in theory at least, can help bring the two sides closer sooner.
The same suggestion coming from Bush and delivered in such visible way has to irate China to no end. The mistrust toward US will only grow deeper. If China is anything like Taiwan today, were the government is powerless to conduct any major business, it is the end to her rise. China will refuse to be dismantled by the US. Basically call it a ‘good try’. Meantime, her citizens will have to wait for another day.
November 16, 2005 @ 12:44 pm | Comment
7
By Qiang Gong
I tend to disagree that this speech will “iritate” China. I think politicians on both sides are too smart to think that those kind of speeches are for real.
For the United States, especially with the Bush Administration, it will go crazy if it does not issue a few “speeches of democracy” or issue a few reports on other countries’ human rights once in a while. Bush is only making this speech to panper to some of his more conservative base at home, people like Bill Krystol and members of the Project for a New American Century.
And I think there’s this tacit “wink wink” in this speech. Bush is saying “Ok, I’m just going to give my usual democracy-is-good-for-you speech, but please understand this is just a formality that I have to go through.” And China is saying “Ok, just go ahead with whatever you have to do, and then let’s talk real business, like trade/textile imports/taiwan, etc”. So both sides understand each other very well 🙂
Case in point, right after the 1989 Tianamen Incident, the Senior Bush wrote to Deng Xiaoping in a private/secret letter that the US wants to continue the economic relationship with China, but for domestic consumption, he has no choice but to condemn China publicly and cut off certain ties for symbolic and political purposes. He said in his letter (paraphrase) “There’s no way I can go on like nothing happened, certain sanctions will have to be taken, but please understand that we don’t want to fundamentally disrupt our relationship.” Deng Xiaoping something like , “Yea, we understand, you do what you have to do.”
International relations are a like more “practical” than many of you think.
November 16, 2005 @ 3:55 pm | Comment
8
By Qiang Gong
I tend to disagree that this speech will “iritate” China. I think politicians on both sides are too smart to think that those kind of speeches are for real.
For the United States, especially with the Bush Administration, it will go crazy if it does not issue a few “speeches of democracy” or issue a few reports on other countries’ human rights once in a while. Bush is only making this speech to panper to some of his more conservative base at home, people like Bill Krystol and members of the Project for a New American Century.
And I think there’s this tacit “wink wink” in this speech. Bush is saying “Ok, I’m just going to give my usual democracy-is-good-for-you speech, but please understand this is just a formality that I have to go through.” And China is saying “Ok, just go ahead with whatever you have to do, and then let’s talk real business, like trade/textile imports/taiwan, etc”. So both sides understand each other very well 🙂
Case in point, right after the 1989 Tianamen Incident, the Senior Bush wrote to Deng Xiaoping in a private/secret letter that the US wants to continue the economic relationship with China, but for domestic consumption, he has no choice but to condemn China publicly and cut off certain ties for symbolic and political purposes. He said in his letter (paraphrase) “There’s no way I can go on like nothing happened, certain sanctions will have to be taken, but please understand that we don’t want to fundamentally disrupt our relationship.” Deng Xiaoping something like , “Yea, we understand, you do what you have to do.”
International relations are a lot more “practical” than many of you think.
November 16, 2005 @ 3:55 pm | Comment
9
By Kevin
I also thought of South Korea as a possibility, and the comparison is fitting, with the Olympics and everything. I find it interesting that South Korea was not even mentioned in the speech.
November 16, 2005 @ 6:39 pm | Comment
10
By Sam_S
I disagree with Richard in the oddest places. I thought Bush’s comments were needlessly provocative, but like Qiang Gong says, we don’t know about the backstage talks, or what practical arrangements are being made.
November 16, 2005 @ 8:48 pm | Comment
11
By richard
Hey, I’m just glad he said something about human rights, and having lived in Taiwan and China, I have to agree with Bush’s observations about which has a more fair and open political system today.
November 16, 2005 @ 8:50 pm | Comment
12
By xing
What Bush said is for sound-bites for newspaper and evening TV news. It is typical for many politicians in the US. I think the Chinese leaders will just ignore him for that. There is really no cohesive China policy. How can it have one? you have the neo-cons on one side and the business people on the other.
November 16, 2005 @ 9:47 pm | Comment
13
By Hui
What he said is not morally wrong or logically flawed. But in terms of the actual effect on China, it’s only going to backfire-if it will have any impact at all.
November 16, 2005 @ 11:48 pm | Comment
14
By richard
I don’t see how it can backfire; I’ll go with “no impact at all.”
November 16, 2005 @ 11:51 pm | Comment
15
By Jo
Nobody here has mentioned the face issue which immediately occured to me when reading excerpts of Bush’s speech in the news. The people who wrote his speech must’ve been aiming for a sore spot and to annoy the Chinese like hell by causing them to lose face at such a high level forum. And I also agree with Kevin that foreign leaders have to stop tip-toeing around China and pandering to its sensitivities. We’ve heard calls for political reform and human rights from pressure groups and NGOs but I think this is the first time that a nation’s leader – the President of the United States, no less – has made clear what he thinks. It may be a diplomatic faux pas but I am surprised and glad to see that someone has the balls to say what China needs to hear, not what it wants to hear.
November 17, 2005 @ 1:20 am | Comment
16
By LfC
Bush did mention South Korea in his speech:
“As South Korea began opening itself up to world markets, it found that economic freedom fed the just demands of its citizens for greater political freedom. The economic wealth that South Korea created at home helped nurture a thriving middle class that eventually demanded free elections and a democratic government that would be accountable to the people. We admire the struggle the South Korean people made to achieve their democratic freedom – and the modern nation they have built with that freedom. South Korea is now one of the world’s most successful economies and one of Asia’s most successful democracies. It is also showing leadership in the world, by helping others who are claiming their own freedom.”
Source: White House website.
November 17, 2005 @ 2:26 am | Comment
17
By Raj
I’d agree with kevin on this one. Taiwan is only “the enemy” because Beijing chooses to regard it that way. Also just because of what Japan did in the past has no bearing on using it as a positive example today.
China is not a special case – it is a country like any other. If it is offended, then it’s like a child sulking because the teacher praised the work of students he/she doesn’t like. Taiwan and Japan are better than South Korea in regards to the comments made, so why should South Korea have been used as an example?
On a side note, there is a fair bit of trying to belittle Taiwan (as I’m sure everyone has seen) from the mainland. It’s Beijing’s fault if it can’t accept that the “rebel province” does many things better than it can.
November 17, 2005 @ 5:55 am | Comment
18
By kevin
thanks, in that case, i feel a little better about it. i just wouldn’t think it would make any sense to leave out south korea, as (with the exception of the recent kimchi scuffle) that is one country that china does not often have “serious beef” with (compared to japan and taiwan).
in that case, i’d have to give bush a big “ganbei!”
PS: i loved the title of this post: “Bush does something that isn’t terrible”
November 17, 2005 @ 6:02 am | Comment
19
By kevin
Above “thanks” directed to LfC
November 17, 2005 @ 6:04 am | Comment
20
By maple leaves
The U.S. government and media have largely shaped American people’s views about China–an authoritarian country with no freedom, no happiness and people are suffering most of the time. I am a Chinese citizen now living in the U.S. I bought and read Bible in China about seven years ago and it was sold in school bookstores. I didn’t see anybody punished. I think many of Bush’s accusations are ridiculous. It seems that the U.S. is the only country in this world that is so afraid of China’s growth.
November 17, 2005 @ 3:33 pm | Comment
21
By xing
maple leaves,
I don’t necessarily agree with you on everthing you have said here. But quite a number of people continue to belive that most Chinese live a terrible life under a bad government. And those people should read this article from the Pew Research Center on IHT titled “To people in China, future looks bright”:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/11/15/news/pew.php
Still, some people will never change their mind.
November 17, 2005 @ 3:50 pm | Comment
22
By richard
The future does indeed look bright. Did you read my glowing post about this very topic?
November 17, 2005 @ 4:01 pm | Comment
23
By richard
Maple Leaves, please check the link I give in my previous comment. It makes the simple point that life can be very good and the people can be very optimistic while at the same time their government initiates repression. As long as you play the game by the rules and know your place and keep your trap shut, it can be sublime. But God help those at the bottom, or those who speak out in the wrong way or those who hold up a mirror to what’s going on behind the rosy scenes or those who cross the police or those who join the wrong exercise group. They will tell a very diffferent story.
November 17, 2005 @ 4:32 pm | Comment
24
By xing
Yes, I understand that. Life is hard for most Chinese, not to mention the political repression for those people who stick their heads out. Most people feel good about the future as people compare their life of today with that of yesterday and they see it generally get better every year.
November 17, 2005 @ 5:19 pm | Comment
25
By richard
Absolutley true, and I’m the first to agree. Things are way better for most. There’s still a huge way to go, and in some ways things have become worse, and as long as there is no meaningful rule of law, no one is safe. God help the guy who gets in the sites of the party and the secret police. And for all the prosperity, the entire system is built on very shaky ground. There’s good reason the media is so restricted. A little spark can make the whole thing ignite like dry timber. Let’s pray the good times keep on rolling, becasue a run on the banks or an outbreak of plague or other very possible crisis can bring down the entire house of cards.
November 17, 2005 @ 5:32 pm | Comment
26
By ZHJ
Wasn’t it Reagan who once said: “are you better off now than 4 years ago?” Most Chinese will say yes, but I doubt this will be the case for the US under Bush. The irony…
November 17, 2005 @ 9:34 pm | Comment
27
By Hui
It’s going to backfire because the statement may serve to energize the party’s radical hardliners. Just like their counterparts in the US, those who run CCP come from different spectrums: conservative, moderate, and liberal. Of course, the rule of the game is different: we have conservatives ride on the left side and liberals ride on the right side. Although you never see them fight with each other on TV, the behind-scene crossfire is much more dramatic and brutal than American political dramas. However, there must be some enemies out there in order for the most hawkish conservatives not to become irrelevant in a time of economic growth and expansion. Bush’s statement just gave them a perfect target. I won’t be surprised if our propaganda system presents the statement as evidence of American conspiracy to take on us. Like it or not, such kind of cheap verbal support from President Bush will simply be bad PR for the promotion of democracy, freedom, and human rights in China, since anyone who criticizes the CCP can be easily accused as the running dog for American imperialism.
November 17, 2005 @ 10:23 pm | Comment
28
By xing
Backfire? I think the Chinese leaders are mature enough to take what Bush said. Some of them probably even think in private what Bush said is basically true although it was merely rhetotic.
November 17, 2005 @ 11:13 pm | Comment
29
By ZHJ
I don’t think it is true what Bush has said. Taiwan is on the decline since it “became” a democracy, which is the same as saying since it is being ruled by the DPP. All the wealth and basic foundations of Taiwan were build under the KMT using somehow the same system as on the mainland. Looking at Taiwan, all the fistfights in parliament and the crackdown on media which exposes corruption and scandals of the DPP doesn’t look appealing to me. I am amazed that nobody here has said this before: Bush just needs to shut his mouth and butt out, ’nuff said. He should not use the PRC as a scapegoat for his own political problems. (Parts) of the mainland will become a democracy, for sure, but not thanks to Bush’ cowboy rhetoric.
November 18, 2005 @ 5:14 am | Comment
30
By richard
Taiwan is on the decline
since it “became” a democracy,
How do you measure this? What are your criteria for decline? I’m here now, and things look mighty damned good.
November 18, 2005 @ 5:25 am | Comment
31
By ZHJ
Taiwan is restricted in its economic growth, because the DPP puts restrictions on Cross-Strait trade, such as the opening of the “san tong”. The question for Taiwan is now not anymore expanding what you got, but preserving. This China Post editorial puts it nicely.
In response to Bush’ speech, I’d also like to refer to Dianne Feinstein, US senator. So I think I will join your club in Bush-bashing. 😉
November 18, 2005 @ 6:11 am | Comment
32
By richard
They may be restricted, but to say they are in decline is a bit much.
And thanks for joining the club!
November 18, 2005 @ 6:19 am | Comment
33
By sun bin
Bush has a point in using Taiwan.
Apart from US’ diplomatic statement on one-china policy, people in Taiwan are 98% Chinese, share the same language and culture.
It is the most appropriate comparison.
also, Bush was not trying to persaude Hu. He just needs to talk about this, to appease those would insist on formality. the target audience is the right wing and the western media, not china.
November 18, 2005 @ 2:42 pm | Comment
34
By sun bin
whether taiwan declined or not has nothing to do with its democracy.
the force dragging it down is just some irresponsible politicians who put ideology in front of pragmatism.
and yes, Taiwan is not as free as other democracy, it is even less free than a non-democracy such as HK.
http://tinyurl.com/8s975
November 18, 2005 @ 2:48 pm | Comment
35
By peter
It is telling that all those comments of Bush were made before entering into China (actually in Korea).
Once in China, there’s absolute zilch on those issues or related issues, other than to attend a Church in Beijing.
What does it tell you about for whom the messages were intended?
November 30, 2005 @ 10:59 pm | Comment