Chinese detail ambitious space program in 2008

AP: China to Launch Rockets in Olympic Year



Wired Science: China Details 2008 Space Plans



The Chinese government has just released details of its planned space flights for 2008, leaving few to doubt the true emergence of a third player in the geo-political battle for control over near-Earth orbit. The boldest mission will be the third manned space flight launched by China and will feature the first spacewalk by a Chinese astronaut.



The much anticipated mission will be Shenzhou 7, and is slated for October. This will be a glorious time in Chinese history, provided the government can manage the seemingly impossible challenge of the Summer Olympics, and this human spacewalk will be the cherry on the proverbial sundae for the CCP leadership.

Related articles by Zemanta

• China Launches Two Satellites, Readies for Third Manned Spaceflight


• Reports: China Chooses Fighter Pilot as First Spacewalker


• India's unmanned moon mission may launch race for lunar landgrab


• Chinese astronaut walks in space


• China's spacewalk astronauts return as heroes

Americans are in no position to judge Chinese human rights...

Olympics Highlight Human Rights in China - washingtonpost.com

I used to think that I was a moral absolutist, and I would regularly dismiss my friends when they would attempt to justify something I considered "inhumane" as the position of a moral relativist, who sees fundamental differences in the way one human-being values the life of another based on cultural differences. It did not take long after I became interested in China for me to abandon my preconceived notions, which were likely the by-product of nearly two decades attending Catholic schools, and an attempt to more fully understand why it is that human life is not valued equally by all, or more importantly, why it cannot be such.

I always knew China was huge, but it never registered with me exactly how huge until I began studying the Chinese Communist Revolution and the major social movements subsequently led by Mao Zedong in an effort to "purge" his country of right-wing dissidents that may eventually pose a threat to the Communist Party's universal authority. The two largest massacres of human life in the 20th century were at the hands of Communist Chinese cadre, some of whom reverted to truly barbaric practices like cannibalism at the instigation of local and national party leaders. Literally tens-of-millions of Chinese citizens were murdered piecemeal during the "Long March" and "Cultural Revolution", yet still the country's population multiplied exponentially during the baby boom era. Growth was so amazing and untenable that the Party was forced to institute drastic population control laws, which we know as the "One Child Policy". Every living Chinese citizen has spent most, if not all, of their life in a fractured society built according to a strict social plan that harshly punished even the slightest deviation.



It is through the lens of this grossly incomplete history of 20th century Chinese growth and development that the West has chosen to judge the ethical standards of a civilization that makes up one-fifth of the worlds population, and has been wholly isolated from the world community until the last thirty years because of internal strife and political instability. I would never pretend that these are ideal circumstances from a Western perspective, or that these tragedies were unavoidable, but I believe it is essential that we not hold the common Chinese citizen responsible for the sins of paranoid men now but a memory. We must recognize that the Chinese people are aware of the differences between our cultures, and are ashamed of the history that we consider to be barbaric.



I have friends from China who comment to me often on how compassionate American culture is compared to their own. They can hardly believe it when they turn on the news to see 30 minutes of coverage on the investigation into the disappearance of one person, and they comment often on the propensity of Chinese media to completely ignore incidents such as floods, and poisonings of water reserves that literally kill whole towns of people in rural provinces.



I had a very difficult time trying to understand what the fundamental difference between the two civilizations that creates this culture of apathy on matters that we in America mourn daily as a nation. The value of each individual life in the US is truly held sacred by the media, which is largely due to the fact that these stories are the driving force behind stronger ratings because of the emotional response they elicit from viewers. Chinese media are much more interested in telling stories about great economic growth and massive engineering projects instead of the more emotionally charged stories, both because they cast the government in the most favorable light possible, and because this is what draws the attention and fascination of the average Chinese citizen.



You may be asking yourself, what is the underlying cause of this cultural divide? After much thought and reflection, I have reached two conclusions. First, Chinese society is essentially atheist, the antithesis of traditional American society, which has largely evolved from small communities built around the local church. Those who are deeply religious in China are absolutely in the minority, and their activities are viewed with great suspicion by the political classes of society because of the role religion has played historically in revolutionary political movements around the world. Secondly, the collective pride of Chinese society and the feelings of inferiority and lack of appreciation they have received from the more "developed" societies of the world, have created within the greater society a more focused and goal oriented vision of where their country is going and how progress toward that end earns them the respect they deserve around the world.



Though this narrow-minded, and less compassionate view on the world is largely the result of government suppression of dissent and censorship of news that serves as a distraction from Party plan, we should not be so jingoistic as to assume that we have any right or reason to pass judgment on a society that we should not even claim to understand. 1.5 billion human-beings is a staggering thought, and such circumstances are truly unprecedented in the history of nation-states.



To judge the undoubtedly complex and morally taxing decisions of the Communist Party Officials according to moral absolutes that we have concluded to be non-negotiable measures of social progress and worthiness of full diplomatic and economic recognition, is to me one of the most ignorant distortions of 21st century realities and further evidence of the poisonous opportunistic political culture that currently reigns in Washington. We cannot presume to understand the responsibility facing the Chinese Communist Party, and it is highly ignorant and dangerously presumptuous to arbitrarily decide that we can better judge the method of governance that is best for a country that in no way, demographically or ethically, resembles our own.



Continuing the movement to boycott the Beijing Olympics next summer is one of the most disturbing examples of political opportunism, worse than most because it is based on an assumption of clearly non-existent moral absolutisms. The only way to effect the social ethos of Chinese, or any other civilization, is to earn both their trust and respect. The more American politicians deride the "values" of our competitors, the greater the chances that mutual prosperity will fall victim to cultural resentment and unhealthy competition between the two greatest and most dynamic societies the world has ever known.



This was written in a stream of consciousness, so it may be fractured and incoherent. I would appreciate any comments that you may have so I can revise and clarify my thought. Thanks.

Tags: Beijing Olympics, Olympic Boycott, CCP, Chinese Civilization, Moral Relativism, Moral Absolutism

Related articles by Zemanta

• Benedict Rogers: China's persecution of Christians hasn't been rolled back for the Olympics


• Decline and Fall of the Maoist Empire:


• China warns financial crisis is damaging its economic growth


• Muhammad Cohen: Why the Chinese (heart) the Olympics


• Georgianne Nienaber: Beijing Olympics: Is U.S. Support the Anaconda in the Chandelier?

Internet forum from People's Daily offers elaborate and engaging glimpse into Chinese perception of US post-9/11 policy...

Chinadaily BBS - Powered by Discuz! Board

"Subject: A nation bickering about smoking while Iraq burns"

A discussion forum feed published by a People's Daily blogger named Shanhuang on the day of the US invasion of Iraq that I stumbled upon this evening is full of some very astute and disconcerting thoughts on the US and the priorities of American culture. With the fourth anniversary of "Shock and Awe" passing just yesterday (with little notice since the media is more concerned over the Justice Dept. and the who is Anna Nicole Smith's baby-daddy) this thread provides a voluminous log of the day-to-day and week-to-week sway of the cerebral tides between the different factions that emerged around the world in the post-September 11th world, and has once again set me thinking about the perception of the US in China.

I have written recently on the flawed perception of the Chinese amongst nearly every person within Middle Class America. I fret regularly to my friend Victor about what I feel will be the ultimate determinant of whether or not China and the US will come to a peaceful understanding and cultural diffusion (a la Japan and South Korea)-- the oft overlooked and underestimated possibility that there could arise a jealousy and spite for China across the United States if/when the US loses its economic stranglehold on the global markets.

Political realities and national interests across the Western Hemisphere will undoubtedly result in a unified resistance to the first substantial threat posed it by another civilization in several centuries time. The lack of careful consideration of the how to best manage/balance the Sino-American alliance by the American press (which I will elaborate on in a subsequent post) coupled with a preoccupation with a sensationalized conflict in the Middle East among concerned citizens (a.k.a. voters) is likely to be remembered as the primary catalyst of opportunistic political pandering by politicians who were similarly complacent, or more accurately negligent, in their careful consideration of the countries interests.

An America that exists under the institutions of our founding Republican principles will not, and must not, allow China to establish an alternative political model under the banner of Mao, even if the guiding wisdom which underlies it be rooted in a less draconian code. There are several reasons why I believe this is an indispensable maxim, the least of which is my nostalgia for the greatness of the the colonial founder's experiment. However, the Chinese must also never become a casualty of US domestic politics in the same manner that the Soviet Union became the issue of greatest concern and source of ideological alliances during the bygone, bi-lateral era of the Cold War, because if the Chinese are anything, they are VERY proud (similar to most Americans as this article makes clear).

Consequently, I see the future of Chinese politics (in light of both the China and the United State's long term interests) through the lens of Japan's US-styled (authored) system, which is basically a rotation of leadership of one political party, the LDP, through the occasional polling of the general populace. So essentially, the political realities faced by the US in the far Pacific Rim as they compete in the 21st century global economy have the potential to be at once unified, at least stylistically between the Japanese and Chinese peoples. However, one need not get too close before the glaring differences in lifestyle and social values- as well as the echo's of bitter diplomatic rifts stemming from Japanese aggression at the outset of the 20th century- rush into view and cloud the thoughts of men tasked with forgetting about these issues and getting on with the jobs of making peace and creating wealth.

It is so easy to forget about China these days, as it seems the only region of the world that is worthy of the media's time, well at least the US media. So many thoughts are provoked by just this one statement; thoughts that send the mind irrecoverably into the depths of my political consciousness. With hope, this issue can soon emerge from suppression and regain its importance on the mantle of US foreign policy, in the spot now occupied by the criminal files of radical Islamic terrorists and politicians, where it will soon so apparently belong.

China holds the key to unlocking growth in Africa...

The recent Beijing Summit made it clear that the Chinese government is becoming more publicly emboldened in their African policy initiatives. Many mainstream pundits and analysts have recently written about this topic, and I thought I would interject with my thoughts while the debate is still young and minds are still impressionable. I have for some time felt that it was essential for the Chinese to take the lead in Africa, and my confidence in this opinion has only been strengthened as coalition forces face increased difficulty in Iraq, and the situation in the Palestinian territories continues to deteriorate.

Though I wish the Chinese would take more responsibility in the current Middle Eastern crisis, I can understand their unwillingness to get involved in a situation that they are neither responsible for nor capable of substantially pacifying. Instead, they should use their experience in managing the development of their own impoverished regions to shape a more prosperous future for the people of Africa, and they should do so without the fear of igniting a diplomatic firestorm among Western governments that view a more proactive China as a threat rather than an opportunity. Africa now faces rampant disease, famine, violence, economic malaise, and is plagued desertification; all the while Western diplomats sit on their thumbs on the upper-east side and squabble over the merits of peacekeeping missions to halt genocidal slaughter in Sudan.

For decades, U.N. policy has failed the people it was established to benefit, those in the developing world, and until recently, there was no end to the destitution is in sight. There is no government in the world more experienced with and successful in the implementation of development policy than the Chinese. Its immense population has required its leaders to climb down from their perches in Beijing and travel to the poor villages in its western provinces to better understand the nature of poverty and conceive of more realistic and effective policies to combat its debilitating consequences. However, China has heretofore been unwilling to assert itself on issues which it fears may derail its economic prosperity because of political opportunists in Western capitols eager to keep them in check as they grow and expand their influence beyond their borders.

Nobody questions the merits of exploring innovative solutions to problems that have vexed policymakers for decades. However, few Western politicians or bureaucrats have been willing to admit that when their initiatives to stimulate economic growth abroad are compared with the initiatives undertaken by the Chinese government to combat similar inequalities domestically the proof is in the pudding. The Chinese economy is booming, its peasantry is becoming increasingly self-sufficient and educated, and most people would agree that the future for the Chinese people (ALL Chinese people) is bright, and their international prestige and influence growing. This leaves western leaders in the precarious position of having to confront a communist government whose success challenges the legitimacy of their own democratic systems. As the U.S. and her allies battle for the hearts and minds of impoverished, war-torn peoples in the Middle East, for whose current situation they bear the lions-share of the responsibility, it is essential that other less-developed regions do not become lost in the chaos. Missions that have been relegated to the back-burner since 9/11 because of the shift in our foreign policy mustn't be permanently retarded, for social stability in a world growing in both population and inequality is not guaranteed and should not be taken for granted anywhere or on any issue.

It seems logical to me that governments in the developed world would feel threatened by the rapid ascendancy of such a formidable competitor in the less-developed world, but I doubt that they have the resources necessary to offer a viable alternative strategy while they become further bogged down in the "War on Terror". As the Chinese begin to spread their wings and establish friendships with countries on the African continent that have felt slighted by the West for years, they are undoubtedly going to earn the respect of the people and governments of these countries, and will finally enter the realm of nations which share collective responsibility to provide aid and assistance to the developing world (G8 members). Therefore, I think it would be in the West's self-interest to allow, in fact encourage, the Chinese to expand into Africa unabated to both relieve themselves of the distraction it poses to progress on current initiatives elsewhere. It is important to make sure the Chinese do not become too ambitious for their own good but rather stay focused on international projects that they are best suited to manage, of which African economic development is clearly one.

Some may argue that by ignoring the African continent and allowing the Chinese to build their prestige through cooperation in economic development projects and poverty alleviation, the West would be squandering their opportunity to build the partnerships necessary to capitalize on the rich natural resources the developing economies in that region will become increasingly adept at harnessing, packaging, and exporting.

I take a contrary view, as I feel that the best way to substantially benefit from the vast reserves of oil, uranium, iron ore, and other minerals and fuels that have only begun to be realized is by allowing the Chinese multi-national companies to take responsibility for financing, constructing, and operating the sorely needed infrastructure that will allow these goods to be extracted and brought to market in a manner that is both efficient and has a real effect on the currently inflated market prices that are currently under the sole discretion of the OPEC ministers.

I suspect that the Chinese are not going to make an investment in these countries unless they have reason to believe that their return on that investment will be substantial. Even if the Chinese and their partners are reluctant to open up their co-ops to full participation from foreign companies and governments, there is likely to be a tangible easing of the pressure the economy's unprecedented growth has placed on global markets, so by allowing them to have preferential access to these reserves it should result in a decline in the price of oil contracts traded in Chicago, New York, and other major commodity markets around the world. This is Economics 101, simple supply and demand.

In terms of realizing benefit on behalf of the American people and the citizens of our Western allies, this tweak in the fundamental market makeup could have a tangible downward effect on the price of gasoline for consumers, as well as ease the burden on airlines that are struggling to cut costs and climb out of bankruptcy. Thus, it would be positive for American industry generally to encourage the Chinese to explore possible partnerships in countries like Zimbabwe, Zaire, Nigeria, Kenya, and others that are ready to test the waters of globalization and improve their embattled economies.

Another comparative advantage China offers its potential African partners is its rich experience in building a domestic economy upon a manufacturing force that can both produce at unparalleled levels while simultaneously maintaining a cost of production well below that sought by countries in the America's and Eastern Europe, which are its only true competitors in terms of quality of labor. The last great untapped labor force in the world occupies most of the African continent and if provided the proper industrial management, the continent has enough raw material to become very competitive in numerous industries by following the Chinese economic development model.

I believe strongly that one of the most debilitating handicaps endured by G8 nations is their irreversible and misguided obsession with framing the debate on international development and poverty alleviation as a domestic political issue, instead of leaving the diplomats to contrive of innovative solutions to the complex problems of the 21st century which are devoid of political calculation. After spending several months considering the merits of the solution I have proposed it seems apparent to me that it will be successful based upon one precondition: the US and her allies acknowledge China's right to use the arena of international trade and developmental economics to enhance its prestige among its peers atop the international community. The ideas I have articulated in this post are an attempt to refocus the debate on development policy in the West away from the prevailing approach of "what should we be doing", towards one that asks the question, "what should we be encouraging others to do?" I hope to stimulate thought, and I welcome all feedback.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Chinese Democracy
• Book review - The Chinese Dream
• China's Communist rulers debate how to respond to the crisis of capitalism
• Chinese economy shows signs of vulnerability with slowdown in growth

Chinese In Africa

BBC NEWS | Business | China defends its African relations

If there is one continent in the world that still elicits feelings of uncertainty in the minds of global political and economic leaders it is unquestionably Africa. The cradle of civilization now faces rampant disease, famine, violence and economic malaise, while Western diplomats sit on their thumbs on the upper-east side and squabble over the merits of peacekeeping missions to halt genocidal slaughter in Sudan. For decades UN policy has utterly failed the people it was established to benefit above any other, and no end to the destitution is in sight, at least until recently.

There is no government in the world more experienced with and successful in the implementation of development policy than the Chinese. Its population has demanded that its leaders climb down from their perch in Beijing and travel to the villages, so as to better understand the nature of poverty and conceive of realistic and effective policies to combat its debilitating consequences. Well, the proof is in the pudding.

The Chinese economy is booming, its peasantry is becoming increasingly self-sufficient and educated, and few people would argue that the future for the Chinese people is not bright and their international prestige and influence not growing. This leaves Western leaders in the precarious position of having to confront a Communist government, who's success challenges the legitimacy of their own democratic systems as they battle for the hearts and minds of impoverished, war torn countries in the Middle East, which are far more valuable to their self-interest than trying to tackle the complicated problems that plague the African continent.

It seems logical to me that governments in the developed world both feel threatened by the rapid ascendancy of such a formidable competitor, but I doubt that they have the resources necessary to combat the Chinese as they begin to spread their wings and establish friendships with countries that have felt slighted by the West for years. Therefore, I think it would be in the West's self-interest to allow the Chinese to expand into Africa unabated, so as to both relieve themselves of the distraction it poses to progress on initiatives currently under way elsewhere, as well as to make sure the Chinese do not become too ambitious for their own good but rather stay focused on international projects that they are best suited to manage.

The Chinese are well aware of where their comparative advantages lie, and I don't think they are eager to bite off more responsibility than they can chew.  We will have to wait and see how the US and other governments engage the Chinese, but with any hope they will be viewed as a partner who shares our goals of global prosperity and alleviation of destitution around the world. Until we are given a reason to feel otherwise, it would be both irresponsible and ignorant to act otherwise.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Phil Qiu: The Chinese authorities have blacklisted certain words on the internet. But you can't suppress communication
• Today's China: Communist Millionaires, Kissing Contests, and Oh Yes, the Olympics
• Recipients of Joint $4 Million Innovation and Commercialization Strategic Development Program Announced
• The Right to Self-determination Doesn't Require the Attention of Richard Gere: