FOCUS
Hindee-Chinee Bye Bye!
It was way back in 1998, former Defence Minister in the NDA government who had famously observed that "China was India’s potential enemy No: 1. Some were shocked, some were surprised, and some smiled and probably muttered "Buddha smiled". Mostly these reactions were ideologically and politically motivated. Since then George Fernandese (GF) was, as the cliché goes "in the eye of the storm". Fernandese was always on the opposite side of Chinese since the days of Chinese annexation of Tibet in 1949. GF was in PSP (Praja Socialist Party) then, and PSP always looked at China as a danger. Somehow Chinese leadership from Mao down to the current leadership did not make things better by either words or actions to change this perception. In fact they did the reverse and sustained a veiled reference to it as "China has an aggressive strategic culture".
As for Tibet, the whole world is aware what China is doing to Tibet and Tibetans. It is the same attitude of aggression that led to the border issues that China raised with India, especially the Arunachal Pradesh, which China claims as part of Tibet. Here it is very pertinent to reproduce what the TIME had to say in its Special Issue: ‘2011 in Brief’. Under the caption UNTOLD STORIES, it said, ‘Tibet is rarely in the news these days, possibly because Chinese occupation of the country has entered its 7th decade. But at least 6 Tibetan monks, nuns and former clerics – 2 of them teenagers – burned themselves to death this year to protest Chinese rule. Self immolation’s emergence among Buddhist monks in Tibet illustrates a "new nihilistic desperation that has descended on the Tibetan plateau." Chinese authorities quickly disposed of the bodies, but the images of their suicides couldn’t be erased’. And Chinese do not give a damn to world opinion.
What really got into the head of Chinese leadership is, not only its geographical size but the economic clout it acquired since last 2 decades. It is undeniable that China is indeed an economic power house, and it started using this newly acquired power to browbeat its immediate neighbours, especially India. It was in this context we have to see, "why Niruapma Rao was summoned past midnight by the Chinese Foreign Ministry, to register its concern over alleged breach of security at the Chinese Embassy in New Delhi". Any other country would have possibly waited for the day break. It was indeed a very high handed behaviour especially when the national envoy of the country is a lady. But what was indeed very sad, our leaders buckled and did not oppose the timing of the call.
If some of these direct responses are in the nature of pin pricks, there were many others with far reaching geo-political implications. China as a big brother in the region rode roughshod on just about everybody with impunity. In the name of development partnership, they ensured that these countries which received the largesse of development assistance acted exactly in accordance with their wishes. The greatest and the most irritable thorn in the Chinese flesh is the Dalai Lama, the Spiritual Head of Tibetans in exile. India is the only country which to some extent asserted without being openly combative. And India is the only country which has issues to be resolved, especially the border issue in Arunachal Pradesh, and the area occupied by China in the north eastern part of Jammu & Kashmir, post 1962 war, after Dalai Lama fled Tibet and took shelter in India. Although, the shelter given to Dalai Lama was perfectly in tune with our national ethoes, it cost us a huge price in terms of Chinese belligerence and their intent to teach us a lesson, ‘not to antagonize a country of the size of China’.
Globalisation of trade, commerce and industry has been a boon for both China and India. But China achieved a runaway success unlike India. India too, did very well, during these past twenty plus years, but the democratic system and parliamentary democracy did not allow it to grow as fast as China. Unlike India, China’s industrial clearances are far faster and easier, since system of questioning the authoritative decisions are missing. Cheap labour contributed enormously to the growth of industries, and finished products in the international markets couldn’t stand the Chinese price advantage due to this cheap labour cost. The increased national revenue helped the infrastructure to be developed quantitatively and qualitatively. These infrastructural improvements made FDI welcome and easy. Thus China acquired, due to the gloablisation of trade and industry, unparalleled economic clout. They were slowly and inexorably inching towards their publicly unstated vision of being world No: 1, and has made its intention very clear without verbose, only action. (See box).
Since China had issues with India to be sorted out, they probably decided to be more friendly with those countries with which India had issues to be settled. Pakistan had for sometime tried to fish in the troubled water, between India and China, and were successful, on the principle of enemy’s enemy is a friend. China rewarded Pakistan with the development of Gwadhar port in Sindh ostensibly to help China’s imports and exports. But then they also developed Hambanthota in Sri Lanka, to wean Sri Lanka away from India. Their infrastructural assistance to Bangladesh and Burma too are ostensibly to ensure smooth flow of its import and exports. Of course there is no way India can match China’s economic power so also its military fire power, acquired largely due to the booming economy of last over twenty years.
But more serious is the issue of huge trade imbalance in favour of China. Indian businessmen, not overtly bothered about the national interest have somehow succumbed to the cheap but low quality stuff from China, in their eagerness to make fast buck. And China’s unscrupulous traders and manufacturers have produced and sold world-wide, including India, duplicates of Indian popular products. Reportedly Delhi police have seized and confiscated counterfeited products of popular Indian brands. Importers in India of these products should be very seriously dealt with. But somehow our approach to these offences lack both seriousness and commitment. Look at the way our famed Minister of Home Affairs and former Finance Minister P. Chidambaram, who exhorts Indians to match the Chinese with competiveness. Do we compete with those who are cheats and crooked? It was over a year ago that authorities in Nigeria had seized a consignment of pharma products written ‘made in India’ on its packing but consignment had travelled from main land China. The recent exposure of poor quality drug coming from bulk drug suppliers from China is a case in point. As is known, Indian traders are not the one’s to be worried about the quality. Their worry is primarily the quantum of profit that they would make, either in their exports or their imports. So what, if they are even life saving drugs! Reportedly India is the largest importer of Chinese bulk drugs, as close to 50% of bulk drug exporters registered in India are from China. It was the inspection by the Drug Controller General of India, that exposed the poor quality drugs. Reportedly they have listed some 11 units of such drug manufacturing facilities. Although inspection of exporting company’s manufacturing facility is allowed under WTO trade regulations, an inspection by Central Drug Standard Control Organisation, from India, was not allowed by the Chinese company, during May 2011. So, the fair practices by China is only to be desired. Similarly cases involving sub-standard HIV test kits from suppliers from Zhejiang province are some cases in point. This is the same province where Yiwu city is located, where 2 Indian’s were detained and tortured for the fault of their Yemini master.
Commenting on what happened to two Indian staff of a Yemani businessman in Yiwu city, Mr MV Kamath, former Prasar Bharathi Chairman, had asked "Is China a nation of barbarians?" Reportedly two Indians were detained, since their Yemani master had fled China without paying his creditors, to the tune of about 1.6 million $. Chinese creditors caught these two Indian staff, Deepak Raheja and Shyam Sundar Agarwal, and tortured and allegedly forced them to eat human excreta, with local government doing nothing to save the situation. Now this is a cruelty of the most despicable kind with official connivance. Whatever difference a country may have with another country, same can be treated as a bilateral issue and be attended to it as per normal international convention. But this kind of treatment is beyond rapproache. The treatment of our diplomat by Chinese court was another dimension of their basic insensitive leadership. Our diplomat, a diabetic, attending the court on behalf of those two Indian staff, providing them with consular assistance, collapsed in the court, when he was not allowed to leave the court to take his food and medicine, and he had to be hospitalized. What, if it had become fatal due to hypoglycemia? This kind of behaviour, with official inaction is totally unacceptable.
It was only when the issue became explosive on international media then the Chinese officials at appropriate level responded and the two Indians were let out of the detention. Their case is still being heard. And suddenly the overtures started coming from China. Reportedly an Assistant Foreign Minister had made some right noises to the state run Xinhua News Agency, that "China was willing to make joint efforts with India to enhance strategic mutual trust and properly handle issues concerning the bilateral relationship. China hopes that the two sides will support each other for better and faster development of Sino Indian co-operative partnership and make concerted efforts to improve relation with India in 2012".
"Lets seize ‘golden period’ for relations" was another news that appeared in the print media quoting the Chinese Special Representative on boundary negotiations, Dai Bingguo.
Of course, this entire turn around had been, due to the totally insensitive handling of trade disputes involving two Indians and the treatment meted out to Indian diplomat being exposed in the media, and the advisory by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs "not to do business with Yiwu". And mind you there has been no official regret or any assuaging statements from the official sources. Unfortunately nobody in our government in New Delhi has even remotely demanded an explanation on the whole issue. So if Chinese authorities are taking liberty at arm twisting India and Indians, can they be blamed? We have been accused of being a soft state, and there is nothing emerging officially to prove this accusation wrong.
Going back to these ‘feel good’ responses from some senior Chinese officials, is not a guarantee at all that things would be back on an even keel. It is true that Mr Dai Bingguo, in a detailed address to Indian officials at the inauguration of India’s new embassy building in Beijing, sounded sensible. Reportedly, he laid out a four-pronged approach to improve ties with India, while acknowledging that gaps in understanding persisted between the two countries. While recognising the importance China is apparently attaching to the Indo-China relationship, Indian Ambassador Jaishankar has reportedly warned that ‘both countries needed to remain continuously sensitive to mutual concerns’. However the stress of Mr Dai Bingguo was primarily on the resolution of border issues.
Hence, in our own interest, India should take note of the development in and around our border with Tibet. The Chinese plan to expand its railway net work in Tibet, especially linking to the town of Nyingchi lying on the border very close to Arunachal Pradesh is a matter to serious concern. Of course, India is developing an airfield for quicker mobilisation close to the border. And its recent agreement with Vietnam to develop oil field in the South China sea, despite Chinese opposition, is a move in the right direction. India should also upgrade its relationship from all fronts with the Japanese, who are uncomfortable with the Chinese big brother attitude.
India should take all Chinese overtures on its face value, but at the same time we must develop our own checks and balances in trying to be even with them. Despite appropriate noises, China may not give up its claims after all on the Arunachal Pradesh, and continue to hold the Aksai Chin area. No doubt India should continue to have highly prioritised relationship with China. But it must try to reduce imports from them to match our exports, especially with the very unethical practices of Chinese suppliers and equally unethical practice of Indian traders. Trade balancing should be taken up on priority, to start with. Sharing of information on terrorism from across the border can be another very important issue of mutual concern. With uncertainty looming large on Pakistan’s political landscape, China may be forced to have a relook at India-China relationship, that aspect has to be given due importance. In the end, what Philippine president Beniguo Aquino III said, while answering question on the relationship with China on its dispute in the South China Sea, should hold the candle. "Nobody is really interested in going to a violent conflict to try to resolve the dispute. I hope they understand that. I am duty bound to protect the interest of my country, just as they are protecting theirs" he has reportedly stated. Indian leadership should recognize this and act accordingly.
It was way back in 1998, former Defence Minister in the NDA government who had famously observed that "China was India’s potential enemy No: 1. Some were shocked, some were surprised, and some smiled and probably muttered "Buddha smiled". Mostly these reactions were ideologically and politically motivated. Since then George Fernandese (GF) was, as the cliché goes "in the eye of the storm". Fernandese was always on the opposite side of Chinese since the days of Chinese annexation of Tibet in 1949. GF was in PSP (Praja Socialist Party) then, and PSP always looked at China as a danger. Somehow Chinese leadership from Mao down to the current leadership did not make things better by either words or actions to change this perception. In fact they did the reverse and sustained a veiled reference to it as "China has an aggressive strategic culture".
As for Tibet, the whole world is aware what China is doing to Tibet and Tibetans. It is the same attitude of aggression that led to the border issues that China raised with India, especially the Arunachal Pradesh, which China claims as part of Tibet. Here it is very pertinent to reproduce what the TIME had to say in its Special Issue: ‘2011 in Brief’. Under the caption UNTOLD STORIES, it said, ‘Tibet is rarely in the news these days, possibly because Chinese occupation of the country has entered its 7th decade. But at least 6 Tibetan monks, nuns and former clerics – 2 of them teenagers – burned themselves to death this year to protest Chinese rule. Self immolation’s emergence among Buddhist monks in Tibet illustrates a "new nihilistic desperation that has descended on the Tibetan plateau." Chinese authorities quickly disposed of the bodies, but the images of their suicides couldn’t be erased’. And Chinese do not give a damn to world opinion.
What really got into the head of Chinese leadership is, not only its geographical size but the economic clout it acquired since last 2 decades. It is undeniable that China is indeed an economic power house, and it started using this newly acquired power to browbeat its immediate neighbours, especially India. It was in this context we have to see, "why Niruapma Rao was summoned past midnight by the Chinese Foreign Ministry, to register its concern over alleged breach of security at the Chinese Embassy in New Delhi". Any other country would have possibly waited for the day break. It was indeed a very high handed behaviour especially when the national envoy of the country is a lady. But what was indeed very sad, our leaders buckled and did not oppose the timing of the call.
If some of these direct responses are in the nature of pin pricks, there were many others with far reaching geo-political implications. China as a big brother in the region rode roughshod on just about everybody with impunity. In the name of development partnership, they ensured that these countries which received the largesse of development assistance acted exactly in accordance with their wishes. The greatest and the most irritable thorn in the Chinese flesh is the Dalai Lama, the Spiritual Head of Tibetans in exile. India is the only country which to some extent asserted without being openly combative. And India is the only country which has issues to be resolved, especially the border issue in Arunachal Pradesh, and the area occupied by China in the north eastern part of Jammu & Kashmir, post 1962 war, after Dalai Lama fled Tibet and took shelter in India. Although, the shelter given to Dalai Lama was perfectly in tune with our national ethoes, it cost us a huge price in terms of Chinese belligerence and their intent to teach us a lesson, ‘not to antagonize a country of the size of China’.
Globalisation of trade, commerce and industry has been a boon for both China and India. But China achieved a runaway success unlike India. India too, did very well, during these past twenty plus years, but the democratic system and parliamentary democracy did not allow it to grow as fast as China. Unlike India, China’s industrial clearances are far faster and easier, since system of questioning the authoritative decisions are missing. Cheap labour contributed enormously to the growth of industries, and finished products in the international markets couldn’t stand the Chinese price advantage due to this cheap labour cost. The increased national revenue helped the infrastructure to be developed quantitatively and qualitatively. These infrastructural improvements made FDI welcome and easy. Thus China acquired, due to the gloablisation of trade and industry, unparalleled economic clout. They were slowly and inexorably inching towards their publicly unstated vision of being world No: 1, and has made its intention very clear without verbose, only action. (See box).
Since China had issues with India to be sorted out, they probably decided to be more friendly with those countries with which India had issues to be settled. Pakistan had for sometime tried to fish in the troubled water, between India and China, and were successful, on the principle of enemy’s enemy is a friend. China rewarded Pakistan with the development of Gwadhar port in Sindh ostensibly to help China’s imports and exports. But then they also developed Hambanthota in Sri Lanka, to wean Sri Lanka away from India. Their infrastructural assistance to Bangladesh and Burma too are ostensibly to ensure smooth flow of its import and exports. Of course there is no way India can match China’s economic power so also its military fire power, acquired largely due to the booming economy of last over twenty years.
But more serious is the issue of huge trade imbalance in favour of China. Indian businessmen, not overtly bothered about the national interest have somehow succumbed to the cheap but low quality stuff from China, in their eagerness to make fast buck. And China’s unscrupulous traders and manufacturers have produced and sold world-wide, including India, duplicates of Indian popular products. Reportedly Delhi police have seized and confiscated counterfeited products of popular Indian brands. Importers in India of these products should be very seriously dealt with. But somehow our approach to these offences lack both seriousness and commitment. Look at the way our famed Minister of Home Affairs and former Finance Minister P. Chidambaram, who exhorts Indians to match the Chinese with competiveness. Do we compete with those who are cheats and crooked? It was over a year ago that authorities in Nigeria had seized a consignment of pharma products written ‘made in India’ on its packing but consignment had travelled from main land China. The recent exposure of poor quality drug coming from bulk drug suppliers from China is a case in point. As is known, Indian traders are not the one’s to be worried about the quality. Their worry is primarily the quantum of profit that they would make, either in their exports or their imports. So what, if they are even life saving drugs! Reportedly India is the largest importer of Chinese bulk drugs, as close to 50% of bulk drug exporters registered in India are from China. It was the inspection by the Drug Controller General of India, that exposed the poor quality drugs. Reportedly they have listed some 11 units of such drug manufacturing facilities. Although inspection of exporting company’s manufacturing facility is allowed under WTO trade regulations, an inspection by Central Drug Standard Control Organisation, from India, was not allowed by the Chinese company, during May 2011. So, the fair practices by China is only to be desired. Similarly cases involving sub-standard HIV test kits from suppliers from Zhejiang province are some cases in point. This is the same province where Yiwu city is located, where 2 Indian’s were detained and tortured for the fault of their Yemini master.
Commenting on what happened to two Indian staff of a Yemani businessman in Yiwu city, Mr MV Kamath, former Prasar Bharathi Chairman, had asked "Is China a nation of barbarians?" Reportedly two Indians were detained, since their Yemani master had fled China without paying his creditors, to the tune of about 1.6 million $. Chinese creditors caught these two Indian staff, Deepak Raheja and Shyam Sundar Agarwal, and tortured and allegedly forced them to eat human excreta, with local government doing nothing to save the situation. Now this is a cruelty of the most despicable kind with official connivance. Whatever difference a country may have with another country, same can be treated as a bilateral issue and be attended to it as per normal international convention. But this kind of treatment is beyond rapproache. The treatment of our diplomat by Chinese court was another dimension of their basic insensitive leadership. Our diplomat, a diabetic, attending the court on behalf of those two Indian staff, providing them with consular assistance, collapsed in the court, when he was not allowed to leave the court to take his food and medicine, and he had to be hospitalized. What, if it had become fatal due to hypoglycemia? This kind of behaviour, with official inaction is totally unacceptable.
It was only when the issue became explosive on international media then the Chinese officials at appropriate level responded and the two Indians were let out of the detention. Their case is still being heard. And suddenly the overtures started coming from China. Reportedly an Assistant Foreign Minister had made some right noises to the state run Xinhua News Agency, that "China was willing to make joint efforts with India to enhance strategic mutual trust and properly handle issues concerning the bilateral relationship. China hopes that the two sides will support each other for better and faster development of Sino Indian co-operative partnership and make concerted efforts to improve relation with India in 2012".
"Lets seize ‘golden period’ for relations" was another news that appeared in the print media quoting the Chinese Special Representative on boundary negotiations, Dai Bingguo.
Of course, this entire turn around had been, due to the totally insensitive handling of trade disputes involving two Indians and the treatment meted out to Indian diplomat being exposed in the media, and the advisory by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs "not to do business with Yiwu". And mind you there has been no official regret or any assuaging statements from the official sources. Unfortunately nobody in our government in New Delhi has even remotely demanded an explanation on the whole issue. So if Chinese authorities are taking liberty at arm twisting India and Indians, can they be blamed? We have been accused of being a soft state, and there is nothing emerging officially to prove this accusation wrong.
Going back to these ‘feel good’ responses from some senior Chinese officials, is not a guarantee at all that things would be back on an even keel. It is true that Mr Dai Bingguo, in a detailed address to Indian officials at the inauguration of India’s new embassy building in Beijing, sounded sensible. Reportedly, he laid out a four-pronged approach to improve ties with India, while acknowledging that gaps in understanding persisted between the two countries. While recognising the importance China is apparently attaching to the Indo-China relationship, Indian Ambassador Jaishankar has reportedly warned that ‘both countries needed to remain continuously sensitive to mutual concerns’. However the stress of Mr Dai Bingguo was primarily on the resolution of border issues.
Hence, in our own interest, India should take note of the development in and around our border with Tibet. The Chinese plan to expand its railway net work in Tibet, especially linking to the town of Nyingchi lying on the border very close to Arunachal Pradesh is a matter to serious concern. Of course, India is developing an airfield for quicker mobilisation close to the border. And its recent agreement with Vietnam to develop oil field in the South China sea, despite Chinese opposition, is a move in the right direction. India should also upgrade its relationship from all fronts with the Japanese, who are uncomfortable with the Chinese big brother attitude.
India should take all Chinese overtures on its face value, but at the same time we must develop our own checks and balances in trying to be even with them. Despite appropriate noises, China may not give up its claims after all on the Arunachal Pradesh, and continue to hold the Aksai Chin area. No doubt India should continue to have highly prioritised relationship with China. But it must try to reduce imports from them to match our exports, especially with the very unethical practices of Chinese suppliers and equally unethical practice of Indian traders. Trade balancing should be taken up on priority, to start with. Sharing of information on terrorism from across the border can be another very important issue of mutual concern. With uncertainty looming large on Pakistan’s political landscape, China may be forced to have a relook at India-China relationship, that aspect has to be given due importance. In the end, what Philippine president Beniguo Aquino III said, while answering question on the relationship with China on its dispute in the South China Sea, should hold the candle. "Nobody is really interested in going to a violent conflict to try to resolve the dispute. I hope they understand that. I am duty bound to protect the interest of my country, just as they are protecting theirs" he has reportedly stated. Indian leadership should recognize this and act accordingly.
J.Shriyan
China’s Buy List
While much of the world is in austerity mode, China will be spending. During the downturn in 2009, it upped purchases of coal, copper and iron ore, capitalizing on low prices. Its outbound foreign direct investment is still tiny, but talk that it is looking for alternatives to U.S. Treasury bonds to park its money have sparked speculation as to what China will buy next. Here are some possibilities:
Real estate: Wealthy investors are putting their money in places like Australia, Singapore and Canada and even U.S.
Energy and raw materials: China buys 65% of the world’s iron-ore exports and 40% of its copper and aluminum. It has opened mines everywhere from Zambia to Peru; drills for oil in countries such as Ethiopia, Kazakhstan and Sudan; and has invested in natural-gas projects in Australia and Turkey. China is even in the market for coal, because it’s large domestic supply is of low quality. It is putting a greater emphasis on North American projects, wary perhaps of the political risks and accusations of neocolonialism that its extensive projects in Africa face.
Food: With memories of 20th century famines not forgotten, China’s state planers have long tried to minimize reliance on grain imports. But income growth is driving up demand for meat. That in turn drives demand for corn as feed. Despite a record harvest in 2011, in October, China made its largest purchase ever of U.S. corn, and imports are expected to grow in 2012. Likewise, China is now the world’s largest soyabean importer.
Your country: In November the government of Iceland rejected a bid by Chinese tycoon Huang Nubo to buy 115 sq. mi. (298sqkm) of land to build a golf course and resort. The offer generated fears that China would use the land as a base for shipping, mining and drilling opportunities in the Arctic that open up via climate change. Huang said he planned to renew the bid and was considering options elsewhere in Scandinavia and Greenland.
Your movies, magazines and television: The Chinese government worries its story isn’t being told fairly by the western press, leaving it at a serious disadvantage in the realm of soft power. So it’s spending billions to expand China’s media reach. The official China Central Television now broadcasts in English, French, Russian and Arabic in addition to Chinese. The state–run Xinhua news service has moved its New York bureau from Queens to Times Square, and has launched an English-language international television channel, CNC World,
Ageing star athletes: China is one upping oil-rich Middle East teams by jumping into the market for soccer and basketball talent. Former NBA star Stephon Marbury-or Mabuli, as he is known in China-is the biggest crossover. He now plays for the Beijing Ducks. This year he was joined in the Chinese Basketball Association by free agents Kenyon Martin, J.R. Smith and Wilson Chandler. In soccer, Chelsea’s French striker Nicolas Anelka joining the Shanghai Shenhua in early 2012. His former Chelsea teammate Didier Drogba is also rumoured to be looking to China.
Aircraft carriers: Two Chinese tycoons bid in 2011 for the retired British aircraft carrier Ark Royal. It’s the latest in a series of used aircraft carriers that China has snapped up; previous buys were from Russia, Ukraine and Australia. Some have been used as tourist attractions, like the ex-Soviet carrier Minsk, on display in Shenzhen, and the Kiev, at a theme park in Tianjin. But a third vessel from the former Soviet fleet, the Varyag, has been refurbished into China’s first active aircraft carrier. China is still in the market for retired ships.
While much of the world is in austerity mode, China will be spending. During the downturn in 2009, it upped purchases of coal, copper and iron ore, capitalizing on low prices. Its outbound foreign direct investment is still tiny, but talk that it is looking for alternatives to U.S. Treasury bonds to park its money have sparked speculation as to what China will buy next. Here are some possibilities:
Real estate: Wealthy investors are putting their money in places like Australia, Singapore and Canada and even U.S.
Energy and raw materials: China buys 65% of the world’s iron-ore exports and 40% of its copper and aluminum. It has opened mines everywhere from Zambia to Peru; drills for oil in countries such as Ethiopia, Kazakhstan and Sudan; and has invested in natural-gas projects in Australia and Turkey. China is even in the market for coal, because it’s large domestic supply is of low quality. It is putting a greater emphasis on North American projects, wary perhaps of the political risks and accusations of neocolonialism that its extensive projects in Africa face.
Food: With memories of 20th century famines not forgotten, China’s state planers have long tried to minimize reliance on grain imports. But income growth is driving up demand for meat. That in turn drives demand for corn as feed. Despite a record harvest in 2011, in October, China made its largest purchase ever of U.S. corn, and imports are expected to grow in 2012. Likewise, China is now the world’s largest soyabean importer.
Your country: In November the government of Iceland rejected a bid by Chinese tycoon Huang Nubo to buy 115 sq. mi. (298sqkm) of land to build a golf course and resort. The offer generated fears that China would use the land as a base for shipping, mining and drilling opportunities in the Arctic that open up via climate change. Huang said he planned to renew the bid and was considering options elsewhere in Scandinavia and Greenland.
Your movies, magazines and television: The Chinese government worries its story isn’t being told fairly by the western press, leaving it at a serious disadvantage in the realm of soft power. So it’s spending billions to expand China’s media reach. The official China Central Television now broadcasts in English, French, Russian and Arabic in addition to Chinese. The state–run Xinhua news service has moved its New York bureau from Queens to Times Square, and has launched an English-language international television channel, CNC World,
Ageing star athletes: China is one upping oil-rich Middle East teams by jumping into the market for soccer and basketball talent. Former NBA star Stephon Marbury-or Mabuli, as he is known in China-is the biggest crossover. He now plays for the Beijing Ducks. This year he was joined in the Chinese Basketball Association by free agents Kenyon Martin, J.R. Smith and Wilson Chandler. In soccer, Chelsea’s French striker Nicolas Anelka joining the Shanghai Shenhua in early 2012. His former Chelsea teammate Didier Drogba is also rumoured to be looking to China.
Aircraft carriers: Two Chinese tycoons bid in 2011 for the retired British aircraft carrier Ark Royal. It’s the latest in a series of used aircraft carriers that China has snapped up; previous buys were from Russia, Ukraine and Australia. Some have been used as tourist attractions, like the ex-Soviet carrier Minsk, on display in Shenzhen, and the Kiev, at a theme park in Tianjin. But a third vessel from the former Soviet fleet, the Varyag, has been refurbished into China’s first active aircraft carrier. China is still in the market for retired ships.
Austin Ramzy
Comments