China’s New System to Address Miscarriages of Justice
So-called ‘human rights’ groups habitually chastise China for the absence of the rule of law and a plethora of social injustices, especially those resulting from local farmers/residents confronting greedy developers/industrialists and corrupt officials over land grabs and pollution. China is introducing a system to investigate and help correct miscarriages of justice. Chinese judicial reform has been on-going for decades and gathering momentum.
Harsh critics of China should ask themselves how long it took for countries like the US to bring in substantive judicial reforms that rectified the courts in notoriously gangster-dominated cities like Chicago before WWII. This is not even to talk about the miscarriages of justice during the civil rights and Vietnam War eras. And in the vicinity, what of the countless injustices that were perpetrated throughout the high growth periods in Japan, Taiwan and South Korea?
So, critics should get off their high horses and recognize progress in Chinese judicial reform which is often a gradual and incremental process.
China’s government will implement a system of investigating miscarriages of justice, the country’s top judge said, in the latest in a series of legal reforms at a time of widening public discontent.
An investigation should “start immediately” once a miscarriage of justice has been identified, Zhou Qiang, president of the Supreme People’s Court, wrote in the latest issue of Qiushi.
“On the widespread concern shown by society over miscarriages of justice, (we) must give information to the public in a timely manner and respond to society’s concerns,” Zhou wrote in the lead essay of the influential journal.
At a key meeting in October, the CPC made “governing the country by law” the focus of its agenda for the first time. It pledged to speed up legislation to fight corruption and make it tougher for officials to exert control over the judiciary.
The measures reflect worries about rising social unrest. Anger over land grabs, corruption and pollution – issues often left unresolved by the courts – have resulted in violence between police and residents in recent years.
– Reuters
A Half-Built Bridge to Nowhere
Very typical of maniacal and ingrate Kim Jong Un led North Korean behavior – enter an agreement saying they’ll meet obligations and then re-neg or in this case abandon outright. How many iterations have transpired over the six-party talks, on and off North-South Korean business activity in the South Korean operated economic zone, and so on. It’s no wonder the international community is fed up with Fatty Kim’s shenanigans.
The AP report below may hold some truth – dismayed with China’s objections over his nuclear intentions and all-round belligerence and China’s close relations with the South (China demurred on Kim’s repeated requests for an official visit; he also summarily executed his uncle who was considered pro-China), Kim’s cozying up to Russia in a bid to balance the relationship. Or maybe the North is just plainly out of hard cash (although barter is always an option). Most of North Korea’s economic aid comes from China which could really stick it to him (pressure on several fronts – trade, aid, energy, investment, diplomacy, etc.) if it wanted to.
But alas, China remains reluctant to exert any substantive pressure due in part to the strong pro-North lobby within the CPC and a deep-seated fear that should economic collapse really occur there, hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of refugees would spill over the border to become an immeasurable burden for the country. Not to mention, under that scenario, South Korean and American troops would be stationed right at the border and the CPC really doesn’t want to deal with that. Thus, despite venting some anger on the Global Times and other official media, China just puts up with Fatty Kim.
The bridge was supposed to be a key link for trade and travel between China’s northeast provinces and a much-touted special economic zone in North Korea — so key that Beijing sank more than $350 million into it. Now, it is beginning to look like Beijing has built a bridge to nowhere.
An Associated Press Television News crew in September saw nothing but a dirt ramp at the North Korean end of the bridge, surrounded by open fields. No immigration or customs buildings could be seen. Roads to the bridge had not been completed.
The much-awaited opening of the new bridge over the Yalu River came and passed on Oct. 30 with no sign the link would be ready for business anytime soon. That prompted an unusually sharp report in the Global Times quoting residents in the Chinese city of Dandong expressing anger over delays in what they had hoped would be an economic boom for their border city.
The report suggested the opening of the mammoth, 3-kilometer bridge has been postponed “indefinitely.” Beijing and Pyongyang have made no official comment.
Foreign analysts have suggested the apparent lack of progress might indicate wariness in Pyongyang over China’s economic influence in the country, which has been growing substantially in recent years as Pyongyang has become more isolated from other potential partners over its nuclear program, human rights record and other political issues.
Since its founding, North Korea has been exceedingly cautious of becoming too dependent on either of its superpower neighbors, China and Russia, preferring to play each off the other. That pattern seems to be repeating itself now.
The official media, while saying little about business with China, have lately been playing up the importance of improving trade and political ties with Moscow. On Monday, leader Kim Jong Un sent a powerful party cadre as his special envoy to Russia to discuss how to bolster such ties.
Better ties with Moscow could further dilute Beijing’s leverage over the North, the limits of which became apparent when the North went ahead with its first nuclear test in 2006. Beijing has repeatedly urged North Korea to abandon nuclear weapons, to no avail.
The bridge — which, from the start, appears to have been of more interest to China than to North Korea — is intended to provide a new connection between Dandong and the special economic development zone in North Korea’s Sinuiju. More broadly, China wants to develop inroads with North Korea that will allow its landlocked northeastern provinces access to North Korean ports so its goods can be exported or shipped down the Chinese coastline more cheaply. Hopes of attracting foreign investment to the 40-square-kilometer (15-square-mile) area of Sinuiju, much of which is still farmland, have yet to materialize.
Hajime Izumi, a North Korea specialist at Japan’s Shizuoka University, said the bridge delays come as Beijing and Pyongyang are rethinking their relationship, shifting from the past focus on alliance and mutual friendship to a more pragmatic one based instead on mutual interest. He added that North Korea may also simply be waiting for the Chinese to chip in more money.
– AP
China Daily Wrong to Laud Growing Chinese Arms Sales Abroad
Have no idea which dope of an editor at China Daily allowed this report to be published!
It’s one thing that Chinese gun makers such as Norinco are doing well on the international market but is it good for China’s image to report on its inroads in the Third World where all sorts of problems abound with such enthusiasm?
China critics and Sinophobes around the world will be reveling in the fact that China’s biggest English language daily features such articles on its own volition. There should be a profound rethink viz. editorial policy on such topics at the paper.
The article can be seen at: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2014-11/17/content_18924414.htm or
Much Ado About China’s J-31 Gyrfalcon Stealth Fighter
China’s second stealth fighter the J-31 “Gyrfalcon” (or “Falcon Hawk”, “Falcon Eagle”) became the star attraction at the 10th Zhuhai Airshow China fair that just closed over the weekend. Leading up to the show, particularly the US media and officialdom had poo-pooed its debut, attacking it as an unworthy knock-off of the US F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the core technologies and design of which were stolen from a subcontractor of Lockheed Martin through cyber attacks.
Interestingly, however, a National Post commentary by an otherwise China critic was somewhat conciliatory, quoting an expert friend of his as saying stealing aircraft and rocket designs is an ‘old business’ “that when done right can work wonders for the country playing catch-up. Look at the US ballistic missile and space programs, which got a 10 to 15 year leap from the V2 rockets and the German scientists who came with it.”
He also notes there is a consensus among Western leaders that, in contrast to their Russian counterparts who had in the day borrowed passenger airliner designs from the West, Chinese engineers are more likely to be able to replicate (and even surpass) Western levels of quality and sophistication. Moreover, the Chinese can pour in a lot of financial resources and manpower to make sure it is done right. (The success of China’s high speed rail locomotives and vast rail network is a case in point.)
Regardless of whether acquired through cyber espionage or indigenously developed or a combination of both, the Chinese have successfully designed and built a 5th stealth fighter that will be formidable for foreign air forces and navies to contend with. Sun Cong, chief designer of the J-31, told the Xinhua News Agency he anticipates the fighter will eventually be paired with the bigger and more technologically mature J-20 that debuted a year earlier and become China’s next generation carrier-borne jet, along the lines of the US’s F-35C.
Its demonstration flight at the air show also indicates it is intended for export. The Zhuhai show drew about 700 companies from all over the world eager to show off their stuff and make deals. Aerial expert John Stillion said to Inquisitr News, “the more ambitious the display, probably the closer it is being ready for prime time. If they fly it, that’s a big deal. One of the ways countries try to increase demand for their combat aircraft is displaying them, doing cool stuff at air shows; it’s an opportunity to show off.”
Huanqiu.com, a major news portal in China, quoted sources from J-31 manufacturer Aviation Industry Corp of China (AVIC) that some “traditional buyers” of Chinese aircraft had expressed “great interest” in the fighter. Foreign analysts speculate Pakistan will be first in line followed by Bangladesh and Myanmar. After that, potentially Iran and various Gulf, African, South American, and even Southeast Asian states could be waiting. It is very doubtful if any will be offered to North Korea or Vietnam even if they have the hard cash because of Korean peninsula nuclear and South China Sea territorial dispute concerns.
The New York Times figures the J-31 will go for between US$75 to $100 million a piece, vastly cheaper than the J-35 Lightning II whose going price has sky-rocketed to a whopping $200 million (and more for the Japanese market) and even the presumably more reasonably priced Russian Sukhoi T-50. Chinese military analysts on a recent CCTV 4 Focus Today programme concurred it would be substantially lower than the $100 million mark, making it affordable for many developing countries.
Although the Western media assumes the basic design to be stolen, they nonetheless nitpick and conjecture about the J-31’s design and performance faults. One big issue is the continued use of Russian-made engines which, in the case of a J-31 prototype, is the Klimov RD-93. But, China has already developed an indigenous design similar to the Russian and improving it with greater thrust for fitting on future J-31s. With greater capabilities and confidence, military analysts suggest Chinese makers may be able to power the J-31 with domestic engines faster than for the J-20 and in greater quantities.
A IHS Jane’s Defence Weekly correspondent writing on CNN, observing the J-31’s flight routine, said the plane “bleeds” too much energy leading to altitude loss when entering turns, deemed a aerodynamic design drawback. Moreover, the J-31 flew “clean” meaning that it was not armed. On real missions loaded with weapons, the plane would be heavier and therefore could perform even worse. Chinese jet fighter aficionados and netizens further point out the J-31’s exhaust appeared darker, suggesting perhaps the engine wasn’t burning fuel efficiently.
But, questioned about possible design flaws of the J-31, Vladimir Barkovsky, a prominent designer with Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG, stated in spite of some imperfections, the J-31 “looks like a good machine”. And although it incorporated certain features already in use on 5th generation US fighter designs, the J-31 “is not a copy but a well done indigenous design.”
Interviewed by US Naval Institute News (USNI News), a senior US naval officer predicted China will eventually perfect the J-20 and J-31 – it is just a matter of time. “They are going to get there one day, make no mistake. It won’t be tomorrow or the next day but the fact this place (Zhuhai) is debuting now should tell you something about China’s commitment”, he said.
China to be Biggest Innovation Spender, Canada Lagging Behind
When it comes to R & D and innovation, the usual knee-jerk reaction of many in the West and Japan is that China only copies and doesn’t innovate. Well, it looks like those people will have to eat their words for, according to a new OECD study, China’s R & D spending is leapfrogging ahead of everybody and in a matter of 5 years will surpass even the US. Meanwhile, Canada is lagging farther behind as the BRICs and other countries march forward. Time for the Canadian government to put on its thinking cap and develop new incentive policies and fast!
A new report on science and technology policy from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) paints a grim picture of Canada’s place in the world. Canada has tumbled out of the top 10 research and development (R&D) spenders since the Great Recession, steadily ceding ground to more aggressive nations on a host of innovation measures.
Canada now ranks 12th in overall spending, according to the report, released last week. It invested less in R&D in 2012 ($21.8-billion U.S.) than it did in 2004 ($22.7-billion). Four countries that Canada handily outspent a decade ago – Russia, India, Taiwan and Brazil – have all jumped ahead.
Taiwan, which spent half of what Canada did in 2002, now tops this country by nearly $3-billion a year.
Canada’s R&D “intensity” – spending as a percentage of gross domestic product – is equally worrying. The rate has been on a steady decline for more than a decade and now stands at 1.69 per cent of GDP, well below the OECD average of 2.4 per cent. In 2012, 20 other countries outspent Canada relative to the size of their economies.
The R&D intensity leader is South Korea, a country with which Canada is now bound in a free-trade agreement, creating new competitive pressures for Canadian businesses.
Most remarkable is the ascent of China, which the OECD says is now on a course to become the world’s biggest R&D spender by 2019, outpacing even the current No. 1 spender, the United States.
Canada is the only developed country with an intellectual property deficit – meaning we spend more to acquire other peoples’ technology than the world buys from us.
And most disappointingly, the private sector continues to underinvest, in spite of repeated warnings about the consequences. Business spending on R&D stands at 0.88 per cent of GDP, near the bottom among OECD countries.
Given all this, the federal government might be expected to be angst-ridden, and grasping for remedies.
But there’s no obvious sense of urgency. The last time Ottawa drafted a science and technology strategy was in 2007. At the time, Prime Minister Stephen Harper vowed to make Canada “a world leader in science and technology and a key source of entrepreneurial innovation and creativity.”
The government promised to deliver an updated innovation strategy more than a year ago, following months of consultations. Two ministers of state for science and technology later, and the government has yet to produce anything. The current minister, former insurance broker Ed Holder, is promising something “soon.”
But expectations are low that the Conservatives will do anything ambitious, or costly, given the government’s determination to eliminate the budget deficit next year, while simultaneously delivering targeted tax breaks.
Short of a radical rethink and significant amounts of cash, it’s not clear what will fix the problem. The government has already tinkered with many of the key levers at its disposal, to little effect. It has put more money into direct R&D grants for smaller companies, invested $400-million (Canadian) in various venture capital funds, refocused the mission of the National Research Council on commercialization, and tightened the rules of its flagship R&D tax credit – the $1.5-billion Scientific Research and Experimental Development program. Ottawa also pledged $1.5-billion over a decade to universities, by way of the Canada First Research Excellence Fund.
But these efforts fall short of what many other countries are doing, condemning Canada to falling even farther behind in the global science and technology race.
– Globe and Mail
Hong Kong Student Protest Leaders’ Stunt
Who are they kidding? They knew all too well there was no way they could get on the plane, let alone arrive at Beijing Airport. It’s all a big stunt by the student protest leaders in search of a honourable way out of their predicament (retreat with their tails between their legs or press on and lose any residual support from the general public) and place the blame on Beijing. Really pitiful they had to resort to such tactics. Just as pitiful was the number of supporters they had at the airport. Basically, this sounds the death knell of the protests.
Their seven weeks of blocking main thoroughfares have thoroughly alienated ordinary Hong Kong citizens who have to work for a living. A campaign launched by a group of anti-Occupy Central activists obtained over 1.5 million signatures in a mere ten days. The moronic antics of the student protestors have also given cause for vigilance by the police to prevent any similar outrages in the future.
Three Hong Kong student leaders were stopped from boarding a flight to Beijing on Saturday to take their fight for greater democracy directly to the Chinese government after airline authorities said their travel permits were invalid.
The students, led by Hong Kong Federation of Students’ leader Alex Chow, had planned to go to Beijing with the intention of meeting Chinese Premier Li Keqiang as efforts to reach agreement with officials in Hong Kong had failed.
A Cathay Pacific spokesman told local media that Chinese authorities had told the airline the students’ travel permits were invalid. He did not elaborate, though the representative of a student body did comment.
“Cathay has confirmed that their (students’) return home card has been canceled by the mainland authorities, so they could not get the required certificates to get on to the plane,” Yvonne Leung, the representative of the Hong Kong Federation of Students, told reporters.
The student leaders left the airport shortly after.
Local media had speculated that the students would be turned back once they landed in Beijing.
About 300 supporters, some with yellow umbrellas that have become a symbol of the democracy movement, showed up at Hong Kong airport where they were greeted by a media pack amid chaotic scenes.
– Reuters
China – Canada Version of China – US SED Established
Belated news but nonetheless a promising development, mimicking the China – US Strategic and Economic Dialogue (SED). It is imperative that Canada – China hold regular talks on important diplomatic and economic/financial matters instead of letting relations be periodically hijacked by ‘human rights’, cyber-espionage, diplomatic and trade related issues and disputes.
On November 8, 2014, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Premier Li Keqiang announced the establishment of the Foreign Affairs Ministers Dialogue and the China-Canada Economic and Financial Strategic Dialogue. The dialogues represent a significant step forward in the relationship between Canada and China with regard to foreign affairs and economic matters, which will deepen bilateral trade and investment ties between the two countries, which is a priority under the Global Markets Action Plan.
The proposed dialogues will be held on a rotating basis in each of the two countries. The purpose of these dialogues will be to enhance bilateral communication and cooperation in the fields of foreign affairs, macroeconomic policy, trade, investment, finance, energy, agriculture, global economic governance and others; strengthen coordination on strategic, long-term and overarching bilateral and global economic issues; advance healthy and stable development of Canada-China economic relations; and promote economic recovery and growth of the two countries and the world.
The first Canada-China Foreign Affairs Ministers Dialogue and the Economic and Financial Strategic Dialogue will take place in 2015.
– Office of the Prime Minister backgrounder
China: Let’s Get Going With the BRICS Bank
China is anxious to start operations of the Shanghai-based New Development Bank for fear of inertia, bureaucratic logjams, and domestic politics of BRICS countries that could muck up the bank infrastructure-building agenda. Serving the pressing needs of BRICS countries efficiently and effectively is one of the bank’s credos.
China on Saturday urged BRICS nations to speed up the creation of a development bank as an alternative to the Western-dominated global financial system.
The BRICS group of emerging economic powers — which also includes Brazil, Russia, India, and South Africa — agreed in July to form the New Development Bank to finance infrastructure projects and an emergency reserve fund.
The Chinese have already chosen a site for the future Shanghai headquarters of the US$50 billion facility and China’s vice finance minister Zhu Guangyao is keen to get moving.
“All (countries) share the view that they should speed up the process to have it completed as quickly as possible,” he said on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Australia.
“And each country will identify feasible projects for the bank as quickly as possible, so that at the moment the bank is launched it will be able to immediately carry out (financing) processes.”
Chinese state media has said the BRICS bank aims to reduce Western dominance of the global financial system, while criticising multilateral agencies like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
For the past 70 years, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank have been the pillars of the world’s economic system, coming to the rescue of countries in trouble and supporting development projects, respectively.
But the Bretton Woods institutions are regularly criticized for their inability to reflect the growing and important contributions of the major emerging economies to the global economy.
Since their creation in 1944, the IMF and the World Bank have only been led by Americans and Europeans.
– AFP
China Will be Doing the Heavy Lifting Under the China-US Climate Change Pact
With key exceptions, Western media, governmental, and institutional/NGO responses to the “game-changing” agreement on climate change signed in Beijing at the APEC Summit between China and the US has generally been positive.
Yet, with some condescension, Time magazine remarked that “China had grown up” while the Atlantic Monthly sarcastically described China as an “overgrown teenager, large and powerful but clumsy and developing” who had finally come around, no longer being obstinate in rejecting caps on its CO2 emissions. Meanwhile, the Christian Science Monitor opined that China had finally accepted “universal values” as if China did not perceive the health of the planet as a common value of all human kind.
But, sarcasm and political rhetoric aside, among the most unfair criticisms were unsurprisingly uttered by US Republic House Majority Leader John Boehner and soon-to-be Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. The latter blasted China as having pledged to “do nothing” regardless of China’s position as a much poorer developing country. A Guardian essay countered that if China was intent on maintaining business-as-usual and doing “nothing”, it would be hard pressed to meet its pledges.
Here’s what the two countries committed to: the US side will reduce greenhouse gases (GHG) by 26-28% below 2005 levels by 2025. The Obama Administration had previously consigned to reducing emissions by 17% by 2020. The US will also double emissions cuts of 1.2% per year from 2005-2020 to 2.3 to 2.8% from 2021 to 2025. To keep its promise, the US would submit the new reduction targets by the end of the first quarter in 2015 as its contribution to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change treaty that will be finalized in Paris late next November.
For its part, China will target CO2 emissions to peak around 2030 or before as well as expand renewable energy sources to about 20% of total usage (from the current 8%) by the same year. This is in line with a 2011 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory study that predicted China’s CO2 emissions would peak around 2030 due to high carbon intensities involved in a number of sectors that China continues to invest substantially in. This pledge requires China to install up to 1,000 gigawatts of new sources of nuclear, hydro, wind and solar power.
The Guardian retorted, on the contrary, it is the US that will have a relatively easy time to meet its new commitments. US CO2 emissions are already 10-15% lower than in 2005 and falling by 1.5% a year. The new cuts will only require the US to continue on the current path, albeit a little faster. So, it is Senator McConnell who has vastly misrepresented the challenges facing each nation.
According to the Economist magazine, China has emitted more GHG than America since 2006 and by 2014-15 China’s total will be twice that of the US and coal burning remains by far the largest component of the country’s energy mix. Observed historically, however, the 10 biggest emitters from 1850 to 2007 were respectively the US (28.8%), China (9%), Russia (8%), Germany (6.9%), US (5.8%), Japan (2.8%), India (2.4%), Canada (2.2%), and Ukraine (2.2%). China’s per capita CO2 emissions were 5.83 t/capita in 2010 compared to 17.2 t/capita in 2009 for the US or roughly 1/3 of the US.
The tasks that lay ahead for China are daunting. In an interview with NPR, Roger Pielke, Jr., a professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado, underscored, “That’s roughly the same as deploying one nuclear power plant of carbon-free energy every week starting today until 2030.”
A renewable energy plan devised by China’s National Energy Administration called for the boosting of hydropower to 290 gigawatts by next year that would average 6% growth since 2010. Wind power will top 100 gigawatts, marking 26% annual growth and solar power will rise to 21 gigawatts growing at 90% per year. As well, China has 22 nuclear power plants in operation and 26 being built/planned. In addition, China’s national nuclear corporation will team up with Canada’s Candu Energy to develop reactors that can use spent fuel from conventional reactors.
Reduction of coal use is imperative as 80% of China’s electricity is generated using the dirty fuel. Cited by AP, Alvin Lin, China climate and energy policy director with US-based National Resources Defense Council projects China will have to hit coal reduction targets at least 5 years ahead of 2030 to reach its target. The country also must introduce and enforce even tougher energy efficiency standards, milder versions of which have been implemented since the mid 2000s.
Going forward, China must overhaul its energy infrastructure to use more renewables and provide sufficient incentives for especially commercial and industrial consumers to switch to renewables and to conserve energy. Chinese banks and various levels of government are being called upon to facilitate more financing and provide tax breaks for energy users to install solar panels and other renewables equipment like in the US.
China will also need to build more efficient power plants and buildings along with better wind turbines and other clean energy equipment and infrastructure. The Xinhua News Agency reports the US and China are collaborating to build a major carbon capture and storage (CCS) facility on the Chinese mainland. In this respect, perhaps SaskPower’s flagship CCS facility at the Boundary Dam coal-fired power plant in Saskatchewan, the world’s first operational commercial scale CCS plant, could serve as a model.
‘Occupy Central’ Students Now Want to Occupy British Consulate
Will there be no end to this nonsense! The students can’t be SO naïve as to believe that in spite of imperial era governor Chris Patten’s recent rants against the HK government, the UK is actually going to jeopardize its economic, financial and trade relations with China to give open support to their erroneous ideas and economy-damaging protests, especially when the Brits had no intention of granting HK citizens the right to vote when they ruled the colony in the first place. The student protestors, as the Chinese saying goes, “don’t know how high is the sky and how deep is the earth”.
…
Activists say they want to show their anger at Britain for not standing up to China over “breaches” of the agreement the two countries made before Hong Kong was handed back to China by Britain in 1997, designed to protect Hong Kong’s social systems and way of life.
“We are angry at the way that the British government has for many years denied that China has actually breached the declaration by interfering with Hong Kong politics,” Anna-Kate Choi, the coordinator for the Occupy British Consulate group told AFP.
“They have the responsibility to make sure that the joint declaration has been implemented properly and that democracy and the high degree of autonomy of Hong Kong has been protected,” Choi said.
The group is a new offshoot of the protest movement, Choi added, with around 10 organisers from all walks of life including a secondary school student.
…
Britain and China are signatories of the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration, an agreement that enshrines the “one country, two systems” principle and states that until 2047 “the current social and economic systems in Hong Kong will remain unchanged.”
But activists feel that Britain is turning a blind eye and that China is eroding Hong Kong’s freedoms.
Posters for the British consulate occupation bear the slogan: “China breaches the joint declaration, UK government respond now” with the pro-democracy movement’s umbrella symbol emblazoned with the British flag.
– AFP