Red China Endorses Kerry

newsmax.com ^ | July 28, 2004 | Charles R. Smith

[snowsislander]

It appears to me that NewsMax is not giving the whole story on this article, which I just posted. (Unless I have guessed wrong at which one NewsMax is referencing...)

Here is a longer quote from the article:

Who coming to power is in China's favor?

There must be the following three prerequisites for the discussion of this question. First, after more than 30 years of development, the Sino-US ties have gone through various tests, and have witnessed the establishment of all sorts of mechanisms and have thus become relatively stable. Second, the United States has possessed a relatively complete and stable democratic political system, its fundamental policies will not have major changes due to the rotation of political parties. Even if such changes do exist, they will finally return to the right track for the sake of national interests. Third, a presidential runner's attitude toward China doesn't necessarily determine the trend of his China policy after taking office, while international patterns, domestic politics and interactions between the two countries are usually the more decisive factors of US policy toward China.

In this sense, although Kerry is friendly with China, his possible assumption of office is not necessarily beneficial to China. On the contrary, at least on two questions, it may cause twists and turns in the Sino-US relations.

First is China-US trade. Since the Democratic Party represents small and medium-sized enterprises and the public interests of middle and lower strata, and it is precisely they that constitute the mainstay of the US unemployed army and victims of the US economic depression, Kerry will definitely apply himself to solving the problems of unbalanced trade and expansion of US employment in the early period of his possible assumption of office. A result of misleading US opinion over the past year is the allegation that factors such as the sharp increase in US trade deficit, the shift of the American market toward China and the artificial control of the RMB (People's Currency) are one of the "chief culprits" that leads to the sluggishness of the US job market. Kerry himself holds no dissent to this view. So it's hard to guarantee that Kerry will not use the "broad axe" to first attack the problem concerning Sino-US trade after his possible assumption of office.

Second is the Taiwan question. Although Kerry's policy stand on Taiwan is favorable to China, if the Congress is still under the control of the Republican Party, there would appear the result that the Taiwan issue would become a "mortgage" in US domestic political struggles. After Clinton put forward his "three no's" policy (not supporting Taiwan independence and "two Chinas" or "one China or one Taiwan", nor supporting Taiwan's participation in the international organizations of sovereign states) toward Taiwan in 1998, the Republic Party-dominated Congress immediately counterattacked by citing the so-called "The Taiwan Security Enhancement Act", as a result, not only the "three no's" policy quickly came to a premature end, but the pro-Taiwan forces within the Congress also became more arrogant. The "weighty words" Bush used when he told Chen Shui-bian on the question of referendum in Taiwan had aroused the dissatisfaction of the pro-Taiwan forces within the Congress, but considering that the Bush administration comprises of associates of the Republican Party, they just left the matter at that. But if Kerry comes to power, the Republican-controlled Congress would likely make a fuss about the tense situation in the Taiwan Straits, forcing him to express his stance on the "one China", "assistance in defending Taiwan" and other questions. This will result in setting up greater obstacles to China's efforts for solving the Taiwan issue. In addition, although a prospective Kerry administration might keep "new-cons" outside the cabinet, it is hard for him to prevent these forces from continuing to make trouble and exerting influence on every corner of the American society.

On the contrary, although the Bush Administration's concept on China is relatively passive, the Republican Party-led government seems to lay more emphasis on immediate interest and major strategies, so it will put more energy in anti-terrorism and punishment of "defeated countries". Though not an ideal "strategic partner", China remains a necessary "strategic helper". More importantly, after four-years' adjustment during his first term of office, Bush has basically tuned his China policy on to the existing track of "contact plus precaution" of the six previous administrations. Therefore, from a short-term point of view, the Republican Party-led administration is more favorable to China than that of the Democratic Party; while from a long-term view, a Democratic administration, which stresses international cooperation, pursues "multilateralism" and stands for a policy of contacts, will be better for both world peace and Sino-US relations.

I wish that NewsMax were correct; between a ringing endorsement by the Chinese Communists, this amazingly inept photo op:

Source: Yahoo

... along with the equally odd decision to "go dark" in August, Kerry should be going off the skids rather than coming off a post-convention bounce. At least two out of three aren't bad.

[VOA]

beautiful graphic...

[End_Clintonism_Now]

[End_Clintonism_Now]

[CaptIsaacDavis]

THE GUY WHO WROTE THIS ARTICLE IS A PROPAGANDIST TRYING TO SPIN A STORY BEFORE IT BREAKS -- AGAINST THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION. The actual story it is based on is called "Sino-US relations viewed from general election". I don't want to link to it, because when you hit the site it pops up a BS button purporting to ask whether to print it or not -- push the wrong button and who knows (it's China!).
It is an article by Yuan Peng with the American Research Institute is carried on the 7th page of People's Daily, July 23, and translated by People's Daily Online.

The operative conclusion is a "balanced" one -- supporting BOTH, with language that can be taken either way..."Therefore, from a short-term point of view, the Republican Party-led administration is more favorable to China than that of the Democratic Party; while from a long-term view, a Democratic administration, which stresses international cooperation, pursues "multilateralism" and stands for a policy of contacts, will be better for both world peace and Sino-US relations."

[CaptIsaacDavis]

This one wins the prize...

[AnimalLover]

Seen this?


http://www.sun-sentinel.com/business/local/sfl-zasian28jul28,0,2005393.story?coll=sfla-business-front

China Plans a 'Village' in Florida

By Doreen Hemlock
Business Writer

July 28, 2004

Imagine an Asian-style "Mizner Park" or "City Place," complete with Asian architecture, teahouses, restaurants and shops selling made-in-Asia goods. Also, there would be showrooms for distributors of Asian products, an Asian culinary school, an Asian spa and perhaps even a hotel and apartments located above the stores.

That's the vision for an "Asian Village" proposed for Broward County by a leading Chinese state-owned group, China Shanghai (Group) Corp. for Foreign Economic and Technological Cooperation known as SFECO Group -- the biggest project to emerge so far from Broward's recent mission to China.

Plans for the $50 million-plus venture are progressing, as SFECO's local representative, Strategia Group LLC, of Miami, scouts for potential sites in Broward this summer.

Slenda Chan, Strategia's chief executive, said she's looking for up to 1 million square feet for the retail phase of the village, which would be about half the size of Aventura or Sawgrass Mills malls.

Later, she hopes to add another 1 million square feet in warehouses and other wholesale facilities, perhaps at a separate location.

The price tag for both the retail and wholesale phases could reach up to $150 million, Chan said.

Plans call for selling mainly goods from China, but also from neighboring countries including Japan, Malaysia, the Philippines and South Korea. Vendors would target both local and nationwide buyers, as well as clients from Latin America and the Caribbean who use South Florida as a business gateway, Chan said.

Strategia will serve as project manager, offering packages for vendors to buy or lease space and services ranging from hiring to office management, she added.

Money and international experience are apparently no stumbling block for the Shanghai group.

SFECO has ranked among the world's top 225 international contractors every year for at least a decade by Engineering News Record, a New York-based construction industry magazine published by the McGraw-Hill companies.

Plus, SFECO already has been active overseas on offices, factories, hotels, power projects and other ventures in Australia, Russia, Holland, United Arab Emirates and Singapore, to name a few nations. Chan describes the Shanghai group as a $3 billion venture.

But finding space in Broward may be a bigger challenge, said Harry Burnett, senior associate at real estate giant CB Richard Ellis Inc. in Fort Lauderdale.

"There are sites where you could find 1 million square feet, but you likely would have to do an assemblage," Burnett said. "And that's a lengthy process."

Shanghai-born Chan, who was educated at Florida International University and has been working in South Florida real estate for years, first brought the idea of Florida projects to SFECO more than a year ago. She emphasized to the group both the strong local market and opportunities for serving all the Americas from South Florida.

Once SFECO signed on, Chan said she began seeking sites in eastern Miami-Dade County, only to find land "very expensive."

She then approached Broward County, found officials "very welcoming" and opted to focus her efforts there.

Palm Beach County seemed too far from South Florida's largest airports and seaports in Miami and Fort Lauderdale, which handle the bulk of trade with Asia, she said.

Strategia had been working on the SFECO project with Broward's Office of Economic Development for months, when Broward Mayor Ilene Lieberman led a business group to China in May.

Chan said meetings between SFECO and Broward leaders in Shanghai helped "kick it up a notch to make the project happen faster."



Doreen Hemlock can be reached at dhemlock@sun-sentinel.com or 305-810-5009.

[snowsislander]

I have been predicting that China will try to cut out that consummate middleman Wal-Mart and sell directly in the U.S., though I had guessed it would simply be like Lowes versus Home Depot, with a mammoth Wal-Mart and a monster China-Mart on opposing corners. (At least, as long as Wal-Mart lasts; I don't believe that even Wal-Mart can undersell their suppliers, but never underestimate Bentonville.)

It hadn't occurred to me that they would try to market it as a whole concept here in the U.S. Daggone, that might be a great idea, but then again it might be a colossal flop. It is a bold one, though I can think of at least two examples of a similar concepts, Huis Ten Bosch (though I believe Huis Ten Bosch wasn't succeeding commercially and has now metamorphosed into a Nice, France theme) and Spain-mura. (the latter site is in Japanese)

[snowsislander]

I posted it here.

[Badeye]

Faux Communists for Kerry!......ROTFL!

I suspect Jane Fonda is pleased.

[LonghornFreeper]

I would love to see an actual source link for this, showing the actual Chinese People's Daily website, I could have alot of fun with that irritating my liberal friends. I don't doubt that China would want Kerry to win, but any story from Newsmax is assumed incorrect until proven otherwise.

[wk4bush2004]

Kerry is unbelievable. How can he give most favored nation status on human rights to a country with the worst and worsening human rights record in the world? It is quite obvious that Beijing wants him to win because they think that he would cut arms sales to Taiwan and allow them to be conquered by Beijing. And he also says that China is not a security threat? China aims to be a superpower and would love to see the US fall! We can't have a traitor like that in the White House!

[LonghornFreeper]

If you take the time to actually read the People's Daily article, you will see that as usual, this Newsmax article is basically pulled out of somebody's hindquarters. The article, linked to below, doesn't endorse anybody, it is simply an analysis which potential winning party would be better for China. It's final conclusion is that Bush is better for China in the short term, Kerry in the long term. Regardless, it is not an endorsement by any means. Why people continue to even post Newsmax articles is a mystery to me, considering the number of times they have been found to be demonstrably false.

Here is the link to the actual article.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1180593/posts