CHINA - BIG FRIEND OR BIG BULLY?
-
As we have all came to know, China ridiculed Singapore for simply having good relations with Taiwan. Who are they to decide who we make friends with? Have they came to the conclusion that they are a big political player in Asia?
Well not being bias...but i like to hear opinions from everyone on this matter. -
A bully friend???
-
IMHO
i feel that it`s not enither one of them
it`s one of the many ppl there trying to act `BUSYBODY`
tt`s why i seems as the country is like one -
Ya X2Originally posted by sgboy2004:A bully friend???
-
China is openning up.
There may be some adjustments to all its policies.
If everybody is able to speak and post freely on internet, their people may say something unpleasant about us just like we may say something unpleasant about them.
It is part and parcel of new realities affecting China.
As for whether China is a regional threat, I will not think so. But it is bent on recovering its past lost territories like Hongkong and Taiwan.
It is now doing so peacefully through dialogue and one-country two-system policy. We should respect their needs and aspiration. For past centuries, the Chinese culture is one of non-aggression. Let's not use our standards to judge others. We may be influenced by press sensationalism as well.
-
A fren hu bully Singapore!!
Hate the Cinese from China
In sch, think dey beri clever like tat...... -
To me, China seems to be struggling to fit itself into international norms and understanding diplomacy and is trying to push everyone around as if it's already the world superpower. Maybe it's the side effect of breakneck growth that gives its the cockiness and arrogance.
A recent quick look already shows China as the uncompromising and difficult to deal with neighbour in the region. China's relationships and diplomatic ties with several Asian countries are currently strained. Singapore is only of them. Japan is pissed with their lack of sportmanship and unneeded nationalism during Asian Cup and the Diaoyutai problem, Korea (North and South) are pissed with China claiming Korea as part of its territory recently. Seems like China is stepping on everyone's toes.
In my perspective, if we feel good ol' America is bad, then China is worse. At least Uncle Sam was relatively polite and didn't try any direct criticisms and play power politics with Singapore. Apparently, US always tries to settle things peacefully behind the scene (with regards to Singapore) and everything is done thru diplomacy, save for some critical writings in her press. At least things are requested from our government, not demanded like what China is doing. China demanded that our PM Lee cancel off his visit to Taiwan, which luckily we didn't. If PM Lee had succumbed to China, then it' would give China's leaders an idea that our government is weak and is "afraid" of China, which gives them even more reasons to try more power politics in future. I suspect it was a test of PM Lee's resilience and character -- whether he'll buckle and give in under pressure.
I'm not sure if this is a transitional period for China as it gropes around trying to find its place in the international community or already trying to assert its economic, political and military influence by flexing its muscles in the region and on the world. -
This is not the first time a "friend" has "bully" us.
US exerted pressure on Singapore over the Michael Fay incident. Habbie has called us a small red dot.
It has happened before and will happen again if our interest clashed with that of a bigger nation.
Important thing is we are able to stand our ground and not caved in to pressure exerted on us. They can say what they want but it shd not affect us internally. -
China is acting like a big brother bcos it is indeed the big brother. The fate of asia is tied very closely to China's. Why do I say that? China is currently the third largest importer of foreign goods in the world. The strong demand from Chinese consumers is driving economic growth in many countries.
Like what my lecturer once said, if chinese economy sweats, asia will get heatstroke. -
China can bully Singapore because Singapore behave like small brother who follow behind Big Brother.
Everyday govt say Singaporeans must DO BUSINESS with China
Every govt say Singaporeans must learn Mandarin, pass Second Language, attend Chinese tuition.
So little pissing Singaporeans look up to Big Boss China..........
.............Big Boss China suddenly turn around and spit in little boy's face.......
...............don't cry lah.........either you continue to lick Big Brudder's toes or you tell him : Bugger off, I am not your little victim any more. you can keep your 5000 years of history to yourself. I have my own singaporean history and culture.........so back off, Peking man.....
. -
Can't wait to get back into the firing line again?Originally posted by idwar:China can bully Singapore because Singapore behave like small brother who follow behind Big Brother.
Everyday govt say Singaporeans must DO BUSINESS with China
Every govt say Singaporeans must learn Mandarin, pass Second Language, attend Chinese tuition.
So little pissing Singaporeans look up to Big Boss China..........
.............Big Boss China suddenly turn around and spit in little boy's face.......
...............don't cry lah.........either you continue to lick Big Brudder's toes or you tell him : Bugger off, I am not your little victim any more. you can keep your 5000 years of history to yourself. I have my own singaporean history and culture.........so back off, Peking man.....
.
There no need to fan anti-China or anti-Singapore sentiments here. -
i really dont know...
if they(china) know how to stop now,they are still friend.
if they dont know how to stop, they are turning to big bully.
i am now looking forward how LHL govt and china govt how to settle abt this.
actually now so far so good.. singaporean from china havent got boycott or condemn. the important for both of us is cool down.
let us prove to other that we have more EQ 1st..
anyway..the most important thing for me is by getting a good job and pretty GF..no time for those. somemore now 2004 Olympic Games ..watch games better. -
I think China is a big bully,as long as she remain a communist state,i will treated her as a "big bully" and potential enemy.I Hate Communism And Socialism!!!
-
no way china can handle 1.3b people if they dont stay communist.Originally posted by drawer:I think China is a big bully,as long as she remain a communist state,i will treated her as a "big bully" and potential enemy.I Hate Communism And Socialism!!! -
actually singapore's policies seem to suggest that we're a semi communist state as well?Originally posted by drawer:I think China is a big bully,as long as she remain a communist state,i will treated her as a "big bully" and potential enemy.I Hate Communism And Socialism!!! 
-
more towards socialist. With a varying degree of freedom. But of course freedom must be controlled. Too much ain't a good thing .
-
Originally posted by oldbreadstinks:actually singapore's policies seem to suggest that we're a semi communist state as well?
Is Singapore a semi-communist state or more towards socialist, is there any differentiating line between the two - Semi-Communism and Socialism ?Originally posted by CenturionMBT:more towards socialist. With a varying degree of freedom. But of course freedom must be controlled. Too much ain't a good thing .
The PAP is as much a domineering Political Party in Singapore, as the CCCP in China.
The PAP practise a semblence of Westminster style of Parliamentary process, as much as the CCCP practise a semblence of People's Representation in its Annual People's Congress.
Throughout the last ten years, the CCCP has sent delegations to visit Singapore and learn about the Singapore Political Process - (more correctly, the PAP Process of maintaining Perpetual Governance); and the PAP has also sent delegations to visit China to "learn" its history.
"Too much (freedom) ain't a good thing" ?
According to the current edition of NEWSWEEK, Communist China has begun to make space, and to embrace 'Avante Garde' art, which is shunned by Singapore's Socialist leaning Ministry of Information and Arts.
"Freedom" is Freedom.
Either one has it, or one does not ?
Should there be any half-measure ?
One can say that with Freedom, it also comes with Responsibility of the "liberated" Actions. -
The situation where "Either one has it, one does not ?" happens when a person is in jail and when a person is released from it it. I dun think such a statement is applicable to society in general.Originally posted by Atobe:"Freedom" is Freedom.
Either one has it, or one does not ?
Should there be any half-measure ?
One can say that with Freedom, it also comes with Responsibility of the "liberated" Actions.
Freedom comes not only with responsibility but social acceptence as well.
Americans are allowed to own firearms but not everyone who own them are responsible. There are deaths and injuries caused by firearms every year but the society accept it as a part of their rights and freedom.
The level of "freedom" in Singapore depends on the nature of our society. I dun think it is a half-measure like you describe.
Total freedom without any restriction and controls is not freedom. It is anarchy. -
SINGAPORE FOREIGN POLICY
Leverage on our strengths.
Our strengths are:
(1) Multi-racial, multi-religious and Multi-cultural country where people of diverse race and cultural background exist in harmony and understand one another.
(2) Our past economic success - except for the high cost part.
(3) International standing - tentatively successful except we tend to offend our neighbours with our high-profile pronouncements of all kinds.
(4) Our military hardware and civil defence software.
We have tested our neighbours' (Like Mahathir's) attitudes towards us before with our legalistic and high-profile "We are not afraid of you" pronouncements but this did not work. Abdullah the new Malaysian PM has already extended his warm gesture towards us. Let's us build on this window of opportunities and take the initiative to offer certain flexibility in respect of certain issues like water or causeway replacement based on realistic long-term interests of our nation.
If we are the first one to suggest and could form another follow-up delegation to iron out details, relations with Malaysia should improve. Legal minds may be too constrained/ Negotiators should not be full of legal jargons as our neighbours may not take our approach too well. Keep legal assertions as the final resorts when there is no alternative except to insist on arbitration. They should know our legal rights when we exchange correspondences or drafts. Keep legalities a bit to the background during negotiations.
As for our relationship with China, they are learning to respect our position. Last time our old administration has struck a certain common understanding with Mao and Deng and they saw our needs and aspirations as a multi-racial country. May be now is the time to build such mutual trust. If we go in and poke finger at their sensitive policies, without in-depth understanding of their major goals and policies, we may end up not the wiser.
Our strengths is that China may find our people trustworthy to do certain things but to help them build up their infrastructures and commerce. To use our strengths, it is crucial to exercise our foreign policies towards China with quiet low-profile helpfulness and mutual respects.
Our international relations should be exercised with suppleness and quiet diplomacy with willingness to benefit our neighbours through two-way technical exchange programs. Essentially this calls for a Swiss quiet diplomacy approach. Swiss has not lost out in any international conflicts to date and I don't see we will lose out if we are able to do the same.
-
Originally posted by robertteh:
Yr posting is sensible and worth reading, better than many of those senior members on this board.
[b
...As for our relationship with China, they are learning to respect our position. Last time our old administration has struck a certain common understanding with Mao and Deng and they saw our needs and aspirations as a multi-racial country. May be now is the time to build such mutual trust. If we go in and poke finger at their sensitive policies, without in-depth understanding of their major goals and policies, we may end up not the wiser.
Our strengths is that China may find our people trustworthy to do certain things but to help them build up their infrastructures and commerce. To use our strengths, it is crucial to exercise our foreign policies towards China with quiet low-profile helpfulness and mutual respects.
[/b]
Our old administration struck common understanding with Deng and Li Peng and we established diplomatic relationships while Starlight Operation continued in Taiwan. There were mutual trusts among the old leaders. As years went by, both sides went through leadership changes. On our side we change from LKY to GCT and now LHL. In China, from Li Peng to Zhu Rong Ji and now to Wen Jia Bao.
The relationship went on peacefully until LHL visited Taiwan. The Chinese needed to know if there were any changes in our position or has the new leadership taken the mutual trust for granted? Making noise was just part of their condemnation of any move that could undermine their one china policy. Such noise was necessary for both the international and their local audience, including Taiwan, and it is more important now than became because of ah bian.
Now months have gone past and what actually happened as a result? Not much, except for cancellations of some trips, and I expect normal relationship to resume soon. Such is the maturity of the relationship and the leadership of both governments. This certainly put to shame who were involved in anti-China and anti- Singapore bashing.
What is of real of concern is that from these anti china bashings, including many on this forum, we saw how little many singaporeans know about China and Taiwan. These two places are near to us in locations and close to many of us in ethnicity. Many Singaporean even spoke like the Americans commenting on democracy and freedom for China and Taiwan.
If anybody want to take on China, calling it big bully or communist, or "poke your finger at their sensitive .." part, it is better to learn from the Chinese proverb, "know your enemy know yourself, a hundred battles a hundred victories." This will benefit us not only in business and in foreign relationship, it save us from exposing our ignorance.
Your call for "greater in-dept understanding" is therefore most laudable. -
Originally posted by tspg:
Is it not obvious that by committing a crime against society that offer you the liberty, you would deserve the removal of such liberties and be sent to jail ?
The situation where "Either one has it, one does not ?" happens when a person is in jail and when a person is released from it it. I dun think such a statement is applicable to society in general.
Freedom comes not only with responsibility but social acceptence as well.
Americans are allowed to own firearms but not everyone who own them are responsible. There are deaths and injuries caused by firearms every year but the society accept it as a part of their rights and freedom.
The level of "freedom" in Singapore depends on the nature of our society. I dun think it is a half-measure like you describe.
Total freedom without any restriction and controls is not freedom. It is anarchy.
Is it not obvious that a criminal will deserve to be incarcerated ? Will you compare his incarceration to the loss of Freedom being "either one has it, or one does not ?"
Why pick on the Americans having the Freedom of Owning Firearms, and not exercising the responsibility to ensure deaths and injuries are caused ?
The fact that owning firearms remains a free choice, despite the deaths and injuries caused, will reflect the great propensity of social tolerance towards the value of freedom available in American Society towards opposing values.
By the way, there exist also a large number of American opponents to gun ownership too.
Such tolerance do not exist in Singapore's society, which in any case have a low tolerance level towards the less conforming members.
To pick a better comparison, why not compare the Freedom to Gather in Public, which is an offence for Singaporeans to gather in public in a group of more then three (or is it five) persons without a Police Permit.
The Singapore Constitution has many laudable paragraphs that will make Singapore a modern and open society.
Unfortunately, over the last forty years of a Single Party Rule, there are many amendments and bye-laws that are rubber stamped into legislations by a One-Party Parliament that nullify the laudable paragraphs of the Singapore Constitution. -
You dun go out much do you ? Stay in your ivory tower every day ?Originally posted by Atobe:Is it not obvious that by committing a crime against society that offer you the liberty, you would deserve the removal of such liberties and be sent to jail ?
Is it not obvious that a criminal will deserve to be incarcerated ? Will you compare his incarceration to the loss of Freedom being "either one has it, or one does not ?"
Why pick on the Americans having the Freedom of Owning Firearms, and not exercising the responsibility to ensure deaths and injuries are caused ?
The fact that owning firearms remains a free choice, despite the deaths and injuries caused, will reflect the great propensity of social tolerance towards the value of freedom available in American Society towards opposing values.
By the way, there exist also a large number of American opponents to gun ownership too.
Such tolerance do not exist in Singapore's society, which in any case have a low tolerance level towards the less conforming members.
To pick a better comparison, why not compare the Freedom to Gather in Public, which is an offence for Singaporeans to gather in public in a group of more then three (or is it five) persons without a Police Permit.
The Singapore Constitution has many laudable paragraphs that will make Singapore a modern and open society.
Unfortunately, over the last forty years of a Single Party Rule, there are many amendments and bye-laws that are rubber stamped into legislations by a One-Party Parliament that nullify the laudable paragraphs of the Singapore Constitution.
Go to any shopping centre you can easily see ppl gathering in groups of MORE than three ( or is it five ) ppl.
There are definitely more than five ppl in this forum.
You cant separate fact from fiction.
You see conspiracy at every corner.
lol
Dun tell me you cant count as well. -
Originally posted by tspg:
Try to gather in a group of three (five) or more, and make a speech on any simple subject, in any public space and see what happens to you.
You dun go out much do you ? Stay in your ivory tower every day ?
Go to any shopping centre you can easily see ppl gathering in groups of MORE than three ( or is it five ) ppl.
There are definitely more than five ppl in this forum.
You cant separate fact from fiction.
You see conspiracy at every corner.
lol
Dun tell me you cant count as well.
You must remember that the Singapore Constitution stipulate the Freedom to Gather, and also the Freedom of Speech.
There are other sections of the legislations that will take care of abusers of the freedom enshrined by the Singapore Constitution, but such legislations should not infringe on the Freedom that is first granted by the Constitution.
Can you separate facts from fiction ?
With the expertise of a master magician, can you discern facts from fiction ?
Can you tell if you are living in a Police State or in an Open Society ?
Your statements shown in your postings reflects an age of struggling fruition into maturity, and it is good that you are participating in this forum.
It will be useful if you will learn to be less impetuous, which easily give your age away. -
This analysis of current foreign policy of Singapore towards China/Taiwan relation and China is very wise. Let us hope our government will not conduct a China policy based on responses of some in this forums aimed at bashing China.Originally posted by sgdiehard:Our old administration struck common understanding with Deng and Li Peng and we established diplomatic relationships while Starlight Operation continued in Taiwan. There were mutual trusts among the old leaders. As years went by, both sides went through leadership changes. On our side we change from LKY to GCT and now LHL. In China, from Li Peng to Zhu Rong Ji and now to Wen Jia Bao.
The relationship went on peacefully until LHL visited Taiwan. The Chinese needed to know if there were any changes in our position or has the new leadership taken the mutual trust for granted? Making noise was just part of their condemnation of any move that could undermine their one china policy. Such noise was necessary for both the international and their local audience, including Taiwan, and it is more important now than became because of ah bian.
Now months have gone past and what actually happened as a result? Not much, except for cancellations of some trips, and I expect normal relationship to resume soon. Such is the maturity of the relationship and the leadership of both governments. This certainly put to shame who were involved in anti-China and anti- Singapore bashing.
What is of real of concern is that from these anti china bashings, including many on this forum, we saw how little many singaporeans know about China and Taiwan. These two places are near to us in locations and close to many of us in ethnicity. Many Singaporean even spoke like the Americans commenting on democracy and freedom for China and Taiwan.
Your call for "greater in-dept understanding" is therefore most laudable.
There should be in-depth understanding of others' needs and aspirations versus our own long-term interests in our foreign policy.
If we could do it during the communist era of China and gain their understanding and tacit support of our position in SEA, there is no reason we cannot now do better. Ah Bian seems to lack a certain balance in his foreign policy as he is too keyed up in gaining independence. May be he is just playing to his domestic politics to be too interested to gain a more acceptable solution.
Ah Bian's current move is against the interests of all parties and is not consonant with international realities. Americans already saw it fit and in their national interests not to contain or isolate China and is working towards accommodation with China. Why risk everything to spill for a fight for after all a modernising China is to everyone's benefits.
Taiwan can start negotiating for openness and eventual democratization of China using itself as a model to egg China to change with an objective of getting both sides to accept a time-table for re-unification.
China may respond to such an accommodation as it has to stablize HongKong as well. They had better diplomatic strategy at one time and had used the one-country two-system to induce cooperation of all parties under Deng Xiao Peng. Greater leadership is needed for China to gain peace with Taiwan and Hongkong. Just my personal view. -
I often see groups of Singaporeans the man-in-street type talking about politics in groups of five or more in kopithiams. These uncles say what they want they criticise the govt openly. I dun see any mata-mata go catch them.Originally posted by Atobe:Try to gather in a group of three (five) or more, and make a speech on any simple subject, in any public space and see what happens to you.
You must remember that the Singapore Constitution stipulate the Freedom to Gather, and also the Freedom of Speech.
There are other sections of the legislations that will take care of abusers of the freedom enshrined by the Singapore Constitution, but such legislations should not infringe on the Freedom that is first granted by the Constitution.
Can you separate facts from fiction ?
With the expertise of a master magician, can you discern facts from fiction ?
Can you tell if you are living in a Police State or in an Open Society ?
Your statements shown in your postings reflects an age of struggling fruition into maturity, and it is good that you are participating in this forum.
It will be useful if you will learn to be less impetuous, which easily give your age away.
Chiam and Low also make frequent visit to PAP held wards to collect feedback from the ppl. I dun see the police arresting them.
The law exist and is evoked to take action against trouble makers and agitators.
If two opposing gangs are holding turf talks in your neighbourhood I suppose you dun mind them doing so because they are only exercising their right of freedom of speech.