China’s Soft-Power Fail: Condemning Hong Kong’s Protests
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
The author conflates world with a small handful of western countries that actively propagandizes against Chinese interests. However, it is true China is remarkably bad at foreign propaganda, but still somehow managed to garnish more support than condemnation for XinJiang camps, from predominantly Muslim nations no less. China will never build enough soft power will to sway Western populations as long as she's positioned by as existential competitor or potential adversary to the West. The piece also contrasts Chinese with Russian approach without acknowledging that the Russian aim is to divide foreign audiences not unite domestic ones. It's certainly not designed for ideological change - even perfect state propaganda program isn't going to make activating latent cross-cultural suspicions or outright sinophobia disappear anymore than people are going to turn pro-Russia when Russia pitted alt-right with BLM protesters.
We need a total war approach to this new information warfare.
https://www.lawfareblog.com/todays-headlines-and-commentary-...
On a more substantive note, it's interesting that, despite embedding idlewords' tweet on the subject, the gloss on the article is more about China's actions and not really at all about the complicity of the American social media networks being "targeted."
The Firewall kind of works against China in this space, I guess. Activity originating from China on Twitter is far more unambiguously recognizable as state-directed than it is in many other places.
I'm curious about how this is perceived in China. From other things I"ve read, plenty of people within China believe what the government is pushing - curious if that's actually true or if that's just from a biased selection of reactions.
I mean the same happens here too basically. Most people barely care and just go with whatever they overhear in the news. Western media is pretty biased too in this regard. Chinese media only shows protesters throwing rocks at police, we primarily get to see protesters injured by police.
Then we have quite a bunch of people thinking the extradition law was literally saying that Hong Kong would have to surrender any dissident at China's request.
While fears of this law muddying the waters are justified, I think it is purposely misrepresented in Western media. As of now, Hong Kong has no treaty at all with China, Macau and Taiwan. A lot of criminals, from murderers to real estate billionaires that cheated others for millions are walking free in Hong Kong while wanted in China or Taiwan. And even then it's not like China or Taiwan could just request anyone to be surrendered to them. Each case would still have to go through the Hong Kong legal system, meaning the crime must also be considered a crime in Hong Kong. For more details the Wikipedia article on this law is a good starting point, there's also a link to the full version of the law.
That is very much is the case. Western media gives a lot of time, space, and prominence to the fears that China could extradict anyone they wanted for any crime they wanted in HK. Meanwhile, it's not that hard to figure that the amendment only allows 37 out of the existing 46 offences listed in Schedule 1 the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance; upping the minimum sentences to 7 years before the extradition is considered; retaining the clauses for double criminality, no political extradition (which is determined by HK, first by the CE, then could be challenged by the courts), etc etc...
I compared the proposed amendment (the earlier one that had a minimum 3 year sentence) against the existing FOO, and the amendment isn't that drastic as a change.
What would be concerning is still some of the existence of white-collar offences that applies, and removing the requirement for the CE to first notify the LegCo and require their approval. The latter, as I understood it, does not happen in other countries, and interesting in HK politics because the pro-democratic camp has most of its sway in LegCo.
What this CE had bungled badly was the lack of consultation and attempted to ram this whole thing through, believing that she had enough votes to do so anyways.
Here the thing though. If tons are criminals are hiding freely in Hong Kong, it isn’t Hong Kong’s legal system that is the problem. It is the fact there are lot of corruption happening in China. The extradition will not change anything. There will still be criminals in China that escape justice by running to Taiwan or Singapore. The source of the problem is China itself. Hong Kong has no reason to weaken its legal system just because some people in China thinks it’s justified to catch a few criminals.
And the whole bill was so stupid to begin with. You never screw with people’s livelihood. People, no matter your political position, will emotionally react to things that threaten their existence. Any bill that would extradict a citizen to China without proper due process (In China, due process is what the party says. The legal system is below the party. They made that clear) is one of them. The fact that the CE couldn’t foresee this boggles my mind. What did you think was going to happen?
It makes me think she was hired to be obedient rather than hired for talent. Her handling of this situation further enforces that view. The whole thing is a shit show. Now, she is stuck between a wall and a rock of her own doing. I also agree that Beijing didn’t allow her to quit. She made this mess, she should stay for the outcome. Either clean up the mess or go down as the CE that ruined Hong Kong.
Also, it’s already been pointed by Taiwan that there are other legal ways to hand over criminals, it’s just that the current government wanted this bill. Similar to how the FBI tried to peer pressure Apple to decrypt a criminals phone even though they already paid an Israeli company to do so.
The Chinese population is huge so it is hard to lump them all in one basket, but here are the different types of people that I encounter.
1) People fueled by Chinese nationalistic sentiments, they believe that the Chinese way of development is superior. They believe the model has a long term vision and it makes decisions faster than western liberal democracies. They know about the Tiananmen square, but they think the government did a good thing by sacrificing a small number of people to achieve a long period of economic prosperity and stability. There are a significant portion of educated Chinese elites who believes in this, partially because they are usually the beneficiaries of the development mode, partially because they are only receiving news and entertainments from the Chinese media, which is quite a bubble in itself. People who do not benefit from this development model also fall into this category due to a self defensive mechanism. They can't change their country easily, and it slowly becomes a Stockholm syndrome. They have to justify why they are ruled by a legitimate government. In the western media, these kind of people are much over represented because they are usually the loudest. If they spread their rhetoric, they don't have to bear the consequences.
2) People who are pro democracy, they are much more skeptic of the Chinese government, but they can't speak out in anyway for the fear of retribution. They are severely under represented in the westerm media. There are government tentacles everywhere in the world to report you if you speak out against your government.
3) People whose political interest is completely paralyzed. Due to the constant bombarding of useless rhetoric shown in mainland media. They know it is probably not true, but they can't change it, so they might as well focus on their economic interest and learn how to navigate within the system, which is still full of opportunities. I would say this is probably the majority.
Nothing new in news manufacturing there.
Sometimes you can get some reliable information from local sources that have not a primary stake on the matters (humanitarian NGOs for example).
Many times there's no way to know the truth : e.g. is there CIA involvement (or any agency of the country you like) ?
You are left to identify patterns for yourself, given a diversity of news sources, but keeping in mind what is the particular agenda of each.
Xi Jinping will not survive HK. Every day that the protest goes on demonstrates the impotence of the CCP.
Even with the great firewall, people are reading that large protests are occurring by "terrorists".
China will need to murder thousands and will destroy 20 years are economic growth, if the choice is between losing control of a major city or committing mass murder.
Xi looks invulnerable at the moment but he is hated and feared withing the CCP due to his lifetime appointment. No one is forgetting that he looks weak globally and the Chinese Grand Strategy (One Belt One Road) is also failing.
There is no good ending, either China commits mass murder or major CCP leaders are arrested or shot.