Saturday, July 4, 2020

HONG KONG

I see that Cuba speaking at the United Nations Human Rights Council has, on behalf of 53 countries, welcomed China's imposition of draconian security laws in Hong Kong in clear abrogation of the 'one China, two systems' agreement between China and the United Kingdom which was supposed to guarantee basic freedoms through until at least 2047.

More evidence, if any was needed, that the UNHRC is joke and a sad joke at that.

The move has been widely condemned by the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia with the UK  offering residency and possible citizenship for up to 3 million Hong Kongers and Australia also considering safe haven residency.    New Zealand not so much.

Why?

41 comments:

pdm said...

New Zealand not so much. - Why?'

Jacinda and Winston will shortly get a focus group together for a conversation on this. To report back by December 2022. Expect extensions of that date if we have a Labour/Green Coalition after September 19.

Tom Hunter said...

Why?

Could we get a comment from National Party MP, Jian Yang, in English, which I know he speaks well.

Or Labour MP Raymond Huo.

Preferably both.

The Veteran said...

Tom ... nice one. Yang of course is not part of the government. Huo is. But it is instructive that NZL didn't sign up to the joint statement of its 'Five Eyes' partners condemning the move.

Tom Hunter said...

And you think National would have were they in government?

It's instructive that almost nobody in Parliament is speaking out against this.

Perhaps they're waiting to see which way the wind blows.

Or the dairy payout moves.

Gustavo Frink said...

Name me a single nation that does not breach human rights in some way.

A bit rich for the UK to criticise China, given the UK's long history of oppression and repression in its former colonies, including Hong Kong. Have they never heard of the Opium Wars? The same goes for the US in its long campaign to deny human rights to nations that do not bend to its will. The US, by the way, that resigned its position on the UNHRC because it got butt hurt over being criticised for its own breaches of Human Rights.

Anybody who thought that China would adhere to the One Nation Two Systems idea is probably still clinging to their copy of The Great Treaty of 1722. Just as many Nazis were inspired by US Racism of the 20's and 30's, I am sure China has observed how the US entered into and then broke treaties with the people of Turtle Island.

China has a repressive government? Who could have guessed? It is why capitalists flocked to China to build new factories - no labour laws, no environmental regulations, a compliant workforce. A Capitalists wet dream come true.

Gustavo Frink said...

But it is instructive that NZL didn't sign up to the joint statement of its 'Five Eyes' partners condemning the move.

A sign that NZ Foreign Policy is based on what is best for NZ, not what Washington tells it to do. Just one more sign of how Trump has weakened American authority and respect among democratic nations.

Last summer, Trump promised Chinese President Xi Jinping that he'd keep quiet on anti-democratic moves in the territory while they were negotiating a trade deal, though he did sign a new sanctions law potentially targeting Chinese and Hong Kong officials. In November, Trump said he stood with democracy protesters in Hong Kong -- but "I'm also standing with President Xi, he's a friend of mine."

Good People. Both Sides.

Tom Hunter said...

What all that guff means is that Gustavo Frink will do nothing to oppose these moves by China, not even to the extent of speaking up or writing about opposing it.

Not quite like the government or National though, for Gustavo will retain his moral and ethical purity by condeming everyone.

Noel said...

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/417367/nz-govt-concerned-over-china-s-security-law-for-hong-kong

Tom Hunter said...

New Zealand Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters said New Zealand had a "strong interest" in seeing confidence maintained in the 'one country, two systems' principle that gave Hong Kong a high degree of autonomy.

Legislating on Hong Kong's behalf without the direct participation of its people and legislature would challenge that principle, Peters said.

"It is important that any national security legislation is enacted in a way that respects the fundamental rights and freedoms of the people of Hong Kong and has their support," he said.


He could have just stood up and said "Squeak"

The Veteran said...

Tom ... let me make my position quite clear. Both Yang and Huo have links with China front organisations. No big deal in itself because those links are known and, to that extent, both are compromised to the point where I suspect their ability to influence their respective parties policy towards China is somewhat limited. I am more worried about possible 'sleeper' agents like the Australian NSW State Labor MP would had his home and office raided late last month amid suspicion he was harboring in his office an 'agent of influence' for China.

The Chinese government is smart. They know Yang and Hou are compromised and if I were them I would be looking at other opportunities to influence policy.

Should National have selected Yang knowing what they know now? No. Can they deselect him? Yes. Will they? Probably not. He's a useful conduit to the Chinese community as is Hou.

Tom Hunter said...

Meanwhile New Zealand's No. 1 National Party blogger is very excited about China joining the TPP, and that post is June 1..

Still, he did support Boris's citzenship gesture a few weeks ago so there's that.

Tom Hunter said...

@Vet

I'm more concerned at the possibility that National keeps him as an MP in order to appease the CCP, who might want more influence in National and Labour but are probably content having a tame Chinese MP who never speaks out against them, when such a person doing so would carry far greater weight than any other New Zealander.

And whatever National knew about him or not the fact is that he lied to the New Zealand authorities in his applications for his residency and then his citizenship. On that basis alone he should be given the boot.

He's a useful conduit to the Chinese community

Is he? Plenty of indications that Chinese people in that community, particularly the ones who escaped over the last couple of decades, don't want to even speak to him. Former NZ diplomat Charles Finny - hardly the sort of person given to OTT thinking - isn't the only one who watches what he says around Yang.

And what usefulness he has on that front could well be outweighed by the number of National Party voters who are concerned about what it all means as think of once again voting for the Party in 2020. I know I'm not alone in that.

Anonymous said...

Vet, what’s your view on five eyes? I think we are heading to an ANZUS moment. Do we stay or go? Do we get anything out of belonging apart from a few people getting tomorrow’s newspaper a day early? We can’t afford to piss China off but Trump is vindictive so we might get slapped around either way. Our values obviously line up with our five eyes partners but the U.S. has gone feral lately.
Ian

Gustavo Frink said...

Not quite like the government or National though, for Gustavo will retain his moral and ethical purity by condeming everyone.

Human Rights are Universal, Tommy boy. But to you, it's only what's on the home page of Breitbart. Not long ago you were all in a twist over Venezuela, but no more. Why is that, Tommy Boy? Are Venezuelans no longer important to you? I have never heard you speak out about rights abuses in Russia, Turkey, USA, et al. In fact, you are fanatical in your support for the Abuser in Chief currently squatting at 16 Penn.

Perhaps you could also enlighten us to what you have done, other than write blog posts read by a few sad, loners, plus me and my 97 other NYMS.

Matt 7:5, Luke 6:42, spring to mind.

Tom Hunter said...

And speaking of our neighbours across the Tasman... Australian university teaching pro-China class that amounts to propaganda,

The University of Queensland is under fire after lesson materials from its Understanding China undergraduate course were leaked, raising questions about foreign interference and educational independence at the public tertiary institution.

It’s the latest in a number of scandals arising from UQ’s close ties with Beijing, which have prompted calls for a Royal Commission.
Among topics canvassed in the ECON3820 course are the “terrorist” activities of the Uighur minority, whose persecution by Beijing has been described as ethnic cleansing.

Another discussion was devoted to whether pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong amount to terrorism.


The "Confucius Institute" funding- again!

Tom Hunter said...

Our values obviously line up with our five eyes partners but the U.S. has gone feral lately.

Trump just got there ahead of a lot of other people. The China distrust in the USA is now growing inside both the GOP and Democrat Parties, even with all their other divisions.

Tom Hunter said...

@GF
Human Rights are Universal

As is your two-faced cowardice.

... plus me and my 97 other NYMS.

I love the fact that you're so much of a troll that you flout the fact. And all this for a tiny blog "read by a few sad, loners". You truly are as pathetic as your non-stand against China indicated.

Gustavo Frink said...

Vet, what’s your view on five eyes?

I'd be interested in that, too.

I don't see value for either of our nations, given the US reluctance to share info.

Here are some of their targets

Charlie Chaplin
Jane Fonda
Nelson Mandela
John Lennon
Angela Merkel
Kim Dotcom

All terrible threats to world peace.

While the CIA was aware of foreign agents operating in Australia, they did not pass this information on to their Australian counterparts until after the agents had departed.

The governments of Britain and the US both refused to condemn the French terrorist attack on New Zealand.


Gustavo Frink said...

Not long ago you were all in a twist over Venezuela, but no more. Why is that, Tommy Boy? Are Venezuelans no longer important to you? I have never heard you speak out about rights abuses in Russia, Turkey, USA, et al. In fact, you are fanatical in your support for the Abuser in Chief currently squatting at 1600 Penn.

The Veteran said...

GF ... well if we weren't a member of five eyes there would certainly be celebrations in the Chinese and Russian Embassies.

Tom ... I've stated my position on Yang. As I said, I'd prefer he wasn't there and I don't consider him a threat. He is compromised. I am much more concerned about the Paddy Costellos and the Bill Sutchs of this world or the likes of John Kirk (remember him). And I wouldn't get too prissy on this otherwise I might be inclined o raise the issues of ex ACT MP Kenneth Wang and why he left the Party.

oneblokesview said...

Stepping back from all the rants about China both for and against.
Perspective.

1. The crackdown could be said to be the unintended consequence of the Riots/Protests that have been dogging Honk Kong for over a year. A bit rich for USA to complain about the crackdown while they were funding/supporting the ferment.

2. Agreements change all the time. (ie 1 Country 2 systems). Get over it. The Treaty of Waitangi has been substantially changed since its inception in 1840. Also by the way the year that Britain took Hong Kong as a ""prize"" in the Opium wars.

3. China is progressing, like it or not. While the USA is regressing?
So who is doing better for their citizens?

4. Finally. Many of my Hong Kong friends were getting fedup to the back teeth with the riots/protests disrupting their lives. They expect to see some normality return to their daily lives. They are not hyper about the security laws.... at the moment.

The Veteran said...

oneblokesview ... an alternative view. Interested to know if your friends are Expats or Hong Kong locals. Can understand the former holding that view.

Kimbo said...

@ oneblokesview

China is progressing, like it or not. While the USA is regressing?
So who is doing better for their citizens?


False equivalence. Whatever is wrong with the USA - or NZ, Australia, Canada, the UK, Europe or any other modern liberal democracies for that matter - they all do immensely better for their citizens compared to China. Unlike China, their citizens are not detained in concentration camps in their millions, subject to torture on a regular basis, in fear of their lives and their families” lives if they dare critical their government when they are in China, or living overseas.

In short, the CCP are genuine totalitarian quasi-fascists, and they, their spokespeople and shills - like you, oneblokesview - deserve contempt. And a whole lot more push back. So kindly take that message back to your paymasters, oneblokesview. Because even for this site where the bizarre trolls it attracts are continually reinventing themselves with new names, your bolt-out-of-the-blue post with a faux NZ name seems about as genuine as a plastic tiki...made in China. Maybe a google search will explain the meaning of the Kiwi vernacular if you haven’t been here (if indeed you are) long enough to work it out.

Gustavo Frink said...

Tom, have you stopped buying Chinese goods?

Is your milk still being sold to China?

What sacrifices have YOU made to support the people of Hong Kong?

Why have you gone silent on Venezuela?

Come on, these are all easy questions to answer, no need for cut n paste jobs. Just tell the truth.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Hmmmmmmmmm

One of the reasons the Nazis took over Germany was that they brought order where before there had been chaos and people traded 'order' for freedom. Interesting to see such a strategy being applauded on this thread.

Anonymous said...

Kimbo, far to harsh on oneblokesview he made some valid points. Part of the reason for the west’s reaction is not that Xi is a bastard by he’s not our bastard. China has a “ never again” attitude to being in a subservient position, reasonable given its history quite evident with regard to Hong Kong. When it sniffed that the protesters had independence as an objective they moved. Independence movement was always going to be squashed no matter the cost or consequences.
Ian

Anne Tiffa said...

And speaking of our neighbours across the Tasman... Australian university teaching pro-China class that amounts to propaganda,

Just one more cut and paste Tomas. But you accept this uncritically. Try this from the horses mouth, so to speak, UQ.

Understanding China (ECON3820)

Course description

This is a multidisciplinary course designed for anyone who has an interest in the Chinese economy and wants to learn about a wide range of issues from a holistic perspective. The course is taught by experts who work on China from various disciplines across the university. Having greater breadth and an understanding from a wide array of disciplines enables critical thinking and diversity. More specifically, this course will critically examine China's policies and consider the key economic, business, political, social, legal and normative factors that shape China's current situation. By examining the complexity and nuance of China's position on a number of issues arising from various disciplines, the course aims to provide students with a deeper understanding of China's global engagement in a changing world.


I bolded bit because I know reading comprehension is not your long suit, you prefer to have all the hard work done for you.

>The course is co-ordinated by Associate Professor Renuka Mahadevan whose academic credentials and publications list is something a poor farm boy from NZ could never aspire to reach.

While your linked article quotes extensively from Clive Hamilton, I doubt you would approve of his other works, such as "Silencing Dissent", What's Left:The Death of Social Democracy", "Requiem for a Species: Why We Resist The Truth About Climate Change", "Affluenza: When Too Much is Never Enough", and "Scorcher: The Dirty Politics of Climate Change".

Wayne Mapp said...

In what way are either Yang or Huo compromised? Yes, I know about their links to China. Why does this compromise them?

In fact I believe it is the opposite.

Both Yang and Huo serve as a valuable conduit, not just to the NZ Chinese community, but also to the Peoples Republic. They know enough of the Chinese senior leadership and senior civil service to get connections for NZ. In the same way that the PM knows about the British government through her years working in Blairs political office, or John Key did with the US and the UK, through central banks. In all cases NZ benefits from the deep links these relationships bring.

I know that people see Yang and Huo's links as being different to that of Ardern and Key, probably because the US and UK are historic allies, and China is not. China is a much newer relationship, but one that is incredibly important to New Zealand. We need deep insights and connections and Yang and Huo provide precisely that.

I realise Tom will not agree with any of that. But from what he writes, he seems to want NZ to have quite an antagonistic relationship with China. In my view, on that he is wrong.

Tom Hunter said...

I want a relationship with China that is based almost solely on trade and held at arms length so that we can speak out against them without being threatened by them over exports or having our house broken into as happened to scholar Anne-Marie Brady.

And I notice you have no response to make on the comments by former diplomat Charles Finny either. He, Brady and a handful of others certainly don't agree with your stand on China, if it can be called standing.

Tom Hunter said...

this course will critically examine China's policies

I guess AT's reading comprehension didn't extend to the course materials containing descriptions of the Hong Kong protests as terrorism or the “terrorist” activities of the Uighur minority - both which line up with the official position of the CCP.

Associate Professor Renuka Mahadevan

Meh. He wouldn't be the first academic who was paid off - and that's assuming he's not naturally a full-blown Chinaphile due to ideological reasons.

Or perhaps he's like you: a full-blown supporter of any regime as long as they're anti-American.

I doubt he's a troll with multiple nyms though so he has that going for him.

Tom Hunter said...

@Vet
And I wouldn't get too prissy on this otherwise I might be inclined o raise the issues of ex ACT MP Kenneth Wang and why he left the Party.

Have at it. I'd love to know more about why he left.

And of course he did leave.

Wayne Mapp said...

I have read Brady's work, and spoken to her. She is an China alarmist. I don't agree with her perspective. As for Finny's view, well that is his opinion.

I don't think New Zealand should have a solely transactional trade relationship with China, with China being held at a distance. It needs to be deeper than that, as indeed it is. It involves two way immigration (lots of New Zealanders work and live in China), two way investment, science research, exchange of scholars etc.

Tom's approach is to be fundamentally distrustful of China, to see them as a threat. It is an approach that deeply binds us into the US relationship where we mirror their every move. I prefer am more independent stance. Obviously we have historic ties with the US and Australia, but we should and do act more independently. The nuclear stance (which I presume Tom opposes) is an example of that. For the last 35 years we have taken a more independent approach than Australia. We should continue to do so. If we are to mirror Australia in every respect we might as well not be an independent nation.

Tom Hunter said...

None of that closer contact has enabled us to even speak up much about the treatment of Uighur minorities, which is at least at the same levels as what Stalin did to the Ukraine in the 1930's and may well get worse, let alone what is about to be unleashed on the people of Hong Kong.

On the contrary we are trapped in a relationship more tightly with China than we ever were with the USA and forced to be far more circumscribed with our criticism. Disgusting is not too harsh a word for where we find ourselves as supposed defenders of human rights.

Anne Tiffa said...

I guess AT's reading comprehension didn't extend to the course materials...

And I bet neither have you, Tomas. You just regurgitate what you are told like a good little Useful Idiot of the Reich. If you do have the course materials, post them. Otherwise you're just telling the latest in your string of lies.

He wouldn't be the first academic who was paid off...

I tried to provide bite sized pieces. I tried to provide links. I tried to educate you Tomas. But you just sneered, because you don't need no learnin', no doubt you had an Uncle who once read a book, so you don't need to.

Associate Professor Renuka Mahadevan appears to be a woman, something you would know had you bothered to follow the links I provided.

Of course, you don't need no evudunce either, to "know" Mahadevan's been "paid off". You just know these things, like the very stable genius you aren't.

You're no fun anymore, Tomas. You're just like the dull kid at the back of the class throwing spitballs because you know you'll always be a cuck, that all the Chads and Stacys are laughing at you.

Gustavo Frink said...

None of that closer contact has enabled us to even speak up much about the treatment of Uighur minorities,

True, Tommy Boy. Just where are your posts on Uighur minorities?

Tom Hunter said...

If you do have the course materials, post them.

So Clive Hamilton is now a liar in your eyes, despite having written material you believe in like Requiem for a Species: Why We Resist The Truth About Climate Change

And you're supporting the CCP's treatment of the Uighur minorities and the people of Hong Kong because you think that pokes a stick in the eyes of your ideological enemies.

Pathetic troll.

And since I'm probably addressing the same person...

Just where are your posts on Uighur minorities?

Somewhere on NM amidst my China Bashing, along with my shots at Vlad the Impaler and that Turkish twat.

You probably didn't notice because you were too busy giggling about the latest nyms you created, but even then your comments would be the same as others of the time: variations on "Name me a single nation that does not breach human rights in some way..... etc, etc.

Pathetic troll.

Oh - and I stopped writing about Venezuela after their pathetic Navy sunk its own warship after ramming a cruise liner. Any nation that hopeless is no longer worth trying to save - although I see their leader's got the hots for one of the Marxist BLM founders - or perhaps it's the other way around.

不不不不不不不不

The Veteran said...

Wayne ... compromised in the sense that if they were proxies for the CCP (and I'm not saying they are) then they are a busted flush. I agree they are a valuable conduit for their respective parties but I stand by my comment that if Yang's entire C.V. had be known to the National Party Board then he would have never got past go.

Anne Tiffa said...

If you do have the course materials, post them.

You don't. Therefore you are relying on other people to tell you the content. In your linked article, Clive Hamilton is quoted several times about the Confucius Institute, but he does not quote a single word from the course materials.

And you're supporting the CCP's treatment of the Uighur minorities and the people of Hong Kong because you think that pokes a stick in the eyes of your ideological enemies.

I have not supported China in either of those, I just point to the hypocrisy of you and Veteran

I'd also be interested in your answers to the questions Gustavo posted, but I know you will be too gutless to answer truthfully:

Tom, have you stopped buying Chinese goods?

Is your milk still being sold to China?

What sacrifices have YOU made to support the people of Hong Kong?


Plus a supplementary of my own:

And why are you so lazy that you believe the hated MSM?

I'm also prepared to bet you haven't bothered looking at the links about Associate Professor Renuka Mahadevan I posted, no doubt because the thought of an intelligent woman of color makes you horribly insecure. I guess
You're just a lonely boy, lonely and blue
You're all alone with nothin' to do
You've got everything you could think of
But all You want is someone to love.

Just like the dull kid at the back of the class throwing spitballs because you know you'll always be a cuck, that all the Chads and Stacys are laughing at you.

It's late here, time to get forty winks before the party tomorrow. I have so many hot dogs and hamburgers to grill before my pals arrive for the cookout. Don't suppose you know what pals are, being stuck in cow shit and all.

Wayne Mapp said...

Tom,

New Zealand (the Foreign Minister) has commented on both the Uighurs and Hong Kong.

My view on China does not mean New Zealand can't comment on their bad behaviour. Rather it doesn't assume that China is automatically bad.

I don't believe that China is currently the same as Stalins's Russia. Although I guess you are not saying they are literally the same (8 million deaths in Ukraine), but similar in principle. That is, China wishing to suppress the unique cultural expression of the Uighurs, similar to what has happened in Tibet.

I used to get lobbied by Falun Gong, who had all sorts of lurid Stalin like views of China. I did a lot of research on that, both official and non official. We could never find any substantive evidence to support their claims.

Anne Tiffa said...

Tom, have you stopped buying Chinese goods? And other unanswered questions.

Tom Hunter said...

As far as I can, troll.

Have you stopped shooting unarmed Black boys?