Comments on: Ping pong, panda and China’s not so harmonious diplomatic symphony

By: lirelou

lirelou — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 00:10:31 +0000

Actually, I rather liked Pomfret’s latest “Why China will (not) rule the world” or some such. (http://silkroadintl.net/blog/) Also, being of a particular nationality does not guarantee that one is gifted with an insight for prescient analysis on their own country and culture. Granted, they already have the requisite language and cultural skills. But analysis often requires looking from the outside in, which many natives are incapable of doing, particularly since their analysis must often be framed in response to their employer’s strategy or goals. Some of the worst analysts I’ve known have been natives of the regions they were analyzing. As an example: In the late 1990s a major corporate entity with interests in Panama wanted to know: 1) Who the next president would be? (i.e., who to suck up to before the election); 2) Whether a referendum authorizing Panamanian Presidents to seek reelection would pass? (i.e., would influence their response to question #1), and whether or not the Panamanian government would allow the U.S. to keep a small counter-narcotics base in Panama after 1999. (i.e., government contracts in support of remaining U.S. forces). To their credit, these were not easy questions to answer. Unlike esoteric governmental agencies, these answers would not gather dust in some obscure file, but would be out there for the chief executives and CEO to see within a matter of six months to a year. The team that provided this analysis consisted to four native Spanish speakers, two of whom had been born and raised in the country. None had a degree from any respected university, and none had ever read in Latin-American politics or history. Unsurprisingly, their analysis resulted in three wrong answers. The opposing party won the election. The referendum to amend the constitution to allow presidential reelection was unanimously rejected by Panama’s citizenry, and after dragging out negotiations on the counternarcotics base until the very eve of U.S. Forces withdrawal, the Panamanian government said “Hell, No!” to even a continued U.S. governmental civilian presence (other than the standard diplomatic one). The bottom line is that the line: I (my wife, father, mother, etc) am (Albanian, Zulu, whatever) does not qualify one (or one’s wife, mother, father, etc) as an expert in that particular country’s culture or affairs.

By: Ned Kelly

Ned Kelly — Mon, 12 May 2008 00:39:26 +0000

Oh and Catherine, is this the Cartman video you’re looking for?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dnUvX8mZu8

In any case I think I’ll send it to Pomfret.

By: Ned Kelly

Ned Kelly — Mon, 12 May 2008 00:27:38 +0000

Actually, Peter, my last post with the video of the Freaks chanting “Gooble Gobble” was intended as an allusion to the way expats-in-China who stay there too long tend to be, or to turn into, sick sad sacks of sh–. You know the type, serial pedophiles, drug addicts, psychotics, patrons of massage parlors and/or gay bathhouses picking up toy-boys…things haven’t changed much since the time of the Boxer Rebellion when the Chinese noticed all too well the creepiness, venality and sleaze of the expat “community”.

But in a way, you’re interpretation of the Freaks’ “Gooble Gobble” accords with mine.

By: C.A. Yeung

C.A. Yeung — Mon, 12 May 2008 00:20:14 +0000

Adriana,

Thanks for the Kissinger joke. It reminds me of episode 2 of the South Park Imaginationland Triology, when Kurt Russell was recruited to head a troop through a portal into the Imaginationland. Kurt was considered a suitable candidate because he was in “that one movie that’s kind of like this”.

As for the first part of your “question” about academic credential, the unfortunate fact for me is that: yes I do have that kind of degree; yes it is on a relevant area; and yes it is from a very famous university. But I consider this as irrelevant when it comes to blogging about China. The only trouble is: now I can’t laugh at your joke. As Cartman would have said in a situation like this: “Goddammit!”

By: Peter

Peter — Sun, 11 May 2008 20:52:42 +0000

… Sorry, I meant to write “Ned’s last post”, not “Ken” (whoever that is) …

By: Peter

Peter — Sun, 11 May 2008 20:50:55 +0000

Catherine, great post! Based on his background one would expect John Pomfret to be willing and able to make explicit the crucial connection between Hu’s recent actions (representation) and China’s deteriorating international reputation (reality). It is exactly that vast discrepancy between rhetoric and reality that’s bugging me, particularly in relation to Ken’s last post “Gooble gobble, one of us!” that also fits in with my own observations. John Pomfret and others who get paid for providing insightful analyses should poke into that bubble of rhetoric rather than sustain (or help create) it. Thanks for doing their job for them!

Of course it’s been an age-old Chinese stratagem for Chinese leaders to “regurgitat[e] old cliches in order to keep [their heads] above the water.” And in a setting in which most alternative voices (within China and beyond) are either silenced or co-opted into silence this strategy has worked wonders. So I’m not sure whether Hu really needs to do more…

By: Adriana

Adriana — Sun, 11 May 2008 17:33:53 +0000

(sarcasm on)

Of course, she does not understand China.

She does not have a Ph.D. from a prestigious Universtity on the subject of “Understanding China”, nor has been ever been named a pundit. Has she ever met Henry Kissinger????

You know that you cannot know anything unless you have a degree from a reputable University to attest to it…

(sarcasm off)

By: Ned Kelly

Ned Kelly — Sun, 11 May 2008 15:38:16 +0000

Catherine, “you don’t understand China!”

(Insert ten thousand “sarcasm” emoticons here, because Catherine IS CHINESE!)