EurActiv - Letters to the Editor

Sir,

As a Chinese national, I am all for the Chinese government’s decision to cancel the EU-China summit.

When you have a summit with a supposedly “strategic partner”, you expect to receive treatment as such. If the Europeans cannot stop their outrageous way of asking the Chinese for economic cooperation on the one hand but rubbing their face in the sand politically on the other, they should not expect a smiling face from China.

Meeting the Dalai Lama is not something of a “spiritual bonding” as the French label it. It is a political statement against China: even a fool knows this. Mixing with the Dalai Lama stands for supporting what he is for, and he is for separating Tibet from China under the name of “Tibetan autonomy”. That is how all Chinese view this issue and they reject it offhand.

If Europeans do not respect the Chinese view, then they can mix with the Dalai Lama as much as they want, but don’t expect the Chinese to pretend nothing has happened and still do business as usual with Europeans.

Confucius once put it well: “Do not do onto others as you would not have them do onto you.” Europeans should learn the right way to treat a partner. If you feel that the Chinese have slapped you in the face, please remember it was you who did so first to the Chinese.

Michael Meng

Chinese national

Author :
Print

Comments

  1. Dear Mr Meng,

    obviously you want respect from Europe. Fine. But then please also respect Europe. We have diverse and open societies, we don’t like taboos and we have learned how to deal with conflict. We will not have prescribed to us by a communist regime to whom we can talk. And while we appreciate well made goods from China, we are perfectly able to produce all of that ourselves again as we did in the past.

    Regards,

  2. “Meeting the Dalai Lama is not something of a “spiritual bonding” as the French label it. It is a political statement against China: even a fool knows this. Mixing with the Dalai Lama stands for supporting what he is for, and he is for separating Tibet from China under the name of “Tibetan autonomy”. That is how all Chinese view this issue and they reject it offhand.”

    Members of the European Parliament are free to meet and invite whomever they want. They make a statement against any interference of a government in their matters, be it the Commission or the Chinese government. And of course China is perceived as a repressive regime and repressive is any attempt to tell a parliament whom to talk with and make it bound by diplomatic foreign policy considerations such as Chinas riddiculous claim that Taiwan was no independent state. Maybe it was a mistake to enable China’s access to our markets as the democratic process didn’t take place in the pace of trade opening.

  3. The obvious answer to the readers’ comments here is that of course heads of state are free to meet whom they want. E.g. Hu Jintao is free to meet representatives of movements for independence of Corsica or separation of Northern Ireland from UK. Still if he did so, he would probably be less credible as a partner for a “strategic partnership” of the kind that Europe claims it wants to have with China.

  4. Dear Mr Meng,

    I guess the Chinese got it wrong this time: cancelling the summit is, let’s put a very simple word to it, A blackmailing, that is the tool that the TRUE strategic partners do not use. Not that it will get China what it wants (because the EU is a free country and functioning democracy and China cannot order who EU can meet and who the EU cannot meet; the EU is not a teenager kid and China is not the mother of that kid) more likely it will loose credibility in business terms. It’s acting as a moody partner to whom you cannot trust… but than again, you cannot trust imported goods either as they many times contain health endangering substances… is that the right way to treat it’s partner? Further on, talking about environmental standards, human rights and so on… you get to see that China is the one that needs additional lecture, not Europe.

  5. The Dalai Lama has stated many times that he does not want independence, but rights for his people. Because he cannot lie – I believe him. On the other hand, the Chinese crony government does. And you’ve probably never heard of the Dalai Lama’s intentions because:

    a) The Chinese government has tried to portray him, of all people, as a terrorist, and you very diligently agree with whatever they have to tell you.
    b) You have tried to read about his manifesto but, “gasp”! Google does not let you search his name and you cannot find out anything about him.

    There is a reason why the West does not trust China, and this is because China does not trust China. When you have a government that controls all sources of information for its people, that bans unfriendly public demonstrations (yet foments violent demonstrations against Japan), that imprisons any journalist with a different opinion, that floods ethnically diverse areas with Han immigration to change the demographic setting of the area, that does not allow people to challenge its government; then I ask you why should the EU trust you?

    Why should we trust China when it has hijacked Copenhagen? Why should we trust China when even Taiwan does not wish to be a part of it – and they are as Chinese as they come.

    You see, China is as diverse as the EU, and when we meet the Dalai Lama we are telling you that we would trust you more if you listened to this man’s concerns. Europe gave up colonialism long ago, perhaps it is time you give this up too. This, of course is impossible, because your government needs to have 100% control of its people, which is neurotic; and ethnically diverse people are a menace to an ethno-centric Han government.

    It is very difficult to befriend such a regime, and, yes, we are afraid of China. It is the biggest country in the world, under control of an opaque and racist government – very dangerous! We would love to have better relations, but we simply do not trust you. But don’t blame us, you don’t even trust yourselves!

    My only question to you is: if tibetans are chinese, are chinese tibetans?

  6. that’s ridiculous! “Chinese citizen” pretends to speak on behalf of all the Chinese, just as their repressive government does.

    Chinese government is in fact a bunch of Communists who do not allow any kind of opposition on free media to exist, oppress the most basic civic and political human rights.

    Not speaking of the violent Tibet occupation (that had had all the independent and sovereign state essentials before) and dismal human rights record there as well as in other regions inhabited by national minorities.

    To occupy the region killing a million civilians there and destroying hundreds of temples and intentiously eleminating region’s historical heritage, that is not what Confucius taught Chinese of, saying “Do not do onto others as you would not have them do onto you.”

  7. Dear all,

    it seems many people are fans of Dalai Lama. it is forgotten that it was a slavery state under rule of Dalai Lama. But I have to say he is such a good actor.

    EU won’t benefit any if it continues to be blind to changing world and China.
    EU needs to learn from USA who is much smarter.

    My suggestion is: buy a ticket and travel a bit outside of Europe which helps you open eyes.

    God bless Europe!

  8. Is the bride (groom) at your liking as a strategic partner ?

    What is a ST (Strategic Partner) ? What is respect ? What is diktat ? What is the acceptable behaviour for partnership?

    A few commentaries above are real European clichés and bias. In substance they say :
    a) If China wants to be a ST (Strategic Partner), it must “be similar” to Europe
    b) It must prove and inspire credibility , righteousness and trust

    But as the fact of requesting a condition (called Respect by the Chinese national) to partnership is perceived by European Members of Parliament (dixit) as a “repressive act” from a “repressive regime”, therefore it is not acceptable as any diktat.

    China can neither be trusted because (dixit)
    a) “we are afraid of them”, “moody”, “blackmailers”
    b) “they make poisonous goods they have copied from Europe” (on request of European companies and -free trade for all- ideology).

    Therefore a “lesson” must be given to China prior partnership and they have learn how to be :
    a) “ Open, unbiased, multiethnic, diverse, anti-colonialist, taboo-free,”
    b) “not communist, abandon control over its people, media, ….”
    c) “ reject an ethnic-cleansing ethno-centric communist Han government”

    The laws of political sciences, as the law of gravity, demonstrate that any blame list is no corner-stone to a partnership.

    European political illiterates should remember the following facts, before imposing a “lesson” (a diktat) to China : Here is another blame list for your literacy.

    About political violence:
    – Both Europe and China are born out of a “slaughter” and “blood baths” but at different times.
    – Europeans (and alike US people as “former European immigrants”) are responsible of a slaughter of over 700 million people and huge suffering over 5 centuries from 1492 , Napoleon, and WWI+II , with ethnic-cleansing of Indians on both American continents (American Christian said” we are the God’s chosen people”), Kosovo, and Yugoslavia.
    – Europeans (French, German, British) forced-feed China into “opium habit” to adopt “free-trade ideology and diktat of colonialism”, invaded and sacked Beijing and China. Is the reverse true ?.
    – Supported treacherously other Chinese troops to keep control over China

    About ideological, cultural and “democratic” violence: The lesson to Europeans should be :

    – Does “free trade for all” should generate “democracy for all”?(dixit commentary) No it generates “profits” for a few in a “common market”(Europe is only a common market).
    – How to qualify the behaviour of “non communist” European leaders when they refuse to accept the decision of French and Netherland people who voted No to a referendum ? Political science semantics says it is “not democracy: governance of the people but dictatorship”.
    – How to qualify European leaders indulging in a “neurotic habit” such as capitalism, i.e the mental disorder consisting to “accumulate money” ruthlessly for the sheer sake of pleasure ?
    – If Tibetans leaders are not “liars” (dixit commentary), they cannot be in charge of a state. Do you believe the Pope is infallible and explain why the Vatican is a state ?
    – So please forget about “God bless Europe”, because nobody cannot prove that God exist or does not exist.

    So would you still like China to be similar to Europe ?

    If Europe is to exist one day as a nation of people, they have to end the practice of violence hidden in their state run economic principles and their “so-called Christian” principles.

    Europeans need a lesson ie “ a cliché cleansing”.

    China has it own way of serving its interest and has paid heavily the fact to “trust” Europeans in the 19th century.
    With regard to Tibet, it is up to the Chinese people to reply to the question “Why an elephant is afraid of a mosquito” ?

  9. Dear Mr. Cheng

    Europe is not a chinese provence, obeying all the orders of PCC.

    they can meet and talk to everybody, even though the chinese government do not recognize dalai-lama.

  10. Dear all,

    I mostly understand and angree the commenters’ view. But none of us took under consideration the words of Mr. Meng as follows: ” If the Europeans cannot stop their outrageous way of asking the Chinese for economic cooperation on the one hand but rubbing their face in the sand politically on the other, they should not expect a smiling face from China.”

    In my view, the EU acted well when met the Lama, so I disagree with Mr. Meng, but I agree with him that we often act a schizophrenic way.

Comments are closed.