Between US President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry, who would Beijing like to see win?
In the past, China used the political tactic of "courting one faction while punishing the other." Examples can range from some form of intervention to financial donations to political parties. China is becoming wiser by not expressing its position outright. Chinese-American expatriate groups (who are predominantly pro-Beijing) are mobilizing for Kerry, while some others have contributed to both sides -- but act as though they are neutral.
In a USA Today report on a poll conducted in China recently, a majority of Chinese people wanted Kerry to win the election. Another poll conducted by the University of Maryland and GlobalScan also stated that only 12 percent of Chinese are in favor of Bush, and as many as 52 percent support Kerry's bid; while 8 percent think that it will not make no difference who is elected. Beijing's propaganda machine regards Bush as a tyrant for his war in Iraq, his pro-Taiwan stance and the arms sales to Taiwan. Thus, Chinese public opinion of Bush leaves much to be desired.
According to 2,000 people surveyed in 11 major Chinese cities by the Social Service Institute of China, 76 percent of respondents were concerned about the US presidential election, and of those, 40 percent supported Bush; while 38 percent supported Kerry.
What causes this discrepancy between polls conducted by US and Chinese pollsters? It is a topic worthy of research. Can the discrepancy be explained by government intervention (which makes the Chinese polls untrustworthy)?
In one "impromptu" poll, a hotel restaurant in Guangdong Province's Foshan City has a banner hanging on its front door advertising the "Bush duck" or "Kerry duck" on its menu as a way for customers to select their favorite candidate. The results show that 47 percent of customers chose the Bush dish and 57 percent chose the Kerry dish. In such a setting, with less intervention by the Chinese government, the poll indicates that customers at the restaurant like Kerry better, which is more in tune with the surveys conducted by US pollsters.
There is also a theory that the Chinese public supports Kerry, but the government is in favor of Bush. It is understandable why the public are in favor of Kerry. A majority of overseas Chinese in the US also see Kerry as a better choice. This can be seen from the position taken by much of the Chinese-language media in the US. The conclusion that the Chinese authorities prefer Bush can be drawn from opinions expressed by Chinese experts and academics in the foreign media. As these people are associated with the government, their intentions for expressing such view must be called into question. Experts believe the reason that the government likes Bush is simply because they are familiar with communicating with him. Why would Beijing choose Bush, who treats Taiwan as a friend, rather than Kerry, who once expressed his support for using the Hong Kong's model of "one country, two systems" as a way to solve the cross-strait issue?
(Although in a recent interview conducted by the Sing Tao Daily News, Kerry said that the "one country, two systems" would not work in Taiwan).
Former US president Bill Clinton established a "strategic partnership" with China during his administration. Democrats should therefore be more attractive to Beijing, as Kerry's election offers the possibility of reviving that relationship.
From an economic perspective, Kerry appears to be paying much attention to the benefits of unions and small and medium-sized businesses. As such, it is possible he would put even more economic pressure on China if he is elected president. But with regard to the China-US relationship, political reasons are often more important than economic ones -- though China has often used its economic clout for political ends. Beijing should hope for a Kerry victory, but in turn, it also does not want to offend Bush.
Also, there is a small proportion of people who think that it does not matter who is elected. This could be true. But, to Beijing who likes to receive "special treatment," it will meticulously analyze the differences between the two presidential candidates and adopt different policies when necessary. Every country hopes to have a US president whose policies are more beneficial to it. The problem is that if a candidate aims to benefit other countries, might he or she indirectly harm the US as a result?
Since so many countries support Senator Kerry, then if he is not elected president, why not nominate him to be the secretary-general of the UN? He is, for sure, a match for Kofi Annan.
Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.
TRANSLATED BY LIN YA-TI
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry