The Chinese government has created a “White Terror” for the Beijing Olympics in vigorously suppressing political dissidents.
In an interview with international media last Friday, Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) was quoted as saying that “Hosting the Olympic games undoubtedly has boosted Beijing’s economy. But due to the fact that the economic aggregate of Beijing only accounts for a minimal portion of that of the entire nation, the contribution of hosting the Olympic games to the nation’s economic development should not be overestimated.”
Commenting on economic policy, Hu said that “maintaining steady and relatively fast economic development and preventing commodity prices from rising too sharply are the top priorities for macro-control.”
The Olympics are a huge political and economic event for all of China. But Hu has said the Games have nothing to do with politics and will only boost Beijing’s economy.
Why would he suddenly become so modest, trying to turn a national event into a local one?
Olympics-related stocks have been sizzling not only on the Chinese stock market but also in Hong Kong and Taiwan. Have they now been turned into shares gaining from a local event?
Hu’s remarks reflect the fact that hopes for an improved economy following the Olympics have been shattered. The Olympics will not only be a money-losing business, but China’s economy could suffer from them as well.
Expenditure on the Olympics is a state secret. It was estimated that the cost of building the stadiums would be US$37 billion, but the true figure has kept increasing. When Hu took office in 2003 some spending cuts were made, but it is almost certain now that the final cost will greatly exceed the original estimate, especially given the price of raw materials.
The government has cited a figure based on expert analysis that the Olympics are expected to bring in total revenue of US$70 billion. The question that follows is: How much will China have spent on nationwide anti-terrorism security measures, efforts to resolve air pollution, shutting down hundreds of factories and commercial losses from an expected 50 percent drop in foreign tourist arrivals, not to mention depressed business because of various local restrictions? Even stores in the Shanghai subway have closed for a month.
The problem is that there are signs of crisis in the economy. Not only have businesspeople from Taiwan, Hong Kong and South Korea started to leave, a survey on the competitiveness of manufacturing by US consultants Booz Allen Hamilton and the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai also indicates that about 20 percent of multinational enterprises have thought about withdrawing altogether.
Statistics also show that growth in China’s foreign trade surplus and foreign investment has decreased. Last month, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶), Vice President Xi Jinping (習近平), Executive Vice Premier Li Keqiang (李克強) and Vice Premier Wang Qishan (王歧山) inspected five developed provinces focusing on foreign trade — only to realize that a large number of firms had closed down.
Later that month, the Chinese Central Economic Work Conference in Beijing changed the thrust of economic policy from “preventing the economy from overheating and overall inflation” to “maintaining steady and relatively fast economic development in the long run as well as keeping rising consumer prices within a bearable range based on economic and social development.”
In other words, the central bank is relaxing monetary policy because unemployment is more detrimental to economic stability than inflation. Nevertheless, the Chinese stock market continues to flounder.
Can the Taiwanese economy really rely on this “clay Buddha”?
Paul Lin is a political commentator.Translated by Ted Yang
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US