One's environment

An article on CO2 emissions produced by China:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jul/28/china-greenhouse-gas-emissions-greenpeace

The article isn't very interesting, but many of the comments were surprisingly leaning towards an understanding. One being quite funny:

• Towncrier28 Jul 09, 1:52pm (about 2 hours ago)

  The more Ii think about this, the more it pisses me off. Environmentalism is just so middle-class, so White, so Western, I wouldn't be surprised if its doctrines are lost on people from Asia, Africa and South America. If I was growing up there, and I was told 'stop developing your factories and start growing trees and living off the land', I'd tell these outsiders to f*ck off back to their own country, and mind their own d*mn business! But that, I suppose, is just me ;)

He sounds... Almost like a young Chinese Netizen...

- J

From All Directions

The most comprehensive collection of news regarding the events in Urumqi on the news site, EastSouthWestNorth:

http://www.zonaeuropa.com/20090706_1.htm

The graphic photographs of death puts things in perspective while the Channel 4 interview with Uighur leader Rebiya Kadeer (By Lindsey Hilsum on July 6) broadens our perspective on how the news is told and perhaps there may be weight in the statements of the CCP when they speak of 'separatists'...

- J

Brothers and Sisters

I'm not sure why that even after last year I am still surprised at the reporting the BBC does. It's so biased it insane. Although it does state how many people died as a result of the initial protests by the Ulghurs on Sunday, it continues on to say, 'Groups of Han Chinese armed with clubs then rampaged through the streets in a counter-protest '. There is nothing about Ulghurs weilding knives and batons on Sunday- no of course not, they were just protesting, except 140 people, mostly Han it has been reported (though unconfirmed but doubtful if not true considering) died that day.

I'm not biasing with the Han Chinese or against the Ulghurs, but reporting that is obviously biased needs a watchdog. Read the Guardian for a more balanced view and the article in Open Democracy on the recent history of Xinjiang.

I also found this good article that was written back in April. It speaks a rare view in the western media whose knowledge and attitude about Tibet/China/Human Rights issues are not on autopilot. Ian Buruma says:

"...the Chinese have another argument up their sleeve, which seems more plausible (and more modern). They are justly proud of the ethnic diversity of China. Why should nationality be defined by language or ethnicity? If Tibetans should be allowed to break away from China, why not the Welsh from Britain, the Basques from Spain, the Kurds from Turkey, or the Kashmiris from India?"

The Welsh are the only people from that group that don't have arms. All the others are considered militant/terrorists. The Tibetans in Lhasa didn't have arms either, but they still managed to kill both Han and Tibetans in the riots of March 2008.

Ian Buruma goes on to argue that the oppression is not an ethnic question but a political question of a lack of democracy.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/08/tibet-china

new articles:

http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/the-uighurs-and-china-lost-and-found-nation

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/08/uighur-china-protests-ethnic-violence

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/8140492.stm

- J

Writing Wrongs

In the city of Urumqi, Xinjiang, China, a protest and riot broke out yesterday between ethnic Ulghurs and Han . It is reported that 140 people have died as a result and over 800 people are injured. It is said that it is the most serious riots since the 1989 Tian'anmen Square. How this tragic incident is reported, just as the Lhasa riots of last year where, are of interest.

While the Guardian article concentrates on the sabotage and on the ground perceptions of ordinary people the BBC have chose to take the political and blame angle with a bias towards the Ulghur's and against official China- so much so in the video report that it assumes that state police were responsible for the violence. Though it seems to me, as in the Lhasa riots, that the Ulghur ethnic population were attacking the Han population. After all the eyes on China last year, isn't it silly to assume that official China would order a riot police force to shoot at the civilian population? Doesn't that sound more like propaganda?

The China Daily also places the political in the article though towards the other direction, towards the World Uyghur Congress (WUR) for whom China places blame. The article also takes an eye witness account as well as the possible explaination about the trigger of the riot.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/06/china-riots-uighur-xinjiang

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/8135203.stm

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2009-07/06/content_8384017.htm

- J