What's new

China Learns the Hard Way That Money Can’t Buy You Love

Viet

ELITE MEMBER
Jun 18, 2012
22,774
0
17,158
Country
Viet Nam
Location
Germany
BY SALVATORE BABONES | OCTOBER 14, 2020, 5:15 AM
Chinese Premier Lie Keqiang and Australian then-Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull during a state visit in Sydney on Mar. 25, 2017.

Chinese Premier Lie Keqiang and Australian then-Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull during a state visit in Sydney on Mar. 25, 2017. DAVID GRAY/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES


China has long had Australia in its sights, and money is its favored weapon. China accounts for roughly a third of Australia’s export earnings. Until recently, it was also a big investor in Australia.

Chinese international students occupy 10 percent of all university places in Australia, and Beijing has funded Confucius Institutes at 13 of Australia’s 37 public universities. China-linked donors fundseveral Australian think tanks advancing China-friendly policies.

Nearly every major public institution in Australia has a “China strategy.” China’s presence looms even larger in Australia’s much smaller neighbor, New Zealand. If there’s one region of the (notionally) Western world where China has staked its claim to the future, it’s in the Antipodes.


Yet the proportion of Australians who hold a favorable view of China has plummeted from 64 percent to just 15 percent over the last three years, according to a Pew Global Attitudes poll released last week. (New Zealand wasn’t surveyed.) The proportion of Australians who view China unfavorably has risen to 81 percent, with only 3 percent undecided.

Australia’s changing mood on China is part of a global shift, but it’s the most extreme reversal among the 12 countries Pew regularly surveys and started before the coronavirus. Despite a widespread and long-standing perception in Australia that its economic future depends on China, it turns out that—at least when it comes to public diplomacy—money can’t buy you love.

China has certainly spent the money. Australian ethics professor Clive Hamilton’s 2018 book Silent Invasion traced the many paths through which Chinese and China-linked money has informed and potentially influenced Australia’s public debates, from massive donations to political parties to the takeover of local Chinese-language media to luxury junkets for journalists and politiciansto visit China.

The controversial China-born and based businessman (and Australian citizen) Chau Chak Wing has given tens of millions of dollars to Australian universities—and has made a series of donations to patriotic Australian causes like veterans’ charities and the Australian War Memorial. A confidant of Chinese President Xi Jinping, he has fought—and won—repeated lawsuitsagainst Australian media that accused him of bribery and spying for China.

The proportion of Australians who hold a favorable view of China has plummeted from 64 percent to just 15 percent over the last three years.

On an even larger scale, between 2016 and 2018 at least eight Chinese state-owned and state-linked firms poured investment into the Australian state of Victoria, which then officially signed onto China’s Belt and Road Initiative in defiance of the national government’s warnings against doing so.

Victoria’s state premier, Daniel Andrews, attended China’s flagship Belt and Road forums in Beijing in both 2017 and 2019, one of the few leaders below central government level to be invited. Australia’s national government did not participate. Perhaps coincidentally—and perhaps not—when China slapped tariffs and restrictions on Australian agricultural exports earlier this year, products from Victoria were largely unaffected.

Whether or not they were influenced by Chinese inducements, by 2018 many leading members of Australia’s political class were heeding China’s call for the country to pursue an “independent” foreign policy, meaning free from its historical alliance with the United States. Former Prime Ministers Paul Keating (in office 1991-1996) and the late Malcolm Fraser (1975-1983) actually recommended that Australia withdraw from its U.S. alliance, while the late Bob Hawke (1983-1991) made a lucrative second career out of lobbying for Beijing.

A senior senator and former government minister even criticized a government-funded think tank, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, for accepting a research grant from the U.S. State Department. Pro-China, anti-American viewpoints had become eminently respectable in Australia.

Meanwhile, the Australian public continued to support the country’s alignment with the United States and express skepticism about its burgeoning links with China.

Between 2008 and 2020, public support for the U.S. alliance never dipped below 70 percent, according to the Australian Lowy Institute Poll. The majority of respondents consistently believed that the Australian government was allowing too much investment from China. And despite the personal unpopularity of U.S. President Donald Trump, the majority of Australians continue to trust the United States to “act responsibly in the world,” compared to just 23 percent who say the same about China.


As Abraham Lincoln never said, “You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” If Hamilton’s Silent Invasion got people talking about Chinese influence in Australia in 2018, a real turning point came in 2019 when U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned Australians: “You can sell your soul for a pile of soybeans, or you can protect your people.” Of course, Australia doesn’t actually sell soybeans, but Pompeo’s point hit home, resonating with an Australian public that was already wary about Chinese influence undermining their country’s institutions.

Had China simply run its public diplomacy through a competent corporate communications firm, it might have avoided a breakdown in relations.

Then came the coronavirus. As in many other countries, China’s early misinformation about the pathogen dealt a serious blow to its credibility in Australia. But we should not overestimate the effects of the pandemic on Australia’s attitudes toward China. Relying on World Health Organization advice, the country’s chief medical officer even expressed confidence in China’s ability to prevent the international spread of the virus, while a leading Victorian state politician praised China’s lockdown response. The coronavirus has been a disaster for the world, but it didn’t have to be a disaster for China’s international relations.


But that was before China lashed out, in response to a call by Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Foreign Secretary Marise Payne for an international inquiry into the world’s handling of the coronavirus. Never mind that the inquiry would be conducted by the China-dominated World Health Organization, or that China itself ended up signing the resolution to authorize the inquiry. China’s embassy in Australia complained that “Australian politicians are keen to parrot what those Americans have asserted and simply follow them in staging political attacks on China.” The Foreign Ministry in Beijing went much further, saying thatAustralia was “highly irresponsible to resort to politically motivated suspicion and accusation” and advising Australia “to put aside ideological bias and political games.” And as China’s deputy head of mission in Canberra explained, Australia’s call for an investigation “hurts the feelings of the Chinese people … all of a sudden, they heard this shocking news of a proposal coming from Australia, which is supposed to be a good friend of China.”


Taken aback by Australia’s apparent insensitivity to the “feelings of the Chinese people,” China’s own diplomats seemed strangely unconcerned about the effects their own comments might have on the feelings of the Australian people. Despite China’s extraordinary access to Australian politicians and public life, its diplomats proved either unable to comprehend the dynamics of democratic decision-making or unwilling to bend to its demands.

Had China simply run its public diplomacy through a competent corporate communications firm, it might have avoided anything worse than a brief coronavirus pause in its march through Australia’s institutions.

Now that China has turned itself into an international pariah, the gravy train that has fattened so many Western wallets will grind to a halt.

 

kankan326

SENIOR MEMBER
Jun 7, 2011
2,718
-4
6,944
Country
China
Location
China
China will be the first ever non-White country that becomes world dominant power since Industrial Revolution. Australians don't want to trade their White superiority complex for money. They simply don't.
 

Zsari

FULL MEMBER
Feb 21, 2014
1,387
1
2,801
Country
China
Location
United States
BY SALVATORE BABONES | OCTOBER 14, 2020, 5:15 AM
Chinese Premier Lie Keqiang and Australian then-Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull during a state visit in Sydney on Mar. 25, 2017.

Chinese Premier Lie Keqiang and Australian then-Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull during a state visit in Sydney on Mar. 25, 2017. DAVID GRAY/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES


China has long had Australia in its sights, and money is its favored weapon. China accounts for roughly a third of Australia’s export earnings. Until recently, it was also a big investor in Australia.

Chinese international students occupy 10 percent of all university places in Australia, and Beijing has funded Confucius Institutes at 13 of Australia’s 37 public universities. China-linked donors fundseveral Australian think tanks advancing China-friendly policies.

Nearly every major public institution in Australia has a “China strategy.” China’s presence looms even larger in Australia’s much smaller neighbor, New Zealand. If there’s one region of the (notionally) Western world where China has staked its claim to the future, it’s in the Antipodes.


Yet the proportion of Australians who hold a favorable view of China has plummeted from 64 percent to just 15 percent over the last three years, according to a Pew Global Attitudes poll released last week. (New Zealand wasn’t surveyed.) The proportion of Australians who view China unfavorably has risen to 81 percent, with only 3 percent undecided.

Australia’s changing mood on China is part of a global shift, but it’s the most extreme reversal among the 12 countries Pew regularly surveys and started before the coronavirus. Despite a widespread and long-standing perception in Australia that its economic future depends on China, it turns out that—at least when it comes to public diplomacy—money can’t buy you love.

China has certainly spent the money. Australian ethics professor Clive Hamilton’s 2018 book Silent Invasion traced the many paths through which Chinese and China-linked money has informed and potentially influenced Australia’s public debates, from massive donations to political parties to the takeover of local Chinese-language media to luxury junkets for journalists and politiciansto visit China.

The controversial China-born and based businessman (and Australian citizen) Chau Chak Wing has given tens of millions of dollars to Australian universities—and has made a series of donations to patriotic Australian causes like veterans’ charities and the Australian War Memorial. A confidant of Chinese President Xi Jinping, he has fought—and won—repeated lawsuitsagainst Australian media that accused him of bribery and spying for China.

The proportion of Australians who hold a favorable view of China has plummeted from 64 percent to just 15 percent over the last three years.

On an even larger scale, between 2016 and 2018 at least eight Chinese state-owned and state-linked firms poured investment into the Australian state of Victoria, which then officially signed onto China’s Belt and Road Initiative in defiance of the national government’s warnings against doing so.

Victoria’s state premier, Daniel Andrews, attended China’s flagship Belt and Road forums in Beijing in both 2017 and 2019, one of the few leaders below central government level to be invited. Australia’s national government did not participate. Perhaps coincidentally—and perhaps not—when China slapped tariffs and restrictions on Australian agricultural exports earlier this year, products from Victoria were largely unaffected.

Whether or not they were influenced by Chinese inducements, by 2018 many leading members of Australia’s political class were heeding China’s call for the country to pursue an “independent” foreign policy, meaning free from its historical alliance with the United States. Former Prime Ministers Paul Keating (in office 1991-1996) and the late Malcolm Fraser (1975-1983) actually recommended that Australia withdraw from its U.S. alliance, while the late Bob Hawke (1983-1991) made a lucrative second career out of lobbying for Beijing.

A senior senator and former government minister even criticized a government-funded think tank, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, for accepting a research grant from the U.S. State Department. Pro-China, anti-American viewpoints had become eminently respectable in Australia.

Meanwhile, the Australian public continued to support the country’s alignment with the United States and express skepticism about its burgeoning links with China.

Between 2008 and 2020, public support for the U.S. alliance never dipped below 70 percent, according to the Australian Lowy Institute Poll. The majority of respondents consistently believed that the Australian government was allowing too much investment from China. And despite the personal unpopularity of U.S. President Donald Trump, the majority of Australians continue to trust the United States to “act responsibly in the world,” compared to just 23 percent who say the same about China.


As Abraham Lincoln never said, “You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” If Hamilton’s Silent Invasion got people talking about Chinese influence in Australia in 2018, a real turning point came in 2019 when U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned Australians: “You can sell your soul for a pile of soybeans, or you can protect your people.” Of course, Australia doesn’t actually sell soybeans, but Pompeo’s point hit home, resonating with an Australian public that was already wary about Chinese influence undermining their country’s institutions.

Had China simply run its public diplomacy through a competent corporate communications firm, it might have avoided a breakdown in relations.

Then came the coronavirus. As in many other countries, China’s early misinformation about the pathogen dealt a serious blow to its credibility in Australia. But we should not overestimate the effects of the pandemic on Australia’s attitudes toward China. Relying on World Health Organization advice, the country’s chief medical officer even expressed confidence in China’s ability to prevent the international spread of the virus, while a leading Victorian state politician praised China’s lockdown response. The coronavirus has been a disaster for the world, but it didn’t have to be a disaster for China’s international relations.


But that was before China lashed out, in response to a call by Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Foreign Secretary Marise Payne for an international inquiry into the world’s handling of the coronavirus. Never mind that the inquiry would be conducted by the China-dominated World Health Organization, or that China itself ended up signing the resolution to authorize the inquiry. China’s embassy in Australia complained that “Australian politicians are keen to parrot what those Americans have asserted and simply follow them in staging political attacks on China.” The Foreign Ministry in Beijing went much further, saying thatAustralia was “highly irresponsible to resort to politically motivated suspicion and accusation” and advising Australia “to put aside ideological bias and political games.” And as China’s deputy head of mission in Canberra explained, Australia’s call for an investigation “hurts the feelings of the Chinese people … all of a sudden, they heard this shocking news of a proposal coming from Australia, which is supposed to be a good friend of China.”


Taken aback by Australia’s apparent insensitivity to the “feelings of the Chinese people,” China’s own diplomats seemed strangely unconcerned about the effects their own comments might have on the feelings of the Australian people. Despite China’s extraordinary access to Australian politicians and public life, its diplomats proved either unable to comprehend the dynamics of democratic decision-making or unwilling to bend to its demands.

Had China simply run its public diplomacy through a competent corporate communications firm, it might have avoided anything worse than a brief coronavirus pause in its march through Australia’s institutions.

Now that China has turned itself into an international pariah, the gravy train that has fattened so many Western wallets will grind to a halt.

Rather Australia will learn it the hard way, don't bite the hands that feeds you.
 

Titanium100

FULL MEMBER
Mar 1, 2019
719
-4
781
Country
Denmark
Location
Denmark
China will be the first ever non-White country that becomes world dominant power since Industrial Revolution. Australians don't want to trade their White superiority complex for money. They simply don't.
Are you for real? Seems like the history you know is only from the 18s and 19s.

There have been multiple Islamic Dynasties ruling the world and not to forget the Mongols and ancient Egypt and Bablyonian empire.
 

Beast

ELITE MEMBER
Feb 5, 2011
21,079
-36
49,982
Country
China
Location
China
Are you for real? Seems like the history you know is only from the 18s and 19s.

There have been multiple Islamic Dynasties ruling the world and not to forget the Mongols and ancient Egypt and Bablyonian empire.
"Since industrial revolutions....." Read his reply again.
 

S10

BANNED
Nov 13, 2009
4,335
-10
6,930
Country
China
Location
Canada
"Oderint, dum metuant" - Roman Emperor Caligula

It means let them hate as long as they fear.
 

peagle

FULL MEMBER
Dec 29, 2019
716
1
1,933
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
BY SALVATORE BABONES | OCTOBER 14, 2020, 5:15 AM
Chinese Premier Lie Keqiang and Australian then-Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull during a state visit in Sydney on Mar. 25, 2017.

Chinese Premier Lie Keqiang and Australian then-Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull during a state visit in Sydney on Mar. 25, 2017. DAVID GRAY/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES


China has long had Australia in its sights, and money is its favored weapon. China accounts for roughly a third of Australia’s export earnings. Until recently, it was also a big investor in Australia.

Chinese international students occupy 10 percent of all university places in Australia, and Beijing has funded Confucius Institutes at 13 of Australia’s 37 public universities. China-linked donors fundseveral Australian think tanks advancing China-friendly policies.

Nearly every major public institution in Australia has a “China strategy.” China’s presence looms even larger in Australia’s much smaller neighbor, New Zealand. If there’s one region of the (notionally) Western world where China has staked its claim to the future, it’s in the Antipodes.


Yet the proportion of Australians who hold a favorable view of China has plummeted from 64 percent to just 15 percent over the last three years, according to a Pew Global Attitudes poll released last week. (New Zealand wasn’t surveyed.) The proportion of Australians who view China unfavorably has risen to 81 percent, with only 3 percent undecided.

Australia’s changing mood on China is part of a global shift, but it’s the most extreme reversal among the 12 countries Pew regularly surveys and started before the coronavirus. Despite a widespread and long-standing perception in Australia that its economic future depends on China, it turns out that—at least when it comes to public diplomacy—money can’t buy you love.

China has certainly spent the money. Australian ethics professor Clive Hamilton’s 2018 book Silent Invasion traced the many paths through which Chinese and China-linked money has informed and potentially influenced Australia’s public debates, from massive donations to political parties to the takeover of local Chinese-language media to luxury junkets for journalists and politiciansto visit China.

The controversial China-born and based businessman (and Australian citizen) Chau Chak Wing has given tens of millions of dollars to Australian universities—and has made a series of donations to patriotic Australian causes like veterans’ charities and the Australian War Memorial. A confidant of Chinese President Xi Jinping, he has fought—and won—repeated lawsuitsagainst Australian media that accused him of bribery and spying for China.

The proportion of Australians who hold a favorable view of China has plummeted from 64 percent to just 15 percent over the last three years.

On an even larger scale, between 2016 and 2018 at least eight Chinese state-owned and state-linked firms poured investment into the Australian state of Victoria, which then officially signed onto China’s Belt and Road Initiative in defiance of the national government’s warnings against doing so.

Victoria’s state premier, Daniel Andrews, attended China’s flagship Belt and Road forums in Beijing in both 2017 and 2019, one of the few leaders below central government level to be invited. Australia’s national government did not participate. Perhaps coincidentally—and perhaps not—when China slapped tariffs and restrictions on Australian agricultural exports earlier this year, products from Victoria were largely unaffected.

Whether or not they were influenced by Chinese inducements, by 2018 many leading members of Australia’s political class were heeding China’s call for the country to pursue an “independent” foreign policy, meaning free from its historical alliance with the United States. Former Prime Ministers Paul Keating (in office 1991-1996) and the late Malcolm Fraser (1975-1983) actually recommended that Australia withdraw from its U.S. alliance, while the late Bob Hawke (1983-1991) made a lucrative second career out of lobbying for Beijing.

A senior senator and former government minister even criticized a government-funded think tank, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, for accepting a research grant from the U.S. State Department. Pro-China, anti-American viewpoints had become eminently respectable in Australia.

Meanwhile, the Australian public continued to support the country’s alignment with the United States and express skepticism about its burgeoning links with China.

Between 2008 and 2020, public support for the U.S. alliance never dipped below 70 percent, according to the Australian Lowy Institute Poll. The majority of respondents consistently believed that the Australian government was allowing too much investment from China. And despite the personal unpopularity of U.S. President Donald Trump, the majority of Australians continue to trust the United States to “act responsibly in the world,” compared to just 23 percent who say the same about China.


As Abraham Lincoln never said, “You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” If Hamilton’s Silent Invasion got people talking about Chinese influence in Australia in 2018, a real turning point came in 2019 when U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned Australians: “You can sell your soul for a pile of soybeans, or you can protect your people.” Of course, Australia doesn’t actually sell soybeans, but Pompeo’s point hit home, resonating with an Australian public that was already wary about Chinese influence undermining their country’s institutions.

Had China simply run its public diplomacy through a competent corporate communications firm, it might have avoided a breakdown in relations.

Then came the coronavirus. As in many other countries, China’s early misinformation about the pathogen dealt a serious blow to its credibility in Australia. But we should not overestimate the effects of the pandemic on Australia’s attitudes toward China. Relying on World Health Organization advice, the country’s chief medical officer even expressed confidence in China’s ability to prevent the international spread of the virus, while a leading Victorian state politician praised China’s lockdown response. The coronavirus has been a disaster for the world, but it didn’t have to be a disaster for China’s international relations.


But that was before China lashed out, in response to a call by Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Foreign Secretary Marise Payne for an international inquiry into the world’s handling of the coronavirus. Never mind that the inquiry would be conducted by the China-dominated World Health Organization, or that China itself ended up signing the resolution to authorize the inquiry. China’s embassy in Australia complained that “Australian politicians are keen to parrot what those Americans have asserted and simply follow them in staging political attacks on China.” The Foreign Ministry in Beijing went much further, saying thatAustralia was “highly irresponsible to resort to politically motivated suspicion and accusation” and advising Australia “to put aside ideological bias and political games.” And as China’s deputy head of mission in Canberra explained, Australia’s call for an investigation “hurts the feelings of the Chinese people … all of a sudden, they heard this shocking news of a proposal coming from Australia, which is supposed to be a good friend of China.”


Taken aback by Australia’s apparent insensitivity to the “feelings of the Chinese people,” China’s own diplomats seemed strangely unconcerned about the effects their own comments might have on the feelings of the Australian people. Despite China’s extraordinary access to Australian politicians and public life, its diplomats proved either unable to comprehend the dynamics of democratic decision-making or unwilling to bend to its demands.

Had China simply run its public diplomacy through a competent corporate communications firm, it might have avoided anything worse than a brief coronavirus pause in its march through Australia’s institutions.

Now that China has turned itself into an international pariah, the gravy train that has fattened so many Western wallets will grind to a halt.

The lesson isn't that money cant buy love. The lesson is that the whites will always prefer white, no matter how good you are to them, that is the lesson. Individually they are a lovely bunch, but nationally, its a different picture.

Pick your friends wisely and you will have a secure future. Because for them if you are not white then their relationship with you is always transactional, and not a bond.

Look at Turkey, it bent over backwards so it could join the European Union, but they would not accept them, because the Turks are not pure whites and also Muslims.
 

thewayoftheworld

FULL MEMBER
Feb 10, 2017
125
0
234
Country
Viet Nam
Location
United States
Australia was never going to side with an Asian power against their Anglo brother. Anglo-American have serious superiority complex that allows them reason their crimes against humanity and genocide of native population around the world.

China should arm the Aborigines against their struggle for independent from racist Anglo.
 

redtom

FULL MEMBER
Aug 2, 2020
284
0
396
Country
China
Location
China
In a corrupt country, it is better to give money to the politicians the state than to give money to the state.

How many countries' politicians own a lot of property in the US?
How many countries have their media controlled by the US?
How many people get their news through social media in the US?

Since Australians feel they have to support American foreign policy at the cost of their lives, we don't care .
But also a warning to other countries: are you willing to die for the US?
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom