Life remains status quo: work, study, work, study, worry. As usual, I'm coming down with something (the weather is changing unusually rapid this year--I was roasting two weeks ago and now I'm well under my duvet at night) and as usual, I am consuming copious amounts of smelly Chinese herbs. I am taking the written portion of the GRE Friday morning, and I will write more about my reasons for that in a later post.

Today, all I have to offer is a very interesting article about China and its growing role in contemporary world order. It's lengthy, true, but well worth the read. Here it is in its entirety.
---

The World According to China

By JAMES TRAUB
Published: September 3, 2006

In Late July, as the United Nations Security Council argued long into the night over the wording of a so-called presidential statement castigating Israel for the bombing attack that killed four U.N. observers in southern Lebanon, Wang Guangya, the Chinese ambassador, blew his stack. This was almost unprecedented: Wang, a veteran diplomat, typically comports himself with unnerving calm. But one of the four fatalities had been Chinese, and Wang had grown increasingly frustrated with the refusal of the United States to condemn Israel outright for the bombing. Worse still, the United States was represented not by Ambassador John Bolton but by a junior diplomat, a breach of etiquette that Wang apparently took to be a calculated insult.

Without naming any countries — he lost his temper, not his grip — Wang lashed out at “a tyranny of the minority in the council” and vowed that there would be “implications for future discussions” on other subjects. Once the meeting ended, Wang planted himself before the U.N. beat reporters and engaged in 10 minutes of robust public diplomacy, complaining that the presidential statement had been “watered down,” observing in several different formulations that “we have to take into account the concerns of other countries” and predicting that the “frustration” his country felt “will affect working relations somewhat.”

It was a delicately calibrated performance. In an earlier era, when the People’s Republic of China tended to conduct diplomacy by tantrum, this might have been the signal for a real breach. But China cares too much about the international order for such revolutionary shenanigans.

Actually, in an earlier era Chinese nationals would not have served in an observer mission in Lebanon, and the People’s Republic would have taken a pass on the whole subject. But China now aspires to play an active role on the global stage, which is why it sends skilled diplomats like Wang Guangya to the U.N. That’s the good news. The bad news is that China’s view of “the international order” is very different from that of the United States, or of the West, and has led it to frustrate much of the agenda that makes the U.N. worth caring about. The People’s Republic has used its position as a permanent, veto-bearing member of the Security Council to protect abusive regimes with which it is on friendly terms, including those of Sudan, Zimbabwe, Eritrea, Myanmar and North Korea. And in the showdown with Iran that is now consuming the Security Council, and indeed the West itself, China is prepared to play the role of spoiler, blocking attempts to levy sanctions against the intransigent regime in Tehran.

It’s a truism that the Security Council can function only insofar as the United States lets it. The adage may soon be applied to China as well.

t was only in 1971 that the People’s Republic of China supplanted Taiwan as the representative of China in the United Nations. During the remaining years of the cold war, the hermetic Communist regime was generally content to follow the lead of the Soviet Union. Little changed even after the fall of the Berlin Wall: China’s permanent representative in the early 90’s, Li Daoyu, was known around the U.N. as Ambassador Look Out the Window. The Chinese stirred to action only in order to block peacekeeping missions to countries that had been so foolish as to recognize Taiwan.

Beijing sleeps no longer. The astonishing growth of China’s economy has made it a global force, and the accompanying need for resources has pushed it to forge new ties throughout Asia, Africa and Latin America. The old revolutionary ardor is gone, and China surveys the world with increasing pragmatism and confidence. China is now a status quo power — “an exporter of good will and consumer durables instead of revolution and weapons,” as David Shambaugh, a China scholar at George Washington University, remarked in a recent essay. Unlike the United States and the West generally, China views the current global situation as fundamentally benign and malleable — a setting conducive to diplomacy.

China has chosen to enmesh itself in global bodies like the World Trade Organization, regional groupings like the six-member, security-oriented Shanghai Cooperation Organization and a vast range of bilateral partnerships. China has begun routinely signing arms-control agreements and antiterrorism conventions. And it has begun playing a more active role at the U.N., contributing troops — almost all of whom provide medical or engineering services rather than front-line patrolling — as well as policemen to U.N. peacekeeping operations.

Wang Guangya, at 56, is a senior member of a new generation of Chinese diplomats vastly more sophisticated and better educated than the party ideologues of old. His English is quite good, and he so relishes speaking to the U.N. press corps that he sometimes keeps answering questions even as he edges away from the pack while graciously thanking the reporters. Still, he doesn’t often attend diplomatic functions, and the occasional dinner in his Trump Tower apartment is normally limited to Asian diplomats. Earlier this summer, I became the first Western reporter to whom he agreed to speak at length.

Wang greeted me in a cheerless reception room in the Chinese mission and invited me to sit parallel to him, as though we were a pair of notables at a reviewing stand. (I took a corner chair instead.) The embassy spokesman and a political counselor seated themselves at a respectful distance across the room. At first the ambassador dutifully recited China’s history at the U.N. But once we got on subjects that exercised him, like Japan’s bid for Security Council membership, he dispensed with the abstractions and assumed the forthright and confident manner that seems natural to him. Throughout our conversation, Wang chain-smoked Chinese cigarettes — Zhonghuas — a habit that had turned his teeth slightly brown.

Wang is bespectacled and slight and has little of the artful smoothness of the more Westernized Asian diplomats. He grew up in Shanghai, the son of a worker, he says, with a low-level position in the Communist Party. Wang graduated from high school in the midst of the Cultural Revolution and along with tens of millions of other Chinese was sent out to the countryside for “re-education.” But after President Richard Nixon’s visit to China in 1972, the leadership recognized that it needed trained officials to exploit the new opening to the West. Wang passed a test that gained him entry to one of the country’s 11 foreign-language schools. In 1974, he was selected as part of a group of 140 to go to England for further study, making him among the very first citizens of postrevolutionary China to receive a Western education. “You think it’s a good thing or a bad thing?” Wang asked me, with a disarming grin.

Apparently, it was a good thing. At the London School of Economics, Wang met Cong Jun, a student from the Beijing foreign-language school and the daughter of Chen Yi, one of Mao’s great comrades. They married soon thereafter. (Cong Jun now works as a minister counselor in the mission and has served as co-president, with the wife of the British ambassador, Emyr Jones Parry, of a discussion group called the Women’s International Forum.) In 1977 Wang was sent to New York as a junior diplomat and stayed for six years. He returned as a political counselor in 1988, remaining until 1992. He became director of international-organizations policy in the Foreign Ministry, ultimately rising to the position of vice foreign minister before returning to New York as ambassador in 2003. Wang is considered the favored candidate to replace China’s foreign minister, Li Zhaoxing, when he steps down a year from now.

Wang is one of the U.N.’s most adroit diplomats. Ambassador Jones Parry says that his Chinese colleague has a trick he’s never seen anyone else perform: “In the council, he speaks in Chinese, but at the same time he listens to the English translation. Sometimes he pauses, and then he’ll switch into English to say something similar to the translation but nuanced from it.” Wang operates by suggestion, by indirection — often by silence. “They play a very skillful game at the U.N.,” says Vanu Gopala Menon, the Singaporean ambassador. “They make their opinions felt without much talking. They never come in first and make a statement. They always listen first and then make a statement which captures the main thrust of what the developing world wants.”

But the game the Chinese play virtually ensures the U.N.’s regular failure in the face of humanitarian crisis. Indeed, the combination of Wang’s deft diplomacy and China’s willingness to defend nations it does business with from allegations of even the grossest abuse has made a mockery of all the pious exclamations of “never again” that came in the wake of the Security Council’s passive response to Rwanda’s genocide in 1994. The most notorious example of China’s new activism in this regard is Darfur. While none of the major powers, with the intermittent exception of the United States, have shown any appetite for robust action to protect the people of this Sudanese province from the atrocities visited upon them by the government and its proxy force, known as janjaweed, the Chinese, who buy much of the oil Sudan exports, have appointed themselves Khartoum’s chief protector.

China first worked to keep the issue of Darfur off the council agenda when both Kofi Annan and Jan Egeland, the U.N.’s humanitarian coordinator, tried to mount a publicity campaign in early 2004. When this failed and Egeland publicly described the horrors there, Wang — along with the ambassador of Pakistan, a regular ally — diluted the ensuing press statement so that the council simply called on “the parties concerned to fully cooperate in order to address the grave situation prevailing in the region.” In the summer, after Congress had declared the ruthless assault on unarmed villagers “genocide,” China vowed to veto an American resolution threatening (not even imposing) sanctions against Khartoum.

And yet, according to Munir Akram, the ambassador of Pakistan: “China was not nearly as active on Darfur as people think. The proposals came from us or from Algeria.” The Islamic countries then serving on the council, as well as several African nations, considered any interference in Sudan’s affairs a violation of its national sovereignty, even though the citizens being abused were Islamic and African. Wang was more circumspect. At moments of friction, according to a Western diplomat, he would quietly insist, “You cannot alienate the Sudan government; without them, the U.N. mission will fail.” Akram is the kind of bombastic figure who suits Chinese purposes to a tee. “Their national style is different from the style of other people, including India and Pakistan,” as Akram puts it. “We are an oral people; the Chinese are not. They make their position clear, and they stand by it.”

And then, when it no longer suits their purposes, they change their position. Several years ago, China joined India in principled repudiation of the chlorofluorocarbon reductions mandated by the Montreal Protocol. But when the international community offered to pay for the technology needed to reduce emissions, China decided that global regulation of pollution did not, in fact, constitute a violation of national sovereignty, leaving the Indians all alone in their principled opposition. On Darfur, as well, China has seen the virtue of bending before the wind, if ever so slightly. As the hopelessly overmatched troops of the African Union failed to stem atrocities throughout 2005, China (along with Russia) continued to block a resolution authorizing a U.N. peacekeeping force. Then this past May, the Sudanese regime and one of the rebel armies signed a cease-fire pact, increasing the pressure for U.N. intervention. China’s position was looking increasingly untenable. And so Beijing agreed to withhold its veto from — though not actually endorse — a resolution authorizing a U.N. military-planning mission.

The great issue that divides the U.N. is no longer Communism versus capitalism, as it once was; it is sovereignty. Ever since the catastrophes of Bosnia and Rwanda, and increasingly in recent years, the Security Council has been asked to defend individuals against an abusive state. When critics in the West deride the U.N. as a failed institution, they almost always mean that the Security Council cannot find the will to do so, whether through intervention, sanctions or merely opprobrium. But this failing is a Western preoccupation: most developing nations, with their history of colonial rule and often their wish to abuse their own citizens without interference, object to all such inroads on sovereign rights. And in China, where memory of “the century of humiliation” at the hands of Western imperialists runs deep — and where the state’s right to abuse its own citizens is not to be questioned — sovereignty has long been a fighting word. During the 90’s, the Chinese abstained on, or publicly criticized, key resolutions authorizing the use of force to dislodge Saddam Hussein from Kuwait and establishing or fortifying peacekeeping missions in Somalia, Bosnia, Rwanda and Haiti. China is now more flexible in practice, but the doctrine of absolute sovereign rights remains central to its foreign policy.

My conversations with Wang kept looping back to this fraught topic. “Each country has to provide the well-being of their own people,” Wang said to me. “In some countries there is a problem, where the protection of their own people is” — here the diplomatic diplomat searched for the right word — “neglected. The U.N. can come in a quiet way, providing help, providing advice. But the role to play is not to impose it when the government is functioning. Of course there are cases where you can say that the country is a failed country. But wherever there is a government, I think the best way to do it is by giving good advice wherever you can, tough way or soft way, to let the government pick up its main responsibility.”

China has, for example, engaged in some gentle prodding of Myanmar — the former Burma — whose authoritarian regime depends on Beijing for weapons and trade. But the generals who run the country have shown no signs of releasing their grip or of ending the house arrest of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the opposition leader and recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. Nevertheless, Wang says that he has “firm” instructions to block a U.S. resolution, now circulating in draft form, that would condemn the regime and threaten sanctions. China does not feel that this issue belongs in the Security Council. “In our contact with the United States,” he says, “their argument is that of course they have the human rights problem, they have the problem of drugs, they have the problem of AIDS. And then may I ask: ‘The U.S. doesn’t have the problem of AIDS, doesn’t have the problem of human rights, doesn’t have the problem of drugs? Then you ask the Security Council to be involved?’ I don’t think that is the case.” I said that I didn’t think John Bolton would be much impressed by this claim of moral equivalency. Wang waved this away.

In another conversation, held a week later in the U.N.’s Delegates Lounge, where Wang blithely violated the no-smoking rules, the ambassador insisted that the right to exercise sovereignty free from outside interference was enshrined in international law. But, I asked, when the world’s heads of state, gathered at the U.N.’s 60th-anniversary summit last September, approved the principle of “the responsibility to protect,” didn’t this, too, become a matter of international law?

This was true, Wang conceded — even though China has strong reservations about the doctrine — “but you have to decide how to apply this.” And since this new obligation applied only to genocide or “massive systematic violations of human rights,” it had no bearing on Darfur. Wang had just returned from a Security Council visit to the region, where he had concluded that the situation was very complicated and that the government had been unfairly criticized. China still stood by Khartoum. After abstaining on the peacekeeping resolution, Wang had asked for the floor in order to reiterate China’s position that U.N. peacekeepers could deploy only with the government’s consent.

Unfortunately, I observed, President Omar Hassan el-Bashir of Sudan had just flatly rejected the proposed peacekeeping force.

The African Union “is doing a good job on the ground,” Wang insisted. “The U.N. force would be a good way to help them, but if in their judgment the Sudan government thinks the A.U. forces are enough, that is their decision.” And second, the Sudanese had agreed to disarm the janjaweed.

“And if they can’t?”

Wang ground a cigarette into his ashtray. “If you are not sure that it will not be successful, then why impose a solution on them before you prove that they will not be able to do it?”

hina has become so influential a country, such an object of imitation, respect and fear, that you can no longer talk about an “international community” that does not include it. The West has a profound interest in China’s development as a global power and its acceptance, however gradual and grudging, of the rules by which the West has defined global citizenship. As Mark Malloch Brown, the deputy secretary general of the U.N., puts it, “How much less intractable so many issues would be if China was as fully engaged in the management and leadership of the United Nations as so many Western nations are.” Malloch Brown takes the optimistic, or perhaps wishful, view that China will find itself inevitably adopting Western rules as it seeks to join the global club, arguing that “as soon as you start grappling with global issues, you find that things like human rights and development and legitimate government are things you come to care about as vital to international stability.”

You can see why a high-ranking U.N. official would wish for such a denouement. If, alternatively, China continues to insist that the Enlightenment principles enshrined in the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights are little more than a Western hobbyhorse, then the great issues will remain intractable, and they will be resolved elsewhere than the U.N. In recent years, both liberal interventionists and conservative unilateralists have begun to call for some new body, or new mechanism, that will not sit idly by during the next Darfur (or more problematically, the next Iraq). This new entity would not include obstructive nations like China and Russia. But excluding China from the world’s foremost decision-making body could have very grave consequences, since it might well rekindle the Middle Kingdom’s old sense of encirclement and exclusion. You’d have to save a great many lives to compensate for that kind of damage.

China plainly wishes to join the international community on its own terms. The People’s Republic is a singular entity, a world-class power almost wholly preoccupied with harnessing its internal energies and preventing domestic conflict. Unlike Russia, for example, China has little wish to use the power at its disposal, save to establish a harmonious environment for its “peaceful rise.” And in any case, China has progressed so rapidly from an insular and impoverished state to a confident and immensely influential one that it has not had time to figure out what to do with its power, or even fully to acknowledge it. China thus cares a very great deal about matters of little concern in the West — “territorial integrity,” for example — and very little about the burning issues in Washington, London and Paris. China has, for example, played almost no affirmative role in the reform debate that has exercised the U.N. over the last year. China is a member of the bloc of developing nations known as the Group of 77 — the group’s formal name is “the G77 plus China,” even though the 77 have grown to 131 — and it shares the organization’s view that the U.N. should pay more attention to economic and social issues and less to matters of peace and security. But even on these questions, according to Ambassador Menon of Singapore, “They were basically just going with the tide.”

Even with its negative agenda — the reforms it wanted to prevent — Ambassador Wang was happy to remain in the shadows. China had spent more than a decade fighting off resolutions introduced in the U.N.’s Human Rights Commission, and it implacably opposed Kofi Annan’s proposal to replace the toothless commission with a much tougher body. But in the crucial final days last September, it was Munir Akram, not Wang, who produced a vague plan supposedly designed to break the deadlock. Western diplomats theorized that China allowed Pakistan to show good faith, intending all the while to block any substantive reforms. Akram, not surprisingly, denies this and says that he does not generally coordinate tactics with Wang. In the end, the General Assembly established a new Human Rights Council with membership standards sufficiently lax that Iran, Cuba, Russia and, of course, China were elected members.

The one issue that roused China to fury was Japan’s bid for permanent membership on the Security Council. China’s all-hands-on-deck mobilization was a reminder that propriety goes out the window on matters China deems to be of national interest, just as had been the case a decade earlier when it openly tried to kill peacekeeping missions in Guatemala, Haiti and Macedonia to punish those countries for their dealings with Taiwan. The merits were plainly not on China’s side. No other country so self-evidently belongs on the council as Japan, which pays 19 percent of the U.N.’s budget, slightly below the U.S. assessment. (China pays 2 percent, and Russia 1 percent.) But Japan is China’s chief competitor in Asia, as well as America’s staunchest ally in the region.

Even more important, though, is China’s deep sense of historical grievance over Japan’s notorious invasion of Nanking in 1937 and its aggression in World War II. Wang explained to me that Japan’s wealth and generosity could not erase this blot: “The current five has been selected not because of their economic power but because of the role they played during the Second World War. China played an important role, and also we didn’t occupy other people’s territory” — unlike you-know-who. (It seemed too niggling to point out that the regime that had fought with the Allies now held sway in Taipei, not Beijing.) China’s bitterness at Japan’s alleged lack of repentance has only been sharpened by the annual visits of Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi to the Yasukuni shrine, popularly seen to be a symbol of militarism. “For the last couple of years,” as Wang expressed this in his oblique manner, “the signal from Tokyo is not that positive.”

In April 2005, soon after Japan, Germany, India and Brazil formalized their candidacy for an expanded Security Council, anti-Japanese demonstrations sprang up in China. Japanese missions and businesses were trashed. The Japanese were shocked both by the virulence of the demonstrations and by the obvious signs of high-level toleration, if not approval. Meanwhile, Wang and several of his lieutenants worked on the ambassadors of wavering countries. Prince Zeid Ra’ad Zeid al-Hussein, the permanent representative of Jordan, which was considering becoming a co-sponsor of the resolution expanding the council’s permanent membership, says that he was called to a caucus room at the Security Council to meet with a Chinese diplomat. “The guy was apoplectic,” Prince Zeid recalls. “He said, ‘How can a great power refuse to accept essential, fundamental truths and yet take pride in the good works it does across the globe?’ ” He later sent Prince Zeid a copy of a book titled “The Rape of Nanking: An Undeniable History in Photographs.” Jordan continued to support the resolution but declined to become a sponsor.

China failed to persuade African countries to reject Security Council expansion as such, yet it still delivered the coup de grâce at a meeting of the African Union in Libya in early August, where heads of state met to choose two nations that would join the other four in seeking permanent membership. Several weeks earlier, China was the host of a lavish state visit for Robert Mugabe, the increasingly tyrannical and eccentric Zimbabwean strongman and a longtime Chinese client. Soon after returning, Mugabe declared that African countries must insist not only on permanent representation in the Security Council but also on the veto. This demand was obviously self-defeating, since neither China nor the four other permanent members would agree to dilute the value of their veto. Nevertheless, vast shoals of Chinese diplomats roamed the halls in Tripoli, appealing to African pride, to the imperative of global parity and so on. The demand for an African veto carried the day, and with that, Security Council expansion died. The corpse bore no sign of Chinese fingerprints.

Last month, the U.N. began the process of selecting a successor to Secretary General Kofi Annan. Asian countries feel that it is their “turn” for the job, and China has promised to deliver an Asian. Any potential successor must survive both American and Chinese scrutiny. The Americans will reject too open an advocate for the third world agenda; China will reject an aspirant from too close an ally of Washington. Other difficulties will arise. China may be happy to firm up its ties with India by backing Shashi Tharoor, a career U.N. official who is India’s candidate, but Pakistan, a close ally, may object strenuously. China may, for once, have to disappoint or even anger some fraternal members of the G77 — a situation it tries very hard to avoid.

The Chinese are much too subtle to throw their support behind a single candidate, but it is widely assumed that they want a technocrat who will put aside Annan’s (admittedly tarnished) mantle of moral authority. Wang, of course, disclaims any such ambition, but he does express the hope that Annan’s successor “might bring some perspective from Asia.” By this, he explained, he meant “patience over rush” and an emphasis on collective rights — those of the state — rather than individual ones. If China succeeds in this regard, the U.S. might find the U.N. an even less hospitable place than it is now.

China and the United States are the twin bêtes noires of the U.N.: the U.S. insists on enlisting the organization in its crusades, while China refuses to let any crusade get in the way of national interest. Washington is all blustering moralism; Beijing, all circumspect mercantilism. Both can afford to defy the consensus view. The emissaries of the two capitals are united by a wary mutual regard and understanding. Bolton and Wang met as midlevel diplomats in the early 90’s and worked together on nonproliferation issues in 2001 and 2002. In their first meeting in this latter capacity, according to an American diplomat, who agreed to talk with me only if he remained unnamed, as he was not authorized to speak publicly, Bolton and Wang talked for four and a half hours without finding much common ground. As the discussion drew to a close, the time came for the inevitable speech on China’s inalienable claims to Taiwan. Wang, who knew Bolton to be impervious to all such oratory, simply said, “Taiwan.” And Bolton nodded and said, “And Taiwan.”

Relations between the two are strictly professional. But Bolton, who declined to be interviewed for this article, is said to appreciate his counterpart’s pragmatism and lack of polemics. China and Russia take the same view on issues involving sovereignty, but whereas Russia, with a home audience to play to, likes to snap Uncle Sam’s suspenders, China, with no wish to harm its relations with Washington, looks for common ground. While Russia openly threatened to veto any resolution authorizing war in Iraq, for example, China stated its opposition as undemonstratively as possible. More recently, both Russia and China have resisted any Security Council condemnation of Iran’s nuclear program, but China has proved far more accommodating of White House concerns. “The Russians spent 45 minutes arguing over the meaning of consult,” the American diplomat recalls. “Wang finally said, ‘Consult is fine.’ ” Wang also earned points when he and the “director” of Taiwan’s unofficial mission to the U.N. happened to arrive simultaneously at the Saudi mission to sign the condolence book after the death of King Fahd; Wang walked over and shook the hand of his diplomatic nemesis.

Wang talked with me about Bolton, and about America diplomacy generally, with the faint irony and mellow wisdom of an antique culture. “I can talk to many people,” he said equably, “those who wish to have nice discussion or those who wish to quarrel.” Wang is, of course, a partisan of the nice discussion. “I do not want to give advice to my good friend,” he went on to say, delicately, “but I believe that sometimes the way that you work, especially the way that your work is respected by others as showing due respect for others, is where common ground can be found.” But what exactly does Wang mean by “common ground”? The consensus that China has sought on Darfur looks like a formula for paralysis. And China’s insistence on showing “due respect” for Iran seems designed less to persuade Tehran to end its nuclear program than to preclude any of the punitive actions currently being contemplated by the West.

Wang told me he believed that blunderbuss diplomacy is the American way “because America is a superpower, so America has a big say.” China would appear to have a big say of its own, but that’s not Wang’s view. At the end of our second conversation, he returned to a favorite theme. “The Americans have muscle and exercise this muscle,” he said. “China has no muscle and has no intention of exercising this muscle.”

I said that, in fact, China had a great deal of muscle but punched below its weight. Wang smiled at the expression and said, “It’s not good?” Well, I said, that depends. And then Wang said something quite startling: “China always regards itself as a weak, small, less powerful country. My feeling is that for the next 30 years, China will remain like this. China likes to punch underweight, as you put it.”

Why was that? Why did China want to punch underweight? Wang spoke of China’s peaceful rise, of the need to reassure all who fear its growing clout. “We don’t,” he said, “want to make anyone feel uncomfortable.”

Alive. Yes. Busy. Very. School. Too much. Work. Also too much.

Me and Papa. Kona. Ain't we cute?

I am in Hawaii. I will write something about it when the ideas about which I wish to write present themselves in good proximity to a computer. It hasn't happened just yet.

But here is an article about Hawaii that I found in the Economist. It is very loosely related to ideas of my own...it will have to suffice until the next post.

---

Embarras de richesse
Apr 7th 2005 | WAIKIKI
From The Economist print edition

Visitors to the Aloha State are both a boon and a bane

THE hotels are full, Japanese tourists throng the designer stores of Waikiki, and the unemployment rate is a mere 3% of the workforce. So what could possibly knock Hawaii, the “aloha” or “welcome” state, off its wave? The answer, according to Rex Johnson, the president of the Hawaii Tourist Authority, is that Hawaii's 1.2m residents may one day get fed up with playing host to overseas visitors, 7m of them this year. “Once we lose this thing called aloha and the residents no longer think of tourism as a wonderful industry, we'll be like any other sand and surf destination, but farther away.”

Indeed, some residents are already fed up. KAHEA, an alliance of environmentalists and defenders of native Hawaiian culture, bemoans the pollution caused by the cruise ships and the risk posed by the tourist hordes to creatures such as the dark-rumped petrel and the Oahu tree snail, or to plants like the Marsilea villosa fern. KAHEA has a point: the US Fish & Wildlife Service currently lists some 317 species, including 273 plants, in the Hawaiian islands as threatened or endangered—the highest number of any state in the nation. Even the state flower, the hibiscus brackenridgei, is on the danger list. The loss of species, says one government report, has been “staggering”. As for the impact of tourism on Hawaiian culture, a KAHEA spokeswoman wryly notes the element of exploitation: “Native Hawaiian culture is used as a selling point—come to this paradise where beautiful women are doing the hula on your dinner plate.”

So what else is new? Hawaii's environment and culture have been under threat ever since Captain Cook and his germ-carrying sailors dropped anchor in 1778. Foreign imports, from the Dole pineapple plantation on Oahu to the Parker cattle ranch on the Big Island, have inevitably had an impact on species that evolved over the millennia in isolation. Moreover, with up to 25 non-native species arriving each year, the impact will continue. But, as the US Geological Survey argues, the impact can add to biodiversity as well as lessen it. The real challenge, therefore, is for Hawaii to find a balance between the costs and the benefits of development in general and tourism in particular.

The benefits are not to be sneezed at. The state's unemployment rate has been below the national average for the past two-and-a-half years (at the moment, only Wyoming, at 2.9%, has a lower rate). Economists at the University of Hawaii reckon that Hawaiians' real personal income rose by 2.8% last year, will rise by 2.7% this year and will continue through 2007 at 2.5%. According to the state's “strategic plan” for the next decade, tourism should take much of the credit, accounting directly and indirectly for some 22% of the state's jobs by 2007, more than 17% of its economic output and around 26% of its tax revenues. Only the presence of the armed forces comes close in economic importance.

The trouble is that the costs can be high, too. As one economist puts it, “We have a Manhattan cost of living and Peoria wage rates.” That translates into a median house price today on the island of Oahu, home to three-quarters of the state's population, of $500,000, and a need for many workers to take on more than one job. Social activists point to the disparity between the modest homes of most Hawaiians and the gated communities and resort complexes that provide second homes for visitors from the American mainland. A 2002 survey of Hawaii residents found that 50% of the sample thought tourism had been “mostly good” for themselves and their families—but this was down from 58% in 1999, and 54% blamed tourism for the increased traffic that clogs Hawaii's few roads.

So should Mr Johnson and his pals in tourism be worried? Though the 2000 census reckoned native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders were a mere 9% of the population (Asians, notably Filipinos and Japanese, made up 42%, whites 24%), probably a fifth of the population has some native Hawaiian blood, and virtually everyone, regardless of race, professes to care for Polynesian culture.

This means that the University of Hawaii, which has managed the star-gazing observatory on the summit of the Mauna Kea volcano since the late 1960s, is now seeking forgiveness for desecrating what turns out to be sacred native Hawaiian land. It also means widespread support for the “Akaka bill”, a move by Hawaii's politicians in Washington, led by Senator Daniel Akaka, to secure federal recognition of a “native Hawaiian governing entity”. The bill deliberately does not envision independence, the demand of some in the “sovereignty movement”. For too many Hawaii residents that evokes alarming thoughts of a loss of their American passports, or American-Indian-style casinos. Instead, it would give native Hawaiians their own office within the federal government, more control over their lands and protection from legal challenge for any affirmative-action programmes.

Such sensitivities should, in the end, be an asset to Hawaii's tourism, forcing it to go for quality rather than quantity in its choice of visitors. In a sense, that choice has already been made. Flights to Hawaii are expensive; Waikiki, the main attraction for February's 122,500 visitors from Japan (a fifth of the total), is a tiny area wedged between the beach and a canal, and so cannot expand; and every development project has to get local political approval. In their darker moments Hawaii's economic planners may worry about airline bankruptcies, a return of SARS or a Pacific tsunami—but the fact is that the sun shines, the surf is clean and over 60% of tourists are repeat visitors. In other words, so far at least, that aloha spirit is alive and well.

Those of you who have known me for some time know that I had a previous life in the entertainment business. For five years, I worked on films, television shows, documentaries, commercials and music videos. On small projects, I took on various production roles, such as 1st, 2nd and 2nd 2nd assistant director and production manager; on big, professional projects, I worked as a general piss on, getting yelled at by and making coffee for people with much less education, or even intellectual curiosity, than ego and sense of self-importance.

Today, I got an e-mail from an old associate in Los Angeles. The subject of the message was "YOU ARE GOING TO BE FAMOUS!!!" (count them, THREE exclamation points). Before I left Hell-A, I worked with this guy, and his crew, on a television pilot for a reality show called Spotcha!. The show was something of a Candid Camera meets Girls Gone Wild, and I had a bit part as the eccentric "director" of the show. Shortly after the pilot was finished, I left LA, and to be honest, I haven't given a lot of thought to the show.

So I was surprised to get this e-mail:

Maile!

You're going to be famous!!! SPOTCHA! is blowingup! Spread the word - we think we have the heat for real this time:www.myspace.com/spotchatv

Tell everyone you know to become a friend!

- Brian

Much to my amazement, this guy is still peddling the pilot. He and his partner have found an agent and they have been pushing this project, as well as a number of other ideas.

Now, I have certain reservations about ever becoming famous, and my life has changed so much that I highly doubt I will be famous in the Hollywood sense (I would much rather be known for a byline, now). But I wish these guys the best of luck. If anything, they deserve success for their perseverance alone.

So go check out the page:

http://www.myspace.com/spotchatv

There are some video clips and you'll even get to see a much heavier Maile bounce about in front of the camera.

Nicholas D. Kristof put this up on his blog (although he didn't write it). Silly.
---
The flood of American liberals sneaking across the border into Canada has intensified in the past week, sparking calls for increased patrols to stop the illegal immigration. The actions of President Bush are prompting the exodus among left-leaning citizens who fear they'll soon be required to hunt, pray, and agree with Bill O'Reilly.

Canadian border farmers say it's not uncommon to see dozens of sociology professors, animal-rights activists and Unitarians crossing their fields at night.

"I went out to milk the cows the other day, and there was a Hollywood producer huddled in the barn," said Manitoba farmer Red Greenfield,whose acreage borders North Dakota. The producer was cold, exhausted and hungry. "He asked me if I could spare a latte and some free-range chicken. When I said I didn't have any, he left. Didn't even get a chance to show him my screenplay, eh?"

In an effort to stop the illegal aliens, Greenfield erected higher fences, but the liberals scaled them. So he tried installing speakers that blare Rush Limbaugh across the fields. "Not real effective," he said. "The liberals still got through, and Rush annoyed the cows so much they wouldn't give milk."

Officials are particularly concerned about smugglers who meet liberals near the Canadian border, pack them into Volvo station wagons, drive them across the border and leave them to fend for themselves.

"A lot of these people are not prepared for rugged conditions," an Ontario border patrolman said. "I found one carload without a drop of drinking water. "They did have a nice little Napa Valley cabernet, though."

As dear old Dad has told me time and time again, "in adversity we conquer."

I have found a new place to live, and I will have it all to myself. Yes, I will be paying more money, but I will have it all to myself. The location is not quite as good as the place I've got, but, did I mention, I WILL HAVE IT ALL TO MYSELF.

Woo-hoo! I am moving up in the world!

Photos forthcoming.

In other news. No word yet on the job for which I had the interview mentioned in the last post. The interview went very well, but it does not seem I'm quite the right fit for what they need. There are two posts: one to be the boss's personal assistant, and the other to be a consultant. After spending my formative young adult years in Hollywood, taking a personal assistant job feels a bit like walking into a fire, but at the same time, my Chinese is simply not good enough to be a consultant. But even is a position was found for me, I'd have to quit my masters to take it, and I don't know if I would do that. I am rather keen to stay the course...

The British Council gig is really turning out to be a kick (good thing). I've got the hang of it now and I just go in on the weekends and make 33 dollars an hour! For sure, in the States, for someone my age, 33 dollars an hour is nothing to sneeze at. In China...I'm bourgeois. To be fair, I only work a few hours per week, but still, it's an awesome gig. Plus, I get to travel. I am going to Wuhan next weekend.

Photos forthcoming.

Forgive the last post. I'm clearly a bit frazzled...

OK. Kona people, I will be making a return on the 28th of June. See you then.

In other news, it's a gorgeous day in Beijing. It rained last night, so today is clear, sunny, blue and breezy. Here is the view from my living room. Hardly a Hawaiian sunset, but it's still quite nice. The tall building center-right is the new Poly Plaza, currently under construction.




Also, I have an interview on Friday with a business strategy consulting firm. I don't know much about them, but a friend referred me, and based on my CV alone, they were interested. (Ironically, it was the same CV I sent the international school who rejected me.) From what I understand, they do research for big foreign companies looking to get into China. It's foreign-run, which is reassuring and the office is located in the swank Dashanzi art district. We shall see how it goes...

You know, non-Americans here often talk about the "great American dream". I guess, to a certain extent, we really do believe that hard work, smarts and diligence will take us anywhere we want to go, but I must admit, at the present, I don't know anyone my age getting ahead. Most of the people I know who have finished college are either barely scraping by, or barely scraping by and living with their parents. Few of them are working in the field that they want to work in, and if they are, they work far too many hours per week, for less than a living wage, with few or no benefits and no vacation (standards based on "civilized Western nations"). To me, China truly is a land of opportunity. In just two years time, I'm making 6 or 7 times what I did when I first started. Very basic competence has taken me all over, and opportunities, while not always stable, abound. I have held jobs not only in teaching, but in marketing, media and voice work. I take holidays, usually when I want to, and I have travelled to Hong Kong, Korea, Taiwan, Thailand and various cities in China, both for work and pleasure. I spoke one and a half languages when I arrived here, and now I speak three, at the very least to "survival" level.
Maybe I have an unfair advantage here: native English skills and an American, and a, in the near future, British degree. I can't imagine the opportunities are so wide from everyone in China, but to be sure, even the Chinese are doing much better than they ever have before.

Despite my pain in the ass roommates...life is pretty good.

I need to bitch.

I have been uber-stressed lately. School and work has taken its toll, the weather is changing violently (a weak excuse...maybe, but everyone I know has been sick at least once in the past month, myself included), and a bunch of people I know are leaving--among them, a handsome, young man who announced to me that he thought I was the coolest thing since sliced bread, just before he hopped a plane for a three-year contract in Hong Kong. On top of all this, I will be making a return back to the island at the end of this month. While I know most people would be thanking their lucky stars for a trip to Hawaii, for me, the thought of a return to my hometown causes nothing but anxiety and indigestion.

Living with roommates is starting to bug the shit out of me. Since living with messy people, I've become rather tidy. (OK, maybe not in my room, but the public parts of the house are usually quite in order.) I don't like to see piles of dishes in the sink, so I do most of the washing. We have had endless discussions where everyone has promised to do more, but at the end of the day, it all comes down to the person who cares the most--me. But more than just the mess, my roommates have become like siblings. And I'm the big sister. I look after all the bills and I make all the repairs in the house. It seems that I am the only one who grasps the relationship between going to the grocery store and having food in the house, though they still recognize the need to eat, and since they know I'm always up early, I get asked to wake them up in the morning. They come in, when they can clearly see I am working, to share with me the smallest of details as to why they think their boss hates them, and they don't understand why I look irritated when I come home, intent on studying, to find them attached to my computer. Indeed, it's nice to have people around, and my roommates really are good people, but I realize more and more, that I'd rather just be on my own. To be fair, it makes sense that I should just delegate more responsibility (though I have tried with limited success) and be more upfront about personal boundaries, but I feel that these people are adults and it's not my place to educate them. What's more, I don't want the situation to escalate into anti-social behavior where I hide in my room when I'm home and put my name on all of my food, nor do I want to sit in the dark because someone has failed, even with several reminders, to pay the electricity bill. The new guy is a lot better than the girl who was here previously--he takes instruction well and has generally a strong sense of hygiene--but it seems that the other girl, has slacked off to compensate.

It's all just pissing me off.

I wake up very early in the mornings, sometimes at 3 or 4 o'clock, especially when I'm irritated. I really enjoy the quiet mornings and I find it's the only time that I have to myself. I can study, read, think and listen to music interruption free. I also can tidy up around the house without anyone getting in my way, whilst feigning guilt for allowing me to look after things.

This morning I was up at half four. I read the newspaper, and then I went into the kitchen to do the dishes. I studied for a bit, then, feeling bored with that, I went back to the kitchen, deciding to undertake a kim bap project.

Not so many people know this about me, but I really, really like the process of preparing food, and I especially like anything where I can chop anything into very small pieces. Really. For some reason, I find it exceptionally relaxing. I also find it interesting to devise new methods for chopping. (Yes, I know, really, I am going off the deep end.) But there's a lot more to chopping than hacking something to pieces. Using a good knife, you can julienne carrots, dice pineapple, mince ginger and put zucchini in to perfect french fry strips.

Making kim bap is a very involved process that requires a lot of patience for cutting, cooling and wrapping. It's basically a Korean sushi roll, and today I used cucumber, egg, spinach, sesame seeds and shitake mushrooms for the filling. In a nutshell, this is how it goes:

1. Cook the rice. Let it cool.
2. While the rice is cooking, use the steamer basket in the cooker to steam the mushrooms and spinach.
3. Cut the cucumber into strips, salt them, let them soak, and then rinse and dry.
4. Beat an egg and fry it thin like a crepe.
5. Cut the spinach, mushrooms and egg into fine strips.
6. Mix the rice with vinegar, sugar and a dash of salt.

Once everything is cool and into appropriate pieces, lay out seaweed on a bamboo roller, put down some rice, smear the rice with sesame oil, add the filling, and then roll firmly.

That's it. The finished project:


Here are some of the things I used to make the kim bap. One of the great things about living in Beijing is that products come from a variety of places. Here, I have Korean vinegar, Chinese sesame seeds and sesame oil, Japanese seaweed and sea salt, in the grinder, from Australia. Michael bought the rice cooker. Being a good member of the club of those who have a Chinese parent, he was shocked and appalled to find that our kitchen was lacking one when he arrived.
And then, when it was all done, I did all the dishes. Mom and Dad would be so proud; possibly more surprised.

On Tuesday, Ariston's dad came home while I was giving Ariston his lesson. Usually, when either of the parents come home early, I cut the lesson short because Ariston is no longer interested in anything I can offer; Mom and Dad are much cooler than me.

So Ariston runs off to play with Dad and I go back to his room to tidy up. Five minutes later I hear screams to high heaven.

"Give it to me, Ariston," I hear his dad plead. Ariston just went on wailing. Then Dad comes into the room carrying the screaming, tearing, red-faced kid.

"What's wrong, Ariston?" I ask. In one fist he's got a red one-hundred yuan note. "I had some money out, he took it, and now, he won't let go of it," his father explained. "Ariston, give it back!" the father asked. Ariston would not give up the bill to save his life.

"Give it to Maile, then," Dad said, hoping I would be enough of a diversion to loosen his son's grip. Ariston gave me one look, paused, then continued screaming and crying.

One hundred yuan is about $12. It's the largest denomination of money available in China. For a kid in China, 100 yuan is easily as valuable as a hundred dollars for a kid in the States. There was precious little coming between the 20-month old Ariston and the money.

The expression "tight-fisted Chinaman" came to mind and I burst into laughter. "He's learned early," I told his dad. "Money and the ABCs...the basics are covered," his dad said.

I went into the other room, got my things together and when I went back to say goodbye, Ariston was being fed by his nanny and the cook. He still had his fist wrapped around the red bill. I laughed again, and said "goodbye". Ariston looked up from his lunch, smiled, and in perfect English, said, "money".

Things are as usual: work, study, work, study, work, study. There is also a fair amount of pretending to studying and thinking about studying.

The beginning of the month saw the national May 1 holiday, and like many a jaded foreigner in China, I opted out of fighting the travelling crowds and stayed in Beijing. (More than that, three-fourths of my students were in town, so I had to work.) There was much to do and see in the capital this year, anyhow. The Dashanzi art district hosted a huge international art festival, and the Midi school, the school in China for rock music, put together a week long event out in Haidian. Artists from all over the world, including Korea, Taiwan, Spain and England performed.

Michael, the new roomie, and I schlepped it over to Haidian park on the first day. The music was alright and the dark beer, at just 8 RMB per clear plastic cup, was even better.

After the festival, we went to one of my favorite restaurants in Beijing. It's a hole in the wall in central Beijing, on a main road in the northern hutong (traditional housing) area. The place has amazing jiao zi (dumplings), including a number of su de (vegetarian) choices--the mushroom and egg jiao zi can find no equal.

It's a bit weird having another hapa around. There's an awful lot of "well, you're hair is more Chinese than mine, but my eyes are more almond shaped..." and "your parents don't get along either?!" Also, since having Michael around, I see that I really am Chinese in some ways. We went grocery shopping the other day, which is quite cool because Michael is a cook, and I realized, because he is, that I am equally comfortable in the dairy section, as well as in the spice/sauce/and dried things that look like twigs section. Michael is as just as at ease in the open market as in the chain supermarket, as I am, and unlike my very white French roommate, he has no qualms about haggling, squeezing the produce, nor buying green vegetables, whose English names we are not quite sure of, but are quite confident that they're probably just fine to eat.

At the restaurant we went to, aforementioned, Michael saw two old men squawking over a bowl of stewed bones. "I want that," Michael said shameless pointing to the men's table, and within minutes, out came the xiaojie (waitress) with a big bowl of beef bones, complete with plastic glove and drinking straw to get into the crevices. Michael went straight to work on the marrow with the gusto I believe to be reserved only for those with Sinic blood in their veins. Then, in his scouse brogue he said with satisfaction, "That's lovely."

That's Michael. (I don't really think he's looks very Chinese, not as much as me, at least.)

In other news, I did not get the job with the international school. They shot me down quick--not even an interview. But, however, the British Council came through, and last Saturday was my first day. It's an OK gig. I just give interviews to painfully nervous Chinese people, for whom the test often dictates their immediate success or near future plans. The cool thing is the job will send me to different cities soon. I am looking forward to that.

Thursday was my birthday. I am 26 years old. It's a strange feeling realizing that this is my THIRD birthday in China.

I tend to get a bit weird around my birthday, but I must admit that this year was not so bad. I've taken an extended break from drinking, so I didn't go out (really, I just don't have the time, money or inkling anymore), but my roommate treated me to lunch and I broke my diet to enjoy a chocolate ice cream. (Note: chocolate ice cream tastes much much better when you eat after a long period of not eating it. [Note: I am not really on a diet so much as on a health kick. Since cutting out the drink and other vices, I've put myself on a whole foods, low-dairy diet. Given that I have already been a vegetarian for 12 years now(!), this was not so hard, but I try to eat processed foods as little as possible. The results have been tremendous. I cook and clean a lot now--the kitchen has never been in better shape--I've lost some weight and my digestion system has never been so functional and efficient, something of an achievement here in China where most foreigners contend with Mao's revenge on at least a monthly basis.])
I bought this book as a present to myself. It's Hunter S. Thompson's Curse of Lono, illustrated by Ralph Steadman. This book was hard to find before Mr. Thompson decided to spray the walls of his home with his own blood and genius, but since the violent event, the story has been rereleased in giant coffee-table format. I was thrilled to find the book at my local bookstore/coffee shop/free wireless Internet access hangout, so I bought it. Hunter S. Thompson spent some time in Hawaii in the early 80's and the book is a collection of his writing about the place. As the photo to the left attests to, Mr. Thompson spent some time on the Kona Coast (though I can't imagine what he, or anyone for that matter, could have be doing there that would constitute "ass kicking").
Ralph Steadman was an artist I became familiar with in college. Here is his interpretation of the Kona Pier. The fish drawn up is the author, himself.


In other news, things are hectic on the home front. My roommate, whom I refer to as La Poupee (the French for "bimbo"), announced four days ago that she will be leaving Beijing on the 23rd. This left my other roommate and I in a scramble to get someone in here as soon as possible to take her room (of course La Poupee was far too busy with her own affairs, such as washing her hair and arranging farewell meetings, to make any effort to find someone herself-- despite her demand for an instant return on her deposit). Perrine, the roommate staying, with whom I get along well, and I, needless to say have been pissed. But as luck would have it, we found someone yesterday. He's another hapa (his dad's from Hong Kong and his mom is English) and he comes from Liverpool. Amazingly, like another hapa I know, he studied media in school, took up service work upon graduation (he's a cook) and then came to China to be an English teacher. What is most appealing about him, aside from the cook part, is that, unlike most of the people I have been encountering of late (very young, hyper-ambitious, or hyper-slack, recent graduates who have come to Beijing to either "break-into" the Chinese market (they usually return home deflated, having discovered that the road to CEO greatness requires wicked Mandarin skills and a struggle greater than a three-month internship) or to pickle their minds and livers on the cheap while snagging as many Chinese girls as possible (they usually return home after having run out of money), is this guy has had roommates in the past, he supports himself and doesn't seem to have any specific agenda other than "seeing how the other half lives" and getting away from the alarmingly "media saturated" British society (his words).
Other news: I am still working and studying, working and studying and working and studying. It looks like the job with the British Council is not panning out, but a friend of mine just referred me for a job at his place of work, the International School of Beijing. The position is Marketing and Publications Manager, and my friend said, given my background, that I may have a good shot at it. This would mean a full American salary, with benefits. We shall see...

The mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, who apparently is known more for having a sharp tongue than a silver tongue, was recently in China and said this:

"People in the West have the wrong impression of China. They think it is all police and soldiers and control, but in Beijing pedestrians didn't even get out of the way of the VIP cars."

Astute observation Ken. Well said.

If you'd like to read the full article, in which Mayor Livingstone says some pretty outlandish, but also some pretty coherent things about China, follow this link http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,,1754791,00.html?gusrc=rss

---
Also, by the way, I have recently engaged a service offered by the Guardian Unlimited. It's called Newspoint, and what it does is compiles newsfeeds from several sites (you can tailor it to your liking). It's awesome. I can now scan the headlines of the Economist, the New York Times, the Financial Times, the Guardian, the Observer, la Liberation and le Monde all in one place!

If you want to check out out, follow the link below. There's a UK and a US version.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/newspoint

There is a new man in my life. I met him a couple of months ago, and now I spend time with him nearly everyday. He comes from a very good family (in fact, I think his parents are loaded), and while he doesn't talk too much, he demonstrates a quick intelligence.

Ariston is very sensitive, and there are times when he cannot control his emotions. I have learned to have patience with him. I realize that boys from good families like to have their way. But mostly, Ariston and I get along swimmingly. He's a very good looking fellow, and he drools all over for me. I must admit he is shamelessly fascinated with my breasts, which he sometimes demonstrates at the most inappropriate of times, but hey, we've all got our foibles, don't we?

This is Ariston.


You see, he's a senstive boy.

My friend Ming and I went out for dinner at the Tree, an excellent beer and pizza place down on Sanlitun, last week. After dinner we stopped by the DVD shop around the corner because I had been trying to track down a copy of the film about Truman Capote, starring Phillip Seymour Hoffman.

The shop we went to is usually stacked to the ceiling with DVDs. The new stuff is always up front and the older stuff is arranged by genre in the back. Each DVD is 10 RMB, and if you buy 10, you get one for free. The quality at this place is guaranteed, so while 10 RMB is a bit stiff, its location is convenient and customer loyalty is high.

Nothing makes me happier that perusing piles of plastic sleeved DVD cases. My finger flipping technique has been perfected and I can, without any hesitation, ask in Chinese, if a movie has English or French subtitles (yes, my French has improved that much here in China). there's lots of hype in the media about copyright protection and I do know some foreigners who feel guilty about buying bootlegged DVDs, but all I have to say about that is "fuck Hollywood." (They lost their chance with me years ago.)

I can find anything here on the streets of Beijing. Really, anything. I have purchased all of Wong Kar-Wai's films, a Charlie Chaplin collection, a substantial amount of Almodovar's work, Scottish films, French films, classic (I mean 70s) American movies...you name it. Several boys have also informed me that finding "tranny porn" or even animal porn is no challenge, at all.

So, shocked I was to find the shelves of the shop nearly bare. The only things out were Chinese movies, some CDs and some very old American Hollywood flicks. On the shelving above the cash register was a new arrangement: stacks of Mao's little red book, in English and in Chinese.

Ming, who speaks decent Chinese asked what happened to the usual decadent collection. The woman, indirectly, said something about officials in town for a meeting. She wouldn't elaborate, but then said, "Come back in two days." "What officials? What meeting?" Ming persisted. "Come back in two days!" the woman said. That was that, and we left empty-handed.

I read this in the New York Times today: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/23/business/worldbusiness/23china.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

American congress people are in town. It seems to be a fair conclusion that Beijing tidied up a bit in anticipation, especially, since the Americans are so uppity about intellectual property rights violations here.

PS - I didn't have to wait two days to go back to the store to get Capote. A guy who keeps cart on the sidewalk in front of my gym had it for only 5 RMB the next day.

Just a quickie to let those who care that I am still alive...

I am up to the creases (those would be the ugly kind that old people get on their foreheads when they work, worry and glare too much) in homework for school. (Yes, this post is yet another exercise in avoidance.) I decided not to return to the Korean school this semester, and now I am working freelance (four students, 16 hours per week), and part-time for the British Council as an IELTS (British TOEFL) examiner. (How many pairs of parentheses can I use in one paragraph?)

Also, I got some interesting comments from a reader (I have readers?!) concerning my political stance and I would like to reply. A proper reply would take more time and effort than what I can afford now, however I would like to say: this little girl is a hell of a lot more complicated than just "left" and "right." For sure, I lean to the left. I'm a pacifist, I believe the government is obligated to its people, I believe in the international community, I won't go into a McDonald's except to take advantage of their immaculately maintained toilets (something to think about in China) and I think rich people, by virtue, are suspect.

But at the same time, I really cannot tolerate the American "left" at the moment. Look at it. Listless. Sure, it's easy to blame the "right." But they're just doing what they do best: making money, finding reasons for war, fearing god, looking after the white folk, saving the family...and so on. But let's take a look at the "left." My people. Bunch of slackers. Too busy whining about globalization to pick up an economics book and plot out a system that WILL work (you know what I'm talking about!) And come on. Why haven't we been able to get behind anyone better than a potato-faced piece of cardboard with less charisma than a wet sock? Is that really the best we can do?

Point being, thanks for the comments and sorry for my lack of diversity in presentation (however, recognize this is not a political blog--the topic comes up every now and then, as I like to let it rattle around a bit while I'm avoid more pressing and relevant responsibilities).

P.S. One more thing. I cannot stand hippies.

My buddy Baron at the paper sent this to me. (He's a photographer.) He told me he found it while he was cleaning out his storage space.

This photo ran front page when I was 13. Baron took it and Karin, another buddy, and actually my one-time supervisor while I was a reporter at the paper, wrote the article. Baron said he actually remembered the interview and taking the picture because I was "cute and talking as if the words couldn't come out fast enough."

Some things don't change. Except for the cute part, of course.

From headline to byline...

Maile93back, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

Maile93front, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

Piaoliang Mei Mei

leilani, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

One of my roommates expressed an interest in seeing photos of my family, and to be honest, I don't really have any.

My family's kind of special. Our extended family is almost negligible, as we left for Hawaii when I was quite young, so it's always been just the four of us. I left for college when I was 17, then my folks split, and we've been slightly scattered since.

We're all independent as hell, and this wild one in the photo is the most conventional of all of us.

This is my little sister. She's the tall, beautiful, popular one. (Whereas I'm the short, agressive, "clever" one. [She's smart in her own right, but really, you're better off having me than her on your trivial pursuit team.])

**PEOPLE SHOULD KNOW ABOUT THIS**

So I log into the New York Times this morning see news about Bush's most-recent budget proposal: $2.77 trillion assigned to security, made possible, in part--perish the thought of raising taxes for the uber-rich--by cuts in education and health care.

It is days like these where I put down in ink my plans for the future that do not involve a return to the country of my birth.

Shortly after I read this article, I came across another one where several members of congress sharply criticized the proposal. Most unfortunately, I cannot relocate that article, otherwise I would quote directly from it. But, for sure, people on the left, as well as the right, were not too keen on the plan.

But here's the thing. We should not be all that surprised by all this. Yes. It's shocking. Yes. It's upsetting. And yes, the fact that people are getting pissed does offer a faint glimmer of hope, BUT we should not be THAT surprised.

**THIS IS SOMETHING YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT**

In 1997, during Clinton's second term, a group got together and formed the PROJECT FOR THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY. This is a legitimate non-profit educational group chaired by William Kristol (son of neo-conservative and long-time Republican presidential advisor, Irving Kristol).

The aims of this group are, as quoted on their Web site, to "promote American global leadership." (To give you a better idea of their sentiment, here is a snippet taken from the article mentioned later: "At present the United States faces no global rival. America's grand strategy should aim to preserve and extend this advantageous position as far into the future
as possible.")

The group's Statement of Principles, which can be read at http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm describes the importance of America's role in the world's recent history (the victory of the Cold War) and in order to maintain the U.S.'s dominance:

- "we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;

- we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;

- we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;

- we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles."

The statement concludes:

"Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not be fashionable today. But it is necessary if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next. "

The Statement of Letters was signed by Elliott Abrams, Gary Bauer, William J. Bennett, Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, Eliot A. Cohen, Midge Decter, Paula Dobriansky, Steve Forbes, Aaron Friedberg, Francis Fukuyama, Frank Gaffney, Fred C. Ikle, Donald Kagan, Zalmay Khalilzad , I. Lewis Libby, Norman Podhoretz, Dan Quayle, Peter W. Rodman, Stephen P. Rosen, Henry S. Rowen, Donald Rumsfeld, Vin Weber, George Weigel , Paul Wolfowitz

THIS IS NOT A CONSPIRACY THEORY. THIS IS REAL.

I'm hardly an expert in this area, but I'd bet the farm that more than one or two of these people, aside from the obvious ones emboldened, are sitting pretty close to Bush's ears.

So while this preposterous budget proposal is shocking and alarming, it should not be that surprising. What would be surprising is if the country can manage to make it out of this mess unscathed.

If you want to check this out for yourself, log on to http://www.newamericancentury.org.

If you wish to see other things I found on the site, carry on. If not, here's a good breaking point.

Thanks for reading.

-----

Further perusal of the group's site resulted in the discovery of a number of articles, including a 90-page plan for "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New American Century." The specific date of this report was not given, as it was in all the other articles; it was simply dated September, 2000. In this epic, these points are clearly made:

The United States must:

ESTABLISH FOUR CORE MISSIONS for U.S. military forces:
- defend the American homeland;
- fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars;
- perform the "constabulary" duties associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions;
- transform U.S. forces to exploit the "revolution in military affairs;"

To carry out these core missions, we need to provide sufficient force and budgetary allocations.

In particular, the United States must:

MAINTAIN NUCLEAR STRATEGIC SUPERIORITY, basing the U.S. nuclear deterrent upon a global, nuclear net assessment that weighs the full range of current and emerging threats, not merely the U.S.-Russia balance.

RESTORE THE PERSONNEL STRENGTH of today's force to roughly the levels anticipated in the "Base Force" outlined by the Bush Administration, an increase in active-duty strength from 1.4 million to 1.6 million.

REPOSITION U.S. FORCES to respond to 21st century strategic realities by shifting
permanently-based forces to Southeast Europe and Southeast Asia, and by changing naval deployment patterns to reflect growing U.S. strategic concerns in East Asia. Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century

MODERNIZE CURRENT U.S. FORCES SELECTIVELY, proceeding with the F-22 program while increasing purchases of lift, electronic support and other aircraft; expanding submarine and surface combatant fleets; purchasing Comanche helicopters and medium-weight ground vehicles for the Army, and the V-22 Osprey "tilt-rotor" aircraft for the Marine Corps.

CANCEL "ROADBLOCK" PROGRAMS such as the Joint Strike Fighter, CVX aircraft carrier, and Crusader howitzer system that would absorb exorbitant amounts of Pentagon funding while providing limited improvements to current capabilities. Savings from these canceled programs should be used to spur the process of military transformation.

DEVELOP AND DEPLOY GLOBAL MISSILE DEFENSES to defend the American homeland and American allies, and to provide a secure basis for U.S. power projection around the world.

CONTROL THE NEW "INTERNATIONAL COMMONS" OF SPACE AND "CYBERSPACE," and pave the way for the creation of a new military service--U.S. Space Forces--with the mission of space control.

EXPLOIT THE "REVOLUTION IN MILITARY AFFAIRS" to insure the long-term superiority of U.S. conventional forces. Establish a two-stage transformation process which
- maximizes the value of current weapons systems through the application of advanced technologies, and,
- produces more profound improvements in military capabilities, encourages competition between single services and joint-service experimentation efforts.

INCREASE DEFENSE SPENDING gradually to a minimum level of 3.5 to 3.8 percent of gross domestic product, adding $15 billion to $20 billion to total defense spending annually.

Fulfilling these requirements is essential if America is to retain its militarily dominant status for the coming decades. Conversely, the failure to meet any of these needs must result in some form of strategic retreat. At current levels of defense spending, the only option is to try ineffectually to "manage" increasingly large risks: paying for today's needs by shortchanging tomorrow's; withdrawing from constabulary missions to retain strength for large-scale wars; "choosing" between presence in Europe or presence in Asia; and so on.

I've cut it again...

haircut, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

The beauty of cutting your own hair is that you can do it anytime, as long as there are scissors and a mirror handy. The bad thing about cutting your own hair is that you begin to get too confident, and then a touch too experimental, and soon you wind up hacking off huge amounts and giving yourself bangs very similar to the ones you had when your mother dictated the kind of hairstyle you should be burdened with.

That being said, I kind of like the new do. It's a bit uneven, but I reckon it should work itself out in a day or two. It will grow back, after all...

Fireworks update:

Although most people have gone back to work (with the very salient exception of the man who fixes water heaters - we have had NO hot water since Saturday!), strings of firecrackers continue to be lit in parking lots, sidewalks and playgrounds. What's amazing is that no one bats an eye at the noise. They just pause their conversations, wait for the noise to finish, and then finish where they left off.

China.

P.S. I have yet to finish my homework. This post is a testament to my urge to avoid the issue.

Speaking of Chinese New Year and fireworks:

China's Lunar fireworks frenzy kills 36

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060130/wl_asia_afp/afplifestylechinalunar_060130182044

In Chongqing:

"...There were 191 fires caused by fireworks overnight on New Year's Eve ... a record for the city," Xinhua quoted a local fireworks official as saying."

Guo Nian Hao!

fireworks, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

This was the view from the window in the den on Chinese New Year's eve (yes, those are bars and no, they are not there because I live in a crime-ridden neighbor; they are there to protect me from hurting myself should I try to escape in the event a fire, obviously). For the first time in 12 years, Beijingers were allowed to purchase, and subsequently blow up fireworks, to their hearts' content, and they did. (Sorry to disappoint, Mom, but I didn't participate. Laziness propped up by a feeble excuse of minding my asthma kept me inside and just peeking out the window.) But Chinese New Year is hardly a one shot deal. It's a multi-day celebration and skull-splitting, heart-stopping pops and squeals had been heard starting a week before the official day, and have continued up until last night. It would not surprise me to hear it continue through the end of the week. Aside from the blasts and bangs and the cars alarms triggered as a result of, Beijing is eerily quiet. Most of the small shops and restaurants are closed up and the subway station closest to my apartment is ghostly. There are several temple fairs happening throughout the city, but the usual streets and traffic zones have petered out to flow that even most Westerners would be comfortable with.

People go back to work on Thursday. I am looking forward to it.

The pictures below are from my trip to Thailand. I think some of them are truly fantasic, not for their composition, which can be mostly credited to me, but for their content, with which I had nothing to do. But before you scroll down to marvel at their "fantastic content," allow me to climb up onto my soap box, pull out the world's smallest violin and play the world's smallest song called "Why I hated Thailand, In a Nutshell." The pictures alone cannot express and complete experience.

I went to down to Bangkok with my roommate Perrine last week and we came back yesterday. But that was not actually the plan. Not at all. The plan was that she was supposed to come back, as she only had a 10-day vacation, and I was to blow off the return leg of my travelling-as-two reduced-rate ticket and carry on to Cambodia and Vietnam, taking the train back to Beijing from Hanoi. But what really happened was that I got pissed off and disappointed and for the first time in my life, I told myself that I didn't want to travel anymore, and I cashed in my chips and went home early.

I understand that this was a slightly exteme response, but those who know me know that I have a propensity for occasionally doing extreme things like, at the drop of a hat, pulling up stakes and moving to China.

Hm...actually, I will stop here. I just got bored writing my own thoughts, so I can only imagine that others would be even more bored reading them. Nevermind.

Thailand's got some really cool things going for it, but it really sucks because it's like any other heavily touristed place. Scams, rip-offs, dred-locked white kids talking about all the places they have "done" (how the fuck can you "do" a place, anyway? You can "do" things and, in all fairness, you can "do" people, but how can you "do" Angkor Wat?), sparkly bars blasting American hip-hop, aggressive sales people selling trinkets imported from India, getting nickel and dimed at every turn, beggar children, other tourists mucking up the photos...the usual. When tourism is such a part of the infrastructure, as it is in Thailand, travelling is not really travelling, but an exercise in accepting alternate level of reality where nothing is quite genuine, but sort of looks it, and the acceptance is so strong that the image is really all that's left.

We made the mistake of going to the wrong places, the places too easy to be, and we paid. Someone who's travelled and lived abroad as much as I have, especially after having grown up in Hawaii, should have known better.

But even having recognized that, I'm definitely, sincerely turned off. And it's all a bit sad because it seems that it can only get worse. It's a race against the clock before the best beaches of the world all look like the shores of Waikiki, if they haven't gone that way already. Or maybe I'm just disappointed that my romantic notion of travelling and adventuring has suffered a smart smack of reality, so much so that I doubt the sincerity of the feeling in the first place.

In any event, enjoy the photos.

tuk tuk, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

Tuk tuks are motorcycle driven carriages. They're cute and fast, but you've got to have the bargaining skills of a Chinese mother to get anywhere on them at a decent price.

flower girl, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

This little girl came up to us with a card saying she had to raise money for school. Perrine is a soft touch and gave her all the coins in her purse, but we refused the flower and told her to keep the money in her pocket and not to give it to anyone. (The beggar kids in China are pimped out by their parents or even organized crime bosses and touristy areas are carved out into turfs protected for a fee. We assumed it was the same in Bangkok.) The girl was pleased with her wind fall, but came back five minutes later to give us a flower. We saw her again another night, and she recognized us and hit us up for more money, but we were so generous the second time.

petting tigers, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

We visited an animal sanctuary tended to by Buddhist monks. They keep tigers and let tourists come in to pet them. The laziness of these tigers is beyond comprehension, but a woman who worked there, a foreigner, explained that most of the tigers were born in the sanctuary and have always lived a good life; they are well fed, well looked after and none of them had ever killed in the wild. Basically, they're just very big house cats. But it was still pretty scary to walk around them. I sat between two on a rock and the napping one stretched out its legs and flipped his tail, hitting me. The tiger didn't notice I was there, but to be sure, I moved over to give it more space.

perrine and the monk, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

The monk came by and put the tiger's head in Perrine's lap. The tiger didn't seem to mind.

Panyee

panyee, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

We stayed a night at a guest house on this small fishing village. It's a Muslim village off the coast of Phang Nga in southern Thailand. Of all the places we visited, I liked this one the best. It was quiet and peaceful and while tourism is clearly the main source of income, the place wasn't crawling with people and it was very much an active, living village. People kept all their doors open and children ran around everyone. There were old women sitting on porches, mending fishing nets and fishermen could be watched dragging in their catches. The place we stayed was just a very clean room with a wooden floor and two matresses. The windows opened with shutters and no glass and the bathrooms were shared, the toilets being of the self-flushing variety, that is, you had to pour the water in with a ladle.

sunset, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

panyee, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

panyee, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

monkey, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

resting buddha, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

sleeping boy scout, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

elephant, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

Like all good tourists in Thailand, Perrine and I went for an elephant ride. It's was really quite good. Our elephant's name was Fendi and she was 45 years old. She's got a pummelo in her mouth.

hammock, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

trunk, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

elephant head, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

elephant master, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

This man took us on the elephant. It was clear that he had known the elephant for some time and he treated the elephant much like his child.

So. I know. I haven't posted in awhile. BUT I HAVE BEEN BUSY! Really!

I am spending lots of time studying of late. Work. Study. Work. Thinking about studying. Worrying about deadlines. Work. And so on...

Here is something interesting from my studies:

Income distribution is measured using the Gini coefficient. A rate of 0.0 means that income is distributed equally across the population. A rate of 1.0 means that it's distributed exclusively to one group. (That's how it works in a nutshell, anyhow.) So the lower the number, the more evenly income is distributed. Sweden has one of the lowest. In 2000, it was .25. Namibia, in 1993 (the most recent report) came in at .707.

China, 2001 .447
USA, 2000 .408

Long live the American dream...!

We've got a scratcher!

Scratch, originally uploaded by dadapunk80.

I know you've got to look hard, but what you see on my wrist is a scratch. A scratch that has broken the skin!

One of my kindergarteners, Robert, wanted something in my hand and when I wouldn't give it to him, he grabbed my wrist and scratched me. I told the Korean teacher she explained to him, in the most patient of tones, that he cannot scratch people. He told him to say "sorry," but he wouldn't. He did manage, after some coaxing, to come up with "Lao shi, dui bu qi," the Chinese for "I'm sorry, Teacher."