Books · China

The Horse That Leaps Through Clouds- book review

In the early 20th century, a Swedish-Finnish nobleman by the name of Baron Gustaf Mannerheim undertook a secret mission for the Russian Tsar to spy on China. Starting from Moscow, Mannerheim crossed Russia, traveled through Central Asia and across China to collect information on the country’s reforms and development. 100 years later, in 2006, Canadian writer Eric Enno Tamm decided to undertake the same journey as Mannerheim, going through the Central Asian Stans and into China, from Xinjiang to Beijing.

Even 100 years after the original, Tamm’s voyage is a remarkable journey. Going through Central Asia, the author sheds light on little-known countries like oil-rich quasi-authoritarian Azerbaijan and repressive and secretive states like Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. The murkiness and poverty of the cities in those states is balanced by the beauty of the sparsely-populated, desolate wilderness of mountain passes, desert and plains. In China, Xinjiang is already heavily policed and Sinicized as cities like Kashgar are built up while having their historic neighborhoods ripped apart. Tamm visits famous cities like Xian and not-so-famous ones like Taiyuan, capital of Shanxi Province, and the holy sites of Wutaishan, one of China’s holiest mountains, and Dunhuang, site of one of China’s greatest Buddhist grottoes.

At every stage, Tamm describes fascinating accounts of Mannerheim’s trek, which was especially sensitive as he had to deal with rival European explorers and spies, and the Qin Dynasty authorities. Besides the historical and nature aspect, the book also features a lot of interesting descriptions of the diverse cultures and ethnicities that is present across Western China, such as small Mongolian and Tibetan sub-tribes as well as the local Uyghur majority.

Despite the 100 years separating the journeys of Mannerheim and the writer, there is a striking similarity between how China was going through significant change in the form of economic and industrial development during Mannerheim’s journey under the Qing Dynasty, as it was during Tamm’s journey and to the present. Tamm raises a provocative point about the parallels between the present and in Mannerheim’s time, as the Qing embraced Western industrial technology and economic changes, but not values and ideas, in an attempt to make the country prosper while retaining power, which ultimately proved futile. The Qing Dynasty would fall just a few years after Mannerheim’s journey when a successful revolution broke out in 1911. The recent news of China’s supposed banning of VPN by early 2018 and the death of imprisoned Nobel Peace Prize laureate Liu Xiabo is a reminder that China’s impressive economic rise and might has been accompanied by greater censorship and repression. I’ve never read this specific view linking the last years of the Qing with the present time expressed before, despite the abundance of predictions about the fall or decline of the Chinese Communist Party, and I admit it is partially convincing.

Tamm also notes the tensions in China’s borderlands, especially the restive northwestern region of Xinjiang, where the Muslim Uyghurs chafe under harsh Chinese rule. Indeed, Xinjiang is China’s most heavily policed region, and there are restrictions on the Uyghur’s practice of their religion and culture. It is obvious that Tamm is not too positive about his observations and experiences during his travel through China.

Tamm also coins a word for China’s pervasive technological censorship – technotarianism. Back then, China had just erected its “Great Firewall” and Google provided a limited version for use in the country, which didn’t prevent it from being banned completely. The censorship has only gotten worse so Tamm’s “technotarianism” is still in place.

Another serious problem Tamm observes is China’s dire environment, especially the heavily polluted air or smog which is as much of a problem in Beijing and much of China now as it was 11 years ago.

Coincidentally, much of Tamm’s journey traces the ancient Silk Road, as he goes through Xinjiang, Gansu, Shaanxi, and Shanxi to get to Beijing. He also visits Henan and Inner Mongolia. Given that the Belt and Road (also known as One Belt, One Road) is meant to recreate the Silk Road and passes through the countries Tamm traveled to, I was thinking it would be fitting if Tamm could go on another journey through Central Asia and China and write a new book.

Incidentally 2017 is the 100th year of Finland’s independence from Russia. After Finland became independent, Mannerheim became its regent and then a national war hero by defending Finland from the Soviet Union during the 1940s as the Commander-in-Chief and Marshal of Finland.

While the book was published 6 years ago, several of the observations are still very relevant. It is a little sad that not only do issues like the severe pollution and the repression in Xinjiang and Tibet still exist in China, but they are perhaps worse now than when Tamm undertook his journey.

Books · Travel

Grounded- book review

Christmas is one day away, so enjoy a photo of a very “Imperial” Christmas tree in Taipei, and a book review. Merry Christmas everyone.

In Grounded – A Down to Earth Journey Around the World, a couple circumnavigate the world by train, bus and ship, without ever going on a plane.
They do this because, according to author Seth Stevenson in the detailed intro: “We despise planes and all they stand for,” (we being him and his girlfriend). As a result, starting from the US, they cross the Atlantic in a container cargo ship, take the Trans-Siberian train from Moscow to Siberia, go from Japan to China through SE Asia to Australia by ferry, bike, and train, cross the Pacific on a luxury cruise liner, then go across the US by train to where they started from.

The journey sounds like an ordeal but Stevenson pulls it off rather smoothly, despite relying on desperate last-minute luck a couple of times. The writer makes it sound so easy, so much that the main challenge is often pure boredom such as when they cross the Atlantic in a cargo ship and encounter a week of mostly unchanging scenery.

One drawback about such a journey is that they often stay in major cities for very short times, sometimes leaving on the same day that they’ve arrived. I know sometimes people say it’s more about the journey than the destination, and Stevenson emphasizes this as well, but I’d rather read more about Moscow and Helsinki than just a page or two. Stevenson does admit this problem later in the book, wishing that he could see more of Sydney for instance. Similarly, the two cross Japan and China in a blur. The book breezes by and before you know it, they are back to the USA.

Coincidentally, the most interesting part is also the longest time they spend in a country, when they take part in a biking tour that cycles across Vietnam in 2 weeks. It is the only time they travel with other people in a group and the group dynamics and camaraderie turn out to be quite positive, though not with a judgmental overview about the tour guide at the end that was a bit harsh.

There’s a lot of complaining during the trip, as you’d expect when trips involve overnight train rides on hard seats and dodgy freighters and crossing the Pacific by ship. Stevenson also doesn’t hesitate to be candid about his fellow passengers and is downright insulting about rural mainlanders visiting Beijing. Stevenson’s girlfriend Rebecca is a peripheral character throughout the trip but steadily reliable, and one can think he was lucky to have someone like her. Rebecca is so steadfast that even after Stevenson leaves her behind in Singapore to run onto a ferry going to Australia, Rebecca “bears no ill will,” Stevenson assures us, and she flies to Bali to rejoin him on the ship.

Having first mentioned it in the beginning, Stevenson further reiterates his disdain toward flying and stresses how doing that robs travelers of a connection to the world. He explains how the ease of flying has taken the charm out of travel and led to the demise of ocean liners and trains, at least in the US.
He is right on some counts, as air travel has actually become a less luxurious experience (mainly for us plebs who fly economy class) than the past despite becoming more common, such as cramped seat space, long pre-boarding security checks and mediocre food. But the accounts of his ferry and liner trips in this book do not make those modes of transportation sound any more attractive. Props to the author for crossing the Atlantic and Pacific by boat but I feel no desire to do it myself especially after reading how his experiences were.

But weirdly enough, despite all these issues, I enjoyed the book and I found myself wishing that it could have been longer.


Troubles in Ukraine

Regarding the Ukraine, which has become a showdown between the West and Russia and where tensions haven’t improved after the Crimea formally seceded to become part of Russia, an agreement has just been reached between the EU, US, Russia and Ukraine.

Whether it holds remains to be seen, but for a long time tensions have been getting worse since violence has spread to other parts of the country. Armed men have taken over government buildings in cities in Eastern Ukraine, the Russian-speaking part of the country that has stronger ties with Russia, demanding increased autonomy or even seceding like the Crimea to join with Russia. Ukraine has launched operations to retake the buildings, but their troops have “defected” and vehicles have been captured by pro-Russian militias. It’s a sign that there are many Ukrainians, in the eastern Russian-speaking parts, which don’t support the new government in Kiev or its Western-oriented views. It’s a very tricky situation, with Russia still keeping tens of thousands of troops just outside of Ukraine’s eastern borders, while the US has issued warnings, making vague pronouncements about taking increased action. The EU seems toothless and uncertain.

To me, the troubles in the Ukraine raise two questions- the integrity of democracy, and the validity of Western media coverage, especially American.

I couldn’t help thinking that all this stems from a basic issue- the overthrow of a democratically-elected leader through unconstitutional procedures, which was basically a mass protest movement, one that was pro-West and supported by the West. I understand the previous president Victor Yanukovych, had angered millions of Ukrainians by refusing to sign a deal with the EU. But does this justify overthrowing a leader because he did something a lot of people don’t agree with? Especially if there were probably millions who may have agreed with it, or at the least did not have a problem with it. I am not supporting Russia or the confrontational stance of its leader Vladimir Putin, nor am I ignorant of the possibility Russia is heavily involved with the tensions. However,  the main point is if the protesters in Kiev got their wish in causing Yanukovych to flee. If this leads to civil war and the breakup of the country, will the protesters believe it was worth it?

This increasingly turbulent state of affairs in Eastern Ukraine reveals the deep chasm in the country, between the more pro-West capital Kiev and the West and the pro-Russian East. It was something Western media seems to have overlooked during the protests in Kiev against the former leader, in portraying this image of a people who were completely against Russia and desperate to join the EU. That might have been true, but I’m sure there were many Ukrainians who didn’t agree and to which the media generally ignored. Instead there were media stories about the mass protesters in the center of Kiev, the Maidan, and their heroism, ideals  and honest and noble dreams, in comparison to the backwards, oppressed and ignorant Russian speakers in the eastern part of Ukraine. At the same time, I admit that I trust Russian media much less than Western media, though that means the latter is held to much higher standards.

Besides Ukraine, there have been recent popular protests in Egypt, Thailand and Taiwan against governments that were democratically elected. Claiming noble aims, the protests attracted huge numbers, favorable media coverage from the West, and had serious impact on their countries, even to the point of overthrowing leaders. Some people see this as people power and laud it, but I see a mockery of democracy, selfishness and chaos.


Troubles arise over the missing flight

It’s coming close to two weeks and the missing Malaysia Airlines plane is still missing. There’ve been more developments during this week, such as Malaysia announcing that the plane was definitely hijacked (which is just a theory despite what they said) and that it flew west from Malaysia, away from its intended flight path. The most recent development is an ongoing search for large pieces of debris that were spotted in the Indian Ocean west of Australia.

The disappearance has been a big puzzle to much of the public and heartbreak for the families of the missing, not to mention a boon to the media and so-called experts and analysts. It’s also a sign that despite all the high-tech devices and the Internet and news and connectivity that we constantly surround ourselves with, it doesn’t mean beans at times. I also feel the same way about the situation in the Ukraine with Russia having basically annexed Crimea right in front of the world, and other crises in Venezuela and Syria. It feels weird and surreal to be able to read and watch so much news about a crisis as it’s happening and yet none of this has an effect on Russia, which has acted with such impunity. The US has responded with sanctions against Russia, which seems like a puny response but probably the most practical option given a military war isn’t appealing (at least to the West).

I’d lauded the multilateral cooperation on the search as a positive thing, but the opposite seems to be true as well. The lack of competence, cooperation, and trust has aggravated regional and neighborly tensions. This is in spite of the fact that Malaysia and its neighbors are members of ASEAN, the longstanding Southeast Asian regional body. China, as a big nation and regional power, should be taking a major part in the search, as most of the missing passengers are Chinese, but then again, few of its neighbors truly trust China, and China doesn’t necessarily have the outright capability to send naval and air search so far out beyond its shores. It’s also unfortunately a sign that Asia isn’t quite the future power sphere that many folks in media, academic and political circles claim it is.


A little more turmoil in the world

Just came back on the weekend from a short holiday to find the world has become a bit more turbulent.

On Sunday evening, China suffered a ghastly terrorist attack when alleged Uighur separatists attacked civilians in a train station, killing 29 and injuring about 130. This attack took place in Kunming, capital of Yunnan province, which is far from Xinjiang, and represents a disturbing escalation (assuming the perpetrators are indeed Uighur terrorists) in tensions involving Uighurs and the state, in terms of both the victims (innocent civilians), the place (train station) and the location (another province). The suddenness and the body count seems to have stunned the authorities and people enough that for now, there’s actually been some sort of reasonable approach to coping with the tragedy and a lack of calls for revenge or repression.

Ukraine had been going through a crazy set of events where its Russia-leaning former president was forced from power by mass protests in the capital. Suddenly this was upstaged by an even crazier development where Russia decided enough was enough and sent in troops, supported by local pro-Russian militia, to seize government and military installations all across the Crimea, an autonomous coastal region which has a lot of Russian speakers and houses a Russian naval base. Besides occupying the Crimea, Russia might move on further into Ukraine, which will almost certainly trigger war with Ukraine, and by extension the US and maybe the European Union.

In Beijing, no violence and turmoil, but the weather has been terrible lately, to the point where day after day seems to be apocalyptic gray and hazy from morning till evening and the PM2.5 reading (which measures the amount of polluted particles less than 2.5mm in the air that can get into your bloodstream) has soared to over 400. The weather has been bad before, in the past half-year I’ve been here, but only say one or a few days per week. For the past two weeks, it seems like it’s been continuous. This was one week ago and it hasn’t gotten much better.

Africa · Uncategorized

Dangers of trivialized war reporting

Not that long ago, the US was engaged in a staredown with Russia over launching an attack Syria to punish it for allegedly using chemical weapons to kill civilians. Russia refused to back down and made some strong counterpoints to the US’ supposedly solid evidence. I don’t want to be callous but I’d strongly advise against accepting the Western “evidence” about the chemical attacks and to be skeptical of the reporting done on that attack and on the conflict so far, which in my view has been skewed towards the anti-regime rebels.

This LRB article takes a wider look and gives a sound criticism of war reporting especially in the last few major conflicts. What’s especially pertinent and harmful is the simplification of these conflicts by media, often describing conflicts as between oppressive evil regimes/dictators and heroic opposition rebels. What’s also relevant is how Western powers (US, Britain, France etc) have been involved in these conflicts and taken advantage of faulty media reporting to influence public perceptions. In addition, the opposition in Libya or Egypt (anti-Mubarak protesters) has often been rather media-savvy, taking advantage of social media like Youtube videos and Twitter to press their cause, which often generates sympathetic coverage and propagation from Western media -sometimes along the lines of “these people use Twitter, they’re just like us, they’re the good guys blah blah.” Hence when the general public, for instance you and me, reads and views these reports, it’s easy to be taken in and believe the general simplified narrative of the conflicts.

Instead of just criticisms, the writer gives actual examples. The “victories” over the Taliban in Afghanistan in 2001 and over Iraq in 2003 by the US were not real military wins, which would explain why so much fighting and instability occurred, even to the present day. Much more recently, Libya presents a good example of a conflict becoming the hot topic for a period of time, before being bypassed for the next conflict or controversy or whatever passes as the story of the day. The country was easily rid of Muammar Gaddafi, but since then it’s descended into chaos and violence. Even the killing of the US ambassador last September hasn’t been solved as yet. Coming back to the current conflict hotspot –
What’s been happening in Syria for the past two years is terrible, but the US has been right to not intervene. Let’s hope it stays that way.

“Conviction that a toxic government is the root of all evil is the public position of most oppositions, but it’s damaging to trust one’s own propaganda. The Iraqi opposition genuinely believed that Iraq’s sectarian and ethnic problems stemmed from Saddam and that once he was gone all would be well. The opposition in Libya and Syria believed that the regimes of Gaddafi and Assad were so demonstrably bad that it was counter-revolutionary to question whether what came after them would be much better. Foreign reporters have by and large shared these opinions.” 


World Cup bidding controversy

The World Cup hosts were revealed Thursday- Russia for 2018 and Qatar for 2022. This shocked a lot of people, making some perplexed while others were happy. You can count me in among the former because I thought the two nations were among the weakest choices, especially Qatar. I had to engage in a little facebook exchange defending my opinion after I put it up as a status update, so I can understand that some people think the opposite about the two choices, with both set to be first-time hosts of the World Cup.

The bidding process was hit by some serious scandals. The process itself was weird from the start when it was determined by FIFA that the hosts for both 2018 and 2022 were to be decided. Usually, as with the Olympics, the World Cup host is determined ahead of time, but only for one tournament at a time. Why this was, I’m not sure though this process won’t be repeated again. There was a bunch of corruption allegations, which is not surprising, but it seems this time it was really thick. Thick enough that two members of the FIFA executive committee that chooses the hosts were suspended for allegedly seeking bribes in exchange for their votes. FIFA “investigated” these members, as well as several other officials, and found they had breached parts of the code of ethics, but not actually engaged in corruption. Then British state broadcaster BBC aired a special documentary on high-level corruption within FIFA that mentioned, surprise, surprise, well actually no, bigwig Jack Warner, a FIFA vice president and Trinidadian Cabinet minister. Four members of FIFA’s executive committee, remember – the 22 guys who vote to select the hosts – were directly implicated in the program . Surprisingly, well actually no, England crashed out in the first round of voting for the 2018 host, finishing dead last with 2 votes, one of which was from its own member. A shattered and furious England has come out from this debacle absolutely flabbergasted, with Jack Warner again being allegedly involved, this time being accused of breaking promises (putting his arm around Prince William and promising him his vote for England).  Not only the England, but the mighty USA has had to eat humble pie as well, itself crashing out in the vote for 2022, though it actually lasted until the last voting round where it went head to head with Qatar and lost. Like England, the USA also isn’t taking this loss well. Even Barack Obama said FIFA made “the wrong decision.”

It’d be easy to cue the laughter and the desire to sneer at two first-world powers getting all indignant over receiving a comeuppance from the rest of the world, but actually there are valid and sad lessons to be gained from this. First, ignore the temptation to treat the reactions of the USA and England as sour grapes and look at the circumstances. These two nations received the highest technical ratings from FIFA, along with Australia. This meant that when it comes to present facilities, transportation and other sorts of infrastructure as well as safety, these countries were seen as the best. For the US, filled with 32 NFL stadiums, each with at least 50,000 capacity, across their vast nation which could easily be modified to stage football matches, they were seen as barely needing to do anything to create match facilities. Qatar, meanwhile, has “little infrastructure to speak of” for holding an event like the World Cup. All their stadiums, barring one or two, will be have to be newly constructed, meaning they don’t exist yet. There are concerns with heat, which will be so hot during the time the World Cup will be held that all stadiums will be air conditioned.Qatar though has promised to dismantle them and ship them to developed nations, presumably for free. This sounds good but it’s premised all on hypothetical plans and designs on paper and animation. Given that they have 12 years, plus a ton of oil money, they might be able to do it but honestly it says something when concrete reality isn’t seen as important. The nation has less than 2 million people, still more than Trinidad, and a large number are not even citizens. They have never qualified for the World Cup and probably have never even come close. There is support from some people over the fact Qatar will be the first Muslim, and first Middle Eastern nation to hold it, but are they really a suitable symbol? I could think of several nations such as Egypt, Morocco, Turkey or Saudi Arabia that could be suitable Muslim hosts. Actually I was not a big supporter of the US bid as I preferred South Korea and Australia, which would also have been a first-time host.

Meanwhile Russia surprisingly won the right to host the 2018 “European” World Cup. While they’ve got a decent footballing pedigree and they are a giant nation (the world’s biggest actually), I feel it striking that China got savaged for being awarded the 2008 Olympic Games while nothing has been said of Russia’s questionable (putting it mildly) human rights record both home and abroad. They’ve fought all-out wars against a sovereign nation (Georgia, 2008, though admittedly Georgia invaded disputed territory that is protected by Russia) and domestic breakaway regions (Chechyna, Ingushetsia), threatened to withhold oil from neighboring nations during times of deep cold, allegedly interfered in elections and politics of neighboring nations like Ukraine, and has been alleged to be involved in the deaths of Russian critics including a notable local journalist. Now that Russia is going to host the World Cup and nobody is angry about it based on their abominable human rights and geopolitical conduct, I look forward to not hearing any complaints over China’s future bid to host the 2026 or 2030 World Cups.

Both these nations were rated among the lowest by FIFA committees and both have serious infrastructural, demographic and security issues, though both are oil-rich. New territories indeed for the World Cup, but it seems like the wishful trumps reality in the soundness of the bids.


The New Cold War review

The New Cold War

Mark MacKinnon
Vintage Canada

I recently finished reading this after starting it last August when I first came here. After beginning my job and getting other books, I stopped reading it and put it aside until January. It proved to be a very decent read with information that is quite relevant to current events in Russia and its neighbours, given last August’s brief conflict between Russia and Georgia and the gas crisis in January when Russia withheld gas transmissions to Europe during a spat with Ukraine.

The book is basically about the political contest in several former Soviet Union and Central Asian nations, especially Ukraine, Belarus and Georgia between Western-backed factions and Russia over the destiny of their nations. The outcomes have been successful revolutions in Serbia, Ukraine and Georgia which brought pro-Western democratic leaders to power and ousted pro-Russian dictators and authoritarian regimes. On the other hand, less successful have been attempts in Belarus and in Central Asia. Furthermore the effect of the successful revolutions caused several Central Asian nations to intensify their oppressive rules and launch brutal crackdowns on democracy activists and NGOs, strengthening or at least tightening their rule.

Several American organizations including Open Society funded by billionaire George Soros, and the National Democratic Institute and National Endownment for Democracy which are part of or affiliated with the American Democrat and Republican parties, have spent loads of money funding, training and providing resources to various pro-democracy/Western organizations, as well as actually helping form new ones.
One understands how threatened Russia feels by this onset of pro-Western/ American regimes in nations that formerly were under its direct control. Russia has certainly tried to hit back with its own political support and manipulations which the book describes as well.

The New Cold War was published last year but in the current context of recent events, is especially relevant. It’s a good primer on understanding the politics in some of the former Soviet Republic countries and the geopolitical dynamics with the looming but declining presence of Russia.
One thing about the writing is the obvious and consistent portrayal of Russia as the villain and it’s only in the end where MacKinnon raises questions of the pro-democracy movements and potential manipulation by Western organizations. On the other hand, It is possible to determine that much of the emotion and impetus behind the pro-democracy movements in these nations were genuine, at least much too genuine to dismiss them as pure creations of the American organizations/ government.
The current tensions in Russia involving an opposition struggling against the government’s increasingly authoritarian measures seem to show some semblance of the same tensions the book describes, in Russia and in several of the former Soviet republics.