Editorials: May 2010 Archives

Editorial | The New York Times
May 27, 2010

There is only one country with any chance of getting through to North Korea. That is China, the North's major supplier of aid, food and oil. As tensions on the Korean Peninsula continue to spiral -- frighteningly -- upward, China is refusing to get involved.

China has only one concern: avoiding any crisis that might unleash huge refugee flows. If it believes that the status quo is conducive to stability, it is mistaken.

Relations between the Koreas have threatened to explode since last week when the South accused the North of torpedoing a South Korean warship, the Cheonan. It offered compelling forensic evidence of the North's role in the March attack, which killed 46 South Korean sailors.

What makes this so especially dangerous is that North Korea's erratic leader, Kim Jong-il, is in a power struggle to ensure that his youngest son succeeds him. (American intelligence officials suspect Mr. Kim may have ordered the attack to prove his willingness to take on South Korea and its Western allies.)

North Korea often blusters, but it has gone much further this time. Over the last few days, it has cut almost all ties and agreements with the South and threatened war if Seoul proceeds with threatened sanctions. On Thursday, it severed a naval hot line that was supposed to prevent clashes in disputed waters.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton tried hard this week to convince Chinese leaders of North Korea's culpability -- and of the need for Beijing to press the North to accept responsibility. There is no doubt about the North's involvement. An international team investigated the incident, and South Korea has produced a torpedo propeller with North Korean markings.

China needs to stop covering for its client and join in a United Nations Security Council statement that condemns the North's behavior. Privately, Beijing should make clear to North Korea that any future acts of aggression will result in a cut off of aid. The United States, South Korea and Japan, which have taken a strong stand against the North, also must leave some room for Pyongyang to back down.

The two Koreas -- which have never formally ended their war -- need to finally set a demarcation line in the West Sea where the Cheonan was attacked and sank. China could do real good if it worked with the United States to bring the two Koreas to the negotiating table.

>> Original Source

By Christopher Bodeen, Associated Press Writer | AP | via UNCENSORED Yahoo! News
May 26, 2010

Rising tensions over North Korea's alleged sinking of a South Korean warship are providing an unwelcome reality check for Pyongyang's chief ally, China.

Only months ago, Beijing was reaping kudos for sponsoring six-nation talks on dismantling North Korea's nuclear programs. These days, it's looking increasingly isolated for failing to back U.S. and South Korean calls to get tough on Pyongyang in the face of what investigators say is overwhelming evidence the ship was struck by a North Korean torpedo.

The ship sinking and rising tensions put Beijing in an uncomfortable position, forcing it to choose between traditional communist ally North Korea and close trading partner South Korea. Beyond that, the situation is squeezing China between playing the responsible power it says it wants to be, and protecting a loyal buffer state reviled by the world.

For Beijing, none of the options look good.

"China won't pressure North Korea. That could lead to a crisis," said Gong Keyu, deputy director of the Asia-Pacific Research Center at Shanghai's Institute for International Studies. "But if China keeps doing nothing, some countries may come to doubt our influence in the region and question whether Beijing is a responsible international player."

For now, Beijing appears to be buying time in hopes of an outcome that won't require it to take a clear-cut stance that could cripple relations with either Korea, with whom Beijing works to maintain a balance in ties.

On Wednesday, a vice foreign minister said the cause of the March 26 sinking in which 46 South Korean sailors died had yet to be determined, and called for dialogue in place of growing confrontation.

Beijing regards the destruction of the corvette Cheonan as "extremely complicated" and is "carefully and prudently studying and examining the information from all sides," Zhang Zhijun told reporters.

Chinese officials have been no more forthcoming in private, telling diplomats that the result of the international investigation blaming North Korea that was announced last week was inconclusive, according to people with knowledge of the discussions. They say Beijing has also faulted Seoul for rejecting North Korea's demand that it be allowed to send its own investigators to the South.

Yet the pressure on Beijing seems likely to only grow. On Friday, Premier Wen Jiaobao travels to South Korea for a three-way summit with his Japanese and South Korean counterparts, and the incident is expected to feature prominently.

Meanwhile, South Korea's plan to bring the issue before the U.N. Security Council would force Beijing into a hard decision on whether to use its veto power to quash the discussion. Doing so might preserve relations with Pyongyang but could be disastrous for Beijing's hopes of being seen as a rising, responsible regional and world power.

>> Complete Report

By Gao Yubing - Op-Ed Contributor - The New York Times
May 16, 2010

ONE hundred thousand fireworks lighted the sky over Shanghai on April 30, marking the grand opening of the 2010 World Expo. For the city's many pajama wearers, it also signified the start of a nightmare.

After pumping $58 billion into staging this mega-event, which is expected to attract more than 70 million visitors over the next six months, city authorities started a campaign to suppress one of Shanghai's most distinctive customs: wearing pajamas in public. Just as Beijing discouraged men from going shirtless during the Olympics, Shanghai wants everyone to wear "proper attire" for the Expo.

Catchy red signs reading "Pajamas don't go out of the door; be a civilized resident for the Expo" are posted throughout the city. Volunteer "pajama policemen" patrol the neighborhoods, telling pajama wearers to go home and change. Celebrities and socialites appear on TV to promote the idea that sleepwear in public is "backward" and "uncivilized."

But many residents disagree. Pajamas -- not the sexy sleepwear you find at Victoria's Secret, but loose-fitting, non-revealing PJs made of cotton or polyester -- have been popular in Shanghai since the late 1970s, when Deng Xiaoping, then China's leader, sought to modernize the economy and society by "opening up" to the outside world. The Chinese adopted Western pajamas without fully understanding their context. Most of us had never had any dedicated sleepwear other than old T-shirts and pants. And we thought pajamas were a symbol of wealth and coolness.

Shanghainese began wearing them to bed -- but kept them on to walk around the neighborhood, mainly out of convenience. At that time in Shanghai, people lived in crammed, communal-style quarters in shikumen -- low-rise townhouses in which families shared toilets and kitchens. Through the 1980s and '90s, the average person had less than 10 square meters of living area. To change out of one's pajamas just to walk across the road to the market would be too troublesome and unnecessary.

Besides, as a retiree told a news reporter: "Pajamas are also a type of clothes. It's comfortable, and it's no big deal since everyone wears them outside."

Mr. and Mrs. Wang, who lived on the street where I grew up in Shanghai, used to stroll after dinner in their pajamas -- nice matching costumes for a loving couple, now that I think about it. Then Mr. Wang would go out to buy cigarettes. In the mornings, Mrs. Wang, still in her pajamas, would dash to a street stall to pick up sheng jian (fried buns) for breakfast.

My own family, a little particular about clothing and slow with fashion, happened not to be part of the pajama troupe. But even those of us who never wore PJs in public are unhappy about the ban.

Two journalists from Hong Kong's Weekend Weekly magazine have already challenged it. They marched in their silk pajamas along Nanjing Road, a major shopping area in central Shanghai, and sat down in a restaurant. They met only one pajama-wearing comrade, and many people made fun of them (maybe because on a rainy day they were wearing silk jammies rather than the quilted or heavy flannel styles normally worn in cool weather). It wasn't what they expected in Shanghai.

Yang Xiong, the executive vice mayor of Shanghai and a director of the executive committee for the Expo, has acknowledged the "practical limitations" that led to pajama wearing, but still insists it is now "inappropriate." The Expo, the logic goes, offers a perfect opportunity to kick the habit; with a large influx of foreigners in town (though, in fact, they are expected to account for only 5 percent of all visitors to the Expo), we don't want to ruin our cosmopolitan image.

Yet even foreigners are disappointed about the pajama ban. Justin Guariglia, an American photojournalist who showcased Shanghai's lively pajama scene in his 2008 book, "Planet Shanghai," says the fashion adds to the city's character. A British friend of mine told me last winter, before traveling to Shanghai for the first time, "I want to see the Bund, the Jin Mao Tower and Shanghainese women in pajamas!"

The historic buildings along the Shanghai Bund will be there for a long time to come. So will the 88-story Jin Mao Tower. But street pajamas may disappear as everyone moves into modern, spacious apartments. By then, some Chinese fashion designer might, as Dolce & Gabbana did last year, send models down the runway wearing pajamas -- and how the audience will applaud!

>> Original Report

By PHILIP BOWRING | Op-Ed Contributor | International Herald Tribune | The New York Times
May 11, 2010

China talk is confusing. The Shanghai stock market is at its lowest level in eight months, with the real estate sector especially hard-hit. Yet the media is focused on a property bubble that triggered another baby step by the government to rein in bank credit to head off speculation.

Meanwhile, others fret that a big bust is about to follow the boom induced by a 32 percent rise in lending last year, which drove first quarter growth in gross domestic product this year to a bubbly 11.9 percent. Even the usually bullish consensus on China seems to be shifting in favor of bears who predict crashes ahead. They note in particular the quiet but spectacular build-up of borrowing by companies controlled by local governments and used as conduits for projects of dubious commercial value.

Is there a plausible middle ground between these positions? Yes, there is on a short-term view, but the longer term is more problematic.

There undoubtedly has been a property bubble, particularly in the major cities, with prices driven by speculative investment, as the few who have money -- often ill-gotten -- buy more property. Prices have soared 40 percent in 18 months, according to independent analysts. They are now almost 20 times average earnings in the top tier cities and at least 10 times in many lesser ones -- far beyond the reach of most salary-earners, even in a society where interest rates are below the rate of inflation, stock markets are erratic and thus property is seen as the only dependable security.

There is a reasonable prospect that this bubble will deflate gradually, thanks to additional housing supply and the government's administrative measures to restrict credit. A 20 percent fall in peak prices could occur, but this should not hurt the banks because few purchases are made with less than a 20 percent down payment.

On a medium term view, prices should also be held down by the government, which is moving back into the business of housing for lower income people by setting aside urban land. In the future, 25 percent to 30 percent of new urban construction may be for this sector and will probably have a knock-on effect by improving affordability for middle income earners. Slowing urbanization may also reduce housing price pressure.

But a more balanced housing market could reveal a bigger problem: the true state of local government finances. City and county administrations have become extremely dependent for revenue on land sales. Local governments have a vested interest in speculation and high land prices to fund the grandiose infrastructure and show projects that enhance their reputations and drive local growth.

Fast-rising land prices have lifted local government revenues, so officials have a vested interest in keeping prices inflated. But even without central government efforts to rein in prices, local land revenues could well stall soon.

China's dirty secret is the amounts borrowed by corporate entities created by local administrations as fronts for grandiose projects. While central government finances remain very conservative, the situation elsewhere is at best opaque. The separation of state and corporate sectors is still fuzzy. Government-related companies have been receiving most of the new credit, often spending with scant regard for the rate of return on the investment. The genuinely private sector has less political clout to get loans, and is rightly viewed as riskier than a state sector that can get bailouts or has land that it can sell to pay debts.

Given minimal household debt levels and low direct bank exposure to property, China can afford some housing bubbles and busts, just as other East Asian countries did in decades past. But what it cannot afford, particularly now that its workforce is no longer growing, and urbanization is slowing, is inefficient use of capital. That danger is being exacerbated by low interest rates and bank bias toward state-sector lending.

China's very high savings rate is a cushion, but it holds back consumption and, if poorly invested, it ultimately will result in bailouts and black holes for banks. Ask Thailand or South Korea about the roots of their crisis of 1997.

>> Original Source