Archive for the Yellow Peril myth Category

“US looking for excuses for ‘cyber army’ expansion” – New York Times alleges hacking by China [People’s Daily]

Posted in Anti-China media bias, Anti-China propaganda exposure, Capitalist media double standard, China, Corporate Media Critique, Media smear campaign, New York Times lie, Protectionist Trade War with China, Psychological warfare, Sinophobia, US imperialism, USA, USA 21st Century Cold War, vs. Google, Yellow Peril myth on February 5, 2013 by Zuo Shou / 左手

February 05, 2013

The United States is once again claiming to have been attacked by Chinese hackers. This time, the alleged “victim” is Dow Jones & Company, the publisher of the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal.
In recent years, there have been quite many “victims” that claimed to have been attacked by “Chinese hackers”: Google, arms dealers, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, NASA… In November last year, subordinate departments of the U.S. Congress even issued an annual report saying China has become the Internet world’s most threatening country.
However, while the United States kept on “flattering” the “Chinese hackers” in such manner, it always seemed vague on presenting evidence. This time, the New York Times and Dow Jones & Company are still making the accusations based on similar grounds as usual – that the IP address of the attacking source is from China.
People with a little understanding of network knowledge would know that attacks of hackers are transnational and hidden in nature, and therefore the IP address cannot be taken as sufficient evidence to confirm the source of the hackers.
National security has become the U.S.’ preferred “fig leaf” to cover the implementation of trade protection and economic sanctions, the ultimate excuse for it to exaggerate the Chinese threat theory on a global scale.

Clearly, by hyping “Chinese hackers”, it can please the people at home, attract political attention, as well as impose more technical restrictions on China.

However, it is a noteworthy fact that, while rendering the “China’s Internet threats”, the United States is also rapidly expanding its network security forces. Just a few days before Dow Jones & Company accused China, media disclosed the news that the United States was going to expand its network security force by five-fold.

There are throngs of commercial spies and network hackers on the Internet, and any national department or enterprise is possible to suffer attacks. Relevant data show that China is one of the countries that suffer most severe cyber attacks in the world. Although from the technical view, a considerable number of attacks are from the U.S. network, China has never made hasty inference or reckless conclusion about the attacking source.

As a major power of the Internet, China explicitly prohibits hacker attacks in the law [sic], severely cracks down on online hacking, and has been participating in global exchanges and cooperation in the field of network security in a constructive manner. In the age of globalized and information-based economy, information security has become a global issue. International cooperation is indispensable in countering hackers. Groundless slander against other countries and the implementation of double standards on Internet governance is not the proper behavior of a responsible big country.

Read the Chinese version at: 美国为“网军”扩编找借口, [see original article for that link]
Source: People’s Daily Overseas Edition, Author: Zhang Yixuan

Article link:

“US provokes spending rise” – Western agencies, US falsify realities of Asian, Chinese military spending [China Daily]

Posted in Anti-China propaganda exposure, China, China-bashing, India, Nukes, Pakistan, south Korea, USA 21st Century Cold War, Yellow Peril myth on April 16, 2012 by Zuo Shou / 左手

By Chen Xiangyang (China Daily)

Recently, two Western think tanks, the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies and the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute in Sweden, published research reports on defense spending in Asia, hyping the so-called “Asian arms race” scenario and attributing the military build-up to Asian countries reacting to China’s rise.

The International Institute for Strategic Studies says in its newly released Military Balance 2012 report that Asia’s defense spending is likely to exceed Europe’s this year, concluding that a classic arms race was occurring in Asia, with China on one side and neighboring Asian countries on the other. The report says that China’s growing military spending is the main reason for the United States pivoting to Asia.

According to the study by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, released in March, Asia has become the biggest regional importer of weapons and in 2011 the five biggest arms importers were all in Asia.

But the West is making a storm in a teacup [sic] in this regard. The growing military spending of Asia, including that of China, is legitimate, rational and inevitable.

First, the growing military spending in Asia is the natural result of Asia’s sustained and rapid economic development. Asian countries in general are becoming more affluent, so it is reasonable for them to correspondingly increase their defense spending.

Second, to safeguard their growing economic and development interests, including oversea interests and the safety of shipping routes, and to address the challenges posed by terrorism, ethnic separatism and religious extremism, Asian countries are increasing their military spending to safeguard national unity and their territorial integrity.

Third, Asia’s total military spending is still limited. According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies report, Asian countries spent $262 billion on defense in 2011, less than the Europe’s expenditure of nearly $270 billion, furthermore, the per capita spending levels in Asia remain significantly lower than those in Europe.

That the defense spending in Asia will outstrip that of Europe this year is simply because European countries have slashed their military budgets as a result of the sovereign debt crisis.

And compared with the US’ military spending, Asia’s is much lower. Despite the unprecedented pressure to cut the fiscal deficit, the US military budget for the 2013 fiscal year is as high as $613.9 billion.

Fourth, complex issues, such as territorial, border and maritime disputes, counter-terrorism operations, nuclear issues and the need to secure resources and energy and regional influence, have propelled the rise of military spending in Asia.

A lack of trust and doubts and misunderstandings concerning China’s rise have also to some extent resulted in a “security dilemma”. Security cooperation among Asian countries lags far behind the thriving economic cooperation.

Fifth, China’s modernization of its military is only a part of Asia’s military spending and it is not the largest spender. The three biggest arms importers from 2007 to 2012 were India, South Korea and Pakistan in that order. India was also the top importer in 2002-2006 and it will increase its military spending by 17 percent this year. China plans an increase of 11 percent.

Meanwhile, the US’ renewed efforts to strengthen and adjust its Asia-Pacific military deployment against rising regional powers has not only aggravated military tensions in Asia, but also led to alienation and even confrontation among Asian countries, further stimulating Asia’s military spending.

The US falsely blames China’s rise for the growing military spending of neighboring countries, yet it is the main beneficiary of Asia’s military spending . The US remains the world’s top arms supplier and it accounted for 30 percent of all arms exports between 2007 and 2011.

In fact, the US as part of its “return to Asia” strategy is fanning the flames of disputes between China and some neighboring countries in a bid to control the Asian security situation and, of course, sell more weapons. And it is worth noting that the US Department of Defense is the country’s largest employer. In fact it is the largest employer in the world.

Asian countries should remain vigilant and be aware the US is trying to sow discord in Asia in order to reap the profits.

China adheres to a path of peaceful development and is committed to peaceful coexistence with its neighbors. China has become the largest trading partner of a number of its neighbors. In 2011, the trade volume between China and other Asian countries reached $1.9 trillion.

This demonstrates that peaceful development is actually the popular sentiment and general trend in Asia.

The author is deputy director of the World Politics Research Institute under the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations.

Article link:

“The Obama Doctrine” – Truman’s USSR Containment policy, Sinicized [Wall Street Journal]

Posted in Australia, Bourgeois parliamentary democracy, China, China-bashing, CPC, Economic crisis & decline, Economy, Encirclement of China, Obama, US imperialism, USA, USA 21st Century Cold War, USSR, Yellow Peril myth on December 12, 2011 by Zuo Shou / 左手

* The U.S. plan to take on China recalls Harry Truman’s containment of the Soviet Union. *

November 25, 2011

by Hugh White

+ Excerpted +

Since 2009, China’s challenge to American [sic] primacy in Asia has become too stark to ignore….On [Obama’s] Asian journey he enunciated what truly deserves to be called the Obama Doctrine…The United States will resist China’s challenge to its primacy in Asia, using all the instruments of its power to strengthen and perpetuate the preeminent leadership it has exercised in the region for decades…

…Where does the Obama Doctrine lead?…

Where it leads depends first on the Chinese. The idea that they will simply cave in is just wishful thinking. That leaves only two possibilities. One is that China’s economy stumbles. This seems to be what Mr. Obama expects. He clearly had China in mind when his major speech in Canberra last week foreshadowed the failure of any country which is not a democracy [sic]. Maybe he’ll be proved right. But people have been predicting the failure of China’s Market-Leninist model for thirty years now, and for thirty years the model has delivered growth at 10% per year. Americans would be unwise now to assume that China will fail anytime soon…

…the Obama Doctrine is a very serious mistake. It commits America to a strategic confrontation which will cost it dearly, which it might not win and which it could quite possibly avoid without sacrificing its vital interests in Asia. America should step back from the Obama Doctrine and explore the possibility of a deal with China to build a better basis for peace in the Asian Century.

Edited by Zuo Shou

Article link:

China announces Pacific drill [Global Times]

Posted in Australia, Beijing, China, Japan, Obama, Pentagon, PLA, Sinophobia, South China Sea, Ukraine, US foreign occupation, US imperialism, USA, Yellow Peril myth on December 5, 2011 by Zuo Shou / 左手

Nov. 25, 2011

China on Wednesday announced a second naval drill in the western Pacific this year, days after US President Barack Obama announced an expanded military presence in the region.

“A fleet of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Navy will go for training in the western Pacific in late November,” the Ministry of National Defense announced.

“This annual regular training is a routine arrangement, not directed toward any particular country or target,” the statement said. “China’s lawful rights, including free navigation in relevant waters, should not receive any barriers.”

The statement did not reveal the location of the drill, nor the vessels to be used.

Japan’s Defense Ministry said Wednesday that a total of six Chinese ships, including one destroyer and a supply ship, crossed into the Pacific between two major Okinawa Prefecture islands in southern Japan early Tuesday.

The ministry said it had dispatched aircraft and ships to “closely monitor” the drill.

Li Jie, a senior captain at the Chinese Naval Research Institute, told the Global Times that the drill was scheduled at the beginning of the year.

“It is mainly to train projects in marine supply, antisubmarine and communications so as to improve naval maneuverability and enhance strategic and technological competence. It has no other intention, and concerns from other countries are completely unwarranted,” Li said.

Peng Guangqian, a military expert at the PLA Academy of Military Sciences, echoed Li’s words by saying, “The naval drill is aimed more at testing the capability and performance of the third-generation naval equipment under complicated weather conditions on the high seas.”

“Only on-the-spot practice can reveal problems that could occur in real battles. Many other countries often conduct similar drills,” Peng said.

Song Xiaojun, a Beijing-based military expert, said that some countries exaggerate China’s naval exercises for their own political purposes.

“Pressed by domestic political demand, some countries magnify China’s moves, especially those related to the South China Sea and the East China Sea,” Song told the Global Times.

But at the same time, Song said there is still a long way for China’s naval development to go as it is not competent enough to protect some of the country’s activities and interests in the region.

The drill came shortly after Obama wrapped up an Asian tour in which he attended the East Asia Summit and confronted Chinese officials over the South China Sea issue, in spite of Beijing’s firm opposition.

Obama also announced the US would deploy up to 2,500 Marines to Australia by 2016 and tighten air force cooperation.

Noting that China was “entitled to exercise their military in ways they deem fit,” Captain John Kirby, a Pentagon spokesman, said Wednesday the US had no problem with the naval drill.

In June, the PLA Navy sent 11 vessels to the same area for a military drill including two submarines, a rescue ship and three destroyers.

In August, China conducted the initial trial of its first aircraft carrier, refitted from an old cruise bought from Ukraine.

In its annual report on the Chinese military, the Pentagon once again amped up the “China threat” theory, claiming that Beijing has developed up to 12,000 ballistic missiles and other long-range anti-ship missiles.

The Tokyo-based Diplomat magazine said in an opinion piece entitled “Yes, China Could Have a Global Navy” that the PLA navy should be able to “enclose much of the western Pacific and the South China Sea within a zone of Chinese maritime supremacy” by 2020 and its fleet “would commence global operations by 2050.”

Separately, China and Japan pledged Wednesday to boost political trust during Japanese Foreign Minister Koichiro Gemba’s visit to Beijing.

“The just-concluded East Asia Summit has demonstrated a strong trend of forging solidarity, development and cooperation within the region,” Premier Wen Jiabao told Gemba.

Gemba was in Beijing to pave the way for Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda’s planned visit to China in December.

If his trip is made, Noda will be the first Japanese prime minister to visit China since the Democratic Party of Japan came to power in 2009.

Zhu Shanshan, Ling Yuhuan and agencies contributed to this story

Article link:

Despite some positive signs, Pentagon report on China still makes much ado about nothing [Xinhua]

Posted in China, China-bashing, China-US relations, Economy, Pentagon, PLA, US imperialism, USA, USA 21st Century Cold War, Yellow Peril myth on August 26, 2011 by Zuo Shou / 左手

by Yu Zhixiao

BEIJING, Aug. 25 (Xinhua) — The Pentagon, despite striking some positive notes, once again trumped up the notion of “China Threat” when it presented an annual report on the Chinese military to the Congress Wednesday.

The report, positively, recognized China has made “modest, but incremental, improvements in the transparency of its military and security affairs,” but, as expected, it exaggerated the threat incurred by China’s military development in 2010 to the Asia-Pacific region.

For many in China, it is weird that the Pentagon, whose expenditures reached nearly 700 billion U.S. dollars and accounted for over an appalling 40 percent of the world’s total in 2010, routinely points its finger at China, whose military only spends a small fraction of what the Pentagon consumes every year.

It is more baffling when it claimed the Chinese military imposed [an] ascendant threat to regional stability.

This well exemplified the saying that “one man may steal a horse while another may not look over a hedge.”

China, which has adhered to a defensive military policy, with its rising economic clout and sprawling commercial and strategic interests around the world, has every right to build a competent military.

More importantly, this would be conducive to regional and world peace and stability.

The report took issue with China’s aircraft carrier under construction, first stealth fighter jet in development, operational anti-ship ballistic missile, among others.

The so-called advanced weapons, which seemingly are taken seriously and cited as the latest examples of the ever expanding “ominous” Chinese military by some in the Pentagon, actually have been owned by some countries years or even decades ago and are not “new faces” at all.

On Wednesday, a high-ranking U.S. military officer, prematurely, and maybe ridiculously, asserted an expanded Chinese naval presence would have “implications for regional rivalries and power dynamics.”

The allegation is an utterly cock-and-bull story about the Chinese military based on a wild guess and illogical reasoning.

China has all along stuck to a self-defensive military policy, and hasn’t dispatched a single combat soldier overseas in the past two decades.

It is in China’s fundamental interests to maintain and strengthen current peaceful and friendly external circumstances, under which the Chinese people are breaking their backs to develop the economy, improve their living conditions and shrug off poverty.

China has no intention or interest to beget any enemies or antagonistic rivals in the world.

Since the beginning of this year, China and the United States have kept positive military exchanges. Chinese Defense Minister Liang Guanglie met his U.S. counterpart Robert Gates respectively in January and June. Chen Bingde, Chief of the General Staff of the People’s Liberation Army visited the United States in May, while his U.S. counterpart Mike Mullen conducted a reciprocal trip to China two months later.

The two countries should cherish their hard-won improved bilateral ties, particularly the military relations, instead of blaming and smearing each other.

Friendly exchanges and mutual trust between the two militaries will serve as a staunch cornerstone for peace and stability of the Asia-Pacific and the world at large.

Article link:

Pentagon stands as bastion of mistrust of China [People’s Daily]

Posted in China, China-bashing, Pentagon, PLA, Psychological warfare, Reunification, South China Sea, Taiwan, US imperialism, USA, USA 21st Century Cold War, Yellow Peril myth on August 26, 2011 by Zuo Shou / 左手

(Global Times)
August 26, 2011

The Pentagon released a report entitled Military and Security Developments Involving the PRC 2011 on Wednesday, an annual paper submitted to Congress that tries to gauge China’s military power projection and intentions.

The Pentagon has published its annual report regarding China’s military for 10 years and the apprehension it tries to convey is increasingly perceived as pathetic by Chinese people.

The 94-page, six-chapter report covers China’s poential new military might, strategy and US-China military contact. Not surprisingly, the latest report raises concerns about Chinese military’s strategic intentions. The report acknowledged China’s improvement in the transparency of its military affairs, but added that “there remains uncertainty about how China will use its growing capabilities.”

The refitting of the aircraft carrier Varyag seems to have exacerbated Pentagon concerns over China’s maritime ambition. However, not owning an aircraft carrier as the world’s largest developing country until now actually reflected more China’s military underdevelopment rather than its sophistication.

The report rightly points out that cross-Straits relationships have made significant progress since 2008, but raises the concern that “the PLA shows no sign of slowing its efforts to develop plans and capabilities for a cross-Strait contingency.” The Pentagon actually needs to answer why US arms sales to Taiwan continue and remain the biggest factor of uncertainty stopping mainland-Taiwan relationship from advancing without a hitch.

The military report also ignored the context of the US strategy of returning to Asia, including the tension the move has created in the South China Sea and East Asia, and what this means for China’s national security. Western-backed military interventions in several countries also serve as a reminder of the need to maintain a necessary military capability. Does the Pentagon really need to ask this question? It is prepared for these uncertain security elements that the PLA has apparent “intentions” on.

China and the US are increasingly interdependent economically and while cooperation is highlighted politically, the Pentagon is still stuck in a suspicious mindset between the two countries. As the world shifts toward a multi-polar power structure, the Pentagon report wrongly paints a picture of Sino-US confrontation. It is sowing the seeds for potential future conflicts.

Article link:

China has right to own aircraft carriers [People’s Daily]

Posted in Anti-China propaganda exposure, China, China-bashing, Encirclement of China, Pentagon, PLA, US imperialism, USA, Yellow Peril myth on August 24, 2011 by Zuo Shou / 左手

August 18, 2011

Edited and Translated by People’s Daily Online

The launch of China’s own aircraft carrier is a long-cherished dream of generations of Chinese people, but this reasonable dream has received bitter criticisms from the United States and some other countries. They even took the chance to play up the “China threat theory” again.

U.S. State Department spokesperson Victoria Newland recently answered several questions about China’s first aircraft carrier at a daily press briefing, and hundreds of millions of Chinese people were full of righteous indignation at her hypocritical and illogical answers. Newland’s arrogance and paranoia have exposed the hegemonic mentality of most Americans.

China’s aircraft carrier project suits the country’s development level and meets current international security needs. Furthermore, the project is not in violation of any commitments or international conventions.

China’s first aircraft carrier, built as a “messenger of peace,” will be used for safeguarding the country’s national security. At the start of the aircraft carrier’s revamp project, the Chinese government said frankly that China would fulfill its international responsibilities and release information about the development of its own aircraft carrier in a timely fashion. Given China‘s frankness and transparency, whoever goes on about China’s aircraft carrier has ulterior motives.

What Victoria Newland has frequently emphasized is “transparency.” Therefore, let us seriously talk about “transparency,” to which the U.S. people have paid so much attention. When a reporter of China asked that, “In the past 10 years, the U.S. military expenditure was growing faster than China’s. Regarding the aircraft carrier, the number comparison was 14:0 in the past, and is only 14:1 at present.” Victoria Newland said that, “Regarding specific military expenditure comparison and aircraft carrier number comparison, you’d better ask my colleagues working in the U.S. Department of Defense.”

Since she was talking about the “transparency,” how could she have not made a basic preparation? How could she only require others to be transparent and evade and refuse to answer the in-depth questions regarding the “transparency” of the United States? From her, we could clearly see the ridiculous requirements and shameless face of the Untied States.

In recent years, China has always tried hard to make its military information open and transparent, including information on China’s national defense construction and expenditure, and China’s efforts have been clearly seen and widely recognized by many international communities and countries. The defense attaché from the Canadian Embassy in China once said that, in his opinion, China is doubtless trying hard to raise the level of its military transparency.

In fact, military secrets are always a core national interest for every country, and no country can guarantee 100 percent military transparency. Therefore, the United States is just trying to unreasonably criticize China’s military strength and sell its “China Threat Theory” by talking about the aircraft carrier.

If it is not transparent that China only carries out scientific researches and education work on a disused aircraft carrier, why does not the United States take out its high-tech “weapons of mass destruction” from its arsenals and let the people of the world study them transparently? Since the military budget of the U.S. Department of Defense is over 600 billion U.S. dollars and the United States enjoys such an overwhelming military advantage, why does it still so care about China’s armament policies and defense expenditures? The United States is just using the aircraft carrier as an excuse.

China is faced with many challenges amid today’s complicated international situation. Some have always feared the ascent of China and its emergence as a prosperous and powerful country, so that they have tried all means to spread the “China threat theory,” attempting to build a fence containing China’s rise.

As a major country with a population of 1.3 billion, China’s historical lesson that a backward country is vulnerable to foreign attack has made it reflect on how to preserve its national security and how to keep the vital interests of its people from being violated. China just aims to safeguard its national interests. As one of the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, China also assumes more and more international responsibility. History and reality have showed that only a powerful country has the right to speak and can play positive roles in protecting national interests and preserving regional and international roles.

Preserving China’s maritime interests, safeguarding its long coast line and developing aircraft carriers are the resolute choices that China must make to preserve its territorial integrity and ensure national security, which must not be “reproached” by other countries.

Article link: