Eric's Beijing Diary

Listening now to the Bible Broadcasting Network...

"Jesus is the sweetest name I know....."

There is no name like Jesus. And no person, no entity, no historian has ever even attempted to deny the sweetness of Jesus. Whatever one may think if who Jesus really is, there has never been any question about the sweetness of his character. No one has ever dared to present him to history as a villain. There have been many great men in history. But even with the greatest of men, there is argument about their virtue, depending on a person's perspective. I think Abraham Lincoln was a great man. But a close friend of mine from the Old South said, "I'm not sorry Lincoln was shot; I'm just sorry he wasn't shot four years earlier."

You see, with most historical figures, the way we view them is based on our own background and perspective.

But more important is the sublime truth that the sweetness of Jesus is the kindness of the Father. God is not willing that any should perish, and he sent Jesus as the most complete representation of his true heart toward man. Philip said to Jesus, "Show us the Father." Philip believed that if they could just see the Father, they would be happy. There are so many ways Jesus could have answered that question:

"Are you out of your mind?! No man can see the Father and live!" (Exodus 33:20)

Or he could have said, "Actually, I'm quite a bit like my Father, so if you know what I look like, you have a pretty good idea what He looks like."

But he said, "He that has seen me, has seen the Father."

The significance of that statement cannot be overemphasized. Jesus is not merely a reflection of who God is. That is true of us (or should be):

"Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven."

But Jesus is the direct manifestation of the Father. So the sweetness of Jesus is an open revelation of how God truly desires to approach man. After all, Jesus did not come of his own. He came because "God loved the world."

Jesus is the sweetest name I know. And this sweet Name was sent to me because God's highest aim was to bring me into a sweet fellowship with Himself.

Went to a Chinese bonesetter today. I had lined up an appointment with a massage place, but I canceled that when someone referred me to the bonesetter. I thought perhaps she would be a little closer to what I really needed. My back was not hurting from sitting in front of a computer too long. There is some kind of alignment problem that is affecting my back.

The bonesetter took my back apart and put it back together. Actually, she shortened my leg. Or tried to. She felt along my spine carefully, especially the lower back area I had pointed out to her. Then she told me that my left leg is longer than my right leg. She held my left leg, while pressing hard on the right side of my groin, and rotated my leg in its socket. She told me it was going to hurt a little. Understatement. After a bit of that, she put my leg in a sling and swung it back and forth. I thought it a particularly odd way to make my legs come out the same.

Her prescription had three main points:

1. "Your stomach is too big." She taught me how to massage my stomach so that it would get smaller. And she told me to eat very slowly.
   

   
   

2. She told me not to cross my legs when I sit, and to sit straight with lower back flush. I think I kinda had that one figured out already.
   

   
   

3. She told me to be very careful when I pick something up. She told me to pick it up with both hands, not to reach down quickly and pick something up with one hand.
   

   
   

In addition to those things, she said I should avoid swinging my leg over when I get on my bicycle. I don't know what I can do about that, but it is something I need to give some thought to, because I am beginning to think that the cause of the problem has something to do with riding my bicycle. I can't imagine that riding a bike would be bad for my back, but it could be that getting on and off is creating a little too much stress in the wrong places.

I don't like to go to doctors. I don't have a medicine cabinet, and I don't take medicine unless I absolutely have to. Actually, I did not really go to the doctor because of my back pain. I prefer to let my body heal itself. God's Word says that we are "fearfully and wonderfully made." The human body has tremendous self-healing power. But this is the second time I have thrown my back out in two months. So I really do need to know what is causing this. Once I find that out, I can prevent it from happening again. I don't know...but I think I'm getting closer to finding the culprit.

Claire and Rose both got baptized this morning. Rose had tried to get baptized last fall, but she was refused. It's kinda tough, because they can only baptize 70 people at one time, and they only have a baptism every few months.

Special Easter choir concert at church tonight. You know, when it comes to music, it really is amazing how the songs of the gospel have an appeal that crosses the boundaries of time and culture. There are lots of different styles and types of music. One can argue all day long about which style is more "spiritual." I have my opinions about this, although I do like many different kinds of music. But the main point that I always stick to, is that whatever our tastes, we must always pursue music that is rich in the gospel.

The joy of Easter is the joy of the fulfillment of the gospel message, and that message never gets old. It is true that we need to teach and preach the whole counsel of God, but somehow, as simple as the message is, there is something in me that craves that message. I have heard it so many times, but every once in awhile, I really need to hear it again. There is no time like Easter to rehearse the old, old story.

Christ, the Lord, is risen today, Alleluia!
Sons of men and angels say, Alleluia!
Raise your joys and triumphs high, Alleluia!
Sing, ye heavens, and earth, reply, Alleluia!

Love's redeeming work is done, Alleluia!
Fought the fight, the battle won, Alleluia!
Lo! the Sun's eclipse is over, Alleluia!
Lo! He sets in blood no more, Alleluia!

Vain the stone, the watch, the seal, Alleluia!
Christ hath burst the gates of hell, Alleluia!
Death in vain forbids His rise, Alleluia!
Christ hath opened paradise, Alleluia!

Lives again our glorious King, Alleluia!
Where, O death, is now thy sting? Alleluia!
Once He died our souls to save, Alleluia!
Where thy victory, O grave? Alleluia!

Soar we now where Christ hath led, Alleluia!
Following our exalted Head, Alleluia!
Made like Him, like Him we rise, Alleluia!
Ours the cross, the grave, the skies, Alleluia!

Interesting article in the China Daily about economists who were given awards because of their work in building economic reform. Specifically, they were rewarded for helping China to move from a planned to a market economy. It's ironic that the greatest heros of today's China are those who have done the most to liberate China from Marxism and Marxist economic theory. One of the questions that is often perplexing to foreigners coming to China, is how long China will continue to pay lip service to Socialism (public ownership of the means of production), while moving in a direction which is decidedly antithetical to socialist economic philosophy.

It has taken a long time, but Karl Marx is finally being discredited in the places where his ideas have had the most impact. This is not admitted universally, but surely it is obvious to the most casual observer of history. They should have listened to Karl Marx's mother, "If Karl, instead of writing a lot about capital, had made a lot of it, it would have been much better."

Yesterday, Richard Holbrooke was on Dialogue. Yang Rui asked him about the potential sell off of U.S. Treasury bills by China, in their attempt to gain Euros. Holbrooke responded that since China enjoyed a $100 billion trade surplus with the Americans, it would not be very nice for them to do this. I was a bit taken aback by this appeal to courtesy in a situation where so many billions of dollars are at stake. As the dollar continues to fall, it is not surprising that countries like China would like to exchange their Treasury bills, which have a diminishing worth, for something which would be more likely to hold its value. What Holbrooke should have said, is that dumping T-bills will cause the dollar to fall, which would also cause the RMB to fall, since the value of the Yuan is pegged to the dollar. Of course, China can get around that by floating the RMB, but they have always refused to do that, because it is the artificially undervalued RMB that makes Chinese goods so cheap for the Americans, and has motivated so many American companies to outsource their manufacturing to China. So China clearly has an interest in keeping the dollar high, because that is the only way to retain the value of the RMB relative to other currencies without unhinging the RMB from the dollar. Still, China is intent on building their relationship with Europe, because although much of China's wealth right now is coming from business with the Americans, they do not want to be dependent on America.

Been out of commission for awhile. Somehow I managed to hurt my back again. I still feel like I've just been thrown from a horse, but it is slowly getting better. Not sure what I did this time. I am wondering if it might be the bed I'm sleeping on. The bed in this apartment is just a glorified box spring. On second thought, drop the "glorified" part. I don't know, but whenever I mention anything about it to my friends, they always insist that hard beds are much better for you. Maybe it was carrying my bike across the tracks that did it. Perhaps I shouldn't have, but my bike isn't that heavy. Besides, the train was coming, and I didn't want to wait for it. I don't know....not sure if that was it, because my back didn't start hurting until after I parked my bike. Anyway, if I hadn't beat the train, I would have suffered something slightly more painful than a backache.

Last night I attended a banquet the Software College put on for some visiting dignitaries from Keio University. The Software College here is working hard to form joint degree programs with academic institutions in other parts of the world. A joint degree program with Florida International University is already in place. The first group of graduates is just finishing up. They took the whole course (Master's Degree in IC Design) in English, and will be given a degree from this university, and also from FIU. During the course of their program, they were taught by visiting professors from FIU, by the Dean of the Software College, who is actually a tenured professor at FIU (on leave, of course), and by people like myself, who are professors here at the Software College.
Keio University is interested in forming this type of partnership. We'll see what happens. Chinese higher education is moving steadily toward the global marketplace. Education is becoming business.

Ran into Emily the other day at the coffee bar. Emily and Kat had come here from Britain with a non-profit educational exchange organization. They were just here for one semester. They came in August, and left in February, just before Spring Break. That's why I was surprised to see Emily at the coffee bar the other day,
"Emily! What are you doing here?!"

"Oh, I got tired of the rain in London."

These young people aren't really making any money here teaching English, but they do get their lodging paid for, and they are having the time of their lives--lots of free time, and lots of friends--Beijing has a sizeable international youth culture.

This morning I signed up for a new Chinese class at "Global Village." I have been gone for over a month, so it didn't make sense to try to go back to my previous class. But I was really thinking of changing anyway, because even though I really liked the book I was in, I was starting to get behind, because my level of "hanzi" (kanji) wasn't quite up to the level of the book. Sometimes my Chinese friends tell me that I shouldn't worry about hanzi, because I can just use the "pinyin" (romanized character) alphabet. But this is not true. You need to learn characters. All the language books teach language based on characters. If you don't learn characters, you can't take classes.

I walked into my class a few minutes late. A bunch of Korean working girls. They all stared at me. One of them finally broke the ice,

"You look like Santa Claus."

Another one placed her hand next to mine, "Your hand is big."

OK, got that part over with. There are lots of Korean working people in Wudaokou. In fact, the language school itself is a Korean company. Wudaokou is a draw for Korean working folks, because there are many companies that will hire Koreans if they have a modicum of Mandarin language skill.

Not everyone has benefited from China's boom. The economic sink hole of Shenyang (formerly known in the West as "Mukden," the capital of Manchuria) paid a high price for China's prosperity, because state owned enterprises there were ordered to lay off as many people as they needed to become profitable. Nevertheless, the tremendous volume of foreign capital flowing into China has generated tens of thousands of jobs, and has produced entire communities of foreigners who come to work for the enterprising entrepreneurs who are taking advantage of the extraordinary economic opportunity.

The Taiwan Question. As I look back over my first year in China, there are many things that come to mind. But perhaps the single most important question I have been asked, over and over again, is "What do you think about Taiwan?" I have been asked this question by students, by visitors to the English Corner, and by friends. I think it sticks out in my mind more than any other single question. More than "Do you like Chinese food?" More than, "Where are you from?" More than "Do you like China?" "How long did it take you to grow your beard?" and "Why does Bush hate Iraq?"

There is a lot of history to the Taiwan question, and that history is not always well understood. When I am asked about it, I try to point out that the present conflict is different from that which existed during the Cold War. At that time, the issue was "Communism" vs. "Anti-Communism." The Guomindang vs. the Communist Party on the mainland. Both parties in that dispute believed very strongly that there was only one China. But they disagreed about who should be in power. In the West, the conflict was always viewed as an issue between those two parties, and the West naturally took the side of Chiang Kai-shek. But there is a third party. A third group of people. A third element that was never considered in those days, because it was politically powerless. I am referring to the Taiwanese natives. When I mentioned the Taiwanese natives, and the conflict between them and the Chinese refugees who came over with Chiang Kai-shek in the late forties, someone at the English corner said, "Everyone on Taiwan came from China." I said, "Yes, but that was four hundred years ago."

Four hundred years is a long time. The Taiwanese natives are descendents of Chinese laborers who were brought over from the mainland by the Dutch in the 1600's. In fact, it would be more accurate to say that the current Taiwanese natives are the result of intermarriage between those laborers from the mainland, and the aborigines who lived on the island before the Dutch came.

When the Nationalist forces began to lose out to the Communists during the civil war which followed World War II and the defeat of the Japanese, they fled to Taiwan as a sort of "last stand." That's what it would have been, too. Dean Acheson, Truman's Secretary of State, took the position that both South Korea and Formosa (Taiwan) were beyond the "defense perimeter" of the United States. But after the attack on Korea, Truman decided to order the Seventh Fleet into the Taiwan strait to prevent a similar attack on Taiwan. Thus began the standoff that has continued to the present time. But the dynamics have changed. During the Cold War, both sides claimed to be the legitimate government of China, and the Americans supported the Nationalists in this dispute. This dynamic is critical to a correct understanding of the current situation. The reason I say this, is because the Nationalists never, never advocated "independence" from China. In those days, we always talked about "Free China" and "Red China." Both parties claimed to be the legitimate government of China. Not just Taiwan, but all of China.

In 1972, Nixon decided to pursue a relationship with Beijing. The condition, of course, was a recognition of Taiwan as a part of China. Nixon and Kissinger took a gradual approach to this problem, maintaining a relationship with Taiwan, while seeming to give tacit approval to Beijing's position. But when Jimmy Carter became president, he took a much more drastic step. He dissolved the thirty-year-old treaty that had existed between Taiwan and the US for the defense of the island. He also ended all official relations with Taiwan, and declared that the Beijing government was the only legitimate government of all the Chinese people.

Yet, the Americans continued to maintain friendly relations with Taiwan, and promised to protect them. So by publicly advocating a peaceful solution to the problem, and yet acquiescing to Beijing's position, America was trying to have it both ways. In one sense, this was rational. It was becoming a bit ridiculous for a small nation like Taiwan to retain a seat on the security council. Taiwan had been given that position because and only because Taiwan had been recognized as the Republic of China, the legitimate government of all the Chinese people. By the mid seventies, that position had become just a little too much of a stretch. But the problem was that this ambivalent approach tended to encourage threatening statements by the Mainland, followed by resistance and talks of independence by Taiwan.

In 1987, martial law was lifted. This was the beginning of the end for the Guomindang. It is important to remember that martial law was implemented in the first place not to protect society from the Communists or from Communist insurgents. Rather, it was put in place to preserve the power of the Guomindang, given that the folks who came from the mainland constituted only about 10-20% of the population, depending on who you talk to. With the lifting of martial law, and the move toward democracy, it was inevitable that the native population would start to become more prominent politically. Ironically, the change really started with Lee, who was Guomindang, but a Taiwanese native. But the real political upheaval was the election of Chen Shui-bian in 2000, which ended the 50 year reign of the Guomindang.

A few weeks ago, I had dinner with a lay preacher from Taipei who had been an acquaintance of Chen Shui-bian. He suggested that Chen Shui-bian's real priority was money. As presumptuous as it is for me to disagree with him, I do disagree with him. Although I have some problems with the approach that Chen Shui-bian is using, I believe that his approach is formed by the fact that he is a Taiwanese native, and thus has no reason to support reunification with the mainland. This, then is the change in the dynamic: While previously, the conflict had been between the Guomindang and the Communists, it is now a conflict between the Taiwanese natives and the Mainland. And that includes those who came from the mainland 50 years ago. So, oddly, the Guomindang, which used to be seen as China's great nemesis, has now become the ally of China in working for reunification. In fact, the recent non-stop flights between Taiwan and the mainland were negotiated by a committee sent to Beijing as emissaries from the Guomindang, and this without the permission of the ruling party.

So where do we go from here? In my discussions with people about this issue, I have tried to point out the importance of understanding and communication. Consider the following interchange, which I have had, in some form or another many times when someone has asked me,

"Do you think it is appropriate for the United States to interfere in the internal matters of another country?"

"Are you talking about Taiwan?"

"Yes."

"Have you ever been to Taiwan?"

"No."

"Have you ever met someone from Taiwan?"

"No."

"Have you ever talked with someone who has visited Taiwan?"

"No."

"Have you ever met anyone who knows someone who has been to Taiwan?"

"No."

"Then perhaps it is reasonable for me to conclude that your feelings about the issue might be influenced by the fact that you have only heard one side of the story."

From these interchanges and others like them, I have become convinced that the shortest route to reunification is the establishment of understanding. And understanding is built by communication. The current cross-straits flights are a start. But they need to be increased to the point that they are routine. Only then will there exist the level of communication that can be the foundation for greater understanding.

In the United States, I have talked with people from each of these three groups. I have heard Taiwanese natives tell me how they were slapped as children when they spoke their native dialect with their classmates. The teacher spoke Mandarin, and Mandarin was the official language everyone was supposed to speak. But rules like this were imposed on the majority by a powerful minority from the Mainland. Hence the sense of bitterness and resentment which drives the current move for independence. Again, the independence forces are not nearly so much anti-Communist as they are anti-Mainland.

But here's the final irony. Chen Shui-bian can argue that he is representing a sentiment felt by most of the people, since there are more Taiwanese natives on Taiwan then there are "Mainlanders." But what chance is there that Chen Shui-bian would now be the president of Taiwan if the Guomindang had never come there? Nobody, even the most radical proponents of independence, could rationally argue that this movement for independence would even be possible without the defacto independence Taiwan currently enjoys. And this must be credited to the Guomindang. Their presence on the island is the reason this is possible.

Well, I said all that to say that I really believe that we should support any group or party which publicly advocates peaceful reunification. In defense of this, let me juxtapose two individuals who figure prominently in the history of this problem. They are Zhou En-lai, and Jiang Jie-shi (Chiang Kai-shek). As different as those two men were, I focus on them, because I believe that they had one thing in common. They were both patriots. They were definitely on opposite sides in the civil war, but I still believe that both of them loved China, even though they had very different pictures of what China should become.

During the Sino-Japanese war, Chiang Kai-shek incurred the wrath of not only the Americans (especially Joseph Stillwell), but forces within his own movement, because he was dragging his feet about fighting the Japanese. Chiang always said that the Japanese were a disease of the skin, but the Communists were a disease of the heart. This issue came to a head in 1936 when Chiang was kidnapped by his own men in what is now known as the "Xi'an Incident." His release was negotiated by none other than Zhou En-lai, who, although no lover of the Guomindang, believed that Chiang needed to be kept alive because China needed him.

Whatever else can be said about Chiang Kai-shek, I don't think there is any doubt that he was a patriot who loved his country. And the country he loved was China, not Taiwan. You see, with both the Guomindang and the Communists it was always about China. This is not to say that he Taiwanese natives do not have a position to argue. I feel that their position should and must be considered. That I why I believe that the Americans have a role to play in ensuring that any move toward reunification be peaceful. But complete independence for Taiwan--I mean the establishment of Taiwan as a sovereign nation, is a position which is unrealistic and unhistorical.

In May of 1895, just after Taiwan had been ceded to Japan by the treaty of Shimonoseki, a few brave souls on Taiwan declared independence, set up the Taiwan Republic, and even flew a flag. But the Japanese troops arrived a few days later, and the dream was over. So Taiwan has been an independent country for no more than a few days in all of its history. Ironically, it has functioned as a defacto independent nation since 1949, but this is not true independence--Taiwan has always operated as part of the American sphere. Not a colony, to be sure, but kept "independent" by the US military. Because of this history, the Americans feel an obligation (and rightly so) to ensure that Taiwan is protected, but also have a very real obligation to back off from any direct interference other than to ensure that Taiwan is not bullied into an arrangement with the mainland that is repugnant to most of its people. It's a tough issue. There is only one China. But the status quo may have to exist for not a few years before a resolution is arrived at which meets the needs of all concerned.

Labels: Taiwan

The China Daily came out with a full two-page response to the U.S. State Department human rights report. In the past, this has always amused me, not because I didn't think China had a point, but because they usually missed it. For example, they always make a big deal about the way women are treated in America. This is laughable. I have known of Chinese women selling their bodies to get to America. And their report this year says that the United States is the only country in the world where former inmates are not allowed to vote. That's not quite true. Former inmates in China are not allowed to vote, either. In fact, no one in China is allowed to vote. So China's criticism of the State Department human rights report has not really been taken very seriously in the past.

This year, however, there has been a rather strong response from quite a number of countries. Especially in the light of the human rights issues created by the Iraq war, there has been lots and lots of criticism of the Americans from many corners of the world. And much of the criticism is warranted. The horrific treatment of prisoners on Guantanamo, where many, many prisoners are kept in small cages without the benefit of counsel, and without ever having been charged has upset human rights groups the world over.

America, which used to be seen as the guardian of human dignity, is gradually beginning to be viewed by many as one of the main violators of human rights, especially the rights of the powerless. America's moral authority has been tarnished by the atrocities at Abu Graib. Americans sometimes react to criticism of those human rights violations, because, after all, the perpetrators were apprehended and punished. Their reaction is, of course, justified in that sense, and since the perpetrators have been punished, the Americans can argue that these atrocities were an aberration. But for the prisoners of Guantanomo, there is no such excuse. Holding prisoners indefinitely without charge goes against everything the Americans claim to believe in. And that appalling abuse is clearly officially sanctioned. More and more, the State Department's pontifications about human rights are being regarded with a growing measure of disgust by the nations of the world.