Surely worth noting! Guess what the issue is?
Prime Minister John Howard has resisted strong public pressure from US President George Bush to press China over human rights.
Quelle surprise!
27 Responses to “Howard disagrees with Bush”
Leave a Reply
Please read the comments policy. If you would like an icon beside your comment, please register a Gravatar.
There is a Comments Preview function below the typing box which activates when you start typing.
Disgraceful, Prime Minister.
But completely unsurprising.
I wouldn’t go that far, Nic. Howard liberated the East Timorese. Labor signed off on their genocide.
You’re in a combative mode tonight, C.L. That’s rubbish, but what’s it got to do with this thread, pray tell?
He’s quite prepared to fuck all of us over, but he knows better than to “fuck with the Wongs“.
Nic diversified the topic by reference to the prime ministerial record. I was merely pointing out that Gough gave the greenlight to the invasion. There followed an attempted cultural genocide - occasioned by mass murder and the assassination of Australian nationals. That was the same year, I think, that Gough voiced his opposition to receiving Vietnamese boat people.
Not particularly combative. I’m reading and listening to the cricket on the wireless!
It’s on sbs, isn’t it, C.L.? I was just about to go and watch. My stepfather, God rest his soul, always used to watch the cricket on Channel 9 with the sound turned down so he could listen to the superior commentary on the wireless. But I think sbs has the Beeb feed, so we’ll be spared the inanities of Ozcommentators. Though I think Benaud is part of the team for this test. Might be fun to try and translate Geoff Boycott’s accent again if he’s still in the game.
Right, forgive me if I don’t check in for a while - off to watch cricket!
I was more referring to Chen and other occasions where the government has turned a blind eye to whats going on in China for the sake of trade.
Australia are getting pantsed.
I can’t help thinking this will make for a better series, so the last bastion of my patriotism is currently in abeyance.
’s.t.r. ..’
‘a.y.a. …’
‘Straya!’
5-97 at lunch, not good.
try 6 for…
the PRC has in recent years become more belligerent in its foreign policy and more repressive in its domestic policy. You can see my Formosan sympathies here, but I think it’s in dealing with Beijing where we really need to be standing side by side with Uncle Sam. India should also be a natural partner in preventing our neighbours becoming client states of (mainland) China to the detriment of our own interests. PJK had it spot on in bringing the US into Asia-Pacific affairs so as to bolster aussie influence.
I’m not exactly sure what you think Australia is capable of doing with regard to China. We can try and embarrass them by shouting about Human Rights, but they’ll just ignore us and quietly shift their commodities contracts elsewhere in Africa or South America. The best way to bring liberty to the chinese people is to give them the economic strength to demand it from their government.
It’s not like we’re abandoning the Americans to the mercy of the big bad PRC - the yanks know we have a delicate situation and they know where the current govt would stand if the proverbial hit the fan. But no one wants that to happen, so we play the game until then.
Or could it be that maybe Howard just likes to act in what he thinks are the best interests of the nation. Surely not.
Quelle surprise!
So it’s all about making a buck, is it, Fred?
If reference to labour standards, including the core ILO conventions on the right to organise and collectively bargain, is good enough for our trade agreement with the US, then it’s damn well good enough for our trade agreement with China. What’s the point of dropping those clauses where they’re most needed?
I was going to make a comment on the cricket but I think I’ll start up another thread.
Ok - future cricket comments can go on this thread.
Is that right, Rob? How absurd can the Howard mob get?
Yes - in many respects, making a buck is an important consideration when the alternative is to chuck a tanty at China, and achieve absolutley nothing.
The inclusion of ILO standards in an FTA will be met with eiother outright refusual - thus scuppering and benefit for us, or alternatively will be meaningless due to a lack of enforcement.
This is not an either/or situation. We are not going to achieve any improvement in HR in China by berating them about it. The question is, can we work out a way of taking adavantage of their increasing economic strength.
And how would you suggest that proceed, practically, Fred?
The only outcome I can see from the Chinese FTA given the absence of ILO standards is the probable destruction of more of our manufacturing industry.
I think we should be very mindful of the reality that our manufacturing industry as we know it is in terminal decline. Not a pleasant outcome for all involved, but very difficult to avoid without forcing the Australian consumer or taxpayer to prop it up.
More importantly though - that’s a very different question than was originally raised. It’s a question of how to best manage our economy in a world that we can’t hide from anymore - as opposed to some naive belief that we can bring liberty to China by demanding that they bow to our concerns.
Well, if we’re interested in “bringing liberty to China” we might do something about what’s going on with their harrassment of Australian citizens in Australia who practice Falun Gong, for a start.
what rot.
The chinese specialise in manufacturing that are highly labour intensive.
understandable given that their labour rates are so low.
Any companies that go under we shouldn’t be supporting anyway.
This is merely a discredited argument forst used agianst the Japanese and then the countries of Asia.
You are spot on about Chinese agents in Australia, Mark. We allow the PRC to deprive our own citizens of their liberties, we hear from defectors that Beijing’s policy is to use trade to shoehorn our China position as far from that of our allies as possible. The Downer doctrine is to play right into their hands, to go the full kowtow. Downer has even been making speeches saying that we’re probably not going to lift a finger for Free China (aka Taiwan) if they get invaded because hey, it’s probably their fault in the first place that their citizens are being deprived of their liberty. Contrast to PJK and Evans 10 years ago, saying publicly that cooperation with our neighbours was meant at least in part as a counter to increasing Chinese dominance in our region. And compare to the China of today, where such an approach is even more warranted.
When people talk about an FTA with China, I can’t help but think of the 250,000 Chinese the government keeps in forced labour camps, held without charge let alone trial. Obviously we as a middle power in a different hemisphere can’t fix that tomorrow, but at the very least should be trying to keep goods manufactured in gulags or from inputs made in gulags out of our country. Forget about jobs and trade for a moment, surely we in Australia can say that we just don’t believe in slavery and that we won’t be party to it? How would an FTA undermine our ability to stand up on something as basic as this?
Interesting to see the difference in how Chen was treated by the Australian government and the US Congress too, James.
Yet another interesting perspective:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/a-menace-looms-for-best-of-mates/2005/07/21/1121539094690.html