The New York Times Issues Venomous Editorial on China-Myanmar Relations

Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 27 January 2015
by (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Darius Vukasinovic. Edited by Helaine Schweitzer.
The New York Times recently released a scathing editorial that was directed against China. The article in question asserted that China was engaging in the "large scale plunder" of Myanmar's treasured natural resources and in "blatant acts of theft" as the result of “crony capitalism” between the countries. The article outlines how China is taking Myanmar's mahogany resources and threatening the area's wildlife with "extinction." The article even blamed China for the death of one protester who was killed by the Myanmar police. The article, written under the title of “The Plunder of Myanmar” accused China of using predatory pressure tactics to achieve its economic aims.

The whole article reads like a call to arms against China's trade with Myanmar. It paints China as a villain and Myanmar as a naive child that has played into China's grasp. U.S. elites are acting as though they are heroes who are on a mission to rescue Myanmar and enforce justice upon the evil overlord, China.

It's interesting to note that The New York Times hasn't tried to suggest that China is engaging in some form of "neo-colonialism" with Myanmar; why have they stayed their pens from issuing this charge? For a long time, public opinion in both the U.S. and Europe has held that China has been out to plunder and extort the resources of developing nations. We know for a fact that the ancestors of modern Europeans and Americans also, for a long time, traded in slaves and sucked both the treasures and the blood from the various colonies they established abroad. Perhaps, then, they see China as being just as ruthless as their own ancestors were?

There are, without any doubt, some traders in Myanmar who are engaging in illicit activities, but the Chinese government’s position has always been that it is strongly opposed to any form of destructive exploitation and the smuggling and trafficking of endangered wildlife species. The Chinese government has also been cracking down harshly on all areas of the illegal narcotics trade. A tiny percentage of Chinese people in Myanmar engages in illicit acts, but The New York Times has ignored this and decided instead to cast all Chinese as bad people. It has deliberately misrepresented China in the hopes of using its influence to stir up animosity towards Chinese people living in Myanmar society.

The New York Times article focused upon issues of human rights, but does it honestly think that the world is blind to the effects of the United States' activities in Afghanistan, Iraq and other developing nations? Has anyone at The New York Times ever published a human rights article in response to the civilian deaths caused by U.S. activities in those countries? How about Myanmar? It was once a prosperous nation, but U.S. sanctions against it fueled the country's degradation into a state with few human rights, and even less in the way of basic, material needs for its people.

The New York Times team should reveal both the historical and the present relationship between the West and developing nations for what it is, and not gloss over the facts. Colonial rule of the West over developing nations lasted for centuries, and many of those old colonies are still penniless today. The West of today adopts a piecemeal attitude towards developing nations now; businesses come in, open mines, take what is valuable, then leave the country in a mess while it tries to come to grips with the deformities of the Western economic model.

Some Westerners still hold onto the old mindset that sees helping the developing nations as a sort of "white man's burden." The New York Times exemplifies this in its attitude of superiority, and in how it tries to advise Myanmar to "take a step back, away from China." Its true intent is to drive a wedge between the Myanmar and Chinese peoples.

Many of China's large-scale investment strategies in Myanmar, such as the Letpadaung copper mine, have met with fierce resistance. Aung Sun Suu Kyi and other politicians have regrets about this, but the Western media have been lending their power to deleterious effect in these matters. The West lacks the financial power to engage in large scale investments in Myanmar, and now it also wants to try to derail China's investment plans. While Myanmar deserves to be modernized and brought up to date, many in the West would rather see it remain impoverished and backwards. This really is inhumane.

In the interests of developing profitable trade relations between Myanmar and China, both countries need to focus on their mutual aspirations for the future while being vigilant against the provocations of the West. China is willing to work with Myanmar to help fortify peace and prosperity within the country, because doing so is within China's best interests. China has no interest in letting itself be surrounded by countries that have abandoned the path to modernization. Moreover, The New York Times, with its angle on how China is commanding Myanmar like a "pawn," needs to be seen not as an entity that is concerned with social progress amid China's neighbors, but more as a force that is concerned with how to manipulate those neighbors into taking down China.

As China's neighbor, Myanmar needs to avoid looking at China through the lens given to it by other external powers. Instead, it needs to maintain its independent soul, and see The New York Times' ploys for the cunning devices that they are.


纽约时报》24日刊发一篇以刺耳语言抨击中国的社评。该文称中国正对缅甸宝贵的自然资源发动“大规模抢掠”,所用的是“公然盗窃”和“权贵资本主义”方式。文章历数中国对缅甸从红木到野生动物资源的“灭绝性”破坏,并把缅甸警察打死一名抗议者归罪中国。文章以“缅甸人民”的名义呼吁遏制这样的“掠夺”和“榨取”。
  这篇就差没对中国“骂娘”的社评很像是《纽约时报》声讨中缅贸易的檄文。它把中国描述成恶棍,而缅甸又傻又愚昧,被中国玩弄于股掌之间。美国精英们则是看穿中国把戏并且为那些愚弱民族主持公道的正义力量。
  《纽约时报》这次没给中国戴“新殖民主义”的帽子,算不算是笔下留情?长时间以来,美欧舆 论把中国在第三世界国家的经济活动通通看成搜刮和巧取豪夺,这大概是因为他们的祖先曾经倒卖黑奴,见什么抢什么,吸干了很多殖民地的血,他们就认为中国一 定像他们的祖宗一样心狠手辣。
  中国某些商贩在缅甸的经济活动的确存在一些问题,但必须指出,中国政府对诸如破坏性开采资 源、贩卖野生动物及走私珍贵树种等,都是坚决反对的。对于贩毒,中国更是严厉打击。极少数中国人在缅从事不道德活动与中国的对缅政策完全是两码事,《纽约 时报》故意混为一谈,显然是想通过其影响力在缅甸社会散布厌华仇华情绪。
  《纽约时报》在文章中强调人权,但这些年美国在从阿富汗到伊拉克等广大发展中国家都干了什么,第三世界的公众不是瞎子。美军在那些国家炸死了多少平民百姓,《纽约时报》为那些冤死者的人权发过一篇社评吗?曾经非常富庶的缅甸这些年陷入落后,保障人权缺少起码的物质基础,美国的对缅制裁实际上一直是推波助澜的外力。
  《纽约时报》的团队应当很清楚西方的繁荣与它们对第三世界的盘剥是什么关系,西方 列强对殖民地的统治及控制延续了几个世纪,但很多那样的地方依然一贫如洗。西方对那里的发展是掐尖式的,开小煤窑式的,总是挑最肥的地方下手,往往留下的 是一盘残局和严重倚赖西方的畸形经济。
  一些西方人至今对第三世界怀有老爷心理,《纽约时报》这篇社评摆出的就是高高在上的救世主架势。它在教训缅甸人“离中国远点”,试图给中缅之间打下新的楔子。
  中国在缅投资的莱比塘铜矿等大型项目遇到阻力,连昂山素季等政治家都感到遗憾,而西方媒体力量在这当中起了很坏作用。西方如今没钱在缅甸大规模投资,中国的投资它们又想方设法搅黄。缅甸就应长期与现代化无缘,保持某些西方人愿意看到的质朴与贫穷?这实在很不人道。
  中缅之间的贸易问题需我们双方认真解决,希望缅甸方面对西方的挑拨保持警惕。中国 很愿意与缅甸一起繁荣,缅甸的和平与稳定符合中国的利益。中国决不想被遭到现代化遗弃的国家包围。而《纽约时报》这样的机构在把缅甸等中国邻国当“棋子” 看,它们最关心的不是缅甸等国的社会进步,而是这些国家怎么变才能最大限度地消耗中国。
  作为中国的邻国,缅甸需要很小心不按照外部大国的利益逻辑审视它与中国的关系。缅甸只有保持心灵上的独立自主,才能看透《纽约时报》这样的“仗义执言”里究竟藏着多少狡诈。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Germany: Ukraine War: Cease-fire Still Out of Reach

Australia: Trump’s Tariffs Were Already Ever-Changing. Now, Court Fights Add to the Uncertainty

Australia: Which Conflicts of Interest? Trump Doubles Down on Crypto

Topics

Germany: Trump for the Charlemagne Prize!

Canada: It Turns Out Trump’s Tariffs Were Illegal After All

Australia: Trump’s Tariffs Were Already Ever-Changing. Now, Court Fights Add to the Uncertainty

Austria: Soon Putin Will Have Successfully Alienated Trump

Canada: Scorning Trump’s Golden Dome Would Be a Mistake

Related Articles

Hong Kong: The Lessons of World War II: The Real World Importance of Resisting Hegemony

Mexico: The Trump Problem

Taiwan: Making America Great Again and Taiwan’s Crucial Choice

Venezuela: Vietnam: An Outlet for China

Germany: US Companies in Tariff Crisis: Planning Impossible, Price Increases Necessary