Posts
In one recent case, when Ren Haiquan, the deputy president of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Academy of Military Science spoke to his contemporaries from 15 different countries in a restaurant in Melbourne, he said: “Some countries ignored the consequences of World War II and challenged the post-war order.” Ren probably did not foresee that he would be labeled as “hawkish Chinese” by Reuters as a result of his words.
Reuters pointed out that the Ren case was not an isolated example, and indicated a fundamental shift in China’s political and diplomatic policies.
Western think tanks have long been engaged in studying the phenomenon of the “hawkish Chinese” and some U.S research institutes have undertaken more complex analysis of Chinese strategic intentions. This, in part, is in response to certain changes. Top Chinese military officials, whether retired or not, used to simply give the party line irrespective of their personal opinions. Today’s officials are different.
Chinese military officials who have been involved in exchanges with the U.S. have also commented on how information documenting their speeches and background were freely available.
“In the online library of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), you can find your own documents, including, age, and family and, in particular, transcripts of your speeches, which go into much more detail than domestic versions,” said an anonymous military official who went on two military exchanges to the U.S.
The CIA evaluates its Chinese counterparts by browsing through their works to gauge whether or not the Chinese military official displays any potential for insightful independent thought. In addition, software exists to distinguish the characters and ambitions of Chinese political figures.
The CIA and US Defense Department have compiled various psychological analyses on eminent political figures, including the late Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez and late North Korean president Kim Jong-il.
Foreign Policy reported in its October 2011 edition that documents relating to prominent political and military figures are easy to access, even though some of the figures involved are highly confidential.
Adolf Hitler was the first such figure to be documented in the 1940s, and a document compiled by Henry A. Murray, an influential professor of psychology at Harvard University, described him as being prone to homophobia and suffering from an Oedipus complex.
Political documents compiled by the CIA are growing. Any Chinese official who talks tough on the U.S. would be branded as hawkish. Targeted individuals can also be elevated to a higher category if their speeches or publications are regarded as “smart”.
When China and the U.S. resumed their military exchange at the end of Sep. 2010, the New York Times attributed the rising tension between the two countries to the rise of hawkish Chinese military officials.
According to the report, young Chinese military officials regard the U.S. as their enemy and believe that the U.S. will always oppose the rise of China.
Semantics, however, plays a part in how the term “hawkish” may be misunderstood. In the U.S. hawkish refers to those who favor military action rather than peaceful discussion in order to solve a problem, whereas the meaning is somewhat different in China.
“I don’t like talking tough for no reason, but neither do I speak softly when challenged,” said Qiao Liang, major general of China’s air force.
He continued: “There would be no hope for the country if its military officials are vulnerable to challenges. Neither would it protect its interests if its military is always aggressive.”
Qiao rejects the moniker of hawkish Chinese, but genuine hawkish Chinese do exist. “I don’t deny our PLA are hawkish Chinese. But that does not mean we are aggressive,” said major general Luo Yuan.
“Who else will talk about wars if the military avoids the topic? If the military does not prepare well for war they are irresponsible and acting in an unconstitutional manner,” he continued.
Most Americans are familiar with hawkish Chinese figures through their speeches and works. However, misunderstandings in meaning occur due to cultural differences and inaccurate translations.
Qiao and his colleague Wang Xianghui published a retrospective of the Gulf War which, on its publication in the U.S. was found to have many translation errors. The book should have been titled “War beyond limits”, but was instead called “Unrestricted warfare”, and the phrase “wars and tactics amid globalization” was mistranslated as “China’s master plan to destroy America” on Newsmax.
One result of this was that “Unrestricted Warfare”, published on the first anniversary of 9/11 was introduced to the United States Military Academy of West Point and the United States Naval Academy as a textbook on how terrorists attack, leading Qiao to believe that his book had been distorted.
The article was first published in Chinese in “Southern Weekend” and translated by Wu Jin.
No comments:
Post a Comment