A country with over a billion people and many minorities, some of them in conflict, should be considered a threat to international security. Asia has two such countries; only one is deemed dangerous.
India has a nuclear program, under no non-proliferation regime. North Korea and Iran are believed to be in a similar status. After India decided to place its nuclear development within some kind of legal framework and agreed on nuclear cooperation with the US, journalists, analysts and pundits never said that would be a threat to global stability. Objections were in terms of the possible interpretations that some members of the axis of evil could draw from that.
China increased its defense spending 14.9% compared to last year’s budget, according to official figures. A recent US Defense Department report claimed China’s growth in defense spending was higher. The US report was accompanied by a choir of calls for transparency and comments underscoring China’s growing assertiveness as a threat to global security.
India increased its defense spending 34% for the 2009 budget, according to Jane’s -a defense think tank. This fact was overlooked by most of the international press.
India has nuclear weapons, deep social inequalities, a steeply rising defense budget, rampant corruption and enough Islamic fundamentalism to make anyone uncomfortable. Regardless of the Pakistan connection, attacks like the ones on international hotels in Mumbai last summer aren’t possible in countries without extremism.
And India isn’t considered a threat to global security. Not only isn’t it a threat, its media coverage is that of a lovely colorful country. India’s chaos is colorful. Meanwhile, China’s more predictable behavior is dangerous.
Both realities look disturbingly similar, but the bigger the effort China places in managing its international image the worse it seems to do.
And this is the center of the problem, according to William Nobrega -CEO of Conrad Group, a consulting firm that follows major issues in both countries. He explained that China’s desire to manage its image underscores the fact that it’s not a free country, and this is very bad for publicity.
Meanwhile India grants its journalists rights and doesn’t have a security apparatus dedicated to alienating the media, local or foreign.
All journalists who work in China have some contact with Public Security Bureau officials, on unfriendly terms, while working in the field. At the end of the day, most of the reporting gets done regardless of the harassment. But sometimes the news professionals are detained. Like most people, journalists don’t enjoy spending time in jail.
As the ample amount of negative news on China shows, PSB officials can’t stop reporters. But they can help journalists add a negative spin to a general backdrop of repression, Goebels style propaganda and media controls. Lack of understanding that the best propaganda is no propaganda is costing China dearly. PR disasters follow PR disasters. Achievements can be counted -and are mildly applauded.
As Mr. Nobrega suggested, the more China attempts to regulate its coverage the greater the backlash from the international press.
It could be inferred that the greater the backlash, the greater the resentment in the country. And the greater the resentment the greater the will to control. And thus, an even greater backlash.
The last attempts by Chinese authorities to allow some coverage by international journalists after the riots in Xinjiang was a great leap forward. Unfortunately, some members of the local security forces had a great idea: arresting a group of Hong Kong journalists covering a demonstration.
The authorities wanted to excuse themselves for the nip alleging the journalists were inciting violence.
Fortunately, few PSB officials carry fire arms. There would be many a shot foot among the ranks.
No comments:
Post a Comment