Letters to the Editor (December 27, 2004)

China ban not unlike situation in West

I was astounded to read that no foreign media would be given access to Chinese officials to attend the recent conference in Beijing (T.N.M., Nov. 26-Dec. 2/04). I applaud your response in boycotting the conference.

On the other hand, we sometimes forget just how fragile freedom of speech and press are, even in the West. There is even serious talk in North America and Europe about restricting access to the Internet.

During the recent destruction of Fallujah, Iraq, by American forces, all foreign and Iraqi press coverage was banned. We were exposed only to heavily censored media reports by those imbedded with U.S. forces.

While the Chinese restrictions are preposterous, unfortunately, sometimes our own press restrictions are no less odious.

R.H. Posma

Oshawa, Ont.

Western ‘bias’ against China

I read your article on China (T.N.M., Nov. 26-Dec. 2/04 and reprinted in the National Post on Dec. 9), and you are biased.

I believe this was your first trip to China, and when you arrived at the Beijing conference, you were treated in a way in which you were not used to. You wrote that “the very heart of Canadian mining is on the verge of being gobbled up by a brutal, totalitarian government hostile to Western values of personal and economic liberty.”

The items you mention in your article are all true. I am from China and I know about the problems there.

As a Westerner, it’s difficult for you to understand the way things work in China. But I believe your inherent bias makes objective commentary impossible.

China is changing. It will take a long time for China to be accepted by the West. The Chinese, both in the government and the private sector, often don’t know how to handle the Western media. What you experienced in China actually is much better than it was in a previous era.

I understand your position on the proposed takeover of Noranda and Falco by China Minmetals. But China is not out to make enemies.

In the same issue of the National Post in which your letter was published, there was a story about the Chinese firm Lenovo buying the personal computer unit of IBM. It’s a US$1.75-billion deal. Lenovo clearly states that no jobs will be cut either in the U.S. or Canada. No matter what’s happening in China day to day, the Chinese will respect Western values when they do business here and in Europe.

You ask: “What employees will stay and who will go?” And for those who stay: “What compromise will they be expected to make?” You are overly concerned. Business is business, and politics is politics. Your biased and politically oriented commentary won’t help Canadian businesses looking to do business with the Chinese. China is a big market nobody can afford to ignore. If you want to wait until that moment, when China becomes completely Westernized, then it will be too late.

I believe the best way to change China is to do business with China. With business ties come power and influence. Getting pissed off and leaving is very immature.

Feng Huo

Brantford, Ont.

Deal could be used as political leverage

Regarding your recent coverage of China Minmetals’ bid for Noranda, there is room for debate as to whether state-owned versus corporate takeovers should be acceptable to Canadians.

Certainly some foreign corporations are no better world citizens than some state-controlled enterprises. And, again, there are bound to be numerous state-owned pension funds and state-owned enterprises (mainly European) that already have a presence in the Canadian corporate landscape.

But you are right in asking “With which countries do we, as Canadians, wish to do business?”

The sore issue of Tibet comes to mind. China’s invasion has been responsible for the tragic death of about one-fifth of the Tibetan population. Incessantly, every day, overwhelming numbers of Chinese immigrants flood into Tibet, while Chinese “education” bans Tibetan language, history and religion — in short, a systematic government policy of cultural and racial extermination.

If China wishes to do business with the democratic and civilized world, is it too much to ask for some democracy and civility in return?

The Noranda takeover presents us with an opportunity. As I recall, when the Dalai Lama visited our country a few months ago, he asked Canada to become the mediator, the broker for a peaceful compromise between himself, as just representative of Tibet, and China. Should not any takeover of Canada’s Noranda be subject to the successful conclusion of such mediation?

Surely an end to China’s barbaric occupation of Tibet would be a sign that China is willing, and eager, to take part (and do business) in a civilized world. With China’s willingness to be a world citizen, Canadians might well find it advantageous to welcome another investor in our country.

Kirk Tougas

Vancouver