Welcome to Huaren


Member Login
User Name:
487 Mitcham Road
Mitcham 3132
Tel 61-3-98735050
Fax 61-3-98743618



kschua portrait 2006.jpg

President's Message

Season's Greetings to all our readers and supporters.

The world is but one nation and its citizens one people.

I am very pleased with the outcome of Paris COP21 Climate Conference. Almost all nations around the planet are represented one way or another. Many nations' top leadership attended the Conference. It is so important to have such dialogue in order to save our planet that we share and live in. Pollution of the planet of one kind or another including wars, affect everyone of us no matter where you live.

It is through genuine dialogue like this in future that we are going to save the planet, our world and our people.

Australia and many other nations have very successful multicultural, multiracial, multi-religious national policies that allow peoples of different cultures, ethnic and racial origins, religions etc to live in genuine harmony. All these need to be implemented properly and secured and protected by civilised laws.

It will never be achieved if human beings try to solve the differences through the use of force and see who can kill the other first to gain the upper hand.

United Nations and leadership of the world should really look at the root causes of all the conflicts around the world at present and try to solve them through face to face dialogue and the rule of law.

Who do not wish to live their lives among families, friends and fellow citizens in happiness, peace and harmony?

It is not the problem of money. It is the mindset that counts. It is the civilised education, behaviour and adhere to rule of laws that count. It is also mutual respect of differences and sit down and discuss them that will eventually give everyone a solution for living in happiness, peace and harmony.

I hope these are food for thought for Christmas and New Year 2016

May I take this opportunity to thank all our volunteers for their contributions and support throughout the year.

May I wish you all a very Merry Christmas and a safe, peaceful and harmonious New Year 2016.

Dr Ka Sing Chua


From: john.lee@minister.com
To: info@barackobama.com
CC: 1503@ohchr.org; unic@uno.de; coi@un.org; spmtlim@gmail.com; unnews@un.org; un.wire@smartbrief.com; brazilemb@brazil.org.au; Canberra@mofa.gov.ae; Embassy.canberra@mfa.gov.eg; embecu@bigpond.net.au; HTCM@yandex.ru; embassy.canberra@mfa.gov.tr; canberra.enquiries@fconet.fco.gov.uk; gremb.can@mfa.gr; embassy@venezuelanembassy.com.au; Canberra@diplobel.fed.be; cnbra@international.gc.ca; can@minbuza.nl; info.canberra@foreign.gov.za; info@saudiembassy.net; emb.canberra@maec.es; vertretung@can.rep.admin.ch; usrsaustralia@state.gov; canberra.australia@mfa.gov.bn; protocol@japan.org.au; consular.jakarta@dfat.gov.au; cambodianembassy@ozemail.com.au; hciisi@bigpond.com; indonemb@kbri-canberra.org.au; passport-au@mofat.go.kr; consular@malaysia.org.au; canberra.pe@dfa.gov.ph; contact@philippineconsulate.com.au; singhc_cbr@sgmfa.gov.sg; vembassy@webone.com.au; chinaemb_au@mfa.gov.cn; mike_teo@mfa.gov.sg; kundu@pngcanberra.org; eu.brussels@mfa.no; consul@philconsulate.com.au; ministry@mid.ru; kevin.rudd.mp@aph.gov.au; support@govuk.zendesk.com; Mackay.P@parl.gc.ca; Kontakt@info.diplo.de; sar@mfa.gov.il; webmaster@mofa.go.jp; web@mofat.go.kr; webmaster@mfa.gov.cn; foreign.news@thetimes.co.uk; customerservice@outsiderclub.com; 'sinacsc@vip.sina.com'; wct@mail.chinatimes.com.tw; info@climateprotect.org; lawsociety@lsuc.on.ca; public.div@asean.org; info@clubaleman.com.ar; clubvina@vtr.net; bimasena@cbn.net.id; nujindia@ndf.vsnl.net.in; resa@kamulodge.com; joniston@hotmail.com; al6000@gmail.com; info@pima.org.nz; leslie@sph.com.sg; samoanwriter@yahoo.com; kambenga2000@yahoo.com; fccthai@loxinfo.co.th; oumastephen@hotmail.com; info@nuj.org.uk; ijuindia@yahoo.com; snuj@ntuc.org.sg; info@ned.org; americas@rsf.org; scoop@huffingtonpost.com; citydesk@worldjournal.com; contact@independent.org; press@rttv.ru; ; info@asiasociety.org; ean@ft.com; editor@ibtimes.com; Editor@Think-Israel.org; editorial@dailymailonline.co.uk; emeinel@fairpoint.net; jenni_glenn@sproutonline.com; letters@dailymail.co.uk; newsdesk@thenational.ae; newsmax@reply.newsmax.com; newsroom@presstv.ir; tassau@bigpond.net.au; welcome@russiancouncil.ru; 'yourpic@bbc.co.uk'; activistpost@mail1.mcsignup.com; counterpunch@counterpunch.org; eedition@jpost.com; eutimes@gmail.com; frontdesk@ubcpress.ca; info@historians.org; Alexandra.bruce18@gmail.com; contact@independent.ie; crgeditor@yahoo.com; emaurice@presseurop.eu; info@journal-neo.org; kwn.webmaster@gmail.com; letters@enquirer.com; mehdiinheaven@gmail.com; NewsLetter@afp.com; notifications@opednews.com; observer.letters@observer.co.uk; peggy.edoire@gemalto.com; redaction@lecanardenchaine.fr; ti-media@firstlook.org; yournews@nzherald.co.nz; newswire@aap.com.au; ventures@ansa.it; info@avaaz.org; info@indymedia.be; ejohnson28@bloomberg.net; andy@borowitzreport.com; worldwise@cnbc.com; editor@commondreams.org; info@fijilive.com; newsroom@nationalfreepress.ca; comments@globeandmail.ca; letters@globeandmail.ca; editor@gulf-times.com; feedback@haaretz.co.il; contact@icij.org; comercial@intereconomia.com; letters@iht.com; communication.itv@canal-plus.com; help@mondotimes.com; letters@nytimes.com; editor@singtao.co.uk; breakingnews@starledger.com; emails@emails.thenation.com; letters@the-sun.co.uk; nova@novatv.nl; info@dw-world.de; contact@tv7.com; wsjsupport@wsj.com; martin.baron@washpost.com; adeborchgrave@washingtontimes.com; redaktion@welt.de; charlesb@russia-insider.com; richard.orange@thelocal.com; haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk; poststelle@bpra.bund.de; editor@dimsum.co.uk; tips@hotair.com; gregf@gregfelton.com; endirect@humanite.presse.fr; lettertoed@thestar.ca; newseditor@independent.co.uk; pilgereditor@gmail.com; media@mostra.com; help@dsg.gov.ae; readers@forbes.com; info@glesinpoint.com; editor@thestandard.com.hk; publications@rsis.edu.sg; 21cbhad@21cbh.com; ad@huanqiu.com; argos@newsletter.argos.cn; berthelsen@asiasentinel.com; cindyliu@chinadailyusa.com; cnanews@mail.cna.com.tw; cnaweb2009@gmail.com; crieng@cri.com.cn; editor@cdnews.com.tw; editor@china.org.cn; Editor@project-syndicate.org; englishnews@chosun.com; englishnews@mail.cna.com.tw; evnn@vietnamnet.vn; info@freebao.com; info@seattlechinesetimes.com; newsdesk@vnsmail.com; nhakran@posttoday.com; pno6RCJECqcC_U@xiaonei-inc.com; president@hurun.net; qiaoxun@qiaoxun.org; readers@chinadailyusa.com; robert@cdnews.com.tw; service@want-daily.com; tkfd_news@tkfd.or.jp; visitshandong@gmail.com; xhslwc@126.com; zhangyunbi@chinadaily.com.cn; letters@dhakatribune.com; stvweb@stv.sh.cn; feedback@wechat.com; info@dihkj.or.jp; kni@kyodonews.com; newsroom@donga.com; partnership@dwnews.com; service@docin.com; tkpnews@takung.cn; webmaster@mail.chinapost.com.tw; occult@oriental.com.hk; advertise@boxun.com; atnextsub@nextmedia.com; chinauslink3@yahoo.com; editor@japantoday.com; eeditor@fz.com; feedback@expressindia.com; info@chinese.net.nz; ; mao.ding@me.com; mingpao@mingpao.com; news@ts.on.cc; qiushiservice@mail.cibtc.com.cn; shakai@yomiuri.com; wuqinqin@hkmnews.com; xhgm@xhgmw.org; zhaoy@southcn.com; news@appledaily.com.tw; webmaster@info.atnext.com; enquiry@on.cc; postbag@bangkokpost.net; letterseditor@bruneitimes.com.bn; newsroom@caijing.com.cn; chinanews@cctv.com; newseditor@channelnewsasia.com; info@mail.chinapost.com.tw; editorplan@mail.chinatimes.com.tw; services@mail.cna.com.tw; newsdesk@dwnews.com; ed@sinoquebec.com; editor@globaltimes.com.cn; en.gmw.cn@gmail.com; hxuc@sina.com; mirandaliang319@gmail.com; international.adsales@indiatimes.co.in; austrasia@iprimus.com.au; editor@indomedia.com.au; master@koreanews.com; kt@koreatimes.co.kr; sydkoh@gmail.com; legendmagazine666@yahoo.com.hk; info@gcs.gov.mo; editor@Malaysia-Chronicle.com; aar26@columbia.edu; editor.mishar@nstp.com.my; eng-info@kcna.co.jp; letters@nstp.com.my; opinion@globaltimes.com.cn; quhong@pc181.com; keebeng@penangmonthly.com; englishpd@163.com; liug@pheonixcnetv.com; editor@philstar.net.ph; newskhi@jang.com.pk; press@disqus.com; english@ryukyushimpo.co.jp; peter.dedi@scmp.com; emaster@eastday.com; szdaily@szszd.com.cn; info@singtao.com; singtao@wanadoo.fr; jubao@contact.sohu.com; letters@taipeitimes.com; service@taiwannews.com.tw; Martintsai@onebox.com; editor@thestandard.com; editor@thestar.com.my; sphcorp@sph.com.sg; webmaster@nextmedia.com; info@weiboenglish.com; xlttnews@vip.sina.com; netcenter@wenhuibao.com.hk; info@wenxuecity.com; zbyanlun@sph.com.sg; zjiang@barstow.edu; amyhe@chinadailyusa.com; letters@thehindu.co.in; press@scribd.com; webcs@1-apple.com.tw; webmaster@thejakartapost.com; james_kristanto@yahoo.com; editor@boxun.com; editor@mail.chinatimes.com.tw; info@asiantribune.com; editorial@thejakartapost.com; opinion@japantimes.co.jp; ngs_hong@tm.net.my; stforum@sph.com.sg; webmaster@xinhua.org; dy@yomiuri.com; en@chinanews.com.cn; Frank.ching@gmail.com; mediacorpnewshub@mediacorp.com.sg; news@ifeng.com; teddy.ng@scmp.com; ethics@imf.org; irccanb@uunet.com.au; aulca@unhcr.org; ronaynecasimiro.lara@hq.nato.int; infor@zim.gov.zw; chi@np.org.tw; citizen_reply@edcc.ec.europa.eu; confirmation@createsend.com; Congressman.Reyes@mail.house.gov; ceo@ceo.gov.hk; InternetPost@bundesregierung.de; Coca.alina@hq.nato.int; content@mail.gov.cn; webmaster@china.gov.cn; webmaster@cwd.go.kr; protocolo@planalto.gov.br; stm@stm.dk; dppforeign@gmail.com; info@dublin.ie; press.president@consilium.europa.eu; info@forum-asia.org; secretary-general@kmt.org.tw; ; webmaster@gov.ru; duty_press@aprt.gov.ru; info@pm.gov.au; ppm@pmo.gov.my; hcinfo@parliament.uk; pm@pm.gc.ca; webeditor@royal.gsx.gov.uk; 'contact@republicanpartyusa.com'; singov_webmaster@mica.gov.sg
Subject: Re: Why China rejects Philippine, Japanese, US claims on South China Sea issue
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 18:37:45 +0800

Dear President Obama,

Would you like to comment, please?

John Lee
New Cross-strait Alliance.

Facts & news not widely reported by Western & other English language media : Why China rejects Philippine, Japanese, US claims on South China Sea issue
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 20:05:43 +1100

Chinese Foreign Minister's address at the ASEAN Regional Forum which is available to all the media but somehow not reported in western media ... Certainly not, as I‘m aware, in any of the Australian press.

<http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/935974.sht> http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/935974.sht

Why China rejects Philippine, Japanese, US claims on South China Sea issue

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi made clear China's stance on the South China Sea issue on Thursday, rejecting the claims of the Philippines, Japan and United States.
Speaking at the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), Wang said China felt imperative to speak the truth and make clear its stance as the South China Sea issue was raised by some countries at the ARF and the East Asia Summit Foreign Ministers' Meeting earlier.
"First of all, the general situation in the South China Sea is stable, and the possibility of a major conflict simply doesn't exist," he said. "Therefore, China is against any unconstructive words and deeds that exaggerate differences and stand-off, and create tensions. They do not comply with facts at all."

China has the same concern as other countries over freedom of navigation in the South China Sea, as most of China's merchandise is transported by the Sea, the Chinese minister said, noting that freedom of navigation there is very important to China, too.
Wang said, "China has always held the stance that parties enjoy freedom of navigation and flyover in the South China Sea according to international laws. China is willing to work with other parties in keeping freedom of navigation and flyover in the South China Sea."
With regard to the disputes over the Nansha Islands, Wang pointed out, "It is an old problem."
Islands in the South China Sea are China's territories as China is the first country to discover and name the islands, he emphasized.

The Chinese minister said this year marks the 70th anniversary of the victory of World War II, and 70 years ago China took back Nansha and Xisha Islands, which had been illegally occupied by Japan.

Highlighting that the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation, on which the post-war international order is founded, demanded Japan return the territories it had stolen from China, Wang said.

"The naval ships that were used by China to take back the islands were provided by the United States, our ally," he said, adding, "These facts must have been recorded in your respective archives.""Till the 1970s, some countries began to invade and occupy islands and reefs following reports on oil reserves in the South China Sea, infringing the legal rights and interests of China. According to international laws, China is entitled to defend its own sovereignty, and rights and interests, and to make sure that the illegal actions infringing China's legal rights and interests wouldn't happen again."

Wang said the Philippines had failed to tell the truth when raising the South China Sea issue.

He said the Philippines alleges that Huangyan Island and other related islands and reefs in the South China Sea belong to the Philippines; however, the Treaty of Paris (1898), the Treaty of Washington (1900) and the Convention between the United States and Great Britain (1930) state clearly that the west limit of the Philippine territory is 118 degrees east longitude, while Huangyan Island and Nansha Islands are obviously not Philippine territories as they are located completely west to the 118 degrees east longitude.

After independence, the Philippines' domestic laws and relevant treaties have all reaffirmed the legal effects of the above- mentioned three treaties and once again expressively defined that the west limit of the Philippine territory is 118 degrees east longitude, Wang said.
"But after 1970, the Philippines illegally occupied eight islands and reefs in China's Nansha Islands through four military operations. That's how the territorial disputes arose between China and the Philippines," Wang said.

In the Ren'ai Reef, which is a constituent part of China's Nansha Islands, the Philippines illegally ran an old warship aground in May 1999 at that feature on the pretext of "technical difficulties." China has made repeated representations to the Philippines, demanding that the latter immediately tow away the vessel. The Philippines, for its part, had on numerous occasions made explicit undertaking to China to tow away the vessel grounded due to "lack of parts."

Afterwards, the Philippines told China that it would not become the first country that breaches the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC).

However, Wang said, more than 15 years have passed and the ship has become rusted, the Philippines, instead of fulfilling its promise, has openly declared that it had sneaked concrete and other building materials into the ship for consolidation.

On March 14, 2014, the Philippine foreign ministry claimed in a statement that the purpose of grounding the warship was to occupy the Ren'ai Reef. The Philippines thus exposed the 15-year lie it has invented and broke its promise. It's simply short of international credibility, Wang said.

Wang also retorted the claims of the Japanese representatives that all artificial islands and reefs in the South China Sea do not produce legal rights for the owner.

"But let's see what Japan has done. In recent years, Japan has spent some 10 billion yen (about 80 million US dollars) on the tiny atoll of Okinotori, building it into a de facto island with cement and steel, and then claimed a right to a continental shelf extending beyond its 200-nautical mile coast boundaries as exclusive economic zone at the United Nations.

"However, most UN members considered Japan's claim inconceivable and chose to decline the proposal.

"Therefore, Japan should review its own words and deeds before criticizing others. Unlike Japan, China has claimed its right to the South China Sea a long time ago, which does not require enhancement through land reclamation."

Wang stressed that China is a de facto victim of the South China Sea issue.

"To maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea, we have exercised great restraint."

China's basic stand is resolving relevant disputes through negotiation and consultation on the basis of respect for historical facts and international laws, including the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.

"This stand will never change," he said.

After friendly negotiations, Wang said, China and ASEAN countries have formulated a set of mechanisms to properly handle the South China Sea issue.

One is "dual-track" approach, which indicates that relevant disputes should be addressed by countries directly concerned through friendly consultation and negotiation. This is also the stipulation of Article 4 of the DOC, to which both China and ASEAN members have made commitments. Both China and ASEAN countries have agreed to make joint efforts to maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea.

"I want to tell you that China and ASEAN are fully capable of maintaining peace in these waters," Wang said.

The second is about implementation of the DOC and consultation on formulating the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea (COC).
Wang said so far, the DOC has been carried out smoothly, while some progress has been made in the consultation on formulating the COC.

"Since the launch of the consultation less than two years ago, we have passed two consensus documents and the consultation has entered the new phase of discussing 'crucial and complex issues'. We also have agreed to launch two hotline platforms between China and ASEAN countries, which will soon be put into operation."

Thirdly, China has offered to discuss and formulate preventive measures for maritime risk control to provide a new platform for the discussion of proposals and ideas raised by relevant parties. "It can be put into practice once a consensus if reached," Wang said.

On the so-called "three halts" proposal put forward by the United States recently, Wang said it is short of feasibility.

"For example, what is the content of the halts? Proposals of different parties are inconsistent. What are the criteria of the halts? Who will set the standards? These problems actually cannot be solved."

China still welcomes constructive comments on the maintenance of peace and stability in the South China Sea; however, relevant proposals should be feasible and double standards are not allowed in particular," he added.

"As to the land reclamation in the South China Sea which some countries are concerned about, it is neither something that happened recently nor initiated by China. In other words, 'the status quo' of the South China Sea has been changing over the years," Wang said.

China began construction projects on some manned islets of the Nansha islands, he said, emphasizing that they are aimed at improving working and living conditions on those islets with strict environmental standards.

The Chinese minister informed his fellow counterparts that by the end of June, China has completed the land reclamation. The next step is to build facilities primarily used for public purposes, including lighthouse, maritime emergency rescue, weather station, marine scientific research as well as medical and first- aid buildings.

"Once the construction is completed, China is willing to open these facilities to countries in the region. As the largest coastal country in the South China Sea, China has the ability and obligation to provide these maritime public goods to countries in the region," Wang said.

He pointed out that an arbitration request over the South China Sea issue was mentioned by the Philippines at the East Asia and ARF foreign ministers' meetings in an attempt to smear China.

"I would like to respond with facts. First, to settle disputes through direct negotiations between relevant parties is the way advocated by the Charter of the United Nations and a common international practice," Wang said. "More importantly, it is also clearly stated in the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC). To this end, China has proposed bilateral talks with the Philippines and this proposal is still valid. But until today, the Philippine side still refuses our proposal."

As to the proceeding of starting international arbitration, Wang said the normal practice is that a consensus should be reached first by the countries concerned.

"However, neither did the Philippines inform China in advance, nor it sought China's consent. The Philippines just unilaterally and forcefully initiated the arbitration," he said. "The Chinese side cannot understand this act, and could only think that there were ulterior motives behind this."

The Chinese minister contended that Manila should know that China has already issued a statement in 2006 that it does not accept the arbitration under the provisions of section 298 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which is China's legitimate right under the law.

While knowing that it is impossible for China to accept any result of arbitration, the Philippines still insisted on pushing forward the so-called arbitration in violation of the DOC and the agreement with China to settle the issue bilaterally.
"There is only one possible explanation to this, that is it intends to confront China," he said. "The Philippine people should know the truth, and the country's future should not be hijacked by a minority of people."

However, the Chinese minister stressed that the door is still open for dialogue. "I believe as long as the two sides sit down and talk seriously, there will always be a solution to the problem, " he said.

Hi Ka Chua

Over the last few months we have been accepting votes via our online voting form for the 2016 Business Excellence Awards hosted by AI. I am delighted to contact you to let you know that Huaren has received a nomination!

The prestigious Business Excellence Awards which were first established to highlight and celebrate the amazing performance and results achieved by the leading firms across the world. Now in its third year the 2016 Business Excellence Awards will identify and honour the most respected companies and their C-level executives throughout a variety of industries, while recognising and rewarding outstanding success.

If you would like to accept your nomination and be considered for an award, please respond with:


(Please note should you respond on behalf of someone else, please notify us of the original email address)

There are no mandatory costs to take part or if you should go on to win.

If you would like further information then please visit our FAQs or alternatively feel free to contact me via email or phone.

Best Regards

Laura Hunter
Awards Co-ordinator
Acquisition International Magazine
Tel: +44 (0) 203 725 6847


发布时间: 2015-12-18 18:33:03 作者:蔡家声 来源:大洋时报 浏览次数:10 评论:0



The world is but one nation and the earth /planet is but one country. It belongs to all of us. We have a duty to look after it and pass it on to our future generation in good shape.
It is the responsibility of all of us, not just few of us.

Dr Ka Sing Chua
World Huaren Federation

Special Message for this special Occasion

Learn the historical lessons from World War I and II

Dear President of USA, Mr Obama, Prime Minister of Australia, Mr Abbott and other World leaders

Australia can be a peace maker and we can do it well. We must not blindly follow the USA. She is our friend and strong ally but she can also make serious mistake as in Korea and Indochina etc.
This is twenty first century civilised world. No time for war games anymore. Dialogue, dialogue and dialogue is the way to go until we find a peaceful solution. A third world war and nuclear war we all must avoid. History showed us that there were never winners in wars but only losers. We all who have been in wars were all losers so do not think you can be a winner and do not glorify any past wars as there is no such war. Humanity all suffered in wars one way or another.
I trust that you all govern for your people and humanity. I challenge any government to have a proper independent referendum before they go to war and see if they have a mandate at all.
No civilised people will vote for a war.

With my best wishes

Dr Ka Sing Chua
World Huaren Federation

Dear President Obama,

Would you like to comment, please?

Eddie Tang.

Nuclear war our likely future': Russia & China won't accept US hegemony, Reagan official warns

Published time: May 13, 2015 10:13
Edited time: May 15, 2015 07:08
Get short URL
Reuters / David Gray
Reuters / David Gray
China, Military, Nuclear, Politics, Russia,USA
The White House is determined to block the rise of the key nuclear-armed nations, Russia and China, neither of whom will join the "world’s acceptance of Washington’s hegemony," says head of the Institute for Political Economy, Paul Craig Roberts.
The former US assistant secretary of the Treasury for economic policy, Dr Paul Craig Roberts, has written on his blog that Beijing is currently "confronted with the Pivot to Asia and the construction of new US naval and air bases to ensure Washington’s control of the South China Sea, now defined as an area of American National Interests."
Roberts writes that Washington’s commitment to contain Russia is the reason “for the crisis that Washington has created in Ukraine and for its use as anti-Russian propaganda.”
Read morehttp://cdn.rt.com/files/news/3f/01/d0/00/military-patrols-china-islands.n.jpgUS mulls sending military ships, aircraft near South China Sea disputed islands – report

The author of several books, "How America Was Lost" among the latest titles, says that US"aggression and blatant propaganda have convinced Russia and China that Washington intends war, and this realization has drawn the two countries into a strategic alliance."
Dr Roberts believes that neither Russia, nor China will meanwhile accept the so-called"vassalage status accepted by the UK, Germany, France and the rest of Europe, Canada, Japan and Australia." According to the political analyst, the "price of world peace is the world’s acceptance of Washington’s hegemony."
"On the foreign policy front, the hubris and arrogance of America’s self-image as the 'exceptional, indispensable' country with hegemonic rights over other countries means that the world is primed for war," Roberts writes.
He gives a gloomy political forecast in his column saying that "unless the dollar and with it US power collapses or Europe finds the courage to break with Washington and to pursue an independent foreign policy, saying good-bye to NATO, nuclear war is our likely future."
Russia’s far-reaching May 9 Victory Day celebration was meanwhile a "historical turning point,"according to Roberts who says that while Western politicians chose to boycott the 70th anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany, "the Chinese were there in their place," China's president sitting next to President Putin during the military parade on Red Square in Moscow.
A recent poll targeting over 3,000 people in France, Germany and the UK has recently revealed that as little as 13 percent of Europeans think the Soviet Army played the leading role in liberating Europe from Nazism during WW2. The majority of respondents – 43 percent – said the US Army played the main role in liberating Europe.
"Russian casualties compared to the combined casualties of the US, UK, and France make it completely clear that it was Russia that defeated Hitler," Roberts points out, adding that "in the Orwellian West, the latest rewriting of history leaves out of the story the Red Army’s destruction of the Wehrmacht."
Read morehttp://img.rt.com/files/news/3d/f3/90/00/war.n.jpgPerverted history: Europeans think US army liberated continent during WW2
The head of the presidential administration, Sergey Ivanov, told RT earlier this month that attempts to diminish the role played by Russia in defeating Nazi Germany through rewriting history by some Western countries are part of the ongoing campaign to isolate and alienate Russia.
Dr Roberts has also stated in his column that while the US president only mentioned US forces in his remarks on the 70th anniversary of the victory, President Putin in contrast"expressed gratitude to 'the peoples of Great Britain, France and the United States of America for their contribution to the victory.'"
The political analyst notes that America along with its allies "do not hear when Russia says 'don’t push us this hard, we are not your enemy. We want to be your partners.'"
While Moscow and Beijing have "finally realized that their choice is vassalage or war," Washington"made the mistake that could be fateful for humanity," according to Dr Roberts.

Memo to Obama: Learn lessons of Korean War to avoid showdown with China

Get short URL
Published time: June 01, 2015 15:11
A P-8A Poseidon surveillance plane (Reuters / U.S. Navy / Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Daniel J. Meshel / Handout)
A P-8A Poseidon surveillance plane (Reuters / U.S. Navy / Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Daniel J. Meshel / Handout)
China, History, Military, Navy, North Korea, Nuclear, Obama, Politics, Russia,USA, War
The Obama administration would do well to apply lessons from the Korean War 55 years ago if it wants to avert a new war with China, which is growing increasingly wary of the US military’s presence in the region.
Tensions between the US and China have been severely exacerbated in recent days by repeated flights by US military aircraft near the Chinese-controlled artificial islets being built with land from the sea bottom in the South China Sea’s Spratly Islands.
The US military - under the pretext of defending 'freedom of navigation' in the sea - plans to conduct flyovers above the territorial 12-mile limits around the islets. This is reckless almost beyond words and may easily escalate into a military conflict between the two nuclear-armed powers. The Chinese government has lodged an official protest against flights near the islands, and the Chinese government newspaper, the Global Times, stated in an editorial: “If the United States’ bottom line is that China has to halt its activities, then a US-China war is inevitable in the South China Sea.”
Read morehttp://cdn.rt.com/files/news/40/65/d0/00/spratly-islands.n.jpgBeijing rejects US criticism over construction in South China Sea
The official US explanation for military activity around the islets, which is 'freedom of navigation,’ simply lacks credibility. These tiny pieces of real estate, and their 12-mile limits, can in no way impede the free movement of ships in the South China Sea. Claims have also been made, without any substantive evidence, that China may use the islets for extensive military purposes. Whether correct or not, the claim that this would justify military intrusions into Chinese-built islets seems strange coming from the Obama administration and military, which have recently established a whole slew of new military agreements, military bases, and deployed new military equipment all around China in its' Asian neighbor countries.
The real explanation for the US military intrusions around the islets is quite different. It is part of a long-term campaign to encircle and isolate China for the purpose of intimidating, weakening, and possibly even destabilizing China to the point where the independent government is replaced by a client state of the US. This campaign is officially referred to as the US 'Pivot to Asia' and is made up of military, economic, and informational elements aimed at isolating and weakening China.
The military element of the encirclement campaign is officially called the 'Air-Sea Battle-Plan', which involves the transfer of up to 60 percent of US military forces - equipped with the latest military equipment - into the Asian theater. The plan also involves creating new US military agreements and new US military bases for American forces in countries around China, including Australia, the Philippines, South Korea and Japan.
Read morehttp://cdn.rt.com/files/news/3f/f6/50/00/china-military-defense-lighthouses1.n.jpgDefense to offense: China unveils new military strategy to boost naval capability
The economic element of the encirclement campaign is the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP.) The TPP is a US-proposed treaty - currently the subject of negotiations between Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States and Vietnam - intended to impose regulatory and investment conditions in Asia. More importantly, it would exclude China from the new economic zone.
The informational element of the encirclement campaign consists of accusations by US political figures, which are endlessly repeated in the US mass media, claiming there is a 'China threat.' This assertion stands reality on its head. After all, the US has approximately 650 military bases around the world and is waging continual wars; China has no military bases in foreign countries and has waged no wars in the last 30 years.
These military, economic, and informational attempts to encircle China reflect US foreign policy concepts are known as 'the Brezinski Doctrine' and "the Wolfowitz Doctrine,' which basically state that for the US government to remain the dominant power on Earth it must secure total dominance of the Eurasian continent, upon which the independent nations of Russia and China occupy central positions.
Following these doctrines, while continuing to attempt to encircle China, and ignoring China's current warnings regarding US military activity around or over its' islets, is dangerous to say the least. It seems we’ve been here before. Sixty-five years ago, during the Korean War, China similarly warned that US-led military forces must not occupy its neighbor, North Korea, nor bring its military forces near the North Korea-Chinese border. Despite some alternate views, the consensus among most US policy makers at that time was that China's' warnings were a mere bluff, and that it would not intervene in the Korean War as the US-led forces moved to occupy North Korea. In fact, China's warnings were an attempt to avoid a military confrontation with the US military.
When the warnings were ignored, and US-led forces occupied most of North Korea and approached the Chinese border, Chinese military forces massively intervened, driving the US-led forces completely out of North Korea and back into South Korea, where they remain to this day. The result of the US miscalculation was the deaths of large numbers of Chinese, US, and Korean soldiers and civilians as the American forces were driven out of North Korea.
Like its warnings during the Korean War, China's warnings that some sort of conflict may result from US military intrusions on or near its islet territory should be taken very seriously. Imagine that the US government was building small artificial islets in the ocean off the coast of California, and that China began moving military aircraft and military vessels into the areas around these islets, while insisting that the US had no right to build these islets.
In that scenario, as well as in the current one, there would be a real danger that by miscalculation, accident, or intention by one side or the other a military conflict leading to war with devastating consequences might be triggered.
Hopefully, US policy makers will take China’s warnings seriously, draw back from the encirclement campaign against the country and learn from the disastrous lesson of the Korean War. In that way, we could avoid repeating history while sparing the world yet another terrible war.
Eric Sommer for RT
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

China V-Day Parade 2015

History backs China's firm stand on islands

Dear Fellow Asian Americans:

Please accept my deepest apology. It is my sad duty to inform you that
the Boards of 80-20 voted unanimously to cease the operation of 80-20
PAC on Oct. 25, 2015, should SELF fail to reach its goal of raising $1
million per yr. and 5 yrs., as anticipated. This decision is final.

We want to THANK those of you, who have

read and forwarded many of 80-20's e-newsleters,
responded to some of 80-20's calls-to-actions,
joined as PAC members, and
donated generously and selflessly to SELF.

We are NOT giving up on saving the PAC. We still hope that once our
community knows that PAC SHALL DEFINITELY die if SELF fails, AsAms
may yet in the remaining 3.5 months open their pocketbooks and help SELF
reach its goals. We know that the chance of a last minute rescue is small,
probably less than 1 in 10. However, we'll still do our best.

DONATE to SELF, Self Empowerment Longterm Fund.

Many of you, who have worked hard to serve AsAms by saving PAC, may want to know more DETAILS of our decision. We owe you that. They are provided as FOOTNOTES, below my signature.

Sincerely yours,
Add a description
President, a volunteer for the past 16 years,
The 80-20 Initiative.


(1) What does the Demise of PAC means?

PAC shall cease all its activities, including endorsing or opposing any political
candidates, but its website shall be kept alive by 80-20 EF. We want to remind the AsAm community how much we together got done, with our puny resources.
In addition, the current Life Members list and Membership list will remain proudly
in display. The AsAm community should remember the names of these valiant
persons who have scarified greatly to keep PAC alive for 16 years.

(2) Donation to SELF Refunded in Full, If Requested

Should the anticipated eventuality happen, EF shall keep its promise to refund
all donations in FULL, if requested. After Oct. 25, 2015, EF shall send 2 emails
and one postal mail (certified to those who have donated $1,000 or more) to donors inquiring if he/she desires a refund and where 80-20 shall send a check to.

(3) Details of 80-20's Decision Process and Procedure

First, the Board of EF voted unanimously to inform the Board of PAC that SELF would likely fail. As a result, EF could not have the resources to hire highly qualified staff, to be trained by S. B. Woo, whom PAC may share for its needs during election seasons. In response. PAC deemed that without highly qualified staff, PAC cannot be effective in the rough and tumble world of election politics, after S. B. Woo has retired. Therefore, PAC's Board has voted unanimously to cease all operations on Oct. 25, 2015, if SELF fails.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

As the president of both EF and PAC, I bear the largest responsibility for the anticipated demise of 80-20. My deepest apology to you all.

DONATE to SELF, Self Empowerment Long-term Fund.

To find the current status of SELF, click here.

Help us spread the word, like us on Facebook, follow us on Twitter !
80-20 Mission Statement
Frequently Asked Questions
80-20's Top 10 Accomplishment, published 3 years ago.


发布时间: 2014-10-03 18:27:29 作者:蔡家声 来源:大洋时报 浏览次数:258 评论:3










PM Lee answers questions on Hong Kong protests


Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong replies to a question during the Question-and-Answer session moderated by Professor Tommy Koh, after speaking on Singapore in Transition – The Next Phase, at the NUSS 60th Anniversary Lecture held in the University Cultural Centre, Oct 3, 2014. Photo: Ooi Boon Keong


UPDATED: 11:48 PM, OCTOBER 3, 2014

Hong Kong is in a very unique and delicate position. It’s not a sovereign country. It’s one country, two systems. It’s never had elections all the years when the British ran it as a colony. When the British term ended, the arrangement with the Chinese was one country, two systems and some limited form of democracy in Hong Kong, gradually extending to direct universal suffrage ... So the governing law is Basic Law, the sovereignty is China and the geopolitical reality is that Hong Kong is now part of China. China wants Hong Kong to succeed and do well, and is prepared to go very far to help Hong Kong to succeed and do well but they don’t want Hong Kong to become a problem for them on the other side of the Shenzhen river in China. Absolutely not.
So the Hong Kong people have to make one country two systems work. They, as well as the central government in Beijing, have to do that jointly. It’s a delicate business where exactly does one country end and two systems begin. ... There’s always grey areas for interpretation. There will be issues which will have to come up from time to time, such as exactly how are you going to elect the chief executive. And these have to be resolved by Hong Kong and China but in a way which is in the interests of Hong Kong and which doesn’t hurt the interests of China and which is in accordance with the law and the Basic Law. ...
These are peaceful demonstrations that’s good. They’re not in Tiananmen, they are not in Zhongnanhai so that lowers the temperature but even then it’s a difficult situation for the Chief Executive and his team to manage and I’m quite sure there’s a large team on the Chinese side in Beijing watching this very very carefully. As long as it’s student demonstrators, and you are talking about Hong Kong matters ... Hong Kongers looking after Hong Kong. These are things which best of all Hong Kong can sort out for itself. But if other groups get involved and use this as a way to pressure China or to change China or, I read in the newspapers, that former activists from Tiananmen in 1989 have come to help the students. I don’t think they need such help. Or the students who were doing the Sunflower movement in Taipei also coming to compare notes — so teach you how to occupy something. I don’t think such help is in anyway helpful. I think that will only make things much more complicated.
But I wish them well. I was just there two weeks ago. They were concerned about this. But if you don’t move forward with the chief executive election rules then the status quo remains. It’s workable after a fashion but you have to ask yourself whether that’s the best outcome for Hong Kong.

Li Ka-shing, the successful business man of Hong Kong, wrote this article really well. Send this to all Chinese all over the world, including the protestors in Hong Kong and also to Editors of Newspapers/Media around the world!

The following article, which is written by Li Ka-shing, describes the current situation in Hong Kong really well. Li Ka-shing says:
“No matter what the mistakes the Communist Party of China have committed, no matter how much the Communist Party appeared to be corrupted, as a Chinese Communist Party's citizen, we should not make life difficult for the people for whatever reason. We must remember the ruling of China by the Communist Party is a history and is by choice.
At least for a long time till now, there is not a single party, whether from the prestige or ability standpoint that could govern our country and could have any power to replace the current Communist party. Furthermore, not to mention, the country led by Xi Jinping, the new central team, does give us hope and also lets us felt the positive energy.
A political party like a man, he might make a mistake, it could correct the error; he might get sick, he could recover. If we leave the Communist Party, China will be in chaos! If China is in a mess, we the people will suffer.
Recently many extreme articles appeared in the Internet, the goal is not to denounce the corrupt forces within the party, but the total negation of the Communist Party. The articles, ignored China's great achievements since the reform, yet targeted various Communist Party errors with coherent, detailed data & language subtlety and even the styles are similar, highly provocative and demagogic. Unlike the ordinary people to vent their discontent spontaneously, these articles are more like an organized and premeditated campaign. One cannot help but suspect what the political motives behind and with what the international background.
As we all know, China's rise has caused some international forces fear, the United States and Japan and some other countries are a deliberate attempt to suppress and block China to excel and progress. Their actual purpose is not to implement what is more universal advanced concepts, rather they consider only the interests of other countries. They make various plans, they contribute money and effort to cultivate the anti-communist hostile forces. Their only one real purpose, is to mess with China, separate China, so China's development will be in stagnation or retrogression, then later become their vassals. These tactics could allow them to dominate the world continuously.
Look at Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, and Egypt, they are the masterpiece of the United States act. These countries are messed up by the United States, so what their people get at the end? For the pro-American forces, do they really get the benefit?
My fellow citizens, open your eyes, look, do not easily be brainwashed, it should not follow the excitement, followed by booing, felt pride while being exploited. We are Chinese, we could not see a disaster in this country. If we have the opportunity to contribute to the country, we should try. If we could not afford to contribute to the country, then we at least try not to cause trouble to it, isn’t it true? If you mess up the country, we are in big trouble. For now, we can do at least, is do not say and do not spread any negative or irresponsible news that are not conducive to the stability in the country!” - Li Ka-shing.
Ladies and gentlemen, after reading this article, please try to pass it on.

WE DID IT!! Largest. Climate. March. In History.

Bersih 4.0 最新消息!大马史上最大规模大集会 吉隆坡大黄潮 - *第9意识* 互联网教育新闻网

Our Most Powerful Petition Target Ever

2014 Nobel Week Highlights

It's time to share China's side of the story

Is America Ready for China as an 'Equal Brother?'

Now is the time to act on climate change

Chinatownology: Moon cake and mongols

UN declares China to be 2014 Best Country in the World

Dear all
While we congratulate China's achievement, China Government must not be too complacent as there are still a lot of work to be done for her disadvantaged citizens.
Dr Ka Sing Chua

Dear all

Japanese W11 Atrocity is still fresh in our mind. Less we forget.

The current Japanese Prime Minister Abe is not "an exemplary International Citizen" no matter how much Tony Abbott wishes to curry favour with him. He should at least take note of what Malcolm Fraser, Bob Hawke and John Howard's opinion. He should go back to learn the history of Japanese's atrocity during W11 including treatments received by Australian POW in Sandakan etc.

Tony Abbott should also join international friends of Japan including many Japanese citizens, telling Abe to follow the real " exemplary international citizen" i.e. German President HE Angela Merkel.

Japan should return the "disputed islands Senkaku or Diaoyu islands" back to China as promised after their surrender in 1945 and pay lots of compensation to China and other affected countries. Then the current conflict will be resolved immediately. The American President Obama should advice Japan to do likewise. We do not need an arm race in the Asia Pacific region. We certainly do not need a war to resolve the current conflict which is being blown out of proportion by Abe.

Dr Ka Sing Chua

In response to the following debates.

The Truth - Documentary on DiaoYu Islands by Chris Nebe .

Why Australia is choosing old enemy Japan over China

Access Asialink July 2014 - Don't take China for granted says Ambassador, insights on agribusiness and events in your city

The White House, Washington

Yesterday, after more than 50 years, we began to change America's relationship with the people of Cuba.
We are recognizing the struggle and sacrifice of the Cuban people, both in the U.S. and in Cuba, and ending an outdated approach that has failed to advance U.S. interests for decades. In doing so, we will begin to normalize relations between our two countries.
I was born in 1961, just over two years after Fidel Castro took power in Cuba, and just as the U.S. severed diplomatic relations with that country.
Our complicated relationship with this nation played out over the course of my lifetime -- against the backdrop of the Cold War, with our steadfast opposition to communism in the foreground. Year after year, an ideological and economic barrier hardened between us.
That previous approach failed to promote change, and it's failed to empower or engage the Cuban people. It's time to cut loose the shackles of the past and reach for a new and better future with this country.
I want you to know exactly what our new approach will mean.
First, I have instructed Secretary of State John Kerry to immediately begin discussions with Cuba to re-establish diplomatic relations that have been severed since 1961. Going forward, we will re-establish an embassy in Havana, and high-ranking officials will once again visit Cuba.
Second, I have also instructed Secretary Kerry to review Cuba's designation as a State Sponsor of Terrorism -- a review guided by the facts and the law. At a time when we are focused on threats from ISIL and al Qaeda, a nation that meets our conditions and renounces terrorism should not face such a sanction.
Third, we'll take steps to increase travel, commerce, and the flow of information to -- and from -- Cuba. These steps will make it easier for Americans to travel to Cuba. They will make it easier for Americans to conduct authorized trade with Cuba, including exports of food, medicine, and medical products to Cuba. And they will facilitate increased telecommunications connections between our two countries: American businesses will be able to sell goods that enable Cubans to communicate with the United States and other countries.
Learn more about the steps we're taking to change our policy.
These changes don't constitute a reward or a concession to Cuba. We are making them because it will spur change among the people of Cuba, and that is our main objective.
Change is hard -- especially so when we carry the heavy weight of history on our shoulders.
Our country is cutting that burden loose to reach for a better future.
Thank you,
President Barack Obama

This email was sent to ho.isaac6@gmail.com.
Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy
Please do not reply to this email. Contact the White House
The White House • 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW • Washington, DC 20500 • 202-456-1111

President of 80-20, U.S.A.

WANT TO HELP STRIKE A BLOW to create the “deterrent
” that will prevent future derogatory depictions of people of
Chinese descent?

UNITE! Demand that FOX TV FIRE this talking head who on a
public broadcast said:

"The Chinese are the single biggest threat to the national
security of the U.S.
,” a talking head on FOX TV said on
7/10. "They have been, they will be and they can
wait, they're very patient. Do you know what we just
did? As usual, we bring them over here and we teach a
bunch of Chinamen -- er, Chinese people -- how to do
computers and then they go back to China and hack
into us."

Click here to hear the racist xenophobic statement, expressed with
such hateful body language and hand gestures. He seems bent on
inciting a race war against Chinese. He had damaged grievously
the psychological, physical and career welfare of Chinese-Ams.

For such a serious offense, an apology is NOT enough.
He must be FIRED.

Clipper's owner Donald Sterling was banned from NBA for life and
forced to sell the team for his racial slur against black in a private
This talking head called ALL people of Chinese
descent “the single biggest threat to the national security of the US”
and used a “C word” in a public broadcast!

America came down hard on Sterling, as it should. Why is my
country so silent on this talking head, Fox TV and Mr. Murdock??

80-20 shall never quit in this demand. We want this to be
the LAST such statements in major TV channels — establishing
a “deterrent effect”. Otherwise, frequent statements against
people of Chinese descent will occur. Our nation could become
so psychologically conditioned to implicitly and explicitly act
AGAINST the rightful interests of Chinese- and Asian-Americans.

We have a huge amount of tools ready to call this to Fox’s
attention. See Footnote 1.

For now, however, we’ll try REASONING. Please send email to
Roger Ailes, Pres. of Fox News Channel
roger.ailes@foxnews.com and Comments@foxnews.com .
Use your own words or state:

“Subject: Fire Beckel or I’ll boycott Fox

Fire Bob Beckel for the sake of ethnic harmony,
world peace and your own reputation. I'll NEVER
abandon this demand. If you do fire Beckel, I'll
remember and respect you for it. If you don’t,
I’ll help create a boycott of products of Fox
advertizers by Chinese people worldwide.
Your name, city and sate”

Do it now! This may not work. So start organizing your own
community and friends and get ready for a big and long battle.
Thank you.


S. B. Woo, a volunteer
President, 80-20 National Asian Am. Educational Foundation, Inc.

A Strong Press Release

Contact person: S. B. Woo 302-366-0259
Subject: Why the U.S. Media Treats Sterling & Beckel so Differently?
80-20 PAC, by far the largest Asian Am. political action committee, announced
today that it shall unite with all organizations, elected officials and individuals to
help achieve the goal of getting Robert Beckel fired by Fox. Beckel stated on
Fox TV “The Five” on 7/10/2014:
“The Chinese are the single biggest threat to the national
security of the U.S.,” and used a “C word”.
Click here to hear his racist, xenophobic statement, expressed with such hateful
body language and hand gestures. He seems bent on inciting a race war against
the Chinese people.
Just several months ago, ABC reviewed a taped Jimmy Kimmel segment during
which a kid blurted out “kill all Chinese” and let it air? Will ABC do the same, if
the word “Chinese” was replaced by Blacks or Jews? Now Beckel, as a news
analyst, publicly stated the above.
The Chinese American community is determined to stop such statements against
us, once and for all. Otherwise, we’ll be like the Jews in Nazi Germany who
eventually faced a very hostile home community.
S. B. Woo, 80-20 President & former Lt. Governor of Delaware says, “We are fully
aware that the U.S. is not Nazi Germany. On the other hand, if such statements
can come against us again and again without severe repercussions to the
offender, then the Chinese- and perhaps East-Asian-Americans will suffer
psychologically, physically and career wise.”
Clipper's owner Donald Sterling was banned from NBA for life and forced to sell
the team for his racial slur against blacks in a private conversation.
In comparison, Beckel called all people of Chinese descent “the single biggest
threat to the national security of the US” and used a “C word” in a public
broadcast! ” Why is our media so quiet on Beckel?” Woo asks. “Where are the
Asian Am. journalists, for heaven’s sake?” [meaning those who work in the mainstream
media. Added by SB Woo]
People of Chinese descent worldwide are watching how fair the media in U.S.A. is.
Is the U. S. media using double standard for different races? (The end)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
How 80-20’s Call to Action & Press Release made a Difference!
The community has really responded. Thanks to them, the following has occurred
1) The MSN poll on whether Bob Beckel should resign was losing by a 30% to 40% 2
nights ago. This morning it is leading by 59% to 26%.
Click on http://specials.msn.com/more-polls.aspx
2) After the press release, CNN got in touch with S. B. Woo.
3) Chinese American residing in China have already gotten in touch with S.B.
They are also reaching out to Chinese-Ams in Hong Kong and Macau. All
of you can help reach people of Chinese descent internationally.
Help make this ugly anti-Chinese broadcast known INTERNATIONALLY.
What else YOU can do!
A) Continue to send email to Roger Ailes, Pres. of Fox News via roger.ailes@foxnews.com
and Comments@foxnews.com . Use your own words or state:
“Subject: Fire Beckel or I’ll boycott Fox
Fire Bob Beckel for the sake of ethnic harmony,
world peace and your own reputation. If you do,
I’ll remember and respect you for it. If you don’t,
I’ll stop watching FOX & choose CNN instead.
Your name, city, sate & TITLE.”
B) An CivilRights Wechat Group has set up petition site: http://www.weidb.com/ptbecke
Please go sign up.
C) THANK all the orgs. and individuals who have responded to 80-20 Initiative’s call
to together protect the life and liberty of Chinese Americans.

S. B. Woo, a volunteer
President, 80-20 National Asian Am. Educational Foundation, Inc.
FORWARD this e-newsletter and use social media please.

Introducing S.B WOO President of 80-20 , U.S.A.
by Dr Ka Sing Chua
President of World Huaren Federation

Biographical Information
Delaware. He was born in Shanghai, China, and came to the
United States from Hong Kong at the age of 18.
He is the president of The 80-20 Educational Foundation (EF), a
501(c)3 non-profit organization focused on winning equal
opportunity in the workplace and equal justice for ALL Asian
Pacific Americans. 80-20 EF's first step in fulfilling this mission is
to create a community-wide awareness of pervasive workplace
discrimination against Asian Americans, thereby hoping to induce
an awareness and will to take action. 80-20 EF is also educating the
community on the importance of group political clout.
He was also the founding president of The 80-20 PAC, Inc. from 2002
to 2006 that works on organizing Asian Pacific Americans (APAs) into
a swing bloc vote in presidential elections, thereby inducing both
major political parties to compete serving the rightful interests of the
APA community.
His past experiences include being the Founding President of the
Faculty Bargaining Unit at the University of Delaware, its Chief
Spokesman and Chief Negotiator; a Trustee of the University of
Delaware; an Institute Fellow at the Institute of Politics, the
Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University; and serving
as the National President of the Organization of Chinese
Americans (OCA).
His bio can be found in The Congressional Record of 2/5/2007. He is
also listed in Who's Who in America. A life-sized picture of him is
displayed in Smithsonian's National Museum of American History in
Washington D.C.. In 2000, aMagazine ranked him the 6th of the 25
Most Influential Asian Americans.
He received his B.S., summa cum laude, in Mathematics and
Physics from Georgetown College in Kentucky and his Ph.D. in
Physics from Washington University in St. Louis in 1964.
To send an unmistakable signal of personal devotion - that his
mission in working to champion equality for all Asian Americans
through 80-20 has no personal gain or interest whatsoever - S. B. has
pledged never to run for a political office or accept a federal government
appointment for the rest of his life.

China presents an olive leaf to USA

BEIJING (Reuters) - China and the United States need to "plant more flowers, not thorns" in their relationship and Washington needs to have a more objective view about China, state media on Thursday quoted President Xi Jinping as saying ahead of a key meeting.
Xi, speaking to former U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson ahead of next week's China-U.S. Strategic and Economic Dialogue, said he hoped both countries could use such gatherings to keep "injecting positive energy" into the relationship.
"The two sides should expand common interests, deepen cooperation, plant more flowers, not thorns, clear the interference and avoid suspicion and confrontation," Xi was quoted as saying by the official China Daily.
China would stick to the path of peaceful development and shoulder its international duties, Xi added.
"We hope the U.S. will objectively view China's basic national conditions as well as its domestic and foreign policies," he said.
China and the United States, as the world's two largest economies, have close trade and business ties and work together on important international issues like North Korea.
But they also have deep differences, over everything from human rights to the value of the Chinese currency.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew, who will attend the Strategic and Economic Dialogue in Beijing, said on Tuesday the yuan's value was a "very big issue" for the United States and that the currency needed to appreciate more.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is also attending, and will likely have to address Chinese concerns over what Beijing views as Washington's support for Japan, Vietnam and the Philippines over their territorial disputes with China.
China's increasingly assertive tone in the disputed East and South China Seas, as well as its rising military expenditure, have rattled nerves in the region and in Washington.
(Reporting by Ben Blanchard; Editing by Nick Macfie)

Dear Sir / Madam,

The Dragon Foundation is pleased to announce the Dragon 100 (龍匯100) 2014. It will take place from 11-18 October 2014 in Hong Kong and Taiwan, focusing on the theme of “Entrepreneurship & Social Innovation”. We would like to invite you to nominate participants who are outstanding potential Chinese leaders aged 18-35 with demonstrated leadership skills, an excellent academic record, talent in non-academic areas and a commitment to serve the community. The closing date for nominations is 31 July 2014.

The annual Dragon 100 Young Chinese Leaders Forum was initiated by the Dragon Foundation in 2002. Since then it has brought together 100 youth leaders of Chinese origin from around the world every year. Intended as a platform for sharing views and generating synergy, it provides stimulus for innovation, enthusiasm and commitment.

Entrepreneurship is all about innovation and creativity, which are major characteristics of young people. It is also a way to generate and promote economic growth. Thus entrepreneurship can be considered both a way of thought and of behaviour, in that it not only requires imagination and passion, but also specific traditional functions such as marketing and finance. The Dragon 100 – 2014 Programme serves as a platform for young entrepreneurs, both established, as well as the up-and-coming, to sit down and openly discuss the challenges and opportunities that face those seeking this particular pathway.

Programme factsheet and nomination form are enclosed, should you have further queries or require any more information, please do not hesitate to contact the Secretariat of The Dragon Foundation, by telephone: (852) 2811-2779, by fax: (852) 2811-2669 or by e-mail: info@dragonfoundation.net Further information may also be obtained at our website www.dragonfoundation.net

We look forward to hearing from you in due course.

Mabel Woo
Project Manager
The Dragon Foundation
Tel : (852) 2811 2779

Dragon 100 - 2014 (Factsheet)

Dragon 100 Application Guidelines_2014

Dragon Foundation Leaflet (May 2014)

Nomination form_ Dragon 100 2014 [LOCKED]

Dear G7 Leaders,

It is Japan, causing tensions in the “East and South China Sea," when it nationalized those Diaoyu Islands in 2012 and by failing to follow those Cairo and Potsdam Declarations, no more, no less.

John Lee.


New Cross-strait Alliance.

G7 stops short of endorsing Japan's anti-China rhetoric

Updated: 2014-06-05 14:41
BRUSSELS/BEIJING - Leaders of the Group of Seven (G7) industrialized nations fell short of endorsing Japan's anti-China rhetoric at a meeting in Brussels on Wednesday.

G7 stops short of endorsing Japan's anti-China rhetoric
China-Japan relations

"We are deeply concerned by tensions in the East and South China Sea," the leaders from Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United States said in a communique issued at the end of the first day of their talks in Brussels.

"We oppose any unilateral attempt by any party to assert its territorial or maritime claims through the use of intimidation, coercion or force," the G7 leaders said, without specifying any country.

Japan had reportedly pushed the G7 to single out China for the rising tensions in the East and South China Sea, hoping to apply international pressure on China in its territorial disputes with Beijing over the Diaoyu Islands.

In an earlier response to Tokyo's futile attempt, the Chinese foreign ministry reaffirmed the country's determination to protect its sovereignty and legitimate rights.

"China is firm and resolute in safeguarding the sovereignty and maritime rights and interests in the East China Sea and the South China Sea as well as national security," Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei told reporters on Tuesday.

"I want to point out that on the East China Sea issue, it is not China but Japan who changes the status quo. It is Japan who snatched the Diaoyu Islands away from China by force over 100 years ago. It is also Japan who attempted to unilaterally 'nationalize' the Diaoyu Islands by violating the UN Charter, the Cairo Declaration, the Potsdam Declaration and other international laws," he said.

"Therefore it is Japan who should clean up its acts and correct its mistakes," the spokesman said.

"Meanwhile, we always hold the point that disputes should be managed and settled through dialogue and negotiation. We advise the Japanese side not to stir up troubles nor mislead the public opinion on international occasions."

The two-day summit hosted by the European Union (EU) focuses on Ukraine situation, ties with Russia, global economy and energy security, according to preliminary agenda unveiled by the EU.

Originally, a G8 summit was scheduled to take place in Sochi, Russia in early June under Russian presidency. At their meeting in The Hague, the Netherlands on March 24, the G7 leaders decided to meet in Brussels in June in the G7 format instead to protest the accession of Ukraine's Crimea region into Russia.

3 June 2014
Dear all

The Shangri La Dialogue showed that US ganged up with Japan by ignoring the historical facts. Why US and other Western countries which fought the Nazi Germany so fiercely, conveniently trying to ignore what Nazi Japan have done to China, US and Asia during the World War 2. Japan has agreed to return all the lands they conquered from China, back to China and US supposed to be the referee to see to that. The US has now conveniently buried this part of the historical fact and ganged up with Japan and condones Japan to re-militarise to the detriment of a peaceful Asia and the world. I believe China has a strong case to argue through International Court of Justice. Those territories in dispute are in fact belongs to China historically and legitimately. I hope China will hire reputable international lawyers to fight for their case just like the Jews and start a whole ranges of compensation claims of war damages conducted by Nazi Japan during the second World War.

In response to the following emails.

Dr Ka Sing Chua

Dear President Obama,

I totally agree with Alice but also like your comment, please?

I would add that Japan and other countries who ignore those Declarations below must be Uncle Sam’s slaves.

Looking forward to hearing from you soon.

John Lee


New Cross-strait Alliance.

The US has given away its credibility in defending human rights when it keeps depriving the rights of Chinese people in defending their rightful lands including off-shore islands. Even a kid could figure out its ill and malicious intent.

The US President and Cabinet/Congressmen/Senate must stop burying their heads in the sand like ostriches; they should act as real men answerable and accountable to their conscience and the almighty God in upholding truth, justice, honesty and righteousness. If they fail to do that, they should henceforth back off and utter no word on the world political arena to make fools of themselves.



Cairo Declaration - Text

The several military missions have agreed upon future military operations against Japan. The Three Great Allies expressed their resolve to bring unrelenting pressure against their brutal enemies by sea, land, and air. This pressure is already rising.

The Three Great Allies are fighting this war to restrain and punish the aggression of Japan. They covet no gain for themselves and have no thought of territorial expansion. It is their purpose that Japan shall be stripped of all the islands in the Pacific which she has seized or occupied since the beginning of the first World War in 1914, and that all the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa, and The Pescadores (are an archipelago off the western coast of Taiwan in the Taiwan Strait consisting of 64 small islands and islets),. Shall be restored to the Republic of China. Japan will also be expelled from all other territories which she has taken by violence and greed. The aforesaid three great powers, mindful of the enslavement of the people of Korea, are determined that in due course Korea shall become free and independent.

With these objects in view the three Allies, in harmony with those of the United Nations at war with Japan, will continue to persevere in the serious and prolonged operations necessary to procure the unconditional surrender of Japan.[2]

Potsam Declaration -Terms of the Declaration

On July 26, the United States, Britain, and China released the Potsdam Declaration announcing the terms for Japan's surrender, with the warning, "We will not deviate from them. There are no alternatives. We shall brook no delay." For Japan, the terms of the declaration specified:[1]

· the elimination "for all time [of] the authority and influence of those who have deceived and misled the people of Japan into embarking on world conquest"

· the occupation of "points in Japanese territory to be designated by the Allies"

· "Japanese sovereignty shall be limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku, and such minor islands as we determine," as had been announced in the Cairo Declaration in 1943.[3]

Document for establishing int'l order after WWII


07-26-2014 10:57 BJT

Saturday marks the 69th anniversary of the issuing of the Potsdam Proclamation. The Potsdam Proclamation was issued on July 26, 1945 by the United States, Britain and China. It called for the surrender of all Japanese armed forces after Nazi Germany was defeated during World War II.

It stated that, if Japan did not surrender, it would face "prompt and utter destruction." The declaration is viewed as an ultimatum posed to the forces of fascism and an important document which helped establish international order after World War II. On August 15, 1945, the Japanese government accepted the proclamation and surrendered.

"As I understand it, the declaration requires that Japan would abandon all its conquests that it made in China.... Japan would become a demilitarized country," Terry Charman, Snr. historian at London Imperial War Museum said.

Dear Prime Minister Abe,

Congratulations to Mr. Stone’s speech which is very accurate therefore deserves respect.

On the contrary, it is very much regrettable that you want to continue to pay your respects to those (14) convicted Class-A war criminals today!

John Lee


New Cross-strait Alliance.

Oliver Stone’s Advice to Japan: Apologize

By Mitsuru Agence France-Presse/Getty Images

U.S. film director Oliver Stone speaks before press in Tokyo on August 12.

Film director Oliver Stone, who is no stranger to controversy, turned from his sharp attacks on the U.S. for the atomic bombings of Japan to criticize his hosts over their attitude to China and other Asian neighbors.

In a speech to foreign correspondents in Tokyo, Mr. Stone said that Japan needs to more completely apologize for its wartime acts, and said it should also resist a shift to relying on military might to deal with security challenges posed by its neighbors such as China and North Korea.

Japan’s leaders have expressed “deep remorse” over the physical damage and psychological pain the country has inflicted on other Asian countries, but repeated visits by cabinet ministers to a controversial war shrine in Tokyo and growing talk of revising the nation’s peace constitution have made other countries skeptical about the intention of these remarks.

He said that if Japan came out with a more forthright apology “that would make front-page headlines everywhere in the world.”

He added that Japan, which is locked in a territorial dispute with China over a small group of islands, should look more broadly at ties between the two countries.

“Don’t look at China as your enemy. Start seeing it differently. Start by apologizing to China for what you did in China and all the people you killed there,” Mr. Stone said. “Japan’s interest in the long-term could very much lie with China.”

Mr. Stone described Japan’s face-off with China over disputed territories in the East China Sea as like “some kid who goes out there and picks fights and then has got his big brother behind him to go clean up after him,” referring to the United States’ security obligations to Japan.

He argued that Japan should show leadership in resolving conflicts in a peaceful manner. “We want to see Japan playing a leading role in making this a more peaceful world by resolving the conflicts in the Pacific in a way that shows the vision of Japan,” he said. “Japan has a peace constitution and a commitment to nuclear non-resolution.”

Mr. Stone’s view is formed by his skepticism of power and his belief in political checks and balances. He went as far as to praise China for not handing over American national security leaker Edward Snowden to the United States. “I’m glad that China didn’t arrest him. At least China had the guts to stand up (to the United States) that way.”

The famous director is in Japan to promote his documentary series, “The Untold History of the United States,” which presents an alternative interpretation of the country’s history in the 20th century, challenging the narrative of America as an “underdog.” The series will be aired by Japan’s national broadcaster NHK.

The documentary includes discussion of the two atomic bombings. Peter Kuznick, professor of history at American University, who worked with Stone in the production of the documentary, said it was “a learning experience for both of us” to meet with the victims of the bombing, as well as historians and journalists in Japan. The documentary contends that the long-held assertions that the bombings were necessary to end the war are untrue and that other factors, such as the Soviet Union’s entry into the war against Japan was a strong factor in the country’s surrender.

“The more we see and the more we learn, the more troubling it is for us and the more we realize how important Japan’s coming to grips with its past is for Japan, but also for the United States and for the rest of the world. Japan and the United States are linked together in this web of deceit in which we both collaborate to tell lies about all of our history,” he said.

Dear Prime Minister Abe,

You will need a translator for you to understand the unconditional surrender by the Japanese government in 1945.

John Lee


New Cross-strait Alliance.

Japs surrender its entirety. Chinese people should turn right!

2013-12-07 concerns please click - Red House Mall












Abe's Article 9 blitz alarms Asia

My China's Dream

History teaches us that the best reform for a nation, is through peaceful transformation. It avoids violent confronation and civil wars among its citizens. This has been happening in all the advanced Western countries last 100 years or more. That is why they are ahead of China and those so-called developed and under developed countries which spent more time fighting and killing one another among their own citizens insteads of developing their countries.

I believe China under the current leadership can lead China to a better future despite all the imperfection China's system still has. Over 113 years of the founding of Commonwealth of Australia, the "White Australia policy" was only abolished 35 years ago. China only opens up to new ideas 35 years ago and Communist ruling party has transformed and modernise itself and China. It still has to open up to more check and balance and democratic governance including open, transparent rule of laws. It should allow all members of parliament to have their equal say whether they belong to Communist Party or other democratic parties' representatives as they are all equal Chinese citizens and nation's representatives. Selection of these representatives should be based on talent. merit and good character.

China has hopes for all, not just for Chinese citizens but for all overseas Chinese and other global citizens. Its development and achievement last 35 years and more to achieve in the coming years, will help to secure peaceful development for China and the rest of the world. We all will benefit from the peaceful transformation of China. My advice to those who promote the overthrown of Chinese Communist Party Government in China and outside China, should direct their energy to help China's peaceful transformation instead.

That is my "China's dream" for this century.

Best regards

Dr. Ka Sing Chua
487 Mitcham Rd Mitcham 3132 Victoria, Australia
Tel: 03-98735050 Fax: 03-98743618


历史教导我们一个国家的改革最好是通过和平改革,这就避免了公民之间的武力冲突和内战。在最近的一百多年来,在所有西方 先进文明的国家都出现过这样的情况。这是他们先进于中国和那些所谓的发展中国家. 而那些所谓的发展中国家花费许多时间打仗和相互残杀,而不是致力于发展他们的国家的原因,

我相信中国在当前的领导下能赢得更好的前景,尽管中国体制上尚有不完善之处。澳大利亚联邦已成立113年之久,直到35年前才废除了白澳政策。在35年之 前中国才实行开放政策,中国共产党这个执政党已经改进了自身和中国并使之现代化。它仍然必须有更多的开放、检查、制衡和民主治理,包括开放透明的法治。它 应当允许议会成员有平等的发言权,无论他们是否为共产党或其它民主党派的代表,因为他们是平等的中国公民和国家代表。选举这些代表必须根据他们的才能和品 格,任人唯贤。

中国有希望,不仅是中国公民的希望,也是所有海外华人以及世界人民的希望。在过去35年里中国的发展和成就以及在今后岁 月里更大的成就将确保中国和世界其它地区的和平发展。我们均会受益于中国的和平发展和改革。我劝告那些在中国国内外致力于推翻中国共产党的人士应当把他们 的精力用于帮助中国的和平改革.




From the Editor

The dispute of Senkaku or Diaoyui islands' ownership between China and Japan is concerning many people in Asia and around the world. On one hand Japan claims that she has the sovereignty over them because they have been under her legal administration since the end of World war 2. While China claims that they belongs to China from the historical perspective. Japan under the Peace Treaty at the end of World War 2, supposed to return the ownership of these islands back to China. But for some unforeseen circumstances, with the eruption of China civil war, China failed to claim them back formally from Japan.

Who actually owns this island is the burning issue.

We hope that it will be resolved one way or the other through peaceful negotiation. Failing that, we suggest that the case be decided in the International Court and tribunal. It is better that way than trying to fight it out militarily. It is not worth having the war to determine the ownership of these islands. As the destruction will be far worse than the benefit for either side. Moreover if a war is declared , its implication will be unmeasurable in term of its influence with the development of China and Japan. Its disastrous effect will not only affect China and Japan but will extend to all Asia countries and the world like Europe and US etc. No one is an island anymore. The war will bring enormous economic disaster, humanity hardship and suffering for many many people, not confined to the Chinese and Japanese.

Cover design for this issue was done by our webmaster James Yin. Thank you James.

Let us hope that the leadership of China and Japan are wiser than that.

we are looking for a bilangual Editor and Assistant Editor to assist us in compiling our regular Emagazine etc. It is voluntary contribution without monetary remuneration. If you are interested, please contact Dr Ka Sing Chua at contact@huaren.org or kchua@huaren.org

I would like to take this opportunity to again thank my special assistant Dr Yit Seng Yow for patiently help to compile our Emagazine and many other voluntary contributors. Without them, we would not have our regular Emagazine for you to enjoy.





如果国与国之间有什么争端不能解决,完全可以提交给国际法庭来和平解决。“法治”胜过“武治”,这应该是每一个有远见的 领导人都知道的道理。我们已经看到,在法治不健全的国家,企图用武力来统治的政权最终都引火自焚。叙利亚就是崇尚“武治”,把一个好好的国家弄得四分五 裂。





Dear Kasing,
This edition of the Huaren magazine is by far the best of any production I have seen globally.
Obviously, the standard of the magazine, as judged by the caliber of the authors and the content, is sophisticated and intellectual, has jumped leaps and bounds.
Please accept my personal congratulations to a publication, now in the leading edge of the Chinese Diaspora. Keep the standard up and keep it coming.
Congratulations, once again and well done.

Dr Anthony Pun,
National President
Cbinese Community Council of Australia.l

Grievance Debate - Chinese Acknowledgement

Chris Hayes MP – Adjournment – Multiculturalism 25 June 2013

The World’s Wartime Debt to China



Published: October 17, 2013

OXFORD, England ­ At the same time that China has stated its desire for peace in Asia, the country has been making assertive claims over waters in the East and South China Seas. The confrontational rhetoric suggests, to many observers (and to China’s uneasy neighbors in the Pacific region), a sense of pent-up entitlement, stemming from Beijing’s growing importance in the world.


But another, little-remembered factor is also at play: China’s lingering resentment that its contributions to the Allies’ victory against Japan in World War II were never fully recognized and have yet to translate into political capital in the region.

China’s resistance to Japan is one of the great untold stories of World War II. Though China was the first Allied power to fight the Axis, it has received far less credit for its role in the Pacific theater than the United States, Britain or even the Soviet Union, which only joined the war in Asia in August 1945. The Chinese contribution was pushed aside soon after the conflict, as an inconvenient story in the neat ideological narrative of the Cold War.

In the early 20th century China’s growing desire for national sovereignty rubbed up against Japan’s rising imperialism on the Asian mainland. War broke out in earnest in July 1937, and during the eight years that it lasted, both the Nationalist forces of Chiang Kai-shek and, to a lesser extent, the Communist fighters answering to Mao Zedong engaged in extraordinary feats of resistance.

Though far weaker and poorer than the mighty United States or the British Empire, China played a major role in the war. Some 40,000 Chinese soldiers fought in Burma alongside American and British troops in 1944, helping to secure the Stilwell Road linking Lashio to Assam in India. In China itself, they held down some 800,000 Japanese soldiers.

The costs were great. At least 14 million Chinese were killed and some 80 million became refugees over the course of the war. The atrocities were many: the Rape of Nanking, in 1937, is the most notorious, but there were other, equally searing but less well-known, massacres: the bloody capture in 1938 of Xuzhou in the east, which threatened Chiang’s ability to control central China; the 1939 carpet bombing of Chongqing, the temporary capital, which killed more than 4,000 people in two days of air raids that a survivor described as “a sea of fire”; and the “three alls” campaign (“Burn all, loot all, kill all”) of 1941, which devastated the Communist-held areas in the north.

These strains placed immense pressure on what by then was a weak and isolated country. But some of the Chiang government’s policies made matters worse. A decision to seize the peasants’ grain to feed the army exacerbated the 1942 famine in Henan Province. “You could exchange a child for a few steamed rolls,” one government inspector recalled in his memoir. Such missteps made the Nationalist (Kuomintang) government seem corrupt and inefficient, and an embarrassing ally for the United States ­ even though the Nationalists did the vast majority of the fighting against Japan, far more than the Communists.

When the Allies won in 1945, China’s contribution to the victory was rewarded with a permanent seat on the Security Council of the new United Nations, but little more. After a civil war, the Chiang regime fell to the Communists in 1949, and Mao had little reason to recognize its contributions to the defeat of Japan. China’s wartime allies also did little to remind their own people of its role in their victory: The Nationalist regime ­ which fled to exile in Taiwan ­ was an embarrassing relic, and the new Communist regime was a frightening unknown. For the West, China had gone from wartime ally to threatening Communist giant in just a few years.

One major consequence that remains of great relevance today is that the old enemies of Asia never struck a multilateral settlement of the sort that took place in the North Atlantic after 1945, with the formation of NATO and what has become the European Union. The United States’ decision to put China on the sidelines of the postwar world order it dominated has meant that China and Japan never signed a proper peace treaty. And it has meant that for many years Western historians treated China’s role in World War II as a sideshow.

But recently a new political openness within China itself has allowed a different picture of the war years to emerge. Chiang and Mao are long dead, and the Chinese government has been trying to claim a greater international role by reminding the world of the benefits of its past cooperation with the West.

Eager to eventually reunify the mainland with Taiwan, Beijing has also adopted a more favorable attitude toward Chiang’s legacy. Chinese filmmakers and academics now have license to talk more freely about the Nationalists’ wartime contribution, whether in television dramas or scholarly articles. A lengthy and sympathetic biography of Chiang by Yang Tianshi, a historian at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, has been a big seller on the mainland. Chiang’s old wartime villa outside Chongqing has even been restored as a shrine of sorts, with pictures and captions describing him as a patriot who stood firm against the Japanese ­ a rehabilitation of Chiang’s reputation that would have been unimaginable under Mao.

This revision of history has significant consequences for East Asia and Southeast Asia today. If America’s leadership in defeating Japan in 1945 continues to justify a U.S. presence around the Pacific today, Chinese leaders feel, why shouldn’t China’s contribution to the same goal earn it some clout in the region? Beijing is trying to cash in today a geopolitical check Chiang Kai-shek wrote nearly seven decades ago.

Rana Mitter, professor of the history and politics of modern China at Oxford University, is the author of “Forgotten Ally: China’s World War II.”


E-Magazine September 2013

E-Magazine January - May 2013

E-Magazine September 2012

E-Magazine May 2012


我们人类喜欢声称人类 文明在中国和其它地方已有五千年之久。然而,我们人类的历史向我们表明的并非如此。我们离我们作为一个世界大家庭或在当今21世纪许多国家内可以足以声称我们是文明 的还有一段路要走。当然有时我们能为我们生活在文明社会所达到的成就而引以为豪。然而,最后真正的人类文明仍然在被创造之中。什么时候生活在地球村大家庭中的我们能称我们自己是‘文明’的呢?一个文明的社会或国家应当符合以下基本准则:

  1. 一个社会/国家/世界应由一系列文明法治所支配,由为人民而建立,并由人民建立的属于人民的适当的执法机构 ,而不是为具体的统治集团或独裁者或为满足他们的思想、宗教统治、权力和贪婪而建立。
  2. 在这些文明法治下,他们不应参与任何国内战争或国与国之间的战争。所有的争端不应通过武装暴动或暴力镇压来解决。因此,任何政治集团不应使用合法的军队获取政权或夺权。该政权应当在人民手中,由人民决定,属于人民,并为人民而存在。政权的转换应当通过和平的方式。所有人类的争端必须通过对话、仲裁、公众辩论、讨论和协商的方式解决,如果仍不能解决的话,则应通过有代表性的法庭系统和文明法治规则解决。必须设立一个用于政权转换的选举代表机构和由公民参与作决定的制度。
  3. 在文明社会和国家外,任何国与国之间的争端必须如以上方式通过和平外交代表系统和联合国宪章,国际法庭解决。不得考虑诉诸任何暴力战争解决争端。对于掌权的人,无论权力大小,采用暴力解决争端以符合他们的利益是便利的作法颇具引诱力。必须有文明法治规则能推迟、制止或防止他们企图如此行事。我知道说来容易做时难,但是我们如果具有适当的计划和执法机构便能做到。

令人难过的是看到东西方的从政者企图解释他们采用暴力战争的“功效”以证明其行动是正当的。最近“反恐”战争的例子是至关重要的。从人类文明的角度来说,宾 拉登和美国总统奥巴马均属同一范畴,归入不完美的领袖。我可以提供许多其它的例子来证明我前面的说明是正确的。人类文明仍然在进化形成中,因为我们还在文明法治规则之外相互残杀。

这是一个对于史学家显而易见的例子,但是很多掌权人却不能认识到,因为权力的诱惑太强了!很不幸的是我们必须反复指出人类的软弱性和他们的失败。在阿富汗、伊拉克、利比亚、中东、柬埔寨、和泰国等互相残杀都不能根本解决问题。同样,杀了宾 拉登或总统布什也不会解决宗教和不同思想意识之间的争端。它只能极化和恶化事态。上个月我访问了柬埔寨杀人现场和‘博物馆’。确实波尔波特政权应对杀人负责,但是它的根源在于印支战争中所造成在印支地区不稳定的政治局势。这最终导致产生杀人场所,不仅在柬埔寨有,在越南、老挝、北朝鲜、和中国等都存在。最终的分析归结为政治领袖的无知,他们下令轰炸和杀人导致成千上万的生命丧失,损坏无数的基础设施和制造了在世界各处颠沛流离的数百万难民极端的痛苦。我们称自己为‘文明’人类应当引以为耻。因此我认为:建立一个将给予我们所有的人,而不仅仅给予我们中的某些人,真正的人类文明,在此文明中创造平等、博爱、自由、公正和对人类幸福的追求,距此目标我们仍然有一段路要走。

我们‘文明’的民众对奥巴马和许多其他世界性的领袖在他们掌权后抱有很多希望,因为他们声称他们希望给他们的人民、社会、国家和他们的地球村大家庭带来和平、繁荣、公正、平等和和谐。我们仍然在等待,我希望我们无须再等待另外的5000年了。1215Magna Carta大宪章的精神为在西方社会的文明法治规则设定了节奏。在中国,孔子和其他哲学家已经在很久以前就如此行了。在此之后,在世界的某些地区,我们在人类‘文明’方面已经取得了巨大的成就和进展,这些地区具有相对的和平、稳定、繁荣、公正、平等与和谐。它证明我们有知识可以如此做到。然而,我们的政治领袖仍然缺乏勇气履行会领导我们达到一个真正的‘文明社会和地球村大家庭’我们认识该作的事情。我们具有我们人类经验的综合性智慧以及引领我们的知识,例如美国独立宣言、联合国人权宣言和义务以及孔子的大同篇,综合的人类哲学以及基督教、伊斯兰教和佛教等的智慧。



主席 蔡家声