At times words fail me and this article in the Scotsman is one of those occasions. A person called Carolynne Wheeler writes about Alex Salmond being stood up by the Wan Gang, the Chinese minister of science and technology, when it had been arranged they would take part in a public question and answer session. Mr Gang's place was taken by Li Junfeng, deputy director 'of a government agency on energy research'.
Part of Ms Wheeler's article:
'The (sic) was no suggestion from the Chinese that Mr Wan had pulled out of the meeting because Mr Salmond represented a separatist administration, but one leading academic stressed yesterday that the Chinese authorities would be wary of being seen to be too friendly with a separatist government.'
Willy Lam, a professor at Hong Kong's Chinese University, said: "Beijing's relations with the UK in general are very good, partly given the fact that when (president] Hu Jintao was in London for the G20 meeting, he was given VIP treatment.
"You can see in photographs he was shown standing next to the Queen and in some shown standing next to Gordon Brown. Even (US president Barack] Obama wasn't given this placement.
"I imagine Beijing would not play up the fact that this leader who is visiting is advocating separatist sentiments, because that might prove embarrassing."
A spokesman for Mr Salmond later said the First Minister had met the people he had both hoped and needed to.
Willy Lam, a professor at Hong Kong's Chinese University, said: "Beijing's relations with the UK in general are very good, partly given the fact that when (president] Hu Jintao was in London for the G20 meeting, he was given VIP treatment.
"You can see in photographs he was shown standing next to the Queen and in some shown standing next to Gordon Brown. Even (US president Barack] Obama wasn't given this placement.
"I imagine Beijing would not play up the fact that this leader who is visiting is advocating separatist sentiments, because that might prove embarrassing."
A spokesman for Mr Salmond later said the First Minister had met the people he had both hoped and needed to.
Is it any wonder the Scotsman is nearly bankrupt? As one forum commenter Canes Pugnaces said "What a shocking piece of invented journalism. This is really scraping the barrel."
To read a balanced article about part of the First Minister's visit see China.org.
Posts
27 comments:
And embarrassing indded it might have proved to be...., 1997 is still too Fresh in everyone's mind in Hong Kong, Mainland China and of course the UK...
It's a relationship that goes to when way back then...
I understand your sentiments...but unfortunately, small entities cannot and will not be allowed to win...Small countries, cultures, entities are just pawns...I can give you an example of my own heritage being hostage to World Powers (The so called powers that be) but I do not feel this is the forum for it... All I can say is that April 24th will tell us if Obama is a man of his word or not... The same goes for Scotland...I feel for you Sista.
Usual "Scotsman" garbage - I rarely read it anymore.
Baron - yer a man ae mystery!
My blog description says it all subrosa.
But I thought you'd be pleased at the implied comparison between Scotland/UK and Tibet/China?
Small wonder the Chinese one party state find Alex Salmond controversial.
The avowed enemy of the U.K and who's whole life and will is bent on breaking up a nation.
To expect the totalitarian Chinese to give massive prominence and a heroes welcome to a minor leader.
dedicated to the proposition small nations are the natural order.
is really to stand Chinese one party totalitarian politics on its head.
Must admit i find Alexs answer to the economic distress in Scotland to turn everybody into caddy's..not very inspiring
Oh Niko Scotland is a nation not the UK. Britain isn't a nation either. So there are no nations being 'broken up.' Got it. Surely you mean the breakup of the crap union which hasn't benefitted Scotland for year.
Baron, what happens on the 24th?
Aye Conan, I've stopped reading it really but thought I'd have a glance last night. That'll teach me.
Oh Stuart, I'm not always flattered by such comparisons, certainly not by that one.
i still buy this rag every day without fail, and yet chie my da for buying the daily record
or the labour liar as i call it.
whole swathes of the debate section are now gone, most notably the "from the blogosphere" section
Subrosa, I thought the overbearing/imperialist state versus oppressed nation unable to fulfil its destiny comparison would appeal to Scottish nationalist sentiment?
Stuart, I support Scottish independence but I'm not a fervent SNP member. In fact I'm not a member of any political party. Your comparison of Scotland and Tibet is quite a poor choice. The unionist parties have yet to unleash physical violence upon Scotland. Should that happen then I will entirely agree with you.
I don't think I have anything to add to this story that the Scotsman have not added before.
Waste of trees.
Still working on it Sub R
What worries me, now that I have woken up, is that the Daily Mail and The Sun outsell all the Scottish based newspapers.
You would think that the eejits editing the Daily Retard, Herald and Hootsmon would waken up to the arket opportunity that the SNP represent.
FFSake they are in government and still they slavver the unionist line.
The BBC is just bloody unspeakable. I am glad I don't pay the voluntary subscription.
I just don't know what the Herald and Scotsman are playing at FC, as I thought business was for profit. They can't be making money as they're 'restructuring' not only once, but a couple of times.
Short-sighted to say the least. The paper which surprises me most is the Dundee Courier which is owned by staunch unionists yet usually gives a balanced account of current affairs.
HP old habits die hard don't they. I bought the SoS until about a year ago when I realised it wasn't worth the money in diesel just to read poor journalism.
Keep at it FC ;)
Sub R
Dundee Courier
Simple really, not rocket science.
Antennae up and ears close to the ground.
Family owned and needs to survive. Whichever way Scotland goes they need and want to exist.
Hoots and Herald, external ownership and no hands on management. All remote and accounts based. They will not, until the Sheriff's Officers arrive actually confront the problem of content of the newspaper and the context in which it exists.
Jeremy wotsitname Clarkson once said don't buy a car whose badge does not reflect the name of the founder. The founder had a vision and, it is the duty of the inheritors of that vision to continue and adapt it for the needs of the moment.
I have to disagree with you FC. The Thomson press keep their Tory opinions but they don't let them interfere with current affairs. Personally I don't think they 'play' to the majority because the majority in Dundee have always been labour as you know, but I do think their journalists do give a reasonable account of politics.
I really don't know that we are disagreeing?
Subrosa, I think you're reading something into what I said that isn't there - the article didn't mention violence, nor did I - the issue was separatism per se, and surely there's a parallel between Tibet and Scotland that would militate against the Chinese cosying up to Alex Salmond irrespective of the issue of violence or other matters that might be used to deflect attention from that parallel?
Similarly, I didn't say anything about you being a member of the SNP nor indeed any other party - note 'nationalist' with a small 'n' ;0)
As for the general theme of the thread, if the article makes the Scotsman morally bankrupt then surely it follows that most blogs and the like are similarly lacking?
As for the Courier, perhaps the difference is that there's little comment in it compared to the Scotsman and Herald, and most of the national news is syndicated thus perhaps provides more of an inherent balance.
I don't see much of the Courier comment being particularly favourable to nationalism.
You're right of course, the article didn't mention violence Stuart. But, if I say chianti to you does it remind you of Scotland? The comparison with Tibet was a poor one that's what I'm saying but obviously I'm looking at it from a different angle to yourself.
I don't retract my comment that the Scotsman is morally bankrupt and yes maybe many blogs are too, including this one of course.
The difference is journalists who write for newspapers are paid for doing so and it is their profession.
Blogging is usually the opinion of the blogger and with a few exceptions none is paid.
I admit the online Courier has little comment and much of the news content is by freelance journalists these days. They still have a political editor who doubles for local events I think.
Stuart, I'm not looking for newspapers to be 'favourable' to nationalism. What I want from my newspaper is an impartial account of events. The Courier and the P&J do better than the Scotsman and Herald most of the time, but that's just my opinion.
Certainly, if SNP members decided to run through the heather some Saturday wearing their kilts and trainers and wielding claymores, then I wouldn't expect any newspaper to praise them - on the contrary :-)
Ooops FC sorry, no, we're not disagreeing. I think I was a little confused there. It's Stuart playing devil's advocate that knocked me off my thought path :-)
Subrosa, I'm not sure what relevance the financial side has in relation to moral 'bankruptcy', unless you mean the latter word in its literal sense - my blog is certainly bankrupt in financial terms ;0)
Anyway, did you see the article in The Times at the weekend titled "China decides on Dalai Lama treatment for Alex Salmond":
"The explanation probably lies in China’s sensitivity to Tibet. Edinburgh is a long way from Lhasa but it is a fair guess that China's leaders see similarities. Here is a leader whose stated policy is to win separation for his country, placing him, potentially, on a par with rebellious Tibetan monks.
"Alex Salmond is no Dalai Lama but to have given him the honour of a meeting with the Foreign Minister may have invited a connection. China is particularly anxious when it comes to issues of separatism. Of course, Mr Salmond will receive a warm welcome but not perhaps with the same seniority as the one given to Mr Murphy."
Again this emphasises that the issue is separatism per se rather than any violent dimension, but I'm sure you'll interpret it otherwise!
Auch Stuart, you know full well I meant in the literal sense.
I've yet to see the article in the Times, I'll read it shortly.
If China or any other country wants to see Scotland as a 'trouble-maker' within the world then that's fine with me. I'm quite sure Scotland would receive support from many countries in the world for wishing to take control of its own affairs.
As for Murphy Stuart, don't upset what has been a pleasant day please!
Post a Comment