Fernando MonteiroGruesome China Inc. Arrest
July 13th 2009 14:56
The Chinese government behind Chinalco’s failed acquisition attempt for Rio Tinto, after calling the Aussie company a “disreputable woman”, arrests one of its executives, Australian citizen Mr Stern Hu, on imaginary spy charges with a risk of being sentenced with life imprisonment or even with the death penalty. Is the Chinese government now behaving as “man who finds work for disreputable women”?
The question for Australia this moment is how to approach this situation. The Opposition demands the Prime Minister to simply call the Chinese President and demand the release of Mr Hu. But Mr Kevin Rudd, mindful of the Chinese political culture is avoiding to confront or humiliate the Chinese, with good reason and tactical sense.
He has preferred to wait until charges are made, which may take up to three months, to then do something public, if at all public. Meanwhile, having the PM many friends in China, being himself a Mandarin speaker, he is certainly pulling the diplomatic strings. I do not think our PM is sleeping.
What is, though, the message the Chinese government is sending to Rio Tinto, Australia and the Western world in general? Are the Chinese suffering of out of control political arrogance based on their GDP growth figures? Do the Chinese government actually think that intimidating Western business concerns is going to do much for them? Does China Inc. think that after episodes of this kind it will be easier and cheaper to import commodities from and sell their cheap exports to the West?
The Chinese government cannot think it can deal with world business the same way it represses rebellion within its own borders. It actually surprises me that they do not, at this point in time, realise that. On the other hand, the Chinese judicial system is a mockery of justice, being the government able to get whatever decision it choses. I think we can only pray for Mr Rudd’s good endeavours to get Mr Hu out of there. It will take some diplomacy.
The next time China Inc. tries to buy part of an Aussie business, or for that matter, any Western business, will they disclose in the purchase documents that, if not being successful, they will try to shoot some of their counterparts with a bullet to the back of the neck?
The question for Australia this moment is how to approach this situation. The Opposition demands the Prime Minister to simply call the Chinese President and demand the release of Mr Hu. But Mr Kevin Rudd, mindful of the Chinese political culture is avoiding to confront or humiliate the Chinese, with good reason and tactical sense.
He has preferred to wait until charges are made, which may take up to three months, to then do something public, if at all public. Meanwhile, having the PM many friends in China, being himself a Mandarin speaker, he is certainly pulling the diplomatic strings. I do not think our PM is sleeping.
What is, though, the message the Chinese government is sending to Rio Tinto, Australia and the Western world in general? Are the Chinese suffering of out of control political arrogance based on their GDP growth figures? Do the Chinese government actually think that intimidating Western business concerns is going to do much for them? Does China Inc. think that after episodes of this kind it will be easier and cheaper to import commodities from and sell their cheap exports to the West?
The Chinese government cannot think it can deal with world business the same way it represses rebellion within its own borders. It actually surprises me that they do not, at this point in time, realise that. On the other hand, the Chinese judicial system is a mockery of justice, being the government able to get whatever decision it choses. I think we can only pray for Mr Rudd’s good endeavours to get Mr Hu out of there. It will take some diplomacy.
The next time China Inc. tries to buy part of an Aussie business, or for that matter, any Western business, will they disclose in the purchase documents that, if not being successful, they will try to shoot some of their counterparts with a bullet to the back of the neck?
| 51 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
