Typhoon Haiyan Disaster in the Philippines

Blackstone said:

But in your heart, you suspect it's far more likely Chinese leaders were embarrassed by the snickering heard around the world, and Xi ordered more monetary and material aid. Yes?

Click to expand...

If that was the case, I would have expected a much bigger increase in the Chinese pledge. Going up from $100k to $1.6m is a significant jump, but it still doesn't really make China a stand out top donor. The same criticisms made against the 100k still apply to 1.6m does it not? China's new pledge is still significantly smaller than those made by the US or Japan and previous Chinese donations to other disasters.

If President Xi was actually bothered by all the sniping in the western press, surely he could have mustered up a little more than an additional 1.5m.

The increase seems far more likely to be as the result of a sober analysis of the latest available information for the damage cause by Haiyan compared to the initial projections before the storm hit.

Monetary assistance is very shallow determination of aid during a disaster. IMO, Countries should focus on humanitarian aid such as food, water, shelter and medicine and having the means to deliver them. Also I should point out the donations between countries means money is not going to a NGO or charity but directly to the Philippines gov't (which is even more corrupt than China). Which is why I think China chose to $1.64 million in relief supplies instead of a sizable cash amount. Though I wish China donated more...

In4ser said:

Monetary assistance is very shallow determination of aid during a disaster. IMO, Countries should focus on humanitarian aid such as food, water, shelter and medicine and having the means to deliver them. Also I should point out the donations between countries means money is not going to a NGO or charity but directly to the Philippines gov't (which is even more corrupt than China). Which is why I think China chose to $1.64 million in relief supplies instead of a sizable cash amount. Though I wish China donated more...

Click to expand...

Ah, I see, thanks for pointing out that the extra $1.4 million is in relief supplies, not cash.

There has been so many lies and half-truths in the western media about Chinese contributions. The reality now seems to be this: the Chinese Red Cross is contributing $100k, the Chinese government is matching that contribution with another $100k, and they're also sending in material aid worth $1.4 million.

I have read since the start of the relief efforts that China is going to be sending in relief supplies. It is good to know that the Chinese government has not bowed to the western smear campaign after all. It is simply western media that is playing games with words and spinning their own narrative.

solarz said:

Neighbors being, what, Philippines and Japan?

Go look at a map, China's total list of neighbors are:

- Russia
- India
- Kazakhstan
- Mongolia
- Pakistan
- Myanmar
- Afghanistan
- Vietnam
- Laos
- Kyrgyszstan
- Nepal
- Tajikistan
- North Korea
- South Korea
- Bhutan
- Philippines
- Indonesia
- Malaysia
- Singapore
- Thailand
- Bangladesh

North Korea is a treaty ally. Russia has close military cooperation with China. South Korea and Pakistan both have excellent diplomatic relations with China. Myanmar, Laos and Nepal are all within Beijing's sphere of influence. Aside from Philippines and Japan, all the rest (16 nations) maintain friendly to warm diplomatic relations with China, even India and Vietnam, despite their border disputes.

Like I said, you need a reality check.

By the way, ever heard about the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

?

Click to expand...

The emerging international relations pattern in Asia is nations that seek economic development/gains turn to China, and the same nations seeking security run to the US. Facts are the 7th Fleet has never been more popular than it is today, primarily because Asian nations are concerned/fearful of China's expansions and her perceived willingness to use force on territorial disputes. Who really started troubles in Diaoyu Island and the South China Sea is debatable, but Japan and others have convinced the world China is the problem. Right or wrong, perception is reality.

Blackstone said:

The emerging international relations pattern in Asia is nations that seek economic development/gains turn to China, and the same nations seeking security run to the US. Facts are the 7th Fleet has never been more popular than it is today, primarily because Asian nations are concerned/fearful of China's expansions and her perceived willingness to use force on territorial disputes. Who really started troubles in Diaoyu Island and the South China Sea is debatable, but Japan and others have convinced the world China is the problem. Right or wrong, perception is reality.

Click to expand...

"Others" being whom, exactly? Is Malaysia turning to the US for security? How about Brunei? Indonesia? They're all claimants in the SCS dispute. None of them were a US colony like the Philippine was, either.

The fact is, *YOUR* perception is wrong and it has nothing to do with reality.

plawolf said:

If President Xi was actually bothered by all the sniping in the western press, surely he could have mustered up a little more than an additional 1.5m.

Click to expand...

Good point and I can't dispute it.

The increase seems far more likely to be as the result of a sober analysis of the latest available information for the damage cause by Haiyan compared to the initial projections before the storm hit.

Click to expand...

Maybe, but Kaiyan was tagged as one of the biggest typhoons in recent memory before it hit the Philippines. Nevertheless, consider a different path China might have taken:
1) Haiyan hits the Philippines, causing thousands of deaths and millions of displaced victims
2) China Foreign Ministry announces all differences between the two countries are put aside for the time being to address the natural disaster
3) China, as the world's second greatest power, gives more $$$ than Japan, Australia, and all countries not named the United States
4) The Peace Ark is swiftly dispatched to the Philippines, carrying more supplies than anyone other than the USN can provide
5) PLAN and PLAAF mobilizes to provide more aid than anyone not named USN and USAF

Just think of the benefits China would have received had she taken the high road;
* Massive goodwill in Asia and in the world
* Reduced tension with the Philippines and maybe even with Japan
* Pride in China for showcasing great power abilities
* Put actions behind words that China intends to benefit all of humanity and not just her own people
* Least we forget, logistical and operational experience for PLAN, PLAAF, and other government agencies. Boy, what great training it would have been (and still could be)
* Promote Chinese soft power (maybe First Lady Peng Liyuan could bring some aid and visit the victims?)

The bottom line is China keeps telling the world she's a "responsible great power," and wants to benefit all of humanity. Haiyan disaster is an opportunity to show it.

solarz said:

"Others" being whom, exactly? Is Malaysia turning to the US for security? How about Brunei? Indonesia? They're all claimants in the SCS dispute. None of them were a US colony like the Philippine was, either.

The fact is, *YOUR* perception is wrong and it has nothing to do with reality.

Click to expand...

Solarz, be reasonable and don't argue for argument sake. You know there are exceptions to most things in life. Let's have a rational and genteel discussion. The subject is informed people wouldn't disagree that, in general, Asian nations run to the US for security and to China for economy. If you can't see your way past that, then we can't have a reasonable discussion.

Blackstone said:

Solarz, be reasonable and don't argue for argument sake. You know there are exceptions to most things in life. Let's have a rational and genteel discussion. The subject is informed people wouldn't disagree that, in general, Asian nations run to the US for security and to China for economy. If you can't see your way past that, then we can't have a reasonable discussion.

Click to expand...

No, that's just how the western media spins it. If you actually bothered to do some research of your own instead of blindly swallowing what the media tells you, you'd have realized that your statement is simply wrong.

solarz said:

No, that's just how the western media spins it. If you actually bothered to do some research of your own instead of blindly swallowing what the media tells you, you'd have realized that your statement is simply wrong.

Click to expand...

Ok fine, we're done on this topic.

Hmmm cannot pretend to be overly pleased by a lot of what is being posted here.
I would advise that the slagging match ends at this point and do not let the lack of red type lull anyone into a false sense of security.

That aside, I will try and navigate this Typhung wrecked thread and see if I can get my own relief mission in operation.

There is undoubtedly two main perspectives to this event.

Perspective one - a major natural disaster has occurred, in which a lot of ordinary and innocent people have been very seriously affected with a significant loss of life, injury and damage to property and infrastructure. The need of these people is real and the response from many people around the world is genuine and sincere.

Perspective two - a major event has happened in a country that forms a critical direct border/buffer between two rival super powers and the event is major enough to participate fundamental political change in the border country, which could irreversibly change the status quo and regional balance of power to the detriment of the established super power.

No-one will have any problem discussing Perspective one and for many it will be the primary focus of this thread.

I personally do not have a problem discussing perspective two, although some of my senior management colleagues may and I along with everybody else will defer to their judgement.

What I will nor any other moderator will permit is the mixing of the two perspectives as this would entail using the emotive issues of perspective one to pursue a distinctly political agenda as per perspective 2.

Unfortunately, we have definitely seen the media mixing the two perspectives to whip up public near hysteria over the event, with a level of exaggeration and disregard for proberty, that is almost a re-run of the Syrian coverage post the Chemical Weapon attack in August. The exaggeration in this case has been so extreme that President Aquino himself has felt compelled to intervene and try and put the record straight, even though he is the nominal beneficiary of much of this effort. I suspect that the OTT nature of some claims and coverage were downplaying the role and efforts of the Filipino Government and armed forces that it was becoming a secondary challenge to his office.

No doubt, the US and its allies will pull out all the stops to maintain the Aquino regime and prevent a poor disaster response from Manila cause his fall and risk the rise of a pro Beijing government. China of course is in a hard position, it has no benefit to see Aquino survive but cannot risk being seen as over miserly. Likewise, given the near unlimited support the Aquino will get from Washington, there is no opportunity (at this point) of using aid as soft power to hasten a public change of opinion in the Philippines, so for Beijing little point in being over generous. I suspect that the amounts offered, represent the minimum acceptable commitment.