`
In Japan, the customer service agent was extremely nice and friendly, but declined his request politely, saying it was against the policy. In Japan, you are rude if you try to change your appointment when the prearranged date is near.
`
In Korea, the customer consultant was not particularly friendly, but she changed the delivery date for him anyway. In fact, in Korea it is possible to change your appointment even until the last moment. Koreans are quite flexible about such things. Besides, Koreans are well known to do things quickly, too. Indeed, everything is so fast in Korean society that it surely is convenient to live there.
`
Then the journalist wrote that in the United States he could not even talk to the customer service representative. Presumably, when he called, the answering machine put him on hold forever. In my recent experience, I had to wait about 40 minutes before I was finally able to talk to a customer service representative. Although it varies depending on the companies and calling hours, putting a customer on hold for about half an hour seems to be common in the United States these days.
`
The Korean correspondent’s comparison of Japan, South Korea and the United States made me smile because it revealed the radical differences among the three countries. Indeed, Japan is a country where people are polite and friendly, and yet they do everything “by the book”. Additionally, in Japanese society it is seriously frowned upon to put someone to much trouble or to take up much of anyone’s time. You should not make yourself an annoyance or nuisance, either.
`
South Korea is a country where the people do not always live by the book strictly and thus can be flexible. Although such elasticity may cause problems sometimes, it certainly is convenient for ordinary people’s everyday lives. In addition, Korean society is speedy. Everything is so fast, so you do not need to wait for a long time. Some foreigners like it so much that they decide to live in Korea much longer than they originally planned.
`
Compared with Korea, everything is so slow in the United States. For example, when you apply for a driver license or transfer from another state’s license, it usually takes a month to receive the license by mail. In South Korea, you can get your driver license within 10 to 15 minutes. When you submit a paper to an American journal, it takes at least a year to get published. In Korea, it takes only a few weeks.
`
Recently, an American friend of mine called a company to paint his house. The company told him that the paint job had to wait for about a year. He also called an electrician to repair an electrical problem in his study. The electrician informed him that he had to be on a waiting list which stretched for about three months. Granted, the Covid-19 pandemic and the current housebuying boom in the United States has had significant effects on supply and demand, but it still is too long to wait.
`
In Korea, painters or electricians would come right away when you call them. As for a doctor’s office in Korea, one can drop in anytime, even without an appointment. In the United States, you may have to wait for several months unless it is an emergency.
`
In the 1970s, when I lived in the United States, America was a truly advanced country. Everything was so admirable and commendable. At that time, the social system of America was superb, and American society was reasonable and rational. Living in the United States at the time was indeed convenient and pleasurable.
`
Half a century has passed. The problem is that the American system has not changed much since then, while other countries have changed rapidly and radically to suit the hyperspeed electronic era. As time goes on, therefore, the once-efficient and impeccable American system has become relatively inefficient and slow.
`
Perhaps the American people may not realise it because they have been living in such an environment for a long time. However, in the eyes of young foreigners who are used to speedy procedures and dynamic changes in their country, obviously many things seem to be very slow in the United States.
`
In America, when you are a regular customer, not a new one, things are much better. For example, when my toilet began leaking a few days ago, the plumbing company initially set up an appointment to install a new one two weeks later. When notified of the urgency, however, a technician came immediately and took care of it. Thus, it all depends.
`
By such comparisons, we can learn many intriguing things about other countries. – The Korea Herald/Asia News Network
Beijing: Universities from the Chinese mainland have secured seven of the top 10 positions in the Times Higher Education’s Emerging Economies University Rankings 2020 for the third straight year.
Tsinghua University maintained its position at the top in the listing of institutions from emerging economies.
Peking University was in second place for the second year running.
Zhejiang University and the University of Science and Technology of China remain in third and fourth place, while Shanghai Jiao Tong University climbed from eighth to sixth. Fudan University was listed in seventh place, while Nanjing University was ninth.
Other institutions in the top 10 include Moscow State University (fifth), National Taiwan University (eighth), and The University of Cape Town (10th).
Phil Baty, chief knowledge officer at Times Higher Education, said: “China’s success in our Emerging Economies University Rankings reflects its rapid rise on the world higher education stage. With the Double First Class Initiative driving improvements across participant universities, we expect it to continue to establish itself as a major global player in providing world-class higher education over the coming years.”
The Double First-Class Initiative refers to fostering “world-class universities” and “world-class discipline”. — China Daily/ANN
Beijing: Universities from the Chinese mainland have secured seven of the top 10 positions in the Times Higher Education’s Emerging Economies University Rankings 2020 for the third straight year.
Tsinghua University maintained its position at the top in the listing of institutions from emerging economies.
Peking University was in second place for the second year running.
Zhejiang University and the University of Science and Technology of China remain in third and fourth place, while Shanghai Jiao Tong University climbed from eighth to sixth. Fudan University was listed in seventh place, while Nanjing University was ninth.
Other institutions in the top 10 include Moscow State University (fifth), National Taiwan University (eighth), and The University of Cape Town (10th).
Phil Baty, chief knowledge officer at Times Higher Education, said: “China’s success in our Emerging Economies University Rankings reflects its rapid rise on the world higher education stage. With the Double First Class Initiative driving improvements across participant universities, we expect it to continue to establish itself as a major global player in providing world-class higher education over the coming years.”
The Double First-Class Initiative refers to fostering “world-class universities” and “world-class discipline”. — China Daily/ANN
Some US political elites have been strengthening political mobilization against China and trying to rope in more Western forces to oppose China. Their most prominent act is to attack the leadership of the Communist Party of China and blacken China's political system. They obviously hope to suppress other countries' desire to expand cooperation with China by mobilizing people's political aversion to China.
Global financial markets are facing a stark wake-up call that they need to unite to stand against acts of what can only be described as economic terrorism by a country which unilaterally imposes its will on others and pursues its own goals at the cost of the interests of others.
More than a year after US President Donald Trump fired the first tariff salvo at China, he is extending the battlefield around the world. On Friday, his administration announced that it will end special trade treatment for India, removing a status that exempts billions of dollars of the South Asian country's products from US tariffs. Trump is seriously mulling slapping tariffs on Mexican imports as he believes the country has taken advantage of the US for decades.
Even close allies cannot trust they will be exempt from Trump's tariff addiction. It was reported that the administration considered imposing tariffs on imports from Australia, but eventually decided against the move amid opposition from his aides, "at least temporarily."
Obviously, Trump, a businessman-turned president, is aiming his trigger finger regardless of the targets, be they US competitors or allies. Trump grumbles about his country subsidizing the world and weakening US industry and pledges to make America great again. But he doesn't realize that a great superpower is supposed to provide public goods rather than resorting to coercion for selfish gains. His tactics are nothing short of economic terrorism.
The International Air Transport Association has estimated that the US-China trade war and high fuel prices will wipe $7.5 billion off expected airline profits in 2019. This is just the figure from the airline industry, which is enough to show the disastrous impact the US-initiated economic terrorism has on the globe. Trump may disrupt the global supply chain with the US' economic clout, but how can a disrupted global supply chain serve the US' strategic objectives of being a great country?
What is worse, before the US becomes great again as the president wishes, he is actually employing the strategy of blocking other countries to take the lead, as we see in his actions in quashing Huawei's 5G advancement.
Later this month, leaders from the world's top economies will meet at the G20 summit in Osaka, Japan to discuss key economic issues that plague the world. The conventional views of globalization and its benefits are still shared by most countries, and many countries and regions are continuing to open their economies. They should unite to face the chaos created by the Trump administration and find a way forward, so the process of globalization will not be held hostage by the US' economic terrorism. - By Zhang Yi
As a civilization that is thousands of years old, China has
always been integrating into the current international system and
taking responsibility to defend the international order after the world
wars and the international rule of law coming into force. At the same
time, China is dedicated to promoting democratization and legalization
of international relations.
Global financial markets are facing a stark wake-up call that they need to unite to stand against acts of what can only be described as economic terrorism by a country which unilaterally imposes its will on others and pursues its own goals at the cost of the interests of others.
More than a year after US President Donald Trump fired the first tariff salvo at China, he is extending the battlefield around the world. On Friday, his administration announced that it will end special trade treatment for India, removing a status that exempts billions of dollars of the South Asian country's products from US tariffs. Trump is seriously mulling slapping tariffs on Mexican imports as he believes the country has taken advantage of the US for decades.
Even close allies cannot trust they will be exempt from Trump's tariff addiction. It was reported that the administration considered imposing tariffs on imports from Australia, but eventually decided against the move amid opposition from his aides, "at least temporarily."
Obviously, Trump, a businessman-turned president, is aiming his trigger finger regardless of the targets, be they US competitors or allies. Trump grumbles about his country subsidizing the world and weakening US industry and pledges to make America great again. But he doesn't realize that a great superpower is supposed to provide public goods rather than resorting to coercion for selfish gains. His tactics are nothing short of economic terrorism.
The International Air Transport Association has estimated that the US-China trade war and high fuel prices will wipe $7.5 billion off expected airline profits in 2019. This is just the figure from the airline industry, which is enough to show the disastrous impact the US-initiated economic terrorism has on the globe. Trump may disrupt the global supply chain with the US' economic clout, but how can a disrupted global supply chain serve the US' strategic objectives of being a great country?
What is worse, before the US becomes great again as the president wishes, he is actually employing the strategy of blocking other countries to take the lead, as we see in his actions in quashing Huawei's 5G advancement.
Later this month, leaders from the world's top economies will meet at the G20 summit in Osaka, Japan to discuss key economic issues that plague the world. The conventional views of globalization and its benefits are still shared by most countries, and many countries and regions are continuing to open their economies. They should unite to face the chaos created by the Trump administration and find a way forward, so the process of globalization will not be held hostage by the US' economic terrorism. - By Zhang Yi
As a civilization that is thousands of years old, China has always been integrating into the current international system and taking responsibility to defend the international order after the world wars and the international rule of law coming into force. At the same time, China is dedicated to promoting democratization and legalization of international relations.
A Japanese right-winger captured in photo at Yasukuni Shrine on the 71st anniversary of Japans surrender in World War II on August 15, 2016. Yasukuni enshrines war criminals, and as such visits by Japanese politicians tend to provoke anger from neighbors China and Korea that suffered from Japans militarist past.
https://youtu.be/p57piVGcVqg
August 15 marked the 71st anniversary of Japan's unconditional surrender during World War II. However, on this special day when Japan should spend time reflecting on its history of militaristic aggression, its Prime Minister Shinzo Abe sent a ritual offering to the notorious Yasukuni Shrine.
The Yasukuni Shrine, which honors 14 Class-A convicted war criminals among 2.5 million Japanese war dead from WWII, is regarded as a symbol of past Japanese militarism.
The honoring of war criminals, no matter what form it takes, only serves to further hurt those Asian neighbors that Japan once invaded. Such perverse acts to whitewash its crimes of military aggression runs contrary to the pursuit of peace in Asia and the world at large.
It's common knowledge that the Yasukuni Shrine is a source of spiritual inspiration for Japan to start another war of aggression. Yet, the country's new Defense Minister Tomomi Inada has tried to associate such a notorious place with the mourning of soldiers belonging to Japan’s Self-Defense Forces.
She claimed at a recent seminar that “the Yasukuni Shirine is not the place to vow not to fight. It needs to become a place where we vow to desperately fight when our Motherland is at risk.” Her words shocked even the Kyodo News.
The 71-year-peace after WWII was hard-won. Born from the victory over fascism, this peace has been the foundation for post-war international order. This conclusion is not something that can be ignored, denied or overturned by any country.
World peace and the post-war order, which came at the cost of the blood and lives of the peoples of Allied countries, is closely tied to justice.
Last year, the world commemorated the 70th anniversary of the end of the World Anti-Fascist War, but some countries, looking out for their own interests, have turned a blind eye to the wrongdoings of Japan and have even urged Japan to abandon its pacifist constitution. The world today is witnessing the negative impact brought about by this short-sighted strategy.
By erasing its invasion history, Japan is on one hand attempting to lock away memories of the war and on the other hand setting the stage for future action. In the House of Councillors election in July, lawmakers pushing for Constitution amendments won more than two-thirds of seats. This has led to forward-thinking people in Japan to also begin worrying about the “return of war.”
In order to strengthen military power and shake off the post-war order, the Abe administration usually uses the so-called “China threat” as an excuse to deceive the Japanese public and other parts of the world.
After Japan adopted its new security laws that lifted a decades-old ban on collective self-defense, the Abe administration has been making every effort to contain China by instigating disputes between China and other countries.
On the day when the so-called arbitral decision on the South China Sea dispute was announced in July, Japan, a non-party in the issue, immediately pressured China to accept the arbitration. At the following 11th Asia-Europe Summit and foreign ministers' meetings on East-Asia cooperation held in last month, Japan reiterated its stance again and again.
In the country’s annual defense white paper issued in early August, Japan pointed fingers at China over the South China Sea issue once again. The paper also made irresponsible remarks concerning China’s armament, military expense and transparency. These actions by the Abe administration has triggered alarm and concern throughout the international community.
Japan's tribute at the Yasukuni Shrine on Monday once again reminds us that world peace is not that should be taken for granted, it demands continual justice and also the capability to defend it.- People's Daily
Japan’s intervention in South China Sea perverse, vicious: expert
Chinese PLA Navy staged drills in the waters of South China Sea on July 8, 2016.
Japan’s efforts to muddle the waters of the South China Sea are perverse acts that turn back the wheel of history, a Chinese expert wrote on Monday in an article that marked the 71st anniversary of Japan's unconditional surrender in World War II and called on the public to ponder Japan’s real intentions.
In the People’s Daily article, Hu Dekun, the president of China Association for History of WWII, pointed out that the war of aggression initiated by Japanese fascists during the 1930s and 1940s had brought tremendous disaster to people both in China and the Asia-Pacific region.
As an assailant country, Japan should be held accountable for its war crimes. However, in order to cement its global hegemony, the US, who then exclusively occupied Japanese territory, allied with the latter in the hopes of dominating the Asia-Pacific order.
But instead of repenting for its war crimes and improving ties with the victimized countries, Japanese right-wing politicians started bullying other countries under the support of the US, read the article, titled “Perverse Acts of Japanese Government.” Things got worse after the US adopted its “Asia-Pacific Rebalance” policy, Hu writes, citing the South China Sea issue as an example.
Hu noted that in a bid to contain China, Japan repeatedly instigated disputes between China and other countries around the South China Sea. Japan, a country not involved in the South China Sea issue, joined the US as another agitator in meddling the waters.
According to Hu, Japan is attempting to get rid of the post-war order by amending its constitution.
After Japan officially adopted the new security laws that lifted the decades-old ban on collective self-defense, the country is now planning a constitution amendment. But the biggest roadblock ahead is public support. The Abe administration is seeking that support by playing up the “China threat.”
What’s more, Tokyo hopes divert public’s attention from other domestic issues. The Abe administration has lost credibility after "Abenomics" failed to revive the Japan’s sluggish economy. By fanning the flames of the South China Sea issue, the administration hopes to route domestic conflicts and consolidate its power.
By poking its nose in the South China Sea, Japan wishes to buddy up to the US. Though the US tried to manipulate some counties to challenge China, its “Asia-Pacific Rebalance” policy suffered serious setbacks by China's diplomacy, friendships and policy of win-win cooperation, especially as the “Belt and Road” initiative aims to benefit most of its neighboring countries. Japan wants to take this chance to curb China so that it could pander to its alliance with the US.
“What’s Japan's real intention for interfering in the South China Sea issue? Is Japan going to repeat its mistakes? ”asked Hu. - People's Daily
Aug 6, 2016 ... Once again, in its latest defense white paper, Japan has shamelessly accused China of jeopardizing regional peace and stability, playing up ...
Jul 18, 2016 ...China hardens after questionable tribunal ruling on South China Sea .... Permanent Court of Arbitration clarifies role in South China Sea case THE HAGUE, July 16 ... 不合法的裁决不过废纸一张, Illegal ruling but a waste paper.
5 days ago ...Beware of meddling via soft power ! Joining the club - Illustration: Shen Lan/GT. MEDDLING by foreign powers is an established phenomenon ...
REFERRING to "Ripples and rumbles in South China Sea" (see below) by K. Thanabalasingam, I wish to share a few more points vital to the issue.
Conventional knowledge is that China's claim to the islands is arbitrary and violates International Law. But what is left out is an impartial overview of the whole situation based on historical considerations and facts on the ground.
Claims made by Vietnam and China are mostly centred on history. The rest of the claimants are late comers after the 1951 Treaty of San Francisco and 1982 UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea).
To avoid complicating the issue, knowledge of history has to be put in perspective. Since there are no "historical titles" to validate, then whatever historical facts, maps or records have to be considered as evidence. At least it sheds light to validate its case.
China has been consistent in her claims since 1279. Marker stones and light houses were on the islands but most were destroyed by Vietnam and the Philippines. Even early European records affirmed Chinese fishermen took annual sojourns on Spratly islands for part of the year.
One interesting event that happened in 1953 involved a Tomas Cloma, (director of the Maritime Institute of the Philippines) who threw away all the marker stones and made a unilateral claim on some Spratly islands and later in December 1974 was forced to sell to the government for 1 peso only, now known as Kalayaan.
All these facts are buried and often not revealed by the West.
The infamous Treaty of San Francisco, also known as Treaty of Peace with Japan, was drafted by US and Allied Powers to settle post-war issues affecting nations. Whatever the circumstances, China/Taiwan and Korea were not invited to attend the negotiations which deprived them of a fair chance and the right to present their cases. This also breached the Cairo/Potsdam declarations.
After the devastating long war, China got the raw end of the deal with unsettled lands and islands. Scholars and historians viewed this as a deliberate manoeuvre by Western Powers especially the US to create ambiguities to serve their covert interests.
I totally agree with Thanabalasingam on the recent statement by the US and Allies to pre-empt the tribunal's verdict in favour of the Philippines is an act of prima facie and undermines the whole proceedings of the court. That is why under Article 298 of UNCLOS, China declared that it does not accept compulsory arbitral procedures relating to sea boundary delimitation in 2006. Without guessing, one could easily decipher why the Philippine chose the arbitration court.
On the ground, it doesn't need a military expert to see what's happening in the region. It is a tussle between China and US with puppets (the Philippines, Australia, Japan, Vietnam) joining in the fray.
The US's sole interest is to maintain her status quo and dominance in the region. China, a rising power, is a direct competitor. When Obama announced the pivot to Asia in 2012, tensions started building up day by day with increasing deployment of military assets to frightening level.
More bases have been opened to the US in the Philippines, Japan, Australia, and some Asean nations, creating a "ring of fire" to contain China.
To harness support US raises up the heat and false alarms on China's threat to "Freedom of Navigation", etc. Do you expect China to remain docile and silent? Freedom of navigation was not an issue for decades. Deliberately intruding into sovereign territory with frigates, spy planes, etc are direct provocations.
Sad to see nations taking sides just to gain a little leverage to support their claims. As far as I can see, these islands are "bread crumbs" created to inflict tension and even wars among nations. Political issues deserve diplomatic solutions. Don't allow a Middle East or Ukraine crisis in Asia.
I trust my country will take the path of engagement and diplomacy.
By Ali Saw Kuala Lumpur The Sundaily
Ripples and rumbles in the South China Sea
AFTER the conclusion of the 27th Asean Summit and Related Summits chaired by Malaysia here in late November 2015, I felt optimistic the year 2016 might see a lessening of tensions in the South China Sea and perhaps even witness a Code of Conduct being signed between all the claimant states. I suppose this was hoping too much.
What we have seen instead is a rapid increase in tensions caused by China's actions in the South China Sea. Understandably, claimant Asean states are anxious and concerned over these latest developments.
Since the start of this year, China has conducted several test flights from its airfield in the Fiery Cross Reef in the Spratly Islands Group. There was also news reports that China had moved an oil rig into disputed waters between China and Vietnam.
This brings to mind the January 1974 Chinese/Vietnamese clash over the Paracel Islands with Vietnam suffering heavy losses and being evicted from the Paracels.
More recently it has been reported and confirmed that China has installed long-range anti-aircraft missiles on Woody Island in the disputed Paracels chain.
This does not auger well for calm and confidence-building between the various Asean claimant states and the Republic of China.
In addition, the occasional reported intrusions of Chinese coastguard vessels into other nations' territorial waters is cause for concern.
The recent statement by the US and some European nations that China must abide by the decision to be made by the UN Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague, hearing the Philippines request to invalidate China's claims, is rather premature in my humble opinion.
The US and other western nations' statement would have been better coming after the tribunal's verdict expected sometime near the middle of this year, if it turns out to be in Philippines favour. As it is, I feel the statement pre-empts the tribunal's verdict.
I had written an article on the South China Sea dispute and stated my personal views in June 2015. I am of the firm belief, based on International Law and UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea), that China's claim to virtually the whole of the South China Sea is arbitrary and unprecedented.
No country has ever claimed such a large expanse of international maritime waters before. There is no provision anywhere that I am aware of for a historical claim, especially when such a claim has never been exercised or enforced until more recent times. China is not only a party to UNCLOS but it has also ratified it. Therefore, China is bound by UNCLOS.
A point to bear in mind is that there are laws and rules to what constitutes an island. Under UNCLOS no shoal or reef can be reclaimed and turned into an island.
A reclaimed land is artificial and not natural. Hence the question of territorial waters or other claims for the artificial island does not arise.
The Code of Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) signed by all members of Asean and the People's Republic of China on Nov 4, 2002 unfortunately has a number of setbacks. There is also a Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea (CUES). Although this is mainly to avoid any untoward sea incident between US Navy ships and Republic of China Navy (ROCN) ships. I feel that CUES should also be used more by Asean claimant states' naval ships and the ROCN ships.
Although I am disheartened by the latest developments in the South China Sea, I sincerely hope that these ripples and rumbles do not develop into a full blown hurricane or typhoon.
By Rear Admiral (Rtd) Tan Sri K. Thanabalasingam was the third chief of the Royal Malaysian Navy and the first Malaysian to be appointed to the post.Comments: letters@thesundaily.com
The U.S. should keep away from the South China Sea for regional peace
China is forced to deploy defensive facilities on islands in the South China Sea in response to early militarization action from other parties and to the U.S. close-up reconnaissance in this region, said a China's professor who specializes in international affairs.
Shen Dingli, a professor specializing in international affairs from Fudan University, wrote in a column that if the U.S. expects fewer disputes in the South China Sea, the country should not choose any side and not support those who infringe upon China's national interests. The U.S. should make those countries withdraw from the region.
Shen stated that the U.S. should reduce its close-up reconnaissance in the region so that China will not need to spare much time to deploy forces in the region.
According to Shen, statements of spokespersons from China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of National Defense clearly show China's attitude towards this issue.
First of all, China deploys defensive facilities in order to cope with other countries' militarization in this area. Secondly, China benefits from freedom of navigation and China is willing to maintain this freedom within the international law in cooperation with ASEAN countries. Thirdly, China urges the U.S. to respect its legitimate interests when it comes to sovereign of artificial islands in the South China Sea.
Shen also said that if the U.S. really cares about China's deployment of radars and missiles on relevant islands, it should reduce the close-up reconnaissance by its missile destroyers and strategic bombers in this area. By Yuan Can (People's Daily Online)
US militarizing South China Sea
Compared with the progress Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and US Secretary of State John Kerry seem to have achieved on sanctions against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, finding common ground to resolve their differences over the South China Sea has proved more difficult.
Just as Wang has stressed, the responsibility for non-militarization of the South China Sea is not China's alone. The United States should lend an attentive ear to China's stance.
On Tuesday, at a hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Admiral Harry Harris, head of the US Pacific Command, said China's deployment of missiles and new radars on its islands and reefs in the South China Sea and its building of airstrips are "changing the operational landscape" in the waters.
The media in the US also hyped up China sending Annihilates-11 fighters to the Xisha Islands. These voices may be a prelude to Washington escalating the flexing of its muscles in the South China Sea.
Yet as a non-regional country, it is irresponsible of the US to intervene in the South China Sea in disregard of the possibility that has emerged that China and the other parties to the disputes in the waters will be able to stabilize the situation rather than let it spiral out of control.
If those in the region were allowed to settle the disputes themselves, the South China Sea would be free from concerns and troubles within the foreseeable future.
It is the US' direct interventions in the South China Sea that are exacerbating tensions and adding uncertainty.
The US' provocative signals have seriously increased Chinese people's sense of urgency to strengthen the country's military capabilities. When US military vessels and warplanes intruded into the 12-nautical-mile territorial seas around China's islands and reefs, Chinese people have reasons to believe their country should not remain indifferent even if its military might is still inferior to that of the US.
On issues concerning national sovereignty, the Chinese military will follow the will of its people.- Global Times
Apr 24, 2012 ... Many people, including many journalists, in the world do not realize that historically, China's claim on South China Sea islands started in the ...
May 29, 2015 ... Washington is taking dangerous gamble in the South China Sea. ... Who owns the South China Sea islets in the eyes of the world? Apr 24 ...
Politeness rules: Japanese players bowing towards fans after a rugby match in Scotland. Japan is a country where people are polite and friendly – and where everything is done by the book. Deviating from the norm is seriously frowned upon. – ReutersRECENTLY, a Korean journalist stationed in Tokyo wrote an amusing article comparing Japan, South Korea and the United States. He wrote of his experience in each of the three countries when he tried to change the delivery date of a TV he had purchased.
