The Good, the Bad, the Ugly and the Outright Stupid

I remember an old western film starring Clint Eastwood, Lee Van Cleef and Eli Wallach – three gunslingers competing to find a fortune in a buried cache of Confederate gold amid the violent chaos of the American civil war in a movie called The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. I cannot remember the plot, but the title has stuck in my mind. Reflecting the players of the geopolitics of today, I thought it might be a good title for me to write about some of the world’s political leaders, but with an addition to the cast: the “Outright Stupid”.

To me, bad leaders are also ugly leaders, not in the physical sense, but certainly in the way they behave.

Let me start with America’s incoming president, Donald Trump:

Donald 2.0 and his nominees

A podcaster Mark Dallas says an English writer Nate White describes Donald Trump as a man who has no class, no charm, no coolness, no credibility, no wisdom, no sensitivity, no humility, no compassion, no warmth, no subtlety, no self-awareness, no wit, no humour, no wisdom, no sensitivity, no humility, no grace, no honour, no soul, etc. He is crude and nasty; he bullies crows, jeers, sneers, punches below the belt, and kicks the vulnerable. He is full of prejudices, extremely vindictive and artless in artform. Even a gentle and polished diplomat George Yeo can term him a liar. I am just paraphrasing what these people think of him. In a nutshell, he is to many of us the ugliest form of ugliness.

I love Chinese idioms. There is one that parallels “A leopard cannot change its spots” which reads 江 山 易 改, 本 性 难 移 (Jiāng shān yì gǎi; běn xìng nán yí), which literally says it is easier to change mountains and rivers than to alter one's character. Many Chinese characters share more or less the same pronunciation. 姓 (xìng) and 性 (xìng) are two of them. The former stands for surname (or family name) and the latter, one’s moral character. There is a line of wisdom connecting these two words here. One can easily change one’s identity to hide past embarrassments or misdeeds, but one’s true character will always remain. You can this time call Donald 2.0, but the fact remains, he is the same Donald in his true self.

Except Donald 2.0’s ugliness is going to be even harsher.

Let us look at some of Trump’s nominees for his 2.0 team:

Many of them are outright not fit for high offices, but Susie Wiles might be an exception. In his first term, Trump changed his chief of staff four times, one of whom was a four-star general and the other three were politically pretty high-powered. This time around he has picked Susie Wiles to fill the hot seat. Wiles has previously managed several politicians’ election campaign, including Trump’s. There is not much about her political stances. I suppose she will survive in her gatekeeper role longer than her predecessors.

The most controversial of his choices so far is Matt Gaetz, the Florida lawmaker, who has been nominated to be the country’s Attorney General. Like Trump, he is, to our sense of commonsense justice, a felon. (The US House Ethics Committee’s investigation into his alleged sexual misconduct, illicit drug use and misuse of campaign funds. Trump is obviously trying to tell the America’s present judiciary who the boss really is.)

Trump has also picked a leading critic of China, Republican Representative Mike Waltz, to be his national security adviser. Waltz has often criticized China’s activity in the Asia-Pacific and has voiced the need for the United States to be ready for a potential conflict in the region with China.

Trump’s pick of Florida Senator Marco Rubio to be the Secretary of State is certainly most concerning to China. Rubio is a Cuban American who holds a biblical hatred for anything “communist”. To him, “Communist” China poses the greatest threat to American workers, families, and communities. He had labelled Trump a "con artist" in an earlier primary and passed some nasty remarks on Trump’s attitude towards women. Will Trump really forgive him for making those “aberrations”?

I believe Rubio has never stepped foot on China and is still thinking that China is a Stalinist world – totally authoritarian, oppressive of the minorities and aggressive towards its neighbours. He naturally supports the DPP leaders in Taiwan. Rubio’s support for Hong Kong democracy protesters earned him Chinese sanctions in 2020.

Nominated as Defense Secretary is Pete Hegseth, who is a Fox News anchor. He is said to have serious character issues. And Robert F Kennedy Jr, a vaccine sceptic has been named for the Health portfolio. However, I believe the latter, though idealistic in nature, is a good man at heart.

Everyone knows Elon Musk; he is a buddy of Trump. Musk will be Trump’s point man in his effort to turn things upside down. His pick of young Hindu-American billionaire Vivek Ramaswamy to be Musk’s deputy does raise some eyebrows. The latter is someone who wheels and deals in a manner that are usually more than meets the eye. (Remember, he himself harbours presidential ambitions.)

Trump rewards those who are loyal to him regardless of situations and is vindictive to those who have “betrayed” him. His defence lawyer John Sauer as the solicitor general and Tulsi Gabbard as the director of national intelligence are cases in point in respect of the former category; and Mike Pompeii and Nikki Haley are examples of the latter.

Steven Cheung is the sole yellow-skin Trump has named to his team. He is going to be Trump’s director of Communications. There is also a press secretary; I do not know how they can separate their duties. Maybe “director of Communications” is the more gloried term for Cheung when he escorts Trump around.

Despite his popularity, Trump is an outlier. His unconventionality may ruffle the Deep State’s feathers if it cuts too much into the latter’s grand scheme of things. And the power of the Deep State may prove to be too great for him to survive.

One thing is clear: Trump is indeed predictable. He is Dennis the Menace. He really has no concept about how to make America great again; his MAGA slogan is designed to make the vulnerable and ignorant, who comprise maybe 60% of the country’s population, place hope on him as their solution to the state America is today. But they refuse to see or seem oblivious to his meanness. (Her own niece authored a book about him and tells us how nasty the man is, even to his close relatives.) Those who have been following his business “achievements” know they were built on the very weaknesses of America’s wheeling and dealing culture, not on a foundation of good corporate practices. Character quality is no issue to him, as long as they are happy to do his biddings. He will sack anyone who tries to be too clever. (Remember the number of “professionals” and “experts” he sacked during his first term? Most Biden appointees stayed with him through his four years.) He hates intellectually looking women – people like Hillary Clinton and Ursula von der Leyen – and loves erotically dressed women, not necessary the pretty looking type, though.

And the outright stupid…

Biden will have to vacate the Oval Office on 20^th January, which means he only has about two months left to pack up. Yet he saw fit to attend the 2024 Lima APEC summit. And look at how pathetic he was placed! (In better times, he would surely be standing next to the host in the front row.)

Where is Joe?

He is already a lame duck president, since Trump has served notice that he will reverse many of Biden’s policies and stances (except the anti-China part). Yet, he is giving greenlight to Ukraine to use US long-range missiles to strike Russia. Is he deliberately trying to create a situation for Trump to get stuck in the Ukraine cesspool?

In the world today, there are many who also fall into this category. Just a couple of days ago, France’s Emmanuel Macron and the UK’s Keir Starmer in Armistice Day ceremony, pledged to support Ukraine for as long as necessary “to thwart Russia’s war of aggression”. Doesn’t armistice mean “an agreement made by opposing sides in a war to stop fighting for a certain time, or a truce? Didn’t Trump say he was going to end the war “in one day”? And we just heard that Zelenskyy is about to give up? What are these two morons up to?

Von der Leyen lost no time in congratulating Trump but what did she get from Trump? A cold thank you! By doing everything to decouple from China, she is going to bring more hardship to EU countries during the next four years. A dumb blonde indeed!

The biggest loser is going to be Volodymyr Zelenskyy. His life might even be in danger. The war will end soon, but much destruction has already been done to Ukraine. It is time for Ukrainians to realize the folly of trying to upset their Russian cousins with their NATO and EU membership pursuits. You should live with your neighbours and cousins who, in the first place, had not caused you miseries, unlike those who suffered in the Baltic satellites in the Soviet time.

The smarter ones…

Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong Un know Trump’s soft spots. Trump secretly admires machos like Putin and autocrats like Kim. Kim’s Intelligence knew Trump would triumph and lost no time in sending his troops to aid Russia in the Ukraine war.

Trump will be asking to see them, and countries like Singapore will be most happy to play host to such meetings.

Trump’s presidency will not be generous to anyone. For many leaders in Southeast Asia, West Asia, Africa and Latin and South America, they have already seen enough of the true colours of American leadership during the last eight years. They know which side of their bread is best buttered and are likely to chart their own destinies.

And those who are stuck

Regardless, some countries will find themselves stuck because they have elected leaders who do not seem to be able to think beyond their personal agenda and to name a few: Yoon Suk Yeol, Ferdinand Marcos Jr, Javier Gerardo Milei, and the most dangerous of all, William Lai of Taiwan. Will Trump be kind to them? I doubt. Ditto Australia’s Anthony Albanese (Australian ambassador Kevin Rudd should also be packing up soon and the need to write off billions out of the expensive nuclear submarines his predecessor had signed the country into.) and Canada’s Justin Trudeau, not to mention NATO, the QUAD, AKUS and what-have-you. But regretfully, Trump will also sideline or desert UN, WHO, WTO and worthy world organisations that seek to protect humanity.

Mandate of Heaven
I am no expert in the histories of other pre-modern states. However, as a student of leadership studies, I do take pride in my understanding of the ups-and-downs of China and what it is today.

Historically and culturally speaking, China has been around – continuously – for five thousand years. It has gone through many tumultuous times – civil wars, foreign occupations, calamities that caused widespread famine and disease, etc. A ruler is expected to rule with 仁 (ren – humaneness, kindness, benevolence), i.e., a tall degree of moral conduct. When a ruler lost his “mandate of heaven”, he would be overthrown, usually in a bloody way, and a new ruler would rose. This concept of Mandate of Heaven is often attributed to Confucius. However, the credit should actually go to Zhou-gong.

Zhou-gong was Duke Wen of Zhou (周文公, Zhou Wen-kong; personal name Dan 旦 1042–1035 BC). He was member of the royal family of the early Zhou (周) dynasty who played a key role in consolidating the kingdom established by his elder brother. He was renowned for acting as a capable and loyal regent for his young nephew King Cheng (周成王) and establishing firm-rule of the Zhou dynasty over eastern China. Confucius credited him for the authorship of the I-ching (易經 – Scripture ) and the Xer-ching (詩経 - Classic Poetry), as well as the establishment of the Rites of Zhou.

King Wu died three years after founding the dynasty and the throne was passed to his youngest son King Cheng. Zhou-gong became the regent and administered the kingdom. Zhou-gong was credited with the introduction of the doctrine of the Mandate of Heaven. (The preceding dynasty – Shang – was plagued by injustice and decadence and so had offended Heaven leading to its downfall.) It is said that he administered the kingdom with great benevolence and once King Cheng came of age, Zhou-gong stepped down. The later rulers considered Zhou-gong a paragon of virtue and honoured him posthumously and one even elevated Zhou-gong to be the 文宪王 (Wénxiàn Wáng or King of Cultural Exemplariness). He was also known as the First Sage (元圣, Yuán Shèng). (In 2004, Chinese archaeologists reported that they may have found his tomb complex in Shaanxi.) In the Analects, Confucius is said to have said, "How I have gone downhill! It has been such a long time since I dreamt of the Duke of Zhou." This was meant as a lamentation of how the governmental ideals of the Zhou-gong had faded. In short, Zhou-gong is said to exemplify the highest form of benevolence and people-first philosophy in statecraft. These were the sage rulers!

Xi Jinping is a modern-day Zhou-gong. And China’s reemergence to help balance bring hope to the Global South is just the beginning.

End

Trump is Back: World Outlook for the Next Four Years

I wrote in July that “The Sudden Collapse of the Biden Puppetry” that Kamala Harris was certain to lose the election in November. (Her star did brighten a little followed her anointment, but that was largely the “honeymoon period” phenomenon.) I am now on-board a flight from Melbourne to Kuala Lumpur and the Wi-Fi was good; I could access the internet to follow the results of the 2024 US Election.

A conman is back to be America's next president! Any surprises at all?

Not at all. The mainstream media has been saying that it was going to be a close fight. It was clear to me that Trump would carry the day. The mainstream media are just trying desperately to sway voters to Harris’s side. (I always argue that the Democrats are too dumb, intellectually so for that matter, to know that 70% of Americans so not make use of their brain!) It appears that the Republicans would also control both the Senate and the House of Representatives!

With Trump returning, the world has to prepare for the worst, China especially. It is not that I prefer Harris, I thought her Ha-ha blonde inadequacy would be the lesser of the two evils for China and by extension, for the world too. But with the outcome known, maybe I should try to find some positive things about Trump’s incoming presidency.

Yes, it was Trump who woke the Chinese up; maybe his new term will also awaken the rest of the world – not only the Global South which have more or less known the true colours of Americanism, but also its Ukraine, EU, NATO, pro-West allies like Japan, Korea, the Philippines, Argentina, semi-ally like India, and “wedlock child” pseudo-state like Taiwan. Israel is perhaps the only exception; regardless of Democrats or Republicans, the Jews are the first amongst equals in the USA!

The US has become a very strange country. It has the best universities in the world; yet, 70% of its population knows very little of anything that is outside America. Its politicians are largely humbugs even though many are alumni of Harvard or Yale or other Ivy League universities. The more outrageous Trump spoke, the more popular he emerged.

Trump the Lion King

Trump thinks he is a Lion King. Nobody can be his equal. As a businessman, he was unscrupulous, and that mindset will continue. Unlike Biden, who rallied all and sundry to be his allies to fight Russia and retard China, Trump would try to extract every ounce of flesh from everyone, ally or foe alike. He is likely to walk away from Ukraine, and with his German heritage, he has no love for the Jews but will also be happy to leave Israel alone to destroy the Palestinians. (It is believed he is beholden to the Adelson casino fortune, which is do everything to promote Zionist causes.) The ingratiation of South Korea and Japan is unlikely going to change his latent admiration for Kim Jong Un. He will ask Taiwan to pay heavily but will only provide lip-service rather than solid commitment to defend the island.

He knows many western leaders do not accord him with any great regard. (Even a minion like Justin Trudeau would dare to belittle behind his back.) He is going to kick them hard. And Narendran Modi be aware: Trump will rush to the toilet to wash himself if you give him a hug.

Trump’s way of making America great again

Trump wants to use tariffs to bring back manufacturing. This might reduce its trade deficits initially, but there is no way America can create – within his reign – the necessary supply chain infrastructure to produce affordable goods within Ameica. His tariffs against friends’ and foes’ goods will only make life more difficult for Americans eventually.

As of October 29, 2024, the U.S. national debt is $35.85 trillion. The cost of servicing the U.S. federal debt is $1,133 billion, which is 17% of the total federal spending. (But as a country, the United States is actually still very wealthy. Its national wealth is estimated to be around $137.6 trillion.) Instead of getting the rich to pay more taxes, he will continue to borrow to fund the federal needs. He will surely continue to count on the US Dollar to harvest the world by printing more money and manipulating interest rates.

But it is already too late

Fortunately, America is no longer able to awe the world. Two companies epitomize the state of America today – Boeing and Intel. They have all the knowledge but no longer the ability to make or execute things properly. Two astronauts were left stranded for months in the Internal Space Station after Boeing’s Starliner could not fly them in scheduled time. And despite billions of subsidies, Intel is now a laughingstock in the world of semiconductors. And remember we would always insist that our computers we wanted to buy should carry the label “Intel Inside” just not too long ago?

They have few shipyards to produce ships now, let alone big-ticket naval vessels. Ditto the situation with their fighter jets. Soon they might have to tout them as flying coffins.  

Devoid of a strong determination to increase national productivity, America’s decline will surely accelerate. 

Philosophy and Missions

In a world that is full of MBAs and DBAs from the world’s top business schools, I am most surprised that their political leaders are much devoid of a basic understanding of these terms.

America leaders generally do not demonstrate that they can conduct themselves or lead with a head and heart that is anchored on philosophy. Good philosophy is driven by virtue, which is usually a life-long belief. Trump’s “Make American Great Again” and Biden’s “America First” are not philosophically anchored; rather, they are mere slogans. (Malaysia, under Anwar Ibrahim, has also come up with a set of values called MADANI, which stand for Prosperity, Respect, Trust and Compassion. He seeks to transform society through Economy and Finance, Legislation, Institution, Education, Community, Culture, Urban and Rural Developments. But given the country’s racial and religious entrenchments, these again may just not be executable. They are largely empty pledges!)

Biden’s mission, though not expressly spelt out, was to retard China. And his team, led by Antony Blinken went all out to create a Mafia fraternity to break China. But as the country’s top diplomat, Blinken appears like a headless chicken, hopping from country to country but bringing back nothing. Janet Yellen is a has-been economics professor. Gina Raimondo’s sanctions are driven by her hatred of China, not foresight or strategy. Katherine Tai wants to show that she is whiter than the whites. As for Llyod Austin, in our jargon, he is a dai-funshi (big, sweet potato),

Against a sage-like leader in China, and against the strength and depth of China’s cultural roots (resilience, perseverance, innovativeness and entrepreneurship, biases towards STEM education, amongst them) and its huge internal markets, can such a mission accomplishable? My answer is also a big No. With a rising China, the obvious option is to work with each other to make the world a better place for everybody, which China will strongly support.

China is a country that does not believe in Zero-sum game. Xi Jinping’s Belt & Road Initiative was designed to improve connectivity, trade and economic growth between Asia, Africa and Europe and the progress and results are obvious for all to see. Hitherto land-locked and left-out countries are now able to move the goods across borders. People become richer. Unfortunately, thanks to American pressure, many countries have opted out or not to join the BRI.

A policy that is based on supremacism and arrogance, which America has been practicing all this while, is surely untenable in the long run.

Biden and his team have caused America to be the “Who cares?” of the world. Even Benjamin Netanyahu is bold to say this to America in the face.

The Biden administration has brought China and Russia closer, and alienate the Global South, who now sees the US as the supporter of many bad causes in the world today.

Biden squandered his four years in the Oval Office!

China
Its philosophy-driven policy – centred on people’s needs, global good, etc – will certainly prevail. It does not need elaboration. I dare say China has long braced itself for the Trump eventuality. Its industries will certainly suffer initially, but its overall ascendency is unstoppable.

A Fragmented Europe
Thanks to the Renaissance, Europe had been the masters of the modern world – until America became No 1 after World War II. For some years Europe under the EU seemed determined to reassert itself and its Euro also became a reserve currency. But now it is a sad union. Its president is an American stooge. Her policies are against the interests of many Europeans. (A case in point is the recent tariff against Chinese EV vehicles, when China’s market is open to all world makes.) Their sanctioning of Russia and refusal to but Russia gas is making their production cost too prohibitive and the lives of their citizens tough. For a very sophisticated society, you cannot imagine they can be so beholden to America that is egging them on to fight their neighbour. NATO’s decision to expand eastwards will certainly go down in history as another example of shooting one’s own foot.

Trump has already said he will end the Ukraine War if he becomes the President. The Europeans would certainly be wondering why they had chosen to fight Russia in the first place. The war was brought about by a joker’s fantasy with NATO in the first place.

Much of Ukraine has been destroyed. Vladimir Putin’s red line – DO NOT BE PART OF NATO – is simple for Ukrainians to respect. It simply must kick out Zelenskyy, who is Jewish in the first place. (Some political observers even speculate that behind him is the big Zionist conspiracy to turn Ukraine into a Jewish homeland, since much of it is now owned by American Jewish interests.)

Europe is where the Renaissance began, and many great philosophers and thinkers hailed from. But the people like Stoltenberg, von der Leyen, and leaders of Finland, Sweden, Lithuania, etc are intellectually incongruent with this greatness.

Fortunately, they still have people like Hungary’s Viktor Orbán and Serbia’s Aleksandar Vučić that have exhibited good sense.

The Outlook of BRICS Plus
The BRICS Summit 2024 (the 16^th, in Kazan, Russia) earlier this month, attended by 36 world leaders, including the United Nations secretary general António Guterres, has clearly demonstrated that Putin is not a pariah as the West Plus wants us to believe. Every clear-headed person now knows that Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine was not premised on a Czarist’s expansionist mission. The West has simply created a monster which Putin has to destroy. (Unfortunately, many countries are still behaving like ostriches!)

Even though BRICS has expanded, one of its original pillars is its Archilles heel. That is India. Modi harbours global leadership ambition. He is NOT happy for India to be lumped into the Global South. Indeed, it has the population to support this ambition. Individually, many Indians are academically and professionally very brilliant. And they speak the international language English. But its cultural, social and religious are too fossilized for great nationhood. Its rich are getting richer; its poor remain downtrodden, value-lacking and behaviourally wanting.

BRICS Plus could easily pave the way for an alternative financial system to overcome the SWIFT, which has largely been weaponised by the US. Unfortunately, India is not quite in favour of the new system, which obviously has to be led by China. The only thread that is holding India in BRICS is perhaps Russia, a country that India depended on weaponry for many years and has benefited a great deal in the Ukraine War. The latter is a classic example of America’s not wanting to sanction India despite this belligerence, thanks to Modi’s ability to hypnotise Biden. But I do not think he can have his way with Trump.

The Other Parts of Global South

The genocide in GAZA has killed their trust of America. Saudi’s crown prince Mohammad bin Salman had taken a rain cheque in the recent BRICS summit, but it does not mean that he is abandoning the cause. Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia and several others are hoping to join. They are all members of ASEAN, and ASEAN is the biggest trading partner of China today. As long as America’s ZIMM (Zionist-Industrial-Military-Media) complex and Dollar hegemon are still terrorizing the world, these countries will continue to balance their acts carefully. But they certainly know what side of their bread is buttered on.  

Conclusion
With a conman at the helm, the US is doomed.

Sanxingdui (三星堆, Three Star Mounds) - Beyond Comprehension

I have always been mystified by its discovery and mentioned it in my book “Knowing Your Roots: In the wake of the new Xiong-Nus at China’s gate”. To me, the artefacts found were totally outlandish to the China we understand for that period.  

Earlier this month, I had the opportunity to be in Chengdu and thought I should pay the museum a visit.

The very impressive Sanxingdui Museum at Guanghan (广汉), just outside Chengdu, was only opened last year. (Apparently, there was an old museum near the excavation site before this.)

     

This is how the discovery was made: In 1927 a farmer while dredging an irrigation ditch in a village north of Chengdu unearthed a large stash of jade relics. However, it was not until 1934 that a regional university organised an archaeological excavation of the site. Nonetheless, the bulk of the discoveries came much later – in 1986 when thousands of gold, bronze, jade and pottery artifacts were unearthed from two pits 20-30 metres apart.  

Intricate bronzes (masks, heads, statuettes, trees, birds, bells, axes and “hybrid” animals), gold objects (tables, masks, and belts), jades (axes, tablets, rings, knives and tubes), elephant tusks, pottery, and cowrie shells were uncovered. One bronze statue featuring a figure with a slender waist, elegant robes, and giant, grasping hands stood 2.6m high in total. The bronze masks, heads, statues, trees and “hybrid” animals discovered in the pits were unparalleled in China, and indeed anywhere else. It seemed that this artistry, completely unknown in the history of Chinese art, was expressing a unique view of the world that had developed in the Sichuan basin of the Yangtze River, which was then a remote region ringed by high mountains.

Clockwise from top: Jade blade (54cm); Bronze head (27cm); Bronze tree (396cm); gold mask; and hollow inside figure 2.62m)

Six more pits were discovered at the same site between 2020 and 2022 during renewed excavations. More than 500 relics, including a gold mask, were discovered. The mask is estimated to be made from 84% gold and weighs 280 grams (0.6 pounds).  

Archaeologists have dated the relics to be between 3,100 and 4,500 years ago, roughly corresponding to the late Xia and early Western Zhou periods, with largely Shang in between. 

The masks and heads show angular human features, exaggerated almond-shaped eyes – some with protruding pupils – and large upper ears.

There were also traces of paint smears – black and vermillion – on them.

Many of them appear to be meant for ritual practices, however, they do not seem to conform to those understood during the period.

Researchers speculated that the human sculptures, in ceremonial costume and possibly including a mask, were meant to commemorate a dead ancestor to whom sacrifice was being offered.

Since these four animals – birds, dragons, snakes, and tigers – predominate the finds at Sanxingdui, the bronzes might represent the universe. It is unclear whether they formed part of ritual events designed to communicate with the spirits of the universe (or ancestral spirits). As no written records remain it is difficult to determine the intended uses of objects found. Some believe that the continued prevalence of depictions of these animals, especially in the later Han period, was an attempt by humans to "fit into" their understanding of their cosmology.

And Sichuan was certainly not a place where elephants or mammoths could be roaming at that time; neither was it where cowrie shells could be found too.

And why are these things clustered in a relatively small area. And most significantly, despite the fact that their craftsmanship – intricate in details and forms – was far superior to that of the Shang’s, they did not seem to have any form of writing, when Shang has always been credited with the dawn of Chinese written characters.

This “prehistoric” settlement was abandoned around 1000 BC and many of the artefacts appeared to have been deliberately smashed or burnt before being buried. And no human or settlement remains were found at or near the sites.

Nonetheless, the finds do include jade artifacts that are consistent with earlier neolithic cultures in China (the Baodun culture, 宝墩文化,2700–1700 BCE).

Did they belong to Ancient Shu (古蜀, Gǔ Shǔ)?

The visit of the museum did not shed much light about its origin. I decided to pick up a book that was sold in the souvenir shop there. The author was apparently trying hard to fit the Sanxingdui culture into the legends of the ancient kingdom of Shu – its possible lineage to the tribal chiefs during the early days of the Chinese civilisation. The book does make interesting reading, but it is short on facts.

To me, this Sanxingdui culture must have predated Ancient Shu, which was conquered by Qin (秦)in 316 BCE.  蜀 evolved from , which is a character composite of 目 (eye), 人 (human) and 虫 (worm). The importance of silkworm to the fortune and symbol of the kingdom could not be understated. Historical records are scant about this kingdom. The kingdom is mentioned in Shi-ji (史記) and Shu-jing (書經)as an ally of the Zhou who defeated the Shang. The Shu kingdom is said to be founded by Cancong (蠶叢) – one who had protruding eyes, a feature that is found in many of the masks and figures of Sanxingdui. 

The Contemporary Shang
Let’s see the parallels in the Shang (商)dynasty (sometimes called Yin (殷) dynasty), ruled in the Yellow River valley during the second millennium BC, succeeding the Xia dynasty and followed by the Western Zhou dynasty. Modern scholarship dates the dynasty between the 16th and 11th centuries BC.

               Above are a Shang nephrite statuette (apparently housed at Harvard University) and a Shang jade human figure. Do they look like those of Sanxingdui’s?

Compared to what you see in Sanxingdui, they are many classes below.

Conclusion
There are many speculations about Sanxingdui’s origin. Some argue that they were from an extraterrestrial culture; others relate them to the legends described in Shanhai-jing (山海经, a Chinese classic of mythic geography and beasts.) I have a different take. Maybe they were the valuables and treasures left behind by an advanced migratory tribe who had to flee the Shang in a hurry? Jew-like people looking for a homeland and chased out after some years?.

The Shang practised human sacrifice, and they were Shang’s genocidal trophies. (The majority of victims were war captives taken the minority tribes.)

Sanxingdui must rank one of the great discoveries and mysteries in modern China. It is indeed necessary for China to do a complete rethink of its prehistory.

One for the album!

End

My Silk Road Tour, September 2024

My wife Saw Hwa does not write or read Chinese. But she loves to tour China. We have been to many places in China, but we have yet to cover the Silk Road. She does not quite like to follow tours organised by Malaysian or Singaporean agencies – the tour guides of the former tend to conduct themselves in Cantonese and the latter, in Mandarin; she knows neither. Moreover, they are too good in terms of delivering value for money – tours usually last seven to fourteen days, and they are packed solid with heavy itineraries. But this is dreadful for both of us, most of the spots are jammed packed with local tourists, whose fear of missing out can be very annoying. She decided to sign up with Sydney’s Wendy Wu Tours for this visit. There were 17 of us in the group, four were from the UK, three from New Zealand, 12 from Australia (two of whom were Australian Chinese); we were the only two from Malaysia. Most of us are in our sixties or seventies. Several of them have visited China before.  

Although the starting point is the historic city of Xi-An, which we have been to a few times before, we still like the city. Things do not stand still in China; you get surprises in every visit. From Xi-An, we took a HSR to Lan-Zhou, and from Lanzhou we visited a couple of nearby smaller cities, including the Tibetan city Xia-He, where the Labrang Monastery is located, Xi-Xia, which is well-known of its biggest Sleeping Buddha statue, and Jia-Yu Guan, where the western end of the Great Wall is located. Apparently, President Xi was visiting Lan-Zhou at that time.

The next stop was Dun-Huang, which was a must-visit city along the Silk Road. The highlight was of course the grottoes there. Not too many foreign tourists were visiting at that time; we were treated like celebrities in a cultural theatre show there.

From Dun-Huang, we took an HRS to Turpan. From Turpan we went to Korla by coach. The National Highway was impressive; it traverses awesome mountains and deserts along the way. We celebrated the mooncake festival in Korla. From Korla we continued to Kuqa and that was where we first experienced “security” check. We were constantly reminded of the need to have our passport with us, giving us the impression that security was tight along the Silk Road. Indeed, the local guide had to file our presence there, but it is not the type of fearsome procedure that the western press had wanted us to believe. Indeed, from thereon, each time we entered a small prefecture city, we had to do the same. But nobody was inconvenienced; as a matter of fact, some police officers even boarded the coach to welcome our visit.

From Kuqa we went to Aksu to visit a cave temple, which predates the grottoes in Dunhuang.

We arrived at Kashgar, the Silk Road’s most western city in China on September 20. We were pretty done with the Silk Road by then. Before we flew out to Urumqi, we visited the Sunday market where live cattle were traded in a big way.

Urumqi was essentially a modern Han Chinese city and the must visit spot is the Heavenly Lake.

From Urumqi, we flew into Beijing. We did not join some of the tours save for a climb to the Great Wall again.

Wendy Wu’s local tour leader Gary Guo was superb. My wife and I survived the 28-day journey without any drama! 

* * * * *

Although several of our tourmates have visited China before, I could see that some were still not convinced that China was far from the Stalinist or totalitarian state they believe it is still one today. When I asked if one who still held the view since we had gone into the countryside only to see that people were generally happy and no poverty or economic or social or religious deprivations were in sight, he said in a democracy one could “moan” and not get into trouble. Saw Hwa was happy to ask if he preferred to see people leading a miserable life in many parts of the “democratic” world, he reluctantly conceded that the Chinese leadership had indeed done much for its people. Another was more accepting; he agreed that all the talk about oppression, or suppression, or forced labour, or genocide was a load of bulls from the western politicians and press.

Yes, Hans, Huis, Uyghurs, and other Central Asian minorities live harmoniously everywhere. Two of local tour guides were Uyghur. I asked them privately if they were proud to be “Chinese” and they responded without hesitancy that they are were. I could tell the answer was genuine.

Be that as it may, there is still much China can do to bring their perceptions to a higher plane.

First…

Yes, the Chinese economy is indeed slowing down. The malls are pretty empty, so are restaurants which boast huge dining rooms and tables. We know what has contributed to this situation. The sanctions by the west have caused China’s supply side to scale back, hence resulting in higher unemployment especially amongst its youth, and the policy clamp down on real estates has caused many Chinese to hold back spending on bigger ticket items. But you do not see any sign of desperation.

We all know the four components of GDP are consumption, investment, government spending, and exports. China is not lacking in the last two. Thanks to western sanctions, investment does suffer. However, it is the consumption component that is troubling the Chinese government now. (The exception is perhaps in the cars you see on Chinese roads – they are generally pretty new; not the old jalopies we often see in developing countries.)

But let the westerners continue with their cacophemism (a new word which I have just learned from my friend Tan Jin Hwee – a hard term pinned on something good to make it look bad). Xi and his team know what is good for the country. And the Chinese have the resilience to go through hardship and turn things around.

Although Chinese cities generally are well planned – broad tree-lined and well lighted boulevards and generous parks and lakes, – even the modern buildings can be described as “nice from far, but far from nice” in terms of upkeep. Their glass facades are crying hard to be cleaned. Most of the shop fronts and apartment blocks are also in dire need of a new coat of paint, not to mention broken tiles in pavements and ugly patches on sidewalks. China should introduce an urban redevelopment authority like what Singapore does. People need to be “forced” to spend to keep their living spaces look clean and orderly. This will certainly add tremendously to “useful” consumption in GDP at this time of need! (Chinese are not poor; they certainly can well afford it.)

However, I should not generalise too much. The Hui precincts, especially their apartment blocks, are remarkably cleaner; even their mosques have traditional Chinese “temple-like features, like those in Xi-An. (I would have thought Uyghurs by the virtue of their religion would have a higher standard of personal hygiene, but this trip tells me that it is a wrong assumption, maybe the nomadic instinct is still present in their culture.)

Public toilets, despite frequent efforts by cleaners, are generally smelly even though some laybys boost state-of-the-art features – electronic panels to tell visitors which is occupied, and which is empty. It is simply a result of poor habits.

These are some of my observations about the hotels provided by Wendy Wu Tours: they are generally adequate; some even have robotic features which did appear a little outlandish to me. But fittings and fixtures found in them, except the two operated by Mercure, still look sloppy in terms of upkeep and maintenance. And the corridors do not smell fresh. I suppose smoking in the room is still hugely tolerated, although no-smoking signs are there for all to see.

Now that China is opening to the world to allow them to see the true situations in Xinjiang, they need to “inform”. Chinese hotels only offer CCTV channels. Few know how to tune in, let alone enjoy their coverages, since instruction is only in Chinese. They should start to cater to western visitors with objective programmes and narratives about China. So are the road signages, since they are only in Chinese and Uyghurs only.

China’s HSRs are an eye-opener to westerns. The stations are awe-inspiring, and their locomotives are sleek. The trains are punctual and the ride smooth. Nonetheless, they look a little tired, though. Many need a good bath. Many users have still not been conditioned to exercise civic-conscious; littering is still evident, even though they have cleaners to do the job. The service’s hawkers seem not very interested in promoting F&B sales, except the ladies who were assigned to sell locally made cosmetics.

Smoking and spitting in public places are still noticeable, and this largely irks westerners. This, I often advocate, is something they need to learn from LKY. Throughout my trips to China, I have always taken pain to convert unthoughtful Chinese to be more civic-conscious and this trip is no exception. I believe I have made at least ten Chinese better citizens by whispering these lines into their ears: 老兄，有外国旅客. 文明旅游，不好随地吐痰 , or 老兄，有外国旅客, 不好在此吸烟 (Dear Friend, there are foreign visitors, let’s do not spit or smoke in this public place.)

We flew out with great optimism for China. My earlier book - China's Arduous Journey to Earn Its Place, From Mr Q to President Xi Jinping - has not been written in vain after all. 

Postscript:

Saw Hwa helps to proof-read my writing. She just reminded me to include this: She picked up an English-edition of a publication called "Valiant Imperial Warriors 2200 Years Ago" sold at the Emperor Qin Shi-Huang’s Museum at Xi-An. Millions of copies must have been sold already, yet the publisher is totally oblivious to the un-English English that can be spotted throughout the entire volume. Another aspect of Chinese-ness that has to be corrected? 

Why did Jake Sullivan visit China?

 

I have always contended that the person who is running the White House is not Joe Biden. He is too semi-demented to do that. I maintained that the person who is calling the shots is Jake Sullivan.

Antony Blinken is intellectually and conceptually too shallow to act effectively or prestigiously as the US’s Secretary of State. Janet Yellen and Gina Raimondo are laws unto themselves; as for Llyod Austin and Katherine Tai, the former is a “potato” and the latter, someone who still needs to prove she is more American than Americans. Austin and Tai probably take orders from Sullivan.

As for Kamala Harris, she was a wall flower in the White House. Nobody has placed any attention to her existence – until she was anointed by Biden to be the Democrats’ White House nominee.

Yes, CNN and all the media aligned to the Democratic Party are furiously promoting Harris, and Donald Trump and his running mate JD Vance seem to be shooting their own feet these days, notwithstanding, I still see Donald taking the trophy in November – for a simple reason: Most Americans cannot tell what is right or wrong, or good from bad. However, I am not implying that the Harris team is better. None of the breed of American leaders is good for the Global South!

Biden is already a lame duck and why was Sullivan visiting China?

After helping Biden to kick China so very hard for the past three years, Sullivan has probably realised that all the Biden administration’s efforts to weaken China has proven not only futile but indeed counterproductive. Yes, China is suffering pains right now, but its resilience will persevere to greater heights. No doubt about this.

China may also appear weak in dealing with jokers like Marcos Jr. But Xi is an extraordinary leader. He will prevail without firing any shots! When to strike? Sun Tze’s answer: When your enemies are in a totally disarray situation, which the US is about to enter into.

Sullivan is smarter than Blinken. He suspects China might be about to strike, and any move in that direction by China will doom Harris’s chance of getting elected. (Apparently, none of American’s aircraft carrier group is in East Pacific now.) His main mission was to gauge China’s preparedness, hence his meeting with General Zhang Youxia, the vice chairman of China’s Central Military Commission. Meetings with Wang Yi were just the old fried rice stuff. And getting to call on President Xi was a chance in his lifetime.

Why are the Chinese still entertaining him?

Read Sun-Tze!

Prof Wang Gungwu – A Historian Without Equal – on China

 

Prof Wang’s scholarship is world renowned, but I have only been seriously following his writings, lectures, talks and interviews after I got involved in a thought leadership orgnisation in 2016. (I had the opportunity to be introduced to him earlier, but that was more on a social basis; he was a VVIP in a function and I, a minor guest.)

His philosophical depth in defining terms which we often use in the most casual manner has a deep impact on the way I think about things now. For example, we were quite happy to be called huá qiáo (华侨, overseas Chinese) when we should be identifying ourselves as huá yì (华裔, ethnic Chinese). Some may argue, “What’s the big deal?” I think there is, but maybe I should leave it to another day to explain the fundamental difference. I also watched another recent interview of him; apparently, he is now working to define wén mínɡ (文明, loosely, civilization) and wén huà (文化, loosely, culture) more definitively. Ditto on “Nation” and “Country”.

When someone alerted me that he would be giving an on-line lecture at HELP University on 10 August, I lost no time in signing up for a seat at the university’s Damansara auditorium. Several distinguished historians were there to hear from him on “China – From Middle Kingdom to World Power: WHAT OF THE FUTURE?” Some were Prof Wang’s students when he was with the University of Malaya. I was happy to see my friends Dr Stephen Leong Mun Yoon and Tan Sin Su there. Dr Leong is a historian in his own right and he and Prof Wang were teaching at the university in those early days.

Well before the US-China tensions, Prof Wang in a lecture he gave at the National University of Singapore in 2016 was already talking about the South China Sea’s vulnerability as the big powers’ pond. But no one could imagine how the relationship between these two countries has soured so much since then. In his 10 August lecture, he spoke for more than an hour, seemingly without notes, on the events leading to China’s rise as a world power in the modern time. (Prof Wang will be turning 94 in October; he is so incredibly robust and sharp!)

To him, the watershed year in the US-China relationship was 2008, when the world suffered a financial crisis. It was China that bailed out America. And this awoken the US. How can a protégé become stronger than the master? Everyone knew China was for decades in a pathetic mess before Nixon visited China. Prof Wang also touched on the term world power, a notion which had not existed until the West began to colonize the world. Even the US was not one until after the end of World War II. And now China is being seen as one.

It is now the US’s obsession to contain China, and because of its constant muscle-flexing in front of China’s doorsteps – in the name of upholding free navigation and protecting its vassals and allies in the region – it has also created an obsession on China’s part to build its naval might. (And militarily, China needs the depths of that sea to operate its submarine fleet.) The region is now gripped by two opposing obsessions!

However, Prof Wang was a little ambivalent on the legitimacy of China over its disputes with the other claimants in the region. He argues that maritime boundaries are almost impossible to determine. China’s claim is entirely borne out of historical records – from the Ming and the Qing – but the entire sea was virtually under the Japanese until after the conclusion of World War II upon which the sovereignty of the islands in the South China Sea was supposed to revert to China, which was under the Kuomintang government of the Republic of China then. In 1949, the Kuomintang government fled to Taiwan and the People Republic of China (PRC) now says it is the rightful owner of these islands. Prof Wang has been quite consistent on this stance over the years. I do understand his position; he understood international laws quite differently from the customary ones held by us Chinese. I suppose that might be the reason he has not been well acknowledged by China all these years, despite his scholarship and academic standing.

In fielding a question, Prof Wang said that the Nine-Dash Line, as appeared in maps published by the Kuomintang government and PRC, had historically never been objected, contested, or challenged by any party until more recently. He explained that this is probably because China was no threat to any power when the map was first drawn, and [in the 1950s and 1960s] PRC was not a member of UN, hence no one paid any attention or importance of this line at that time. Since no one contested, these maps formed the legal basis of China’s assertion on the legality of this line. However, he also said there are also historical records to support such assertions. (Sin Su helped me to recall this part.)

In a recent interview with SCMP, Dr Wu Shicun (吴士存), the founder of the National Institute for South China Sea Studies in China said that the XiSha Islands (西沙群岛, Paracel Islands) had long been mapped out during the Ming dynasty and were Chinese possessions. However, in the wake of Imperial Japan’s seizure of northeast China, France in 1931 took control of nine islands and reefs, including ZhongYe Dao (中业岛, Thitu Island) in the South China Sea. All these are in the NanSha Islands cluster (南沙群島, Spratly Islands), though. When China was in the grip of the Cultural Revolution, the Philippines under the then Marcos Senior, sent his military to take over a number of islands in Nansha including FeiXin Dao (費信島, Flat Island) and ZhongYe Dao. This was in the 1970s. As both Beijing and Taipei did not respond militarily, the Philippines conducted five more military operations and took over eight more Chinese and reefs. RenAi Jiao (仁爱礁Second Thomas Shoal was not amongst them, though. However, I must say even though Dr Wu says these NanSha islands and reefs were originally China’s, he did not quite substantiate his assertion with more solid evidence. He did say that Beijing has never claimed that the whole of the South China Sea belongs to China, nonetheless, he contends that these islands and reefs should all be returned to the Chinese people.

In the absence of any legitimate record, I actually found it difficult to support positions taken by people like Dr Wu, even though it was obvious that the only country which had an intimate knowledge of the South China Sea was certainly China. However, I did find it difficult to support the Philippines’s claim either. The Filipino’s concept of nationhood did not arise until the late 1800s and seas beyond the main islands were rainbows to them. However, recently a friend forwarded me a CGTN article which carried an opinion of Anthony Carty (profile below) who had gone through British and French archives, spanning from the 1880s to the late 1970s, to look at the historical understanding of sovereignty of NanSha Islands. He discovered that “the archives demonstrate, taken as a whole, that it is the view of the British and French legal experts that as a matter of international law territory the XiSha Islands and the NanSha Islands are Chinese territory.”

On NanSha, he says “French legal advice was that France never completed an effective occupation of the Spratlys, and they abandoned them completely in 1956. In the 1930s, they recognised that these Spratlys had always been home to Chinese fishermen from Hainan and Guangdong. There had never been any Vietnamese or Philippine connection and French interference had only been in its own name and not that of Vietnam. It is the British who then drew a decisive conclusion, from all the French and British records available, that the Chinese were the owners of the Spratlys, a legal position certified as part of British Cabinet records in 1974.

Interestingly, he also discovered a record in the US National Archives, circa mid-1950s, in which the under-secretary of state says that the Filipinos have no claim to the Spratlys and it is the US interest to encourage them to make a claim anyway to keep Communist China out of the area.

Be that as it may, an arbitral tribunal in 2016 ruled in favour of the Philippines on most of its submissions. However, it clarified that while it would not "rule on any question of sovereignty ... and would not delimit any maritime boundary", China's historic rights claims over maritime areas (as opposed to land masses and territorial waters) within the "nine-dash line" have no lawful effect unless entitled to under UNCLOS. China, which did not participate, has rejected the ruling, as has Taiwan. The United Nations does not hold any position on the case or on the disputed claims. And I understand the ruling is not legally binding.

There may be too much water under the bridge already. And China might be fighting an uphill battle. The South China Sea is full of players now. The map below shows how it has been divided based on oil and gas interests, though there are overlapping claims in many parts. It is might that matters now. No matter how strong China’s legal position is in XiSha and NanSha, it will have to contend with the Vietnamese in the former and the Philippines, Malaysia, and Brunei or even Indonesia in the latter.

It is likely that Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, and Indonesia are likely to be able to come to terms with China on the pond’s resources, I do not see that this route will be possible with the Philippines, as long as Marcos Junior is helming the country.

But as far as China is concerned, its military and naval control (not ownership) over the pond is non-negotiable, for it means life or death for China. The possession of RenAi Jiao and HuangYan Dao (黄岩岛, the Scarborough Shoal) is absolutely important to China – as long as America and its hoodlums seek to use the Philippines to contain China. Maybe China should say this louder and clearer to the world. (Prof Wang was posed this question by a member of the audience: Isn’t this hard stance of China destroying the very image it wants to project to the world? I cannot quite recall Prof Wang’s reply, but I believe he took pain to talk about role of soft power in geopolitics.  

Anthony Carty (born 1947; PhD Cambridge), is a legal scholar at the Beijing Institute of Technology. Previously, he was a law professor at Tsinghua University and the University of Hong Kong (Sir YK Pao Chair of Public Law), after a career in Britain.

Postscript:

I also love to show off the following picture to friends. Two great historians – Prof Wang and Dr Leong – holding the two books which have been self-published by me. The contents of the two books must be of elementary stuff to them!