Toward the end of last month, a live-in nanny in Shanghai was discharged from hospital after recovering from COVID-19, but could not go back to her previous place of residence, so she lived in a public telephone booth for several days. Heaven knows how she managed to eat, sleep and cope with her other everyday needs.
In the end, it was not Shanghai authorities who came to her aid, but a non-governmental organization — the local branch of the Blue Sky Rescue organization from her hometown, Ningguo, in Anhui Province. If she was “rescued” and taken back to Anhui, she was probably put in group isolation. Unable to find a place to stay in “inclusive” Shanghai, she was, hopefully, not accused of “bringing the virus” to her home province.
On Dec. 30 last year, in reply to an Agence France-Presse reporter’s question, Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Zhao Lijian (趙立堅) said: “You can be happy that you are living in China during the fight against the epidemic. The Chinese people have secured a strategic victory, which I’m sure you’ll agree is most reassuring.”
The nanny had the same good fortune to live in China during the pandemic and spend a few days in a Shanghai phone booth. No doubt she also found the experience “most reassuring.” If she dared to say otherwise, she would make China look bad, and Shanghai even worse.
In that case, she would probably have been “contained and controlled” by Shanghai officials, or else “hunted down” rather than “rescued” by a team from her home province.
Some of the Chinese Communist Party’s favorite propaganda catchphrases are “socialism with Chinese characteristics,” a “harmonious society,” the “Chinese dream” and “patriotic education.” This incident shows the true face of such slogans.
If and when Shanghai suppresses its COVID-19 outbreak, no doubt China would praise all those involved as “heroes in harm’s way.” If so, surely the nanny should be listed as a “hero in harm’s way.” After all, instead of running away to her home province, she stayed in the danger zone and bravely fought the outbreak all by herself in a phone booth, sorting out her own food and other problems without bothering Shanghai’s busy government officials. Future discussion of Shanghai’s anti-COVID-19 campaign should not omit her captivating story.
China’s leaders originally expected other countries to copy China’s “achievements” in controlling COVID-19, but now China seems to be giving other countries “negative lessons” in that respect — the nanny’s ordeal being a fine example.
As for Hong Kong, it should also learn from Shanghai’s “negative lessons” in handling COVID-19 and take a more humane approach.
Lin Rongjie holds a doctorate in history.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath