The Greens oppose the CPRS not because it is too weak, but because it will point Australia in the wrong direction with little prospect of turning it around in the timeframe within which emissions must peak, says Senator Christine Milne.
Hu is the broadsheets’ Schapellian moment
|
It was, with apologies to JGA Pocock, the Schapellian Moment: everything unsavoury in the Australian character brought out by the plight of a young woman caught up in the terror of a foreign justice system. Our xenophobia, our racial and cultural snobbery, the ease with which we can be egged on by a tabloid media making a mint from our anger — this Midnight Express — Bali brought it all out: the death threats to Indonesians, the demands for boycotts, the willingness to entertain any absurd theory dreamt up by a journalist or defence lawyer. And many of Schapelle’s outraged supporters made their tentative way onto the internet to sites like www.dontshootschapelle.com to rail against the vile Indonesians and the failure of the Howard Government to Do Something. The febrile reaction of the local media made for quite a change from the 1970s. Back then the travails of Australian drug smugglers in Thai gaols were more the stuff of life lessons in our newspapers. They described the hell endured by the likes of former rugby league player Paul Hayward in gory detail as evidence of what fate awaited those who got mixed up in heroin trafficking. We nodded over our copy of The Sun and reflected that they were getting what they deserved. We got another Schapellian moment, in miniature, earlier this year when beer mat mum Annice Smoel was temporarily inconvenienced by Thai authorities for theft. This unleashed a wave of tabloid fury that swarthy types would dare to arrest an Aussie mum who just wanted a good time with her mates. The little bastards wouldn’t even take her bribe. Aussie money not good enough for them, evidently. Smoel had great Schapellian potential, being not merely blonde and a mum but not charged with anything particularly serious, thereby neutralising the whole debate about whether she was actually guilty. Inconveniently for the Australian media, she was let go into the waiting arms of her children and, almost certainly, symbiotic life form Max Markson. Stern Hu, however, has shoved all my patronising bogan-hate back in my face. Yes, true, Hu’s incarceration by the butchers of Beijing has not generated anything like the media coverage of Corby or even Smoel, whose ordeal occupied a number of tabloid front pages. But this case has quality not quantity: most of the Stern Hu coverage has been in the broadsheets, and in the op-ed sections, and it too has brought out plenty of kneejerk responses. In short, Stern Hu (a name that is a gift to subeditors) is the broadsheets’ own Schapelle, almost perfectly designed to push the buttons of the commentariat in the same way as your ordinary punters had their buttons pushed by the Corby saga. No photogenic bogan boogeyboarder, true, but the perfect emblem of late noughties Rudd-era Oz: a Chinese-Australian mining executive front and centre in the negotiations over prices for Our Minerals, minerals that China Inc, our bogeyman/saviour, would love to get its panda paws on. It’s not xenophobia unleashed by the arrest of Hu; the chattering class is too subtle for that. But any number of reflexive responses have emerged, and many of them are simply more complicated versions of what was revealed by Schapelle: the basic fear of what’s Out There, in places where the Aussie value of a fair go doesn’t hold sway. Most obvious has been the inscrutable oriental stuff that seems to still pervade discussion of the Chinese Government, as though bullying and intimidation, and a complete lack of acquaintance with ideas like the rule of law, are just a mask for some long game, centuries — nay, millennia — in development, aimed at global domination. All carefully hidden beneath those blank, same-same faces. Moreover, these are serious issues. Important issues. “Deep international politics — or at least the perception of deep politics, and that is enough — is involved here,” declared Rory Medcalf on his Lowy Institute “weblog” (whatever that is). What’s required therefore is Deep Thought from foreign policy analysts and old China hands. Paul Keating has emerged to repeat his long-term theme that we need to mollycoddle Beijing more or risk alienating the coming superpower. But there are plenty of sinophobes as well as sinophiles, or, more correctly, those who despise the Chinese Government. I should know because I’m one, and I readily joined in on that score earlier this week. Then there’s the realpolitik school, commentators who like to show how tough they are by affecting a cynical air and trying for a Kissingerian basso profundo tone. “The signs are that Australia is about to be taught another lesson in realpolitik,” intoned Paul Kelly, in words carefully weighed for their substance, gravitas and unutterable ponderousness. “Rudd at some point will probably need to make concessions to China for Hu’s cause.” Kelly evidently also has a direct line to the ChiCom politburo, stating in another column that the arrest was an internal signal of a move “to a more conservative, state-focused and security-conscious expression of power.” Because Beijing has been taking it easy on the whole state security thing until now. For others, including a shrill Julie Bishop, it’s a sort of international sport, with Kevin Rudd to be judged — and inevitably found wanting — by how much he muscles up to the big boofy bloke in the red shirt. And the speculation about the alleged crime has already started. There’s no cannabis in Hu’s luggage but there may have been cash in little brown envelopes. Experts on the ways of doing business in “the Middle Kingdom” (there’s that inscrutable thing again) are a dime a dozen offering advice on how they do things differently Over There. The flipside of this obsessive media interest — and what is most galling — is that it won’t last long. In retrospect, it’s impressive that Schapelle hogged our attention for as long as she did, although it was strung along by moments such as p-rn magazines adding her to their Hottest Babes lists. The Chinese — and possibly our own Government — will be very aware that we’ll have forgotten about Stern Hu in a week or month, depending on how much more juice there is in the story. Thereafter he’ll enter obscurity. Just ask James Peng, the Chinese-Australian businessman abducted by the Chinese Government from Macau in 1993, robbed of his company by the daughter of Deng Xiaoping and sent to prison. After initial media interest — “Shanghaied in Shenzhen” was one Herald Sun headline — he disappeared out of media consciousness until he was released — due, Alexander Downer boasted, to the Howard Government’s “terrier-like determination” — six years later. Or for that matter ask Frederick Toben, who didn’t even get the initial media interest. This appalling Holocaust denier was, for putting his nonsensical views on the internet, abducted by British authorities from a plane stopping over at Heathrow on a flight to a third country, and subjected to imprisonment, harsh bail conditions and an extradition hearing for a German arrest warrant. Toben’s disgraceful treatment got virtually no media coverage of any kind in Australia except from Crikey and Brisbane broadcaster Michael Smith. But then there were no simple stories to tell about Toben, no obvious lessons. He was a deeply unpleasant man who had his rights systematically and egregiously violated not by an brutal tyranny like China but the United Kingdom. The exception is David Hicks, but the growing outcry over his incarceration reflected both an increasing contempt for the neo-con incompetents to whom the Howard Government had outsourced our foreign policy, and a savvy campaign by Hicks’s supporters. That campaign relied heavily on encouraging Australians to forget that he was a jihadist with a range of deeply offensive views and a demonstrated willingness to act on them, in favour of an image of a nice kid who’d made some mistakes and was paying too high a price for them. The media loves a simple story to tell, you see. And the bulk of the Stern Hu coverage is about forcing his terrible situation into whatever neat narrative most commentators want to run with. Until the next story comes along, and that won’t be long. |
|
|
12 Comments
one thing, and one thing only, is for sure in all this: thanks to the media, led by the virulently bigoted newscrap, the chances of australian citizen and rio tinto employee stern hu being accorded any goodwill or being treated as a citizen of a friendly nation by the chinese authorities is zero. I am sure hu, his family, friends and colleagues and rio tinto would like to express their profound gratitude to our media sleazebags.
my ignorance may be showing but how is the arrest of Mr Hu “China looking after its own interests” but the questions arousing about the Fitzgibbon affair are “xenophobic and racist” Perhaps some who believe the good of the nation is secondary to the way the nation appears are reminded that China is not a western democracy and are looking in the mirror and reexamining their opinions? Style over substance doesn’t cut it in a foreign prison.
Once again our media has put people at risk to sell headlines. I hope Mr Hu makes it safely home to his family, I wonder how many editors of the newspapers hope the same? Wouldn’t it be better for headlines if he had something bad happen to him? Vultures.
I loved the “free schapelle” t shirts I saw in Glenferrie Road. Of course she was innocent, she was white and pretty.
Perhaps the media by and large loves a simple story, but this one (Stern Hu) is not simple and I believe a number of commentators have done well to spell out its complexities. You are too dismissive of its implications (perhaps you like to keep it simple too - so go join your mates!). One can spin out any situation by drowning it in prejudice - you obviously have many. I hope you have analysed where your’s come from and perhaps put a product warning in front of your comments in future.
With comments such as your’s we could all be down the drain in no time!
Cheers chum!
Sorry Andrew
Is your email referring to my comments or the article? Its a bit confusing and vague.
Andrew Farran , you resort to personal abuse of Bernard Keane, a trait not uncommon in those who lean to the right and count the Liberal Party doctrine as their political bible. No doubt you also enjoyed the the treatment of David Hicks, an Australian Citizen incarcerated in that chamber of horrors Guantanemo and the disgraceful treatment of Dr Haneef, a non citizen, by the then Howard Govt. I don’t recall the good doctor being offered visits by his countries Foreign Affairs staff, or receiving any Australian justice, as he was kept under arrest on trumped up charges. Turnbull and Bishop were Ministers in a Govt that trod all over human rights and supported the disgrace. Now those same two persons are acting like screaming skulls and expect the Chinese Govt to cower in a corner at their outbursts. Where is your criticism of their attitude? Perhaps selective judgement is more in your line.
I think this is one the most offensive articles I’ve ever read at crikey. To liken Schapelle Corby to Paul Hayward is a disgrace (there was zero doubt about Paul Hayward smuggling heroin, in cohoots with Neddy Smith) and to see it as impressive that this story “hogged our attention for as long as it did” is a sad reading of Bernard Keane. The reason a vast number of people questioned Schapelle Corby’s guilt is because of the implausibility of the circumstances. We all know about the unlocked boogie board bag etc but I’ve read all I can about her case and it becomes more problematic the further you dig. This is compounded by the subsequent revelation that yes, there were indeed drug smugglers working in our baggage handling departments at the time Schapelle Corby flew to Bali.
The reason Schapelle Corby is still in prison is because she has a wayward family who, together with her shonky advisers, made it easy for people to move to the position of quietly accepting that she’s guilty. In a forensic sense, the questions are still unanswered. The sad truth is that if Schapelle Corby’s dad was a doctor or lawyer and she’d gone to SCEGGS, she’d have been home years ago.
Peter Nicholson
just a clarification
Im not saying Scappelle is guilty just amused by the instant assumption of innocence because of her appearance. I agree with Peter Nicholson that if she had the familial connections of perhaps say Michelle Leslie she would be home.
Just on Heathdon’s clarification, I’m not sure Schapelle Corby’s looks were ever as important as some people say. It’s more the illogicallity of the whole thing - a clear bag of cannabis on top of an unlocked bag, going through Brisbane and Sydney airports when a direct route from Brisbane is available, having your girlfriends sleeping over the night before you do your drug run, smuggling from a high priced market like Australia to a market which has an abundance of cheap drugs. So much just doesn’t make sense.
An important intangible is that Schapelle Corby doesn’t appear to have the nerve to smuggle drugs through customs, particularly in an unlocked bag. Compare her and Renae Lawrence of the Bali 9 - chalk and cheese. I’m bolder than Schapelle Corby and I couldn’t do it.
One of the most appalling aspects of the xenophobic reaction at the time of Shapelle Corby’s arrest, were those people that demanded a refund of their donations to the tsunami appeal.
In 2006 I obtained an Australian passport, a little booklet was included with a personal message from Alexander Downer: “…I believe strongly that the Australian Government has a responsibility to assist-to the extent we can-Australians in trouble overseas….”. I remember at the time thinking that it left out “….Australians in trouble overseas, except David Hicks….”.
Another small matter was that of Australian Federal Police complicity in the entrapment of the Bali 9. The double standard by our political leaders in regard to the death penalty also is worth pondering.
If you “…believe strongly that the Australian Government has a responsibility to assist-to the extent it can-Australians in trouble overseas….”, such matters as guilt or innocence, good looks or otherwise, evidence or lack thereof, media spin, public perception, which school you went to, national/commercial interests etc., should not be part of the equation. Assistance to Australians in trouble overseas should be unconditional. I like to think my Australian Passport is worth at least that.
The outrage by the now opposition (that the Australian Government is not doing enough for Mr.Hu) rings rather hollow to those of us that can remember back to when they were the government.
For God sake, how about mentioning China deliberately moving to junk their market economy settings in the wake of the GFC and reasserting it’s command and control centralised economic settings? Do you think?
And the small matter of removing the iron ore miners best negotiators unless and until they cut a best price deal. That’s one hell of a negotiating tactic by Beijing there.
Sort of like the Cincinnati Kid with Steve McQueen only he gets locked in his hotel room before he can take a seat at the poker table against The Man.
Nice.
Dr Harvey M Tarvydas
Based on so many comments to media the Ausie normal person seems to have more insight and appreciation of this issue than the opposition polititians. Probably because they are responding naturally rather than having to manufacture a ‘proper’ response.
At least the Goverment polititians have an intelligent leader that can control himself.
While I an a touch smaller than Rio Tinto I have interests in two very different business’s that deal in China. Coruption there in business (local & foreign) and public services is getting us all down.
This year particularly the Chinese government has been trying to change this and the March conference their shows their determination to help China become like the rest of us procedurally and ethically in business.
In the defence of the Chinese this may be part of that effort and their internal law and order system should be given a chance to do something as valuable as this decontamination.
Insulting them and carrying on like fools and crybabies in their face they do not deserve while we build up a psychotic delusion about payback.
We didn’t do much in the coruption scandal with grain to Iraq to qualify ourselves as China’s advisors on ethics and anti-coruption methods.
The Australian Government cannot take any moral high ground on the issues, because it tacitly supports policies that it must presume to be the defacto standard for treatment of foreign citizens. That is the US government policy of locking people up for extraordinary long periods of time without hope of fair trial, including in the mix torture as a means of evidence gathering, or just torture for idle amusement by sub de-humanised prison guards.
Yhe absence of hard factual information about what crime or misdemeanor Mr HU has done is absolutely in keeping with US standards of meting out justice to foreigners, especially those from nations with which they in competition with.
I would say Australia’s involvement in the wars for oil in Pipelinestan and Baddystan is an example of competition, which would be perceived as moves against Chinese resource interests. And Australia is completely supporting US policy in every detail. Therefore how does China view Australia’s involvement in this activity on its doorstep ? Its real nice for the US to plead for Mr HU on our behalf, but the US is a debtor nation to China as well as being a practiced deliverer of injustice.
Most cases of the pressure and rewards for our bendy public office holders would not be so blatant as that uncovered in the recent Nuttall case. Mr Nuttall should thank his lucky stars he did not get justice in China.
Bribery and corruption are always at risk of becoming standard fare in any government that dispenses big resource development favours. The government now risks not being to explain adequately as to why it offers such big ETS concessions to carbon polluters, nor how the system will actually work. Economic growth is totally incompatible with carbon emissions reduction. The government cannot promise and deliver both.
The sad thing is that Mr HU is possibly a pawn in all sorts of ways. He is a pawn of Rio Tinto, who have in some way authorized or advised HU in taking some risk in a resources gambit. So how much of what he has been arrested for has been approved by his company? Does this make the company liable? I am sure their legal team are keeping it quiet. He is now a captured pawn of the Chinese government, or possibly competitive Chinese business interests. He is even a pawn of Mr Turnbull, who has been crowing with delight in Mr Rudd being unable to have sufficient leverage and maneuverability in the great game to bring about the appearance of justice at work. It is too early to tell yet, we may have many years to go on this. Mr Rudd may yet do something for international justice, or at least will bend the standard rules for the executives of big important corporations.