IBRAHIM ISA
----------------------
Sabtu, 21 November 2009

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TIONGKOK MODERN DI MATA SEORANG CENDEKIAWAN BELANDA, --   HENK SCHULTE 
NORDHOLT
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Para sahabat dan handai y.b.,


Pagi ini aku baca di harian Belanda de Volkskrant, 21 Nov.  2009, sebuah 
tulisan analitis mengenai TIONGKOK
Judul: DE LANGE MARS IS NOG MAAR BEGONNEN. Long Mars baru saja dimulai.
Pengantar Red. berbunyi sbb:

'Tiba-tiba Barat menemukan Tiongkok, sedangkan negara-biara Mao sudah 
bertahun-tahun lamanya
menempuh arah pada posisi ekonomi terbesar di dunia.
Sekarang ini meski Peking tak-bisa-tidak sekata untuk dicapainya solusi 
mengenai masalah-masalah dunia,
namun, suatu Tiongkok yang demokratis akan punya arti lebih besar,
begitu menurut pendapat Henk Schulte Nordholt.

Aku baca dengan penuh perhatian. Ditulis dengan latar belakang 
pengetahuan dasar mengenai Tiongkok modern.
Dan dengan obyektivitas seorang cendekiawan Barat,

Nama penulisnya adalah Dr Henk Schulte Nordholt, seorang pakar dan 
historicus.
Banyak menulis mene=genai Tiongkok. Sayang  tulisan itu dalam bahasa 
Belanda.

Yang bisa bahasa Belanda, saya sarankan untuk membaca artikel Henk tsb.
Mudah-mudahan juga bersedia untuk menterjemahkannya dalam bahasa Indonesia.
Supaya bisa dibaca oleh pembaca Indonesia.

Salam takzim,

Ibrahim Isa

-----------------------





ChanCT schreef:

 
 
----- Original Message -----
*From:* H.S. Han <mailto:hanhwies...@planet.nl>
*To:* C.T. Chan <mailto:sa...@netvigator.com>
*Sent:* Saturday, November 21, 2009 7:40 PM
*Subject:* Re: Newsweek The Rise of China

Kawan-kan yang budiman,

Banyak tulisan-tulisan yang mendefinisikan dekade sekarang ini adalah 
kebangkitan Tiongkok, yang pernah saya tulis dalam artikel-artikel saya 
tentang renaissanceTiongkok dan pencerahan. Pemimpin-pimpinan 
dunia bertanya mengapa RRT tidak ikut dalam mendemokrasikan dan perang 
di Afganistan ? Saya rasa jawabannya jelas ialah: RRT beranggapan bahwa 
Peperangan di Afganistan tidak bisa dimenangkan, kalau tidak bisa 
dimenangkan buat apa harus ikut! Sekali terjun tidak bisa keluar lagi. 
Bisa keluar tetapi kehilangan muka. Ini adalah pengalaman USA di 
Vietnam, dan juga pengalaman USSR diAfganistan. Bukankah lebih baik 
membangun negara baik dalam bidang ekonmi, teknologi dan budaya, sebagai 
persiapan mendemokrasikan negara. Bagi para kawan yang ada interes 
persoalan ini silahkan baca artikel dibawah ini. RRT yang pada tahun 
1978 masih tergolong negara ketiga (Third World) sekarang menjadi negara 
kedua yang terpenting didunia ini sesudah USA!

Salam dan nikmatilah 
weekend                                                                         
                                                                                
     
Han Hwie-Song

Newsweek

20/10 Facebook

*What really defined the decade was the rise of China*.

By Fareed Zakaria

    *



Shanghai's majestic and thoroughly modern skyline

Philippe Lopez / AFP-Getty Images

One year in, it seemed obvious what would define this decade. After 
9/11, everyone could see that we were living in the age of terror. 
Presidents and senators talked about it, the media covered its every 
twist and turn, from bombings in Bali to terror camps in Pakistan. And 
yet, as the decade comes to a close, it is clear to me that the big 
story is actually something quite different, something less 
crisis-ridden, less television-friendly but in the long run far more 
consequential---the rise of China.

First, the case against terrorism as a defining idea. A few years into 
the decade, the age of terror began fizzling out. Once the combined 
power and attention of governments worldwide were focused on them, 
terrorist groups found it much harder to operate. They were chased 
around the globe by special forces, their money tracked, and their 
recruits scrutinized at every visa entry point. Al Qaeda's core mission 
was a jihad against the United States, and its methods were large 
attacks on symbols of American power---warships, embassies. It has found 
it very difficult to continue along this path in the new environment. 
Similar groups and people---all small minorities as well---have picked 
up the battle, inspired by Al Qaeda more than directed by it. But these 
local groups can only attack smaller targets in their home countries, 
often places that are unprotected and will always be 
unprotected---cafes, railway stations, subways. The problem with these 
attacks, however, is that they kill locals, turning more and more 
Muslims against Al Qaeda and its ilk.

Thus the core weakness for Al Qaeda is exposed---it lacks popular 
appeal. Its message does not resonate anywhere. It hopes to stun the 
world by spectacular acts of violence precisely because it cannot do so 
with its political message or popular support. This lack of appeal 
always limited Al Qaeda's global danger---after all, no non-Muslim wants 
to live under an Islamic caliphate. Now even Muslims were emphatically 
turned off. How can a movement with no real mass appeal pretend to be 
the future or scare us into reshaping our societies? Of course, 
terrorism is a problem. Modern technologies of communication and 
violence ensure that a small group of people can make a lot of trouble 
anywhere in the world. They have to be fought and societies have to 
learn resilience, bouncing back from the next attack. But that makes 
terrorism a condition of today's world, not a dominant story of tomorrow.

The real trend of the decade has been the rise of China from a Third 
World nation to the second-most-important country on the planet. In 
1990, China was under a cloud. It was still very much a Third World 
country, with average income at less than a dollar a day. Most of its 
reforms were about a decade old, progress was real but still slow, and 
the high drama of the brutal suppression of Tiananmen Square had caused 
the leadership in China to stop all new reformist policies and caused 
the world to put better relations with China on hold. China was in a 
freeze.

The thaw came, as Zachary Karabell points out in his new 
book, /Superfusion/ 
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/141658370X/?tag=nwswk-20>, when 
Deng Xiaoping toured China a few months after the crackdown. He 
announced that economic reforms would continue. China would continue its 
embrace of modernity, the West, trade, and technology. Politics would be 
placed on hold but not the economic development of the country. "One 
does not stop eating for fear of choking," Deng said, using one of his 
trademark epigrams to explain the future.

The rest is history. China grew over the decade around 10 percent a 
year. Compounded, this has grown its GDP to $4.8 trillion, which will 
make it the second-largest economy by next year. The scale of China's 
achievement, which can now be viewed over three decades, is 
extraordinary by any standard. It has industrialized at roughly three 
times the pace that the West did. What took 100 years in Europe has 
taken one generation in China. And in handling this massive 
transformation, what is really striking is the absence of large-scale 
violence. It is true that China is a dictatorship, but so were many 
Western countries when they industrialized, and they had much mass 
violence. Other East Asian countries have made this journey, but none 
has the size and scale to alter the world.

And China has not just survived the financial crisis but thrived during 
it. The Chinese economy will grow at 8.5 percent this year, exports have 
rebounded to where they were in early 2008, foreign-exchange reserves 
have hit an all-time high of $2.3 trillion, and Beijing's stimulus 
package has launched the next great phase of infrastructure building in 
the country. Much of this has been driven by remarkably effective 
government policies. Before the global economy skidded to a halt, 
Beijing was running a budget surplus and had been raising interest rates 
to tamp down excessive growth. Its banks had been reining in consumer 
spending and excessive credit. So when the crisis hit, the Chinese 
government could adopt textbook policies to jump-start growth. It could 
lower interest rates, raise government spending, ease up on credit, and 
encourage consumers to start spending. Having been disciplined during 
the fat years, Beijing could now ease up during the lean ones. It's fair 
to say that the winner of the global economic crisis is Beijing.

The net effect is that we have the rise onto the world stage of a new 
great power and one with massive potential for further growth along all 
dimensions. Of course, nothing can be taken for granted. China does have 
a restless middle class, persecuted minorities, border disputes, and the 
challenge of moving up the economic ladder, all within the context of a 
one-party system. Perhaps these troubles will make the country spiral 
downwards. I doubt it, but were it to happen, China's unraveling would 
be the dominant story of the next decade.

/Zakaria is editor of/ NEWSWEEK
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0393047644/?tag=nwswk-20>

------------------------------------------------------------------------


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Kirim email ke