Now more than ever it is important that Australians understand the diverse perspectives within the Australian Chinese community. ‘Views in Chinese’ translates key articles from a range of Chinese-language media outlets in Australia on issues regarding the Australia-China relationship, and noteworthy articles about the People’s Republic of China (PRC). These are not the views of China Matters. Until January 2018, ‘What does China say about…’ pointed out articles from PRC state media and sources close to the PRC in both Chinese and English to draw attention to PRC positions on a range of issues.


The following is a synopsis of Chinese-language news articles, compiled by China Matters Junior Fellow Intern, Jessie Ding.

This article was first published on the Australia-based Chinese-language news site, ACB News, and was republished by Guancha on 9 October 2018.

ACB News – Aohua Finance Online

by Zhang Zhisen


On Thursday 4 October 2018, Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Minister for Immigration David Coleman travelled to Hurstville to attend a Chinese-Australian community event. They met with local businesses and had lunch with Chinese community representatives. During the event, Morrison delivered a speech. His speech emphasised the importance of keeping Australians together, recognised the many contributions the Chinese Australian community has made, and affirmed his commitment to strengthening Australia-China relations. Whilst some people in attendance remarked that Morrison’s words appeared to be superficial and characteristic of a new Prime Minister, the author, Zhang, felt that Morrison’s speech was rational, frank and sincere. Zhang is hopeful that the new Prime Minister will prioritise Australia’s interests over party factionalism.


Who hosted the PM?

Local businesses and Chinese community representatives in Hurstville.

Key points in the article

  • PM Morrison’s comments demonstrate his political courage and sense of responsibility amid a climate of criticism regarding the Chinese Australian community
  • Current political and global climate has allowed PM Morrison to deliver his Australia-China sentiments with clarity
  • The author is hopeful that Morrison’s ‘deeds’ will align with his ‘words’, and that the present government will prioritise Australia’s interests above party factionalism

What points of the speech were highlighted?

  • Goal of governance of the Morrison government: to build a stronger Australia by keeping Australians together. This means acknowledging that Chinese Australians are a vital asset to Australia.
  • Expressing appreciation and gratitude to the Australian Chinese community for their practical contributions to Australian society throughout the years (including involvement in war and in sports)
  • The importance of maintaining good Australia-China relations and promoting the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership and increased intergovernmental dialogue at upcoming global summits
  • Differences between Australia and China should be approached constructively, according to principles of equality and mutual respect
  • Potential to further the relationship in many industries and sectors
  • Reaffirming the role and contribution of immigrants

Zhang Zhisen is the Editor-in-Chief of Aohua Finance Online Review and Research Fellow at the Australian Studies Centre, East China Normal University.

See further commentary:

By Wanning Sun FAHA, Professor of Media and Communication Studies at UTS  

By Anthony PunOAM current President of the Chinese Community Council of Australia Inc.

In Sydney Today surrounding an open letter written originally in Pearls and Irritations.

By Jieh-Yung Loa Chinese-Australian Writer, Researcher and Commentator.

In the Australian Financial Review.

Read More

The following is an article published by the PRC state-owned tabloid Global Times (环球时报) that comments on the recent ABC board scandal:

Chairman of Australia’s avowedly independent news media organization resigns over suspected government manipulation

Justin Milne, chairman of the Board of Directors of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), announced his resignation on the 27th (of September) because of the alleged order to dismiss a reporter to please the government. Three days earlier, he had dismissed Michelle Guthrie, the general manager and editor-in-chief of ABC and then revealed that the company had been pressured by the government to do so. Suspicion of government manipulation of the avowedly independent media organisation has caused dissatisfaction among ABC employees and the Australian public.

Guthrie’s dismissal was announced on the 24th. Subsequently, Australia’s Fairfax Media revealed that in May this year, Milne asked for the dismissal of two reporters in an email to Guthrie because the Australian government did not like their reports. Milne reportedly cited economics correspondent Emma Alberici and said “they hate her… Get rid of her. We need to save the Australian Broadcasting Corporation… We can’t be sure that they (the ruling coalition) will lose in the next election.” The incident caused widespread protests from ABC employees. The media organisation is Australia’s national broadcasting corporation which is operated by public funds, but should be independent and not involved in party politics. The Australian government also announced that it will investigate political interference.

However, Milne denied the existence of government intervention and denied that he had written to Guthrie to ask for the dismissals. But Milne admitted that he had a confidential conversation with Guthrie. Milne believes that his resignation at this time will serve as a “decompression valve” in the current storm, dispelling criticism of the ABC. Now there are vacancies in two major positions in the ABC and the company is in an unprecedented crisis.

Turnbull, who had been a business partner of Milne, also made clear that he had not asked for any reporters to be dismissed, saying that he only worried about the accuracy and fairness of the report. Australian Prime Minister Morrison then issued a tweet welcoming Milne’s resignation, saying that “it is time for the Australian Broadcasting Corporation to resume normal broadcasting”. However, the Australian opposition Labour Party will still launch an independent parliamentary investigation to find out whether there was government intervention behind this serious incident.

At present, the two journalists who are unpopular with the government have not been fired, but the impact of this incident on the ABC is very bad. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) stated that ABC is regarded as Australia’s most respected media and has an important place in all aspects of the country. But its “independence” has provoked controversy for some time. Conservative politicians and commentators believe that it has left-wing tendencies and want to cut its budget. CNN said that the current government has often criticised ABC’s reporting as “inaccurate” and biased.

The ABC has previously done a lot of anti-China reports. In June last year, it broadcast a large-scale program accusing China of infiltrating Australia, interfering in its domestic affairs and jeopardising its national security through Chinese-Australian businessmen and international students. However, Turnbull then went so far as to pander to this misleading report, saying that it “educated” China to respect Australian sovereignty.

Translation by: Chris R. Lanzit, NAATI Certified Professional Translator (Chinese-English), NAATI Practitioner ID: CPN0BC84W

Date of translation: 2 October 2018

Read More

This article was first published in The New York Times in Chinese. SupChina also made mention of it in their daily newsletter.

The author, Deng Yuwen 邓聿文, is currently a visiting scholar at the University of Nottingham. He was formerly Deputy Editor of the Central Party School’s journal, Study Times (学习时报) in the PRC.

Why the theories that the Party is rapidly decaying and that Xi Jinping is incompetent are wrong

By Deng Yuwen

It is essential for all who are concerned about China’s future direction and democratic institutions to discuss these matters in a calm, objective, neutral and serious manner.

But unfortunately, most people start from the extremity of their own stance, values, emotions and individual experiences. They cannot objectively regard, analyse, and judge what they themselves observe or examine. This is a frequent phenomenon strongly affecting Chinese liberals including overseas democracy activists in the time of the Communist Party of China (CPC) and Xi Jinping. This situation is clearly evident in the lead-up to and beginning of the US-China trade war, with pessimism and taunts all around about China and the CPC. It seems that for the Chinese economy to collapse, the CPC vulnerable to attack and for Xi Jinping’s position to be untenable, there only needed to be the first shots fired in a trade war. Rumours of a coup d’état ran rampant, stunning everyone, particularly during the first phase of the Beidaihe meetings when Xi was missing from the headlines of official journals. It’s not that you can’t have your own position and feeling when discussing issues, but one must try to avoid preconceptions because it is easy to have a distorted view. In particular, it is necessary to avoid going to extremes in order to attract attention. Democratisation is a serious matter. To make China democratic as quickly as possible, the premise is to understand the objective or opponent of your consideration, understanding even more clearly their strengths and weaknesses.

However, there are two misconceptions in the observation and study of the CPC and Xi Jinping by the liberal democratic forces at home and abroad. The first is the theory that the CPC is in rapid decay and the other that Xi Jinping is incompetent. Observing the political programs of overseas Chinese, or in the words of critics published on social media such as Twitter, you will see that it is difficult to find anything of consequence on the topic of the CPC and Xi Jinping other than abuse, cursing, ranting, passing along gossip, conspiracy theories and that which runs counter to common sense. Not to put too fine a point on it, this is one of the reasons for the decline of the democracy movement overseas.

This phenomenon also exists inside China. At gatherings such as private parties or dinners, the criticism of the CPC and Xi Jinping is very intense. For some liberal intellectuals the currently perceived political situation is difficult to praise. For example, before the 19th Party Congress some scholars eloquently said that the congress would not be held or that the CPC would certainly fall from power after the congress, or that Xi Jinping would be overthrown at the congress. A few people have even bet with me on this. Why is the theory that the CPC is in rapid decay incorrect? Because it only addresses one point, not the rest. It turns a blind eye to the fact of their antipathy or their inability to prove their point. In the view of “rapid decay theory”, the CPC seems to be a paper house which will fall with a single push. But the truth is not so simple.

On the surface, many of China’s realities are braced for “rapid decay”: internally the CPC has dissatisfaction and resistance among the masses; and externally the West led by the US is strongly containing it. In particular, the US-China trade war has led to economic depression and recession, affecting people’s lives and triggering strong dissatisfaction with the CPC’s and Xi Jinping’s dictatorship. The middle class who supported the CPC in the past has also displayed disloyalty to Xi Jinping. Coupled with the intensification of the high-level power struggle caused by the anti-corruption campaign, it can be said that the conditions for the people’s “uprising” are already in place and only a call to action for a peasant uprising is lacking.

This view seems to have been confirmed by the “70-year limit theory” for a one-party autocracy. The theory says that the vast majority of the world’s autocratic countries or governments will collapse or step down when they have been in power for 70 years. The Communist Party of the Soviet Union and Mexico’s Institutional Revolutionary Party are two examples. So it will also be difficult for the CPC to escape this historical pattern.

However, it is very problematic to regard the people’s complaints and the strong dissatisfaction of various classes and levels against Xi Jinping as a prelude to the CPC’s collapse. It may lead to overall social unrest only if the economic situation deteriorates to the point of being out of control, with large-scale unemployment and hyperinflation. But even so, it is difficult to assert that the CPC will collapse tomorrow or anytime soon.

The reason is that the complexities of China itself and the changes in the international community are not entirely unfavourable to the CPC. China is a country with great internal differences, which makes it extremely problematic and magnifies the seriousness of problems. However, it also means that China has a strong tolerance for problems and has a lot of room for manoeuvre.

It should also be noted that although the CPC’s ability to adjust and adapt was weakened with the strengthening of Xi Jinping’s totalitarian rule, the speed of this weakening has not caused the CPC to be completely indifferent to changes in the outside world. Overall, the CPC’s resilience is still very strong and a relatively effective governance mechanism has been developed. In order to alleviate the dissatisfaction of the masses, Xi Jinping is also strengthening the accountability of officials. In addition, although Xi Jinping’s “China Dream” has been widely ridiculed, its nationalist sentiment and value of strengthening China is still attractive to Chinese society; his “precise poverty alleviation” to improve the welfare of the lowest levels of the masses has also been useful as a cohesive force in bringing them closer to the party. At the same time, the CPC’s strengthening of social regulation and the opportunistic attitudes and behavioural strategies of the people in the face of political pressure are also extending its rule.

From the economic point of view, although China has suffered a lot of pressure and difficulties this year, it must also be noted that the opening up to the outside world is the biggest in recent years. There are many examples, such as the Central Government’s Hainan Freeport, expanding the opening of the financial services industry, allowing banks and securities companies among others to hold more than half of the foreign-owned shares, and the expansion of opening up measures in Shanghai, Guangzhou and other places.

This of course is not to say that the impact of the trade war on the Chinese economy does not exist, but it is very likely that after the next tariffs on Chinese goods of US$200 billion or even more than US$500 billion, the impact is not as serious as expected when the trade war began. Foreign capital continues to flow into China. Elon Musk’s Tesla not long ago registered a wholly-owned company in Shanghai, and recently increased its registered capital from 100 million yuan to 4.67 billion yuan. As some economists in China have said, the US-China trade war mainly affects market sentiment and does not necessarily have a big impact on the real economy. Although market sentiment will also exacerbate economic recession, we must also see that the Chinese government is working hard to resolve it, although the effect has not yet become apparent. From the perspective of international politics and geostrategy, in view of the rise of global populism, the emergence of strongman politics, crises and internal contradictions within the West and an emphasis on the Chinese market, the degree of acceptance of the CPC in non-Western countries has increased. The overall environment around China has improved significantly from last year, especially with India, North Korea and Myanmar. China’s containment by the West (excluding the United States) is difficult to maintain over a long period of time.

In fact, the “rapid decay theory” is just a replica of the already existing “China collapse theory”, which has been popular for 20 or 30 years. The difference is that the “rapid decay theory” is mainly supported by the antagonistic anti-communist Chinese people at home and abroad, and the “collapse theory” is principally supported by research by overseas experts and scholars who analyse China, including some ethnic Chinese scholars. But the two are remarkably similar in their view of the rapid collapse of China and the Communist Party of China. Both believe that political infighting, corruption and economic recession will lead to the fall of the CPC and collapse of China.

If the judgement on the CPC’s “rapid decay” is wrong, then the judgement on Xi Jinping’s “incompetence” is not accurate because the two are closely related. Since he came to power nearly six years ago, when considering Xi Jinping as a person and his thoughts and policy lines, a view that seems to be universally recognised by the liberals is that Xi is a leader who is grandiose, head-strong, ambitious but lacking talent, and opinionated. Unable to bear responsibility, the CPC pushed him to the highest position and chose the wrong person.

Many of the liberals ridiculed Xi Jinping as an incompetent person. The common example is that although Xi is a doctor of law from Tsinghua University, his true level is only a that of a junior high school student. After he took office, he was left by Hu Jintao with a good hand (not referring to China’s reform process, but that the national strength continued to improve and the international environment rose correspondingly in a vacuum) which he squandered. Domestic affairs and international diplomacy are in a mess, domestic grievances have raged, and in the international arena we have fallen into unprecedented isolation. Particularly, by making an enemy of the United States, which will eventually lead to a US-China trade war and a comprehensive stifling by the US.

Xi created confusion in domestic and international affairs after coming to power, releasing many contradictory signals. In particular, he did not continue Deng Xiaoping’s reform line. On the contrary, he modelled himself after Mao Zedong and turned in a completely leftward direction, returning to orthodox socialism, superstitious spiritual power, promoting high-handed rule, and economically strengthening the state-owned system. This led to extreme disappointment by Party reformers and socially moderate forces. This seems to prove that he is not good enough to accomplish anything, but more than good enough at creating a mess.

However, this view cannot explain how Xi took control of power shortly after he took office and changed the leadership system of “Nine Dragons Controlling the Water” during the Hu Jintao period. For a person who had no military power and political achievements before coming to power, it is a miracle that he achieved such power and authority. It is important to realize that the strongman status of Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping was achieved under heavy fire and through long-term leadership positions. How did Xi Jinping alone get the whole party to be obedient? Is it because the leading cadres of this party are no good, or is it the result of the intentional choice of the CPC’s top leadership? Many people mention anti-corruption. But the problem is that Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin also pursued anti-corruption. Why did it not work?

Judging from the governance situation of Xi Jinping’s six years in office, the haphazard view that Xi Jinping is a fool, that he only had a junior high school level education, that he had no governing principles, is absolutely wrong. It underestimates him. Xi Jinping has a set of designs for China’s future. They are collected in the report of the 19thNational Congress. Although it does not satisfy the appetite of liberals, Trump’s former chief adviser Steve Bannon extracted the “hidden meaning”. In a December 2017 speech in Tokyo, Bannon warned the free world to be wary of China’s power. Before the 18th National Congress, Li Weidong, the former president of China Reformmagazine, referred to the strategy of the powerful country as the “Red Empire” strategy, and summarised its main points. This shows that there are some people who can anticipate or read Xi Jinping. In short, Xi not only has a set of methods in the struggle for power with which he can defeat political enemies, he also has a whole set of ideas and strategies for governing the nation and the party. Not only that, but in comparison to Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin, Xi also has very strong executive powers. He wants to turn this set of things that he thinks are “right” into reality.

One of the biggest mistakes made by the liberal democratic forces to date is to belittle Xi Jinping’s ability and regard him as rash. It should be noted that Xi is a dictator with finesse, ideas, a mission and a will. He may be the last leader of true communism. Maoist communist education and its intellectual structure and the seven years of youth education in Liangjiahe village have determined his mode of thinking, making him superstitious, full of antipathy toward corruption, and sympathetic with the people. He believes that in the open environment of globalisation, the CPC and China can be transformed into a purely political party and state, but the cruel political struggle has also made him ruthless. He adopted a two-handed strategy of governing the Party and the rule of democracy with the purpose of practising his ideas in China and returning to orthodox socialism. In this regard, Xi is also an idealist. Of course, under the one-person leadership system, his idealism and sense of mission, without sufficient opposition, are bound to bring China to a dead end.

I am not here to sing the praises of Xi Jinping and the CPC, to extend the prestige of the political dictatorship, to end the ambition for freedom and democracy, but to call attention to the fact that the liberal democratic forces at home and abroad think that they are standing on the moral high ground by being dismissive of Xi Jinping and the CPC. By just staring at the shortcomings and weaknesses of others they will make irreparable historical mistakes. For the free democratic forces, we should always remember that to defeat the opponents, we must, as the CPC itself said, strategically despise our enemies, but tactically take them seriously, learn more about opponents, and learn the strengths of opponents. Only in this way can we formulate realistic strategies. Otherwise, when historical opportunities come, they will be wasted.

Read the original article in Chinese at:

Translation by: Chris R. Lanzit, NAATI Certified Professional Translator (Chinese-English), NAATI Practitioner ID: CPN0BC84W

Date of translation: 25 September 2018

Read More

The People’s Republic of China has pressured foreign airline companies, including Australia’s Qantas, to remove any public information that suggests Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau are part of different countries to the PRC.

The following are two translated articles from Chinese-language outlets in Australia which offer different opinions on the controversy. The first is an article published by (澳洲亿忆网), and the second by Vision Times (看中国):

Australia’s civil airlines’ websites, with Hong Kong and Taiwan as separate entities, might face a complete block from China!

You think this is over, but it’s not! Australia has gone further and further out of the way to challenge China. With the Australian Prime Minister’s visa to visit China being rejected, and Australia continuing to do things, China-Australia relations have been very tense recently. But we did not think that at this critical juncture, Australia’s airline companies would suddenly be “doing things”!

In its international interactions, China has always maintained that Taiwan is a component part. Every country considers its territory to be sacred and inviolable. Recently, some Australian airlines have totally ignored China’s attitude and rashly listed Taiwan as an independent country! The separate listing of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, rather than in the category of other cities in China, is going too far! At this point, the editor of this piece was indignant and wanted to pick up a Chinese history book and explain the history of China to these Australian bumpkins!!!

Such an approach is entirely a sort of provocation of China. For this reason, the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) sent letters directly to several Australian airlines demanding in tough language that they remove any public indication that Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Macau are subordinate to countries other than mainland China.

The letter stressed that if Australian airlines obstinately persists, their official websites and all types of information in China will be completely blocked!

A spokesman for Qantas said that the letter is true and that it will make an adjustment accordingly. The letter was sent in April and is now in May, but this adjustment has not yet been implemented.

CAAC also sent an identical letter to American Airlines and United Airlines at the same time.

The same words firmly warned them that their official websites will be closed in China if they do not delete the information that divides China’s territory.

The shutting down of official websites is not merely idle talk. According to an investigation, the official website of Marriott International was blocked by the Chinese authorities and the server was closed for a week in January 2018.

Because it lists Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau, and Tibet as independent countries in the questionnaire for customers. This is a contempt for the integrity of China’s territorial sovereignty!

Although Qantas continues to avoid responsibility, other Australian airlines have a good attitude. Among them, Virgin Atlantic quickly committed itself. While the company did not receive a warning from CAAC, it still re-checked whether there was still anything incorrect in the official ticket sales information!

That CAAC issued a letter warning to Qantas is only an example. As China has become stronger, any divisive action with regard to its sovereignty and territorial integrity will receive a serious warning. Especially the issue of the separate affiliation of Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau, etc.

After the Global Times article was published, many foreign companies automatically altered the territorial labels of these regions to “Taiwan, China” or “Hong Kong, China”.

The “One China” principle is one that we will always defend and it absolutely cannot be challenged!

Link to the article

Australia bravely says “No” to the Communist Party of China’s threat about changing Taiwan’s name

The Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) recently issued a letter to 36 foreign airlines requesting them to change the names of “Taiwan”, “Hong Kong” and “Macau” on their company websites and in advertisements in accordance with PRC standards. The move sparked the resentment of the countries concerned. After the United States denounced Beijing for its “nonsense”, the Australian foreign minister also publicly warned China not to attempt to meddle with Australia’s aviation industry in this coercive manner.

According to an article in the “Sydney Morning Herald”, the Australian aviation industry received a threatening letter from  CAAC last week.  It said the names of Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau should be changed on their websites and in advertisements because Beijing believes that the names used by some foreign airlines indicate that they view them as independent countries.

In response to this, Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop publicly announced a few days ago to the Chinese side that it should not use coercive methods to force the Australian aviation industry to adopt the “political opinion” of the Communist Party. The Communist Party of China should not think it can meddle in the Australian aviation industry in a coercive manner.

Bishop said that for Australia the name of the destinations listed by the domestic aviation industry should be determined by the airlines themselves. The government certainly cannot exert pressure on the companies or it could affect their normal operations. Moreover, these things belong to Australia’s own domestic affairs and other countries need not intervene.

On April 25, CAAC issued a public letter to 36 foreign airlines requesting that these operators must change their position on Taiwan and Hong Kong in order to meet the political standards of the Chinese Communist Party. At the same time, it also threatened that if these companies do not comply with the above requirements, they will be handed over to the cyber security department to be dealt with. In this regard, the outside world believes that these foreign airlines’ websites will be subject to control in China and may even be blocked.

In fact, the United States has taken the lead in issuing a public statement denouncing the CPC for this demand, referring to it as “Orwellian nonsense,” and emphasising that Americans will resist the “political correctness” that the CPC imposes on U.S. companies and citizens.

Link to the article

Translation by: Chris R. Lanzit, NAATI Certified Professional Translator (Chinese-English), NAATI Practitioner ID: CPN0BC84W

Date of translation: 14 May 2018

Read More

The following is a translated article published on (澳洲新闻网) by Weibo user Omnipotent Pudding (万能的布丁). It covers a recent warning issued by Scamwatch about a fraudulent scheme which targets Chinese-Australians:

Australian officials warn all ethnic Chinese for the first time! Unprecedented fraud has occurred widely among ethnic Chinese! The money obtained by cheats basically can’t be recovered!

Those in Australia, please note!!

For the first time, the Australian government has issued a warning to the Australian Chinese community!

At present, a type of unprecedented fraud is happening widely among ethnic Chinese!!

Their target is the Australian Chinese community!! Everyone may have seen the news before. Some fraudsters posing as Chinese embassy staff have called Chinese-Australians to perpetrate fraud.

Now, thanks to impressive publicity by the Australian media and the Embassy, everyone has been warned not to believe this fraud. So, the swindlers have invented new schemes! A brand new scam against ethnic Chinese has emerged in Australia now. Fraudsters have falsely assumed the identity of employees of DHL International Express.

That’s right, the DHL courier that often delivers important documents.

There are also swindlers who pretend to be Chinese police or “special investigators”. Whatever they claim to be, the content of what they tell you is the same:

“We have a package of yours here with your name and address on it (they will repeat your name and address accurately, enhancing credibility). And a lot of fake passports have been found in your package!”

We all know that DHL is one of the few international courier companies that can send important identification documents such as passports. Overseas Chinese are very likely to be anxious when they receive a phone call from DHL Express on such an important issue as passports, and they just listen to what the other person says.

Moreover, forgery or participation in passport fraud in China is a felony!!

According to Article 320 of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China:

Those who provide forged or altered passports, visas or other entry and exit documents or sell these types of documents shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than five years and fined in accordance with the severity of the crime. If the circumstances of the crime is severe, they shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of more than five years and fined accordingly.

On being told that you are suspected of participating in the fraud of a large number of passports and that you may be put in jail, many people would be anxious! Then, a fraudster posing as a DHL staff member or a police officer tells the victim that “we suspect you of money laundering or property transfer”.

Then he proposes that if you pay bail or pay a “priority investigation fee,” you can avoid going to jail…

If the fraudsters find out that you may not give them money, they will try to find a way to gather some valuable personal information when you panic.

For example, your passport number, bank account number, current address, etc.

Finally, Australian officials warned that Chinese victims who have been cheated are rarely able to recover their money at present!! In other words, once you have incautiously transferred money to a fraudster, the police may not be able to do anything about it!

The money you have been cheated of will probably not be recovered!

Today’s fraudsters know very well where the weaknesses are of us overseas Chinese. Embassies, passports, visas, family safety, and other issues we care about most often are the places where they begin!  [Emphasis added]

Therefore, if you receive a call about problems with your passport or visa, please hang up immediately.  If you do not feel comfortable, you can call DHL headquarters or the embassy for verification.

In short, it takes constant vigilance to ward off evil. If everyone read this Pudding article and raised their awareness, after receiving such a fraudulent call they would remember how to deal better with fraudsters.

Translation by: Chris R. Lanzit, NAATI Certified Professional Translator (Chinese-English), NAATI Practitioner ID: CPN0BC84W

Date of translation: 30 April 2018

Read More

The following is a translated excerpt of an article by Xia Feiyan (夏飞岩) published in Vision Times (看中国). It covers the two open letters by scholars of China and the Chinese diaspora to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security:

Xia Feiyan: An Unequal Academic Debate

The legislative proposal of the “Anti-Foreign Interference Law” by the Turnbull government and the publication of Prof. Clive Hamilton’s new book “Silent Invasion: China’s Influence in Australia”, has set off a controversy among the elite in the Chinese-Australian community. The focus of the debate is whether the Communist Party of China’s (CPC’s) influence has interfered with Australia’s free and democratic society. Will exposing it and adopting legal measures arouse racial discrimination in our multiculturalism?

In fact, when two separate groups of academics, which included ethnic Chinese experts and professors, took part in the debate in open letters, the allegation of “racial discrimination” became nonsense. Regardless of the language used by each, the real target was not the ethnic Chinese, but to prevent the CPC’s influence on Australian society from spreading, or continuing to allow the CPC to fully control the Chinese community and spread to all areas in Australia.

The most successful aspect of the CPC’s penetration of Australia is to allow the vast majority of Chinese to acquiesce in their lies and to give up the courage to challenge the CPC’s bottom line. Because acquiescence means personal safety, it is what the CPC is most pleased to see. When the CPC cracks down on the calls and warnings for countering infiltration under the guise of “racial discrimination against China,” it can indeed allow a group of Chinese to follow up. If even the so-called Chinese experts and scholars jointly sign an endorsement of the Chinese Communist Party, it only shows the Chinese Communist Party’s deep penetration of this group of scholars.

In December last year, Australian Prime Minister Turnbull expressed his determination that Australians have begun to counter the strong penetration by the CPC by saying the “Australian people have stood up.” Many Chinese expressed their gratitude for the courage of the Australian government. Strangely enough, it was mocked by the former Prime Minister of Australia.

The slogan “The Chinese people have stood up” was in a speech delivered by Mao Zedong at the first plenary session of the CPPCC National People’s Congress on September 21, 1949. The concept of “stand up” means that the communist ideology formally replaced the Western civilizational culture of the United States and United Kingdom and the traditional Chinese Confucian culture adhered to by the Nationalist government.

Must the comparison of Turnbull’s determination to use “Australian values” to drive away the “infiltration of the red forces” with “the Australian people have stood up” be challenged? Still we can see that Rudd’s article was reprinted and held in respect by numerous red media. Turnbull’s resolve was ridiculed by countless red media.

Thinking of Kevin Rudd’s letting slip on Weibo of “learning from the Nineteenth Party Congress”, one could not help but ask: “Comrade Rudd, can you stand up and speak?”

Some politicians and scholars who have lived off of others have always claimed that they often criticise the CPC’s actions, etc. I remind you that it is called “kneeling and pleading”. As long as you walk along the line drawn by the master, you will be esteemed.

In a democratic and open society, when it comes to disputes related to the dictatorial regime of the Communist Party of China, or when the subject of an argument touches the CPC’s bottom line, the situation is different. We can see that some Australian politicians and scholars will “consciously” integrate with the mouthpiece of the CPC, allowing public opinion to show a wide range of irrational disparities. This shows that the CPC’s influence in Australia is enormous. In such an environment, can we use the strength of sound to distinguish whether or not it is just? Of course not.

In retrospect, the open letters of the two groups of scholars seem to be equal in a society of free speech and mutually express the theory of support and opposition. But if you see the difference in the environment between the two, the state of the disparity is very great. Many signatures come from the same institution, but they express different opinions.

An open letter against the legislation said that “alarmist talk” would make “Australian Chinese not even dare to participate in this open debate.” Ask these scholars, don’t you feel ashamed to write such words? In the current environment, the reality is that “alarmist talk” makes the Chinese frightened not to openly tell the truth. Chinese who are willing to provide real proof to Clive Hamilton hardly dare to leave their real names.

At a press conference for the publication of the new book, “The Silent Invasion,” at the New South Wales State Capitol, I met John Hugh, a former Parramatta City Council member who supported the publication of the new book. I asked him with concern: “You will soon visit China. Won’t supporting this activity cause trouble?” John laughed. “I just think that everyone has the right to express their opinions. I often go back and there should be no problem.” As a result, he was forcibly repatriated at the Shanghai airport on the grounds that “you know what you did”. Obviously, the optimistic Mr. Hugh still underestimates the degree of evil in the Communist Party of China. The Party has issued an unequivocal warning to Chinese around the world. As long as you are Chinese, no matter where you live or what nationality you take, you do not have the right to freedom of speech and you must always conduct a “self-examination.”

An unequal debate is enough to show that the current measures of the Australian government have touched on the CPC’s sensitive nerves and caused it to come out fighting on all fronts. This is the naked expression of influence.

When Mao Zedong’s uttered the phrase “the Chinese people have stood up,” it left all the kneeling people of the mainland under their control. Now Turnbull also said that “the Australian people have stood up.” He is trying to get those who are still living in the free world to stand up.

I would like to ask those scholars and professors who bamboozle while signing their names, “Can you ask yourself first whether you are standing or still kneeling.”

Translation by: Chris R. Lanzit, NAATI Certified Professional Translator (Chinese-English), NAATI Practitioner ID: CPN0BC84W

Date of translation: 7 April 2018

Read More

The following is a translated excerpt of an article published by Australian Financial News (澳洲财经见闻) on the recent immigration debate in Australia:

Resisting immigration? I’m afraid Australia is just ‘firing blanks’

For a country established primarily by new immigrants, immigration is certainly a continuing topic of discussion.

In the last decade (as of 2016/17), with overseas students and mining investment boosting employment over the long term, net overseas immigration in Australia hit a new high, reaching an average annual 217,400 people.

Wage growth has stagnated while property prices have risen rapidly in Sydney and Melbourne. The clamour of anti-immigration rises day by day. Increasingly, some populists also refer collectively to immigrants as “non-Australians” and make difficulties for the latter. But in fact Australia is a multicultural country and 28% of Australians were born abroad.

Those who oppose immigrants tend to simply attribute the economic downturn to immigration which has led to an increase in population. In fact, this view is too one-sided. Many people who oppose immigration see the competition for housing and jobs as having been brought about by it and overlook the immigrants’ contribution to employment. They have also ignored the synergy of the whole being more than the sum of the parts. In fact, Australian immigration and development is not a zero-sum game.

The federal government’s mode of thinking has changed significantly in the recent past. The abolition of the 457 visa indicates immigration policies have been tightened. The motive for this move seems to be once again aimed at obtaining votes. Stabilising the economy or protecting the environment are being used as excuses for prejudice.

Aside from its political stance, Australia seems to have unwittingly exposed a bigger problem.

Without immigration, what will the Australian economy rely on in the future?

Most of the economic growth forecasts are based on a population increase of 400,000 people per year. The scale of the former amounts to one new city.

With mine production reaching full capacity, a decline in resource prices, and the end of the boom in housing in the eastern coastal area, immigration will fall. And the secret weapon of Australia’s economic miracle will no longer exist.

An even more complicated problem is: if you want to increase productivity, you must make major expenditures on infrastructure. These expenditures should have been made in order to cope with the influx of immigrants.

If the Australian government really wants to control the budget deficit, it cannot simply rely on countless new immigrants to promote the economy and increase the tax base. Otherwise, the government will have to face serious financial problems.

Maybe they will seriously consider a resource rent tax instead of looking at the national wealth as inexhaustible and do nothing. Tax cuts on foreign companies may give way to corporate taxation. Furthermore, it raises the question: can we afford tax incentives for rich people’s pension funds and property investment? The answer is perhaps. However, doing so will inevitably come at the cost of a recession.

There is a very simple relationship between immigration and economic growth. The bigger the population, the bigger the economy. The greater the population, the more products and services are consumed.

There is nothing wrong with promoting economic growth through immigration. But in the past 20 years in Australia the mistake that the government has made is: on the one hand, they are happy to see the good economic growth; on the other hand, they are completely unwilling to make necessary expenditures to ensure that the economy can cope with the demand from large for immigration inflows.

As a result, many of our large cities are overwhelmed. The infrastructure is outdated. Public utilities cannot meet demand. This situation in turn adversely affects our productivity, leading to further distortion of our distribution of wealth.

With the economic achievements we are about to achieve, leaving aside the original GDP data, we have just advanced one small step.

If Australia’s economic performance is assessed in terms of per capita GDP growth, we will find that our economic growth has not been so brilliant.

In terms of its annual growth rate, our per capita GDP growth is only 2% higher than during the recession 25 years ago. And this 2% only lasts for a few years into the new millennium. It has remained at 1.5% and 1% for most of the time.

Immigration should be viewed as an optimistic opportunity for development. On the contrary, political decision-makers should not bow to narrow-mindedness, ignorance and intolerance.

Translation by: Chris R. Lanzit, NAATI Certified Professional Translator (Chinese-English), NAATI Practitioner ID: CPN0BC84W

Date of translation: 5 April 2018

Read More

The following is a translation of an article published by the People’s Daily (人民日报), an official newspaper of the Communist Party of China. The article was also circulated on Australian Chinese-language outlet Melbourne Today (今日墨尔本) :

Australia denies helping ASEAN countries engage in infrastructure to counter China’s influence

During Australian Prime Minister Turnbull’s visit to the United States in February, news that Australia, the United States, Japan and India will cooperate in the launch of a “four-nation regional joint infrastructure plan” to help Asian countries engage in infrastructure and counterbalance the rising influence from China’s “Belt and Road Initiative” was revealed in major media. At that time, the countries involved were secretive and did not disclose any information on it to the outside world. On March 18th, at the Australia-ASEAN summit in Sydney, the host country Australia announced the “ASEAN-Australian Infrastructure Cooperation Initiative.” The Australian Financial Reviewreported that this is Australia’s first public announcement that it will strengthen cooperation with Southeast Asian countries in infrastructure construction.

The initiative stated that Australia will play a role in the design, feasibility and planning of infrastructure projects which would then be funded by regional institutions such as the Asian Development Bank. Australia’s Foreign Minister Bishop said in a statement on the 18th that the Sydney-based G20 Global Infrastructure Center will establish contact with ASEAN and “strengthen cooperation between the public sector and private investors to fund ASEAN infrastructure projects.”

The Australian government did not disclose how much capital it would invest in this capital construction project, nor did it clearly specify what kinds of projects it was targeting. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation said that this plan is actually the focus of Australia’s efforts to respond more effectively to China’s influence. It is also the first time that Australia has taken specific actions to challenge China’s dominant position in infrastructure construction.

Japan has taken the lead in discussing how to use the four-nation dialogue mechanism as a fund-raising agency to provide assistance to Southeast Asia and the Pacific region. In January this year, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan said in an interview with the Australian Financial Review: “Ensuring international standards for the construction of infrastructure such as ports is very important, and infrastructure investment must be open and transparent, and it must not endanger financial security.” In response to the enormous enthusiasm of China and Asian countries for infrastructure, President Trump has promised in the recently announced budget to establish a specialised financial institution. At the East Asia conference held in Manila last year, the United States, Australia, Japan, and India discussed the issue of regional infrastructure cooperation for the first time. Also during that meeting, the four nations agreed to resume the so-called “quadrilateral security dialogue.”

Reuters reported on the 19th that a senior U.S. government official disclosed that the four-nation regional joint infrastructure plan is still in its embryonic stage and has not yet reached a level of maturity which allows it to be announced. But it is seriously being discussed. He tended to describe the plan as an alternative to the “Belt and Road” rather than a “competitor.” Bishop’s spokesperson said on the 19th that the agreement was purely an ASEAN initiative and “is not meant to counter China.”

The Australian Financial Review stated that due to its hesitation in joining the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, Australia lost its chance to be vice president of the bank.  Because of the alarmist speculation about China’s true intentions, Australia’s attitude towards the “Belt and Road” is ambiguous. Australia’s Minister responsible for foreign aid to the Asia-Pacific region even went as far as launching a random attack on China’s infrastructure projects in the South Pacific. Some Asian scholars said at the meeting last week that the Australian government should work hard to help ASEAN countries design better infrastructure projects rather than trying to encourage them to remain vigilant about Chinese funds. Moreover, where the funding for the ASEAN-Australia Infrastructure Cooperation Initiative will come from is also questionable because Australia has already cut infrastructure spending in its aid budget.

Translation by: Chris R. Lanzit, NAATI Certified Professional Translator (Chinese-English), NAATI Practitioner ID: CPN0BC84W

Date of translation: 21 March 2018

Read More

The following is a translated excerpt of a WeChat (微信) post by Australian Red Scarf (澳洲红领巾), a media platform which covers Australian life style issues and interesting topics for international students:

Urgently revealed! Personal Prospective Of Students: The Australian government is destroying the future of China’s top talent!

Since May last year, hundreds of doctoral students and visiting scholars who received state sponsorship or scholarships have immediately applied to go to Australia, where they have received admission notices and invitations from many prestigious schools. They go there to continue their doctoral studies and research projects with well-known instructors and research teams, so that they can make greater contributions to the development of their home country when they return.

It is unimaginable that in March of 2018, half a year later, these outstanding students who have worked hard to win state funding and scholarship awards through their strenuous efforts have not only failed to travel to Australia, but also that their state funding is threatened…

Abnormal Delays

Why has this strange visa delay problem arisen on the Australian side?

One thing worth noting is that the students and scholars who are caught in this visa trap are all engaged in research in the fields of science and engineering.  These include electronics engineering, materials, machinery, robotics, microbiology, biochemistry, optics, lasers, physics, computers (oriented toward machine learning), chemistry, chemical engineering, thermoelectric refrigeration, metallurgy, and immunology.

However, being able to obtain national sponsorship or “full scholarships” from Australian schools naturally proves the strength of these students in these fields. Therefore, the admission by many of Australia’s most famous universities—in contrast to the indifference and delays by their national government—is very much concerned with whether these outstanding Chinese people will be able to further their studies.

In the past half a year, these Australian schools have applied for an extension of time for the students and scholars to start school. On the one hand, they have also continued to communicate with their national government and asked Australian officials to approve Chinese students’ visas as soon as possible.

Oddly enough, the official answers received by these Australian universities are almost exactly the same as the responses received by Chinese students. They are a single word: “wait” and there is no “timetable”.

This also left the school without any alternative. One student who was ensnared by the visa problem told Yan Zhige that the Australian school even ridiculed on the Australian government in an email sent to him. He said that there are about 20 doctoral students in the schools’ engineering department who are still facing visa issues…

Some students also suspect that the Australian government is interested in the suppression of doctoral and masters degree students in science and engineering, because students who went to study non-science and engineering majors, especially those studying for undergraduate and masters degrees at their own expense, were at the same time quickly granted a visa. Those having a problem are those studying for a Ph.D. or Master’s degree in science and engineering who have a full scholarship or are funded by the Chinese government.

Students’ suspicions are not without reason. After all, in the past two or three years, Australia’s mainstream media, such as Australian Radio Television, Australian News Corporation  and Australia’s Fairfax Media Group, have been constantly making remarks on the “China threat theory.” Some extremely irresponsible persons have repeatedly labelled overseas Chinese students as “spies”, accusing them of “stealing Australian technology” without any evidence, and saying that this is “China’s infiltration of agents into Australian”.

Hopefully, more media exposure will allow everyone to recognise some of the government’s actual actions and it is hoped that the Australian government will not further waste the time of Chinese students!

Translation by: Chris R. Lanzit, NAATI Certified Professional Translator (Chinese-English), NAATI Practitioner ID: CPN0BC84W

Date of translation: 19 March 2018

Read More

The following is a translated excerpt of an article by Xia Feiyan (夏飞岩) in Vision Times (看中国):

Silent Invasion: A book which has jolted the Australia-China relationship

After the Turnbull government introduced the anti-espionage bill in Australia late last year, the CPC claimed that anti-China forces were at work. However, Turnbull responded that the “Australian people had stood up” and  bombastically warned that we will severely crack down on foreign infiltration, vowing that “Australia will not give in.” As a result, Australia-China relations have cooled off precipitously. On the other hand, the degree of warmth in Australia’s Chinese New Year celebrations was even greater than in previous years, with gongs and drums proclaiming “May you have a prosperous New Year” again and again. Greetings to ethnic Chinese during the New Year came from the Prime Minister and ministers as well as from local officials and mayors. The Turnbull couple personally attended the grand New Year celebration held by the Chinese community in Melbourne.

However, in the midst of the New Year celebrations, the Australian media hurled an explosive piece of news. The book, “Silent Invasion: China’s Influence in Australia” written by Prof. Clive Hamilton, which will eliminate all of the CPC’s obstruction in Australia, will officially be launched in early March. At the same time, the Commonwealth Parliament said that if the book passes its review, it will also obtain special immunity granted by the government to eliminate any defamation or fraud allegations it may engender.

The book appeared like a bomb, agitating the entire community and placing the ambiguous relationship between Australia and China at the forefront of public opinion.

Many people have asked when an expert who focuses on environmental and climate research began to observe politics. Professor Hamilton said many countries are watching Australia’s attitude and plan to follow its example. “People who have been bullied are now unwilling to accept it and have begun to start fighting back,” he said. “We only want long-term peace as well as sustainable relations between the two countries. If it wants this, Beijing must immediately stop its political and social interference.”


The Australian government turned a blind eye to the infiltration of the CPC and just began to wake up today and start to fight back. Although it has hit the so-called overseas Chinese who treat the CPC as supreme, it is definitely a good thing for the greater part of the ethnic Chinese population.

The New Year’s lion dance and the storm over the new book shows the attitude of the Australian government. In Australia, ethnic Chinese, including Chinese traditions and culture, are cared for and  respected. However, it is absolutely unacceptable that the CPC infiltrate and interfere with Australia and commit any act that violates Australian values. From now on, the Australian government will not compromise.

Translation by: Chris R. Lanzit, NAATI Certified Professional Translator (Chinese-English), NAATI Practitioner ID: CPN0BC84W

Date of translation: 23 February 2018

Read More