China is currently on the extreme side of a non-interventionist foreign policy (with the exception of the civil "dispute" with Taiwan). They don't consider a country's domestic policies, they just trade with whatever regime is in control and whatever policies they have in place - for good or bad. Some would say this makes them the ideal trading partner, as you won't find special clauses exempting their contractors from local jurisdiction or requesting allocated space for building a couple of military bases in their trade agreements.

Personally, I think countries should strive to adopt a "moral" foreign policy. However, one has to wonder about the implicatons of a new brand of Chinese foreign policy which takes trade and the military explicitly as a tool to mould the domestic affairs of others according to its perceptions.

BTW it's not just the Chinese that have an issue with Japan's refusal (and unfortunately their Western support in this) to stop the honouring of their war criminals. On this issue they actually find common cause with the Taiwanese, Koreans and Filipinos.

Perhaps Germany should repeal all previous apologies for its part in the Holocaust and start making pilgrimages to the shrines of Hitler and his cronies everytime it has an issue with one of Israel's foreign policies in the Middle East...

If the Japanese were just doing what was necessary for conquest (yes even plunder) then maybe. But they went way, way beyond that.

All I'm saying is - you may not want to see a new China that suddenly decides it has a high moral mission to be impressed upon the outside world.

I'm all for intervention in Sudan independent of the U.N, by a coalition of nations similar to that which went into Iraq. China's Sudan policy will change once it has no incentive to continue its current trading relationship with Sudan.

Exactly!  Which, by the way the are acting (or inaction), they don;t seem to mind being useless to ending the genocide.  I know that China has told Sudan that they will impose sanctions if they continue acting in the horrific manner that they are, but China is getting so much out of them that I doubt much will actually happen.

It's a shame.  One of the only countries that has an impact on the Darfur incident and, even though they are trying to create a clean image for the Olympics, this is one scar that is clearly visible.

its so typicall for us morally superior westerners...
we are so good in pointing with our fingers at others.. forgetting what shit we did in our past. even when we had been further developed then china is by now. Who are we to act like this? I mean.. If you take the "western" world all together.. China probablly still has more inhabitants.
Only like 30 years ago my country supplied factories which could be used to produce chemical weapons to iraq. We all know where that ended.

and i think china has every right to protest when japan celebrates their war heroes...
as someone stated above allready.. what would happen if germans would start praising the birthday of hitler. what if me make it our national holiday instead of day of reunion? Israel would be so quick in blaming us.. followed by the US.

I am not a protestant...in germany we have 34% protestant and 34% catholics... i am a catholic... but i honestlly do not care for religion at all.

I personally think that "castrating ourselfs for the sins of our grandfathers" made at least germany what it is today. I wouldn

nah, point not made:P

I mean we should clean our own alleays before we go start pointing fingers at china.
The Problem in Sudan is not that they are using chinese military equipment.
In Sudan and at any genocide in the world we need to do something as fast as possible.
But i ask you, what do you have in mind what should be done?
A coalition like it was in iraq? hmm, i guess in Sudan i would even support that. Maybe even Nato could do it.
But then again.. will we send such coalotion forces to Chechenia? To Palestine???
Will our goverments send such a force to Sudan?
I doubt.
Why did they send such a force to Iraq and not to Sudan where it would be a good thing?
Maybe in Sudan there would be no $$$ to make.
So isn

/me waves the Arpad flag.  Am I a facsist, now?

But on topic, it sounds as if China's policies are amoralistic.  How is this different from EVERY other economic power?  To some extent, every nation's policies fall short of desirable moral standards.  But let's not call these policies 'morally deficient'.  Let's call it 'humanistically defiicient'.  Let's say that the governments of the world should (and yet often fail) to provide domestic and foreign policies which protect and foster the human rights of its citizens.  Let's recognise the fact that ALL countries fall short in this regard.  Let us also recognize that ALL nation states generally do NOT succeed in fostering equality of DIGNIFIED economic opportunity as well. 

So, is there a way for nations to improve their domestic human rights policies, and develop a foreign human rights policies and provide for better, more equal, and more dignified route of economic prosperity?  The approach could be an international, cooperative exploration of this issue by our world's leaders.  It would be process of policy discovery and development, much like technological discovery and development, where by the process of finding out which human rights policies actually work, and whereby our nations share that 'discovery' and that 'development' with any country freely.  Our leaders could view successful human rights policies as a kind of new and VALUABLE 'sociological-technology' which not only improves human rights, but also furthers economic development (world leaders tend to do anything if it is in the name of economic development).  However, many national leaders seem to think that 'economic policy development' is somehow independant from 'human rights policy development'.  This, I think, is the root of the problem.

It seems world leaders have forgotten that fostering human rights, fostering equality of economic opportunity, is the process by which economic development occurs.  In fact, one can possibly argue that fostering human rights and increase equality for economic opportunity IS true economic development.

right, cuz human rights are made up. murder is a novel concept.

and just cuz everybody else does it, so can we. (as if genocide is the same as ... i don't know, whatever deficiencies you had in mind)

great argument!

next time anyone complains of america's imperialism, i guess i should say

"Ghengis Khan, byatch!" or "Napoleon, [shoe polish]!"

and the dinka just have to accept that they are history's shitbirds of today.

thank god for europe