Two Truths and A Lie

Chinese President Xi Jinping visited the White House and the United Nations headquarters in New York this past week. President Xi’s sojourn in America, as expected, received maximum media attention. Interestingly and yet not in the least bit shocking, the majority of articles were written about the sizable sum of money that China ever so graciously bestowed to the United Nations. Why do I say that such reports of President Xi’s visit to the United States were expected? Simply because the general public will never be interested in reading the psychology of such leaders, but rather the definite figures that rule our societies. To the public, numbers are the only things that indicate worth and therefore are what regrettably justify the claim that China is a subservient participant in the United Nations’ fight for the implementation of the post-2015 development agenda.There is a lack of understanding regarding President Xi’s statement at the U.N. and his promise to have China participate in more missions. The evident absence of knowledge pertaining to China’s involvement and role within the United Nations is one that is alarming to say the least. Understandably, the United Nations is shrouded with mystery and therefore is often perceived as an organization of true democracy, a form of government that is of and for the people. However, due to this lack of transparency concerning the process of creating internationally upheld policies and what kind of dialogue commences at assemblies, profiles of nations are created from rumors and the so-called verified “facts” presented in news reports. I say this from my experience of attending meetings and interacting with diplomats from various permanent missions—they are not all the altruistic and charismatic individuals that we imagine to be associated with their profession. Though it is hard to believe, the younger diplomats play games on their smartphones to pass the time during the three hour sessions as their wiser and more experienced bosses repeat monotonously what the previous nation had said about the topic at hand. What was even more shocking to witness was when a diplomat visibly fell asleep while at the table and the rest of the Security Council was discussing possible militaristic actions against terrorist groups. Of course, this particular diplomat is also a human and therefore has the full right to be exhausted from the demanding hours that is required of her profession. However, it is her duty as, not only one of the select few who has the responsibility but also as a major player part of the process of dictating international policies, to represent the voices of a population. Problematic? I’d say so.From an economic standpoint, it would be rather idiotic to not recognize China’s monopolistic power of various markets. However, one would think that China would have utilized this position of prosperity to benefit others, considering its status as one of the P5 within the United Nations. Ideally not only in China, but also the nations that are in more dire financial situations. And no, I am not referring to the classically poor continents such as Africa or South America. Nor am I referring to the Middle East, which has received an extensive amount of media coverage, perhaps an amount that could be characterized as excessive. I am well aware and am concerned for the lives lost in conflicts and the emotional and mental strife that continues to ensue as a result. I am talking about countries that neighbor China, such as the rest of Inner Asia and Central Asia, that would indisputably benefit from the funding. Nonetheless, President Xi made the decision to emphasize his government’s willingness to “help out” developing countries.It is quite ironic considering China is in the development stage itself, therefore invalidating the position of dominance it presumes over other nations. How could a country such as China still be learning? Unbeknownst to the public, China has always had a non-participational and oppositional status in U.N. activities. China is notorious for conforming to international norms and adjusting accordingly rather than implementing radical movements to a more economically stable future.The most outrageous part of China donating the lavish sum of money to the U.N. and peacekeeping missions was the fact that its President stressed how important his country felt it was to ensure women’s rights. It was hilarious for him to say such a thing, not because his statement was untrue, but rather because his government was and continues to be one of the worst countries in regard to upholding these basic human rights.The Chinese government had originally strategized for him to display his commitment to women empowerment, but the history of the criminalization of female activists proves otherwise. United States’ representative, Samantha Powers, showed her dissent and disbelief to such a claim as she posted pictures of Chinese women who had fallen victim to the Chinese government onto the windows of the U.S. Mission. Considering that the United States also holds a seat in the exclusive P5, Powers would not have to face as heavy of a consequence as will a country with a smaller influence such as Guatemala. But then again, if Powers were to be reprimanded, would it be for the public benefit, or would the U.S. Mission be concerned for the economical relationship it has fostered throughout the past few decades?There are two truths: China is a giant within the industrial hemisphere and is also privy to sources of intelligence of which the U.S. could only dream of. Here is the lie: China will successfully execute the Six 100s initiative of making available to developing countries 100 of various programs and facilities. Why? Because no country, human or leader is truly selfless, and if China wants to remain in its seat of power, it can never play the nice cop.