c*******2
发帖数: 617 | 1 西方的洗脑新闻里， 这篇比较中立。提到中国只提了“Chinese criticism, largely
expressed through state-controlled media, has been particularly virulent。”
原因很简单， 这篇不是仅仅报导中国的反应。 专门针对中国的， 同一个事情，则上
纲上线。比如路透社的报导， 关键词是反西方宣传， 臆想的中国动乱， 和我党又害
怕了。
China seizes on Libya for propaganda war against West
Wed Mar 23, 2011 1:58am EDT
* China media denounce Western motives in Libya
* Propaganda campaign to counter calls for protests
* Campaign shows Party's jitters - analyst
华俄街报纸， The Global Times on Wednesday published a commentary 。。。。。
,” said the article in the nationalist tabloid, which is published by the
official Communist Party mouthpiece People’s Daily.
＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊
Russia and China have called for a ceasefire in Libya. Now South Africa and
India have joined in the outrage over the scale of the attacks
Britain and France are facing a rising torrent of international criticism
over military intervention in Libya, with Russia and China leading calls for
an immediate ceasefire. Just as a majority of Britons distrusts their
government's motives, according to a new YouGov poll, many, if not most,
countries around the world also view the action as risky, self-interested,
and duplicitous.
The fragile consensus on intervention achieved last week, when the UN
security council approved "all measures necessary" to protect Libyan
civilians against Muammar Gaddafi's forces, has shattered in the wake of
large-scale US, British and French ground and air attacks. The attacks were
widely seen internationally as disproportionate, careless of civilian lives,
and extending beyond the agreed plan to impose a defensive no-fly zone.
The criticism is coming not only from leaders with a traditionally anti-
western outlook, such as Russia's Vladimir Putin, who accused the allies of
launching a new "crusade" against the Arab world. Leading developing
countries such as India have deplored the escalation in fighting as likely
to make matters worse, while a growing number of African leaders are highly
critical of perceived western disregard for national sovereignty.
The international uproar will form the backdrop to a UN security council
meeting in New York on Thursday which is due to review implementation of UN
resolution 1973. Last week's decision cannot be reversed without another
full vote. But Russia, China and non-permanent council members including
South Africa and Brazil – from the so-called Brics bloc of countries – are
expected to express strong reservations about how the UN mandate has been
interpreted and executed.
While none of the opposing countries has so far expressed more than
diplomatic disapproval of the government's actions in Libya, analysts
suggest the row could have a potentially negative impact on Britain's
political, trade and commercial relations with some of the world's most
powerful emerging economies. The longer the war continues, the more damage
it could do to its main western protagonists.
Chinese criticism, largely expressed through state-controlled media, has
been particularly virulent, possibly reflecting second thoughts in Beijing
about its unexpected decision to abstain in last week's vote, rather then
use its veto.
"The air attacks are an announcement that the west still wants to dominate
the world. [It] still believes down to its very bones that it's the leader
of the world," said the online Global Times. "Iraq was attacked because of
oil, and Libya is also being attacked for its oil," the People's Daily
claimed. And while it was clear that Beijing's anger stemmed from unease
that the western doctrine of "liberal humanitarian intervention" might one
day be applied to China, it also reflected genuine unease about increased
instability in the Middle East region, its major oil supplier.
However much they may dislike Gaddafi, African leaders have been stung into
action by the spectre of dozens of Tomahawk cruise missiles and state-of-the
-art military technology raining down on a fellow African country. Jacob
Zuma, South Africa's president, voted in favour of UN resolution 1973 after
he was personally lobbied by Barack Obama. But he has quickly changed his
tune.
Speaking this week, Zuma called for an immediate ceasefire, expressing
concern about civilian casualties. South Africa, he said, "rejected any
foreign intervention, whatever its form". The air strikes, he suggested,
were more to do with regime change than humanitarian assistance.
Zuma was part of an African Union delegation that was about to travel to
Libya to help mediate an end to the conflict when the bombing started. The
mission was cancelled. Now the AU, generously funded by Gaddafi in the past
and smarting from another galling example of western insouciance, has called
for an end to military intervention, too.
Other major African and Asian countries, notably Nigeria and India, have
joined the campaign demanding Britain and France back off. "The measures
adopted should mitigate and not exacerbate an already difficult situation,"
the Indian external affairs ministry said.
Uganda's president, Yoweri Museveni, added hypocrisy to the Anglo-French
charge sheet. "In Libya they are very eager to impose a no-fly zone. In
Bahrain and other areas where there are pro-western regimes, they turn a
blind eye to the very same conditions or even worse conditions," he wrote in
the New Vision newspaper.
The seven-country east African security and development organisation,
Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), warned meanwhile that the
intervention was an open invitation to terrorists. "Our fear is that what
is happening now in Libya may motivate terrorist groups in Somalia,
Afghanistan and Iraq to regroup on African soil," it said.
Britain and France may try to shrug off this tidal wave of global criticism,
in the way western powers historically always have. But some very
influential countries, with an increasing capacity to make life
uncomfortable, are now ranged against them. Ignoring them will be harder to
do the longer the war continues, and the more people are killed.
While the Libyan intervention remains far from resolved, it has already
notched up one remarkable achievement. It has given Zimbabwe's ostracised
president, Robert Mugabe, a chance to speak out on behalf of the majority of
world opinion. As usual, the war was all about oil, Mugabe said this week.
Western countries were "bloody vampires". |
|
