Positive and Negative

I've been sucked in by a tragic novel (and a TV show adapted from it) lately. The story is almost like an illustration of Tsangyang Gyatso, the 6th Dalai Lama's poem:

First, it's best not to meet, so then you may not love.
Second, it's best not to know each other, so then you may not lovesick.
Third, it's best not to be in accompany, so then you may not owe .
Fourth, it's best not to sympathize, so then you may not recall.
Fifth, it's best not to love,so then you may not abandon.
Sixth, it's best not face to face, so then you may not greet.
Seventh, it's best not to wait for each other, so that you may not let down.
Eighth, it's best not to promise, so that you may not continue.
Ninth, it's best not to depend, so that you may not snuggle.
Tenth, it's best not to encounter, so that you may not reunite.
But to meet is to know. Better never having met than have.
How do I sever myself from you, to avoid missing you in my life and death.

This is more or less The Beatles' "To Know Her is to Love Her" (and various "To Know Him is to Love Him") stated in the negative, which reminds me of the Golden Rule.

In Christianity, the Golden Rule is stated as "so in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you." (Matthew 7:12) In Confucianism, the Golden Rule is "do not do unto others what you do not wish for yourself." (Confucius, The Analects, XV: 24)

I remember when Professor Tu Wei-ming mentioned these Golden Rules in class, he said that these words, though ancient, can shed light on not just individual, but state behavior in history as well as in the modern world. For instance, the expansion of the European empires lead to colonialism, U.S.' power made it assume a leadership role in the global order with active presence in the Middle East as well as Asian Pacific, executing policies informed by the idea of "promoting democracy", leading the war on terror and  intervention in Libya, in contrast, even when the ancient Chinese empire had ships reaching far lands, instead of colonialize those people, the emperors were typically content with a nominal recognition as the "son of Heaven" and would splurge for some exotic gifts as tributes in return.

Is there any linguistic or cultural study of why the Chinese tend to state things / act in a negative sense -- "do not"; but Western countries the opposite?

A Deleted Xinhua Article on Kim Jong-Il's Death

The article was originally published on Xinhua, but deleted within several hours, that is, before it was reposted on one of Caijing's website. The deletion makes the article even more mysterious and makes one wonder what in this article is troublesome to Xinhua's editors and those at the Propaganda Department.

The article is entitled "What happens to North Korea now that Kim Jong-Il is dead?" My translation:

Kim Jong-Il is dead -- (I) wasn't so surprised to hear this. From a natural perspective, everyone dies, no matter how high his position is, how powerful he is, how much his wealth is worth, death is inevitable to everyone. So death is a natural occurrence, any rational person will face it with calm. But Kim Jong-Il's death would still bring his family and friends a sudden pain. Now that Kim Jong-Il is dead, an era has come to an end, what happens to the future North Korea?

The Chinese still have a general favorable feeling about North Korea, because no matter in ancient times or modern times, China and the country a river away have always kept friendly communications. When an ordinary Chinese mentions North Korea, Kim Il-Sung, Kim Jong-Il immediately come to their minds. In Kim Il-Sung era, North Korean revolutionary efforts progressed rapidly, and as they were just about to unify the Korean Peninsula, U.S. invasion turned the situation around, and the Korean army was suffering great lost. As their revolution was hanging on a string, and it could be said that it was the most difficult time in North Korea, Mao Zedong firmly made the decision to help North Korea fight against America, and preserved the fruits of North Korean revolution, laid ground of North Korea's map and independent development today. After North Korea entered into Kim Jong-Il era, China and North Korea have kept a close relation.

But the Kim Jong-Il era North Korea is still marred with danger and threats from all sides, especially in the recent several years, it has been facing difficulties domestically and internationally. In diplomacy, North Korea has had a series of incidents. Non stop North-South conflicts; politically, U.S., Japan and other countries are always keep a close eye on North Korea and keep stirring up conflicts in the North and South, imposing several rounds of economic sanctions on North Korea. Militarily, they urged South Korea to having military exercises and making North Korea feel an existential danger. Yet North Korea has held firm its persistent and never-compromise national policy, the submarine incident, the bombing of Yeonpyeong Island almost lead to wars, if not for the mediation and the support from China and Russia, war would have already started. North Korea lack of power would lead it to a fight to death, and this could very much lead to an all-out war or a nuclear war. Economically, North Korea has always followed a policy of seclusion. Its socio-economically development has been slow and its ordinary citizens have a very low living standards. Whenever faced with natural disasters, North Korea would have to depend on neighboring countries' aid.

North Korea's economic difficulties are ingrained into its politics: seclusion policy, tight control over the press, military dictatorship, still exercising planned economy, are the reasons why North Korea are still very backward in its economy. Even though Kim Jong-Il had come to China to visit and study a number of times, revealing that he was considering ways of reform, actual practice has not showed effectiveness.

Kim Jong-Il passed away, leaving behind a North Korea that is economically and politically backward. As his successor, the 28-year-old Kim Jong-un would probably become the new leader, but this succession leaves plenty of room for our imagination. What would happen to the future of North Korea? What road would it take? Would it still pratice the lineage-controlled Communist military dictatorship, or model after China to explore Communist reform, or accept South Korea's unification policy and step on a road to capitalism, all is a question mark.

No matter what road North Korea would take, as a neighbor and former close ally, every Chinese wish North Korea would pass the current difficulty with stability and peace. Of course, we also wish that those countries that are thinking (plotting) something will keep their rationale and give North Korea some time, and let their people voluntarily decide what they want for the future.

The Biggest Challenge in Handling Post-Kim-Jong-Il North Korea

Forgive me for not being able to rejoice in the death of a dictator. Kim Jong-Il died before he was able to groom his son into a full-fledged credible, powerful successor. No one is able to predict what's going to happen. Of course, when Kim Jong-Il himself took over his father's leadership, the international community had the same worries and made the same predictions: the pending collapse or implosion of the regime.

The biggest challenge in handing post-Kim-Jong-Il North Korea, IMHO, is to align the interests of major foreign players: South Korea, U.S. and China.

President Obama and President Lee Myung-bak of South Korea had an urgent phone call at midnight tonight, in which Obama assured Lee of U.S. commitments "to the stability on the Korean peninsula, and to the freedom and security of our allies." The press release was extremely short, merely restating the commitment, and stating they would be in close touch, reflecting the caution both administrations took facing the unpredictability of the North Korean situation.

What is noticeably absent is any publicized exchange between the Obama White House and China.

Let's see where each country's interest lies:

For China, the worst fear after Kim's death is the possibility of a regime collapse/ implosion. This could happen in multiple ways, one of which is the scenario of a power struggle leading to a civil war. In which case, China would mostly likely to step in before the spill over reaches its northern province.

For U.S., Kim's untimely death poses the crucial question of who has his finger on North Korea's nuclear button. The possibility of Iran or terrorists gaining access to North Korean nuclear technologies and materials significantly increased now that there is a vacuum in command and control. So in the case of a North Korean implosion, the American troops in South Korea would be the first to step in and secure the nukes.

To make matters worse, the Chinese and U.S. militaries have not talked to each other about their steps in such a scenario -- understandably, Beijing wouldn't want their North Korean "friends" to know that they are actually contemplating the possibility of North Korean collapse with capitalist America -- but as all students of international relations know, mis-understandings/communications could only exacerbate the potential for conflicts.

I can only hope that Beijing and Washington, both civilian government and military, are having candid and rigorous discussions right now, not leaving any scenario off the table.