Keywords: US shows bias over Diaoyu Islands row; Two Sessions meetings shorter, cheaper after reforms

US shows bias over Diaoyu Islands row

China expressed strong dissatisfaction after the outgoing US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton expressed bias over the Diaoyu Islands disputes during a joint meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida on January 18.

"We acknowledge they are under the administration of Japan," said Clinton, adding "we oppose any unilateral actions that would seek to undermine Japanese administration." Clinton then reiterated the US does not take sides on the issue.

Chinese media backlash was immediate and repetitive, with many outlets saying that the US' attitude may harm Sino-US relations and calling for China to never back down on the Diaoyu issue.

The People's Daily reiterated that China's bottom line is not to give up sovereignty of the Diaoyu Islands.

"US should know the meaning of the Daioyu Islands to China. The US has already borne historical responsibility for the Diaoyu Islands disputes by 'returning' the 'administrative jurisdiction' to Japan in the 1970s, and it should not agitate tensions by expressing biased opinions which may harm China-US relations," read the opinion piece.

The Beijing Times echoed in saying that Hillary's controversial comments do not help to ease tensions, saying "this is not the attitude a politician responsible to their country and history should have."

The Global Times offered mildly sober analysis in an opinion piece saying, "China should treat subtle changes in US statements rationally.

"We have to help other sides properly understand us," said the paper, following with the foreboding, "there should be no ambiguity when it comes to China's willingness to counterattack in the event of a military provocation."

Two Sessions meetings shorter, cheaper after reforms

Official meetings and receptions during the ongoing provincial Two Sessions have reportedly been less extravagant due to eight new regulations issued by the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee. 

However, Chinese media immediately decried the new regulations as token measures, calling for policymakers to focus on the content of the meetings rather than mere ceremony and formalism.

According to the new regulations released early last month, local governments have avoided buying non-essentials such as flower arrangements and colorful banners, simplified agendas and have not blocked roads for motorcades during meetings in Jiangsu, Henan and Yunnan provinces.

The Two Sessions, or annual gathering of provincial legislatures and political advisory bodies, began January 19 and will close before the Spring Festival, according to the Xinhua News Agency.

"The government should first survey public opinion before undertaking any reforms," read an article in the China Youth Daily.

"Open and transparent reforms based on people's opinions is more welcome than correction from within the system,"the article continued, suggesting that extravagant meetings need to be forbidden because what people really care about are "the outcomes of these meetings."

"The government should first correct meeting reform before addressing the content of those meetings," commented the Hong Kong-based Ta Kung Pao.

"But if we are satisfied with style reform and stop here, that will only become the beginning of another round of formalism,"read the paper.

"The Two Sessions will be more humane if it focuses more on the feelings of deputies and ordinary people,"said the Dahe Daily based in Henan, adding "the layout of the meeting hall is less important than the suggestions and plans which deputies put forward."

@风信子ybyb: The Two Sessions should set examples on cutting costs. A thrifty government could unite its people and do more with limited funds.

@何卫刚: When the truth and shorter meetings become popular across China, they become the elements of a new political form. The Two Sessions often overemphasizes "telling the truth" and "shorter meetings," which may make people think they weren't telling the truth before. Going too far is not a good thing.