Skip to main content

Amid trade tensions with America, China is showing old war films

This could be a propaganda own goal

 Print edition | China

May 23rd 2019

There is a lot for Americans to dislike in the Chinese propaganda film “Shangganling”. It is based on a real battle in late 1952, during which American and South Korean forces failed to take a mountain ridge from more lightly armed Chinese troops, who suffered terrible casualties. The weeks-long campaign came near the end of the Korean war of 1950-53, which began when the Stalinist regime of Kim Il Sung invaded the pro-American south and which eventually drew in millions of Chinese and unforces. Chinese schools teach that China joined the war in self-defence and was victorious. Pupils are told their countrymen showed solidarity with communist brethren in Korea while standing up to American imperialists who were bent on attacking China’s heartland. Official histories avoid the awkward question of who started the “War to Resist America and Aid Korea”, as it is known. China’s internal estimates put the Chinese death toll at 400,000. The public is told that only 152,000 Chinese were killed.

Newspapers have begun to cite the Korean war in editorials, as they brace the public for prolonged trade conflict with America. Filmed in 1956, “Shangganling” is one of several Korean war films shown on national television in recent days. Sporting crude, prosthetic hooked noses beneath their steel helmets, the “Americans” in that film cackle with laughter as they incinerate Chinese troops with a flame-thrower. In their foxholes they ogle photographs of pin-up girls. They fairly swagger as they advance with support from tanks and bomb-dropping us Air Force jets. But their bullies’ bravado vanishes in hand-to-hand combat, depicted in a close-up frenzy of wrestling and stabbing. Soon the Yanks are running away, hands raised in panic, only to meet a murderous American officer, who is shown coldly ordering the fatal machine-gunning of his own troops to frighten the rest back into action.

Get our daily newsletter

Upgrade your inbox and get our Daily Dispatch and Editor's Picks.

Perhaps sensing that this Mao-era grotesquery could be misinterpreted, state media have offered guidance. In a tweet, Hu Xijin, editor of Global Times, a nationalist tabloid, argued that victory on Shangganling (Triangle Hill, as Americans called it) had enhanced China’s status in its talks with America during the war. “There is no equal negotiation without fighting” is the film’s message to Chinese viewers, Mr Hu wrote. A blog, Taoran Notes, which appears to have official backing for its musings on the trade feud, said references to Korea were a way of saying that China is a master of “talking while fighting”, including in today’s contest with America.

To the Chinese public, the Korean war is an easily grasped symbol, signifying that “even if we go head-to-head with the Americans we should not be afraid. We can take them,” says the best-known Chinese historian of that conflict, Shen Zhihua. He hopes that China’s negotiators are signalling toughness to the public in order to leave themselves wriggle room in talks with America.

Mr Shen is an unusually outspoken scholar, whose long research in Chinese, Soviet and Western archives emboldens him to challenge official accounts of the Korean war. He has angered Maoist hardliners by arguing that Stalin cornered Mao into entering the hostilities. The professor says that what the Chinese leader actually wanted was Soviet help to invade Taiwan, the redoubt of the Nationalist regime which was driven to the island at the end of the Chinese civil war in 1949. In 2017 Mr Shen gave lectures calling today’s North Korea, and its nuclear weapons, a liability for China.

Propaganda should not be confused with history, the professor says, drawing deeply on a cigarette in his office at East China Normal University in a suburb of Shanghai. Chinese academics know about the “huge price” that China paid for a war that ended where it started, with Korea divided along the 38th parallel. Early Communist leaders “knew in their hearts” what happened, too. He is less sure that today’s still do. As for the general public, they do not know how many died and remember the war simply as a “great success”, he sighs. Mr Shen would like to explore hard questions about why talks to halt the Korean war lasted a year-and-a-half, and who benefited from that drawn-out process. Alas, he suspects, such research probably could not be published in China.

Misreading past and present

Foreign historians do not face such constraints. They argue that Mao deliberately prolonged the war by dragging out talks on an armistice that other combatants were ready to declare, notably by stubbornly demanding the return to China of 14,000 Chinese prisoners-of-war who were desperate to be sent to Taiwan. His aim was, in effect, to talk in order to continue fighting (and receiving modern weapons and aid from Stalin), despite warnings from his own military chief about “massive, unnecessary casualties”. Mao, unmoved by human suffering, predicted early in the war that 400,000 Chinese would die, and told Stalin that his plan was to spend “several years consuming several hundred thousand American lives”. Told about his own son’s demise in Korea, Mao murmured only: “In a war, how can there be no deaths?”

China’s noisiest patriots, vowing on social media to ditch iPhones for Chinese smartphones, have no idea of the true price their country paid in Korea. They know nothing, for that matter, about why America sought peace talks almost 70 years ago. True, America was daunted by China’s willingness to sacrifice lives. In the end, though, America and its allies wanted an armistice because a unified Korea was not an interest worth all-out war, let alone a nuclear one as some hothead generals proposed.

Today, America is debating something unrelated: whether openness to a rising China is sensible and even necessary, or an act of self-harm. War talk and broadcasting xenophobic films is a gift to American hawks who argue that China is an ideological foe that cannot be trusted. In their desperation to assure their own people that they are not a pushover, China’s rulers are forgetting the first lesson of propaganda. Real history can be a valuable guide. Falsified history leads countries astray.

This article appeared in the China section of the print edition under the headline "A propaganda own goal"


Popular posts from this blog

SSG Commando Muddassir Iqbal of Pakistan Army

“ Commando Muddassir Iqbal was part of the team who conducted Army Public School operation on 16 December 2014. In this video he reveals that he along with other commandos was ordered to kill the innocent children inside school, when asked why should they kill children after killing all the terrorist he was told that it would be a chance to defame Taliban and get nation on the side. He and all other commandos killed children and later Taliban was blamed.
Muddassir Iqbal has deserted the military and now he is  with mujahedeen somewhere in AF PAK border area”
For authenticity of  this tape journalists can easy reach to his home town to interview his family members or   ISPR as he reveals his army service number”
Asalam o Alaikum: My name is Muddassir Iqbal. My father’s name is Naimat Ali. I belong to Sialkot divison (Punjab province), my village is Shamsher Poor and district, tehsil and post office  Narowal. Unfortunately I was working in Pakistan army. I feel embarrassed to tell you …

CPEC Jobs in Pakistan, salary details

JOBS...نوکریاں چائنہ کمپنی میںPlease help the deserving persons...Salary:Salary package in China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) in these 300,000 jobs shall be on daily wages. The details of the daily wages are as follows;Welder: Rs. 1,700 dailyHeavy Duty Driver: Rs. 1,700 dailyMason: Rs. 1,500 dailyHelper: Rs. 850 dailyElectrician: Rs. 1,700 dailySurveyor: Rs. 2,500 dailySecurity Guard: Rs. 1,600 dailyBulldozer operator: Rs. 2,200 dailyConcrete mixer machine operator: Rs. 2,000 dailyRoller operator: Rs. 2,000 dailySteel fixer: Rs. 2,200 dailyIron Shuttering fixer: Rs. 1,800 dailyAccount clerk: Rs. 2,200 dailyCarpenter: Rs. 1,700 dailyLight duty driver: Rs. 1,700 dailyLabour: Rs. 900 dailyPara Engine mechanic: Rs. 1,700 dailyPipe fitter: Rs. 1,700 dailyStorekeeper: Rs. 1,700 dailyOffice boy: Rs. 1,200 dailyExcavator operator: Rs. 2,200 dailyShovel operator: Rs. 2,200 dailyComputer operator: Rs. 2,200 dailySecurity Supervisor: Rs. 2,200 dailyCook for Chinese food: Rs. 2,000 dailyCook…

Historical relationship between Kurd and Baloch.

The Kurds are the ethnical group living in a region known as Kurdistan which is divided into Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran. They  are struggling for an independent region since decades and they are famous for their female guerrilla fighters.        On 25 September 2017, the referendum for an independent Kurdish region  was held in Iraq with a turn out of 72 %.   On this important occasion, the historical relation between Kurd and Baloch people is worth discussing.       When it comes to history, every nation tends to find its roots and origin. Same goes with the Baloch people. The Baloch people are always curious  about  finding their roots in history. Even if you  talk to a shepherd in Balochistan, he will be curious to talk about his  tribal or ethnical roots.      The Balochs have always conveyed the history to the next generations in different mediums like poems etc. No Baloch before 20th century had written books on  history  or origin of the Baloch nation .