Dragon and Bear are back together!?

If you browse through the newspapers in China last week, it is unlikely to miss the headline of Russian PM Mr. Putin’s visit in Beijing and the huge trade deals between two nations. Energy deals, as usual. Remarkable cooperation for two countries and world economy, blah blah blah. Not until I noticed the news reported in FT column have I found how interesting this topic can actually turn out. Indeed the national political interest can have an obvious impact on the style of new writing, esp. for such kind of financial/political news.

Let us see how the world reacts to the closeness of two powerful nations, or as FT puts it, the relationship of Chinese Dragon and Russian Bear. Though it is quite hard to be objective on an issue like this, the news on Reuters did a comparatively satisfactory job there. The article is pretty objective and filled with facts rather than speculations and comments. Divided by several subtitles, it is quite clear with the facts presented and discussion about the eagerness from Russia and price of the deal respectively. Both sides have been interviewed though the emphasis was put more on the Russian oil company. During the discussion part, it provided more background trade info between the two. When there is the need for some strong comment, it is always the words quoted from some analysts rather than presented directly in the news. Since the analysis involved were ones from Chinese, European and Russian, the news became quite convincing to me. The only disappointment is that it missed the point that Russia and China suggested the trade in Yuan or Rubles, which could be the highlight if put into action. However, I found another following article solely on the currency problem to cover the whole story.

There are some magnificent achievement during Putin’s visit regarding the oil trade deal and other aspects such as the construction of nuclear plant and culture sides. However, the dispute of the oil price and other friction turned the deal into more of general proposal but a solid “right now” plan. There is quite a difference of opinions in different media. Take WSJ Online as an example. The energy pact snags was emphasized several times, even in the first sentence. Surprisingly, the actual figures of the deal or the details of any contract signed were not mentioned at all. Ironically, the article did a fantastic job pointing out the underlying intentions of two sides and the conflicts of the interests even if there were no descriptions of the deal. The arguments were quite solid and straightforward though and the currency used in the trade was highlighted in the news. As WSJ always do, the news again added a lot of background stories of the tension, which was somehow distracting in such a long passage. In a word, WSJ was quite pessimistic about the deal and defined the two sides as rivals. On the contrary, in Chinese version of WSJ, the news covering the topic was short and concise. More like a news update, it just informed the readers of the general info of the oil deal.

Obviously FT didn’t bother writing two different versions of stories. (Dragon and bear, the provocative comment I mentioned at the beginning.) When FT translated the whole blog and posted it on FT Chinese, the consequence is the heated debate in the comment below. Firstly, the article itself did come up with some unique points of view. The coincidental timing--Putin was busy in China when Hilary Clinton went to Moscow. And the currency topic was the highlight but the writer made it very obvious whose side he was on. In my eyes, the whole article was typical fear in Europe and U.S of the “formidable alliance” with Russia and China. (“making noises”, “most formidable authoritarian states have found common cause”). It did make an effort to “comfort” people later by stressing the huge divergence of interest between the two. Although it is acceptable in a blog with such kind of article, it may turn out really ugly translating it into Chinese. No wonder there were tons of Chinese coverage later quoting the blog from FT and criticizing it. Besides, this time even the news covering the deal on FT failed my expectation. There were two news articles with exactly same contents and different headlines. (“stalled”, “hits deadlock”). Again the focus there was the setbacks. The news was enriched by various figures and interviews. Frankly speaking, I cannot really say it was biased only because the article regarded the deal impractical and represented what the majority of people here think.

Another major financial media, Bloomberg, also covered the story in a quite intriguing way, where the mutual deal became Russian’s monologue. From the news, or in my eyes, “the analysis of Russian energy market”, Russian became the world’s energy supplier with the help of Chinese market. All the interviews were from Russian professionals or companies and potential impact was also only from Russian. Surprisingly, the similar problem occurred in the report on BBC (luckily not as serious as Bloomberg). Starting with the quotation of a Russian official, the article did not involve any opinions from Chinese side at all. While the whole story was presented from Russian side, it was not news worthy as international news. Are Chinese opinions that hard to get? In spite of that, the news was fairly objective and filled with quite a lot of evidence.

Finally come down to the two nations. In Chinese media, it was all great news with big inspiring headlines all along, such as “paint rosy future together”, “elevates sino-russian ties”. The one from Xinhua net, which is an official paper in the country, tried really hard to pass the great news to Chinese people. The pride (“the end of Chinese one-sided importation of tech”, “help Russia”) and the significance of the “strategic partnership” was everywhere through the lines. Even with the some mention of the unsettling price and imbalanced trade performance, the news tended to cover it with emphasizing the “promising potential ahead” and “what bilateral cooperation could bring to the world peace”. Lack of critical review on the deal and continuous discussion of the contribution towards world economic order made the news less exciting and it did serve the political purpose here. However, Chinese blogs, or even the debate in the FT comment reveals the fact that maybe Chinese people are not even as thrilled as the government does. There lies some similarity in Russian media. RT, which is a quite open English media online, reported the story. Besides lots of facts and figures, it did quote a lot of words from Putin. Moreover the importance of the common ground on some issues, and the culture ties were emphasized. The other analysis article clearly showed that Russian were not as optimistic as Chinese. The potential fear for Chinese power still exists and everyone knows the limited cooperation is for own interest.

As far as Im concered, the deal is undeniably win-win situation for both. More energy and natural resource supply meets Chinese big demand, while Russia intends to diversify the market rather than relying on Europe only. The current situation favors Chinese side, since China is maintaining the good economic growth and relies mainly on Far East for oil. However, Russia is going through a rough time due to the crisis and collapse of oil price. Even it is just limited partnership for own interests, it still benefits both sides. Also the force from US pushed two nations closer in a subtle way and westerners may really shiver a little as the blog form Telegraph put it. Maybe that is why the western media would rather see the dragon and bear as rivals than an united power together.