The British government’s attempt to reverse its citizen Akmal Shaikh’s death sentence in China has met with very little sympathy from Chinese, internet reaction suggests. According to the website Global Voices Online, a common if unsurprising reaction seemed to be along the lines of “why should a foreigner deserve special treatment?” More interestingly, one fiery post that went viral applauded the Chinese government’s position by invoking the spirit of Lin Zexu, a celebrated official who took on British and Chinese interests alike to battle the scourge of opium in the 1830’s. By ignoring the pleas of foreign governments and harshly punishing foreign drug importers, the gist of the original post went (here, in Chinese), China had demonstrated it was strong and could defend itself as it saw fit. As references to Lin Zexu subsequently became commonplace in online discussions of the Akmal Shaikh incident, the latter-day diplomatic row became a refutation of foreign privilege in the popular imagination.

Never mind that the British government’s stance on this issue was about due process for the mentally ill. How did in the world did this debate shift from due process to Lin Zexu?

The substance of the Brits’ diplomatic protest was lost in translation from the start. Its appeal for clemency was packaged as a thinly veiled critique of the fairness of the Chinese criminal justice system,  something many Chinese might simply with. Unfortunately, concern for the mitigating circumstances of mentally ill people in capital punishment cases is almost as distant from the daily concerns of Chinese as animal cruelty. This weak message was wholly drowned out by its subtext, which was the implication Akmal Shaikh deserved more just treatment than the system afforded most Chinese. Even if no Chinese loves their criminal justice system, your average Chinese wasn’t about to support granting a foreigner a “get out of jail free” card on an apparent procedural technicality.

In retrospect, that messaging blunder was compounded by being insufficiently attuned to the Communist Party’s domestic marching orders and its nationalist lore. One pillar of the communist regime’s legitimacy is its historical willingness to stand up to overbearing foreigners, be it against currency pressure or marginal perceived slights. As the British spoke out increasingly forcefully on making an exception for their citizen, increasing the stakes for both sides, it became increasingly difficult for Beijing to back down.

With the Akmal Shaikh incident, European anger over Chinese intransigence on human rights seemingly boiled over. Edward McMillen Scott, a vice-president of the European Parliament, has since published an incendiary op-ed in the Independent calling on all of Europe “to stand up to [China’s] abusive one-party state and forget trade.” If Europe follows through on this defiant stance (a marked contrast to the Obama administration’s low key manner with China, by the way), they would be wise to heed the lessons of the Akmal Shaikh incident and find a way to keep Chinese public opinion on their side, if that’s possible.

(A word about gauging “netizen reaction” in general: China’s net users, known colloquially as netizens, are generally prolific in commenting on events and public affairs in internet discussion boards, as these are the most free and public space for conversation in today’s China. While the commentary recorded is cacophonous, ill-informed and can never be presumed to be an authoritative representation of Chinese opinion, it is almost always of interest to foreign observers, who will take any chance they will get to hear unfiltered Chinese voices. Moreover, certain stories or memes will become verifiably popular, based on the number of response posts or views, and this itself can be revealing. Several websites are helpful in monitoring such stories and aggregating and translating the reactions: chinasmack.com, globalvoices.org, chinahush.com, etc.).

<!–EndFr

According to news reports, in 2009 China surpassed Germany as the world’s top exporter.   China’s exports for 2009 were more than $2 trillion, slightly ahead of Germany, at $1.2 trillion.   The last two months of the year saw the strongest increase, and helped China’s gross exports surge.

“This is just one more step by China in attaining economic size commensurate with its population,” said Arthur Kroeber, managing director of Dragonomics, an economic research firm in Beijing. Germany has a population of about 80 million, while China’s population is about 1.3 billion.

“The next big news will be when China surpasses Japan to become the world’s second-biggest economy,” Kroeber said. Analysts say that is likely to happen this year.

Read the full article in the Washington Post here

• Beijing 2008 Olympic Games , Considered a successful demonstration on behalf of Beijing, which debuted its growth to the rest of the world, but all the attention the country received was not awarded without controversy over its contested human rights record, and unfavorable environmental practices.
•  Strategic Economic Dialogue , Gained momentum at the beginning of the year with over a couple sessions of bilateral trade talks, but productivity slowed at the most recent dialogue, where the spin-up over the global recession strained efforts to come to a consensus on specific economic issues
• China-Taiwan Talks , Chinese and Taiwanese envoys agreed to engage in regular talks, scheduled to take place every period of 6 months. This past year, one of these sessions resulted in an agreement to expand upon the limited number of direct flights occurring between the two locales. As talks progress, the countries are expected to cooperate financially, allowing banks to establish branches on each side of the Taiwan Strait.

Impact of Global Recession
Since the global recession, the co-dependent nature of the US and China's partnership has become more pronounced, with each country working more urgently to push its priorities. In addition to the recession, the year's high-visibility events have forced Washington and Beijing into a room together more frequently, providing the partnership with increased opportunities to exchange dialogue, clarify stances, facilitate understanding, and hopefully , flourish.It has become clear given the recent global turn of events that the USA and China will need to hinge upon their shared interested to effect individual country agendas.

2008 Event that should have received more coverage: China-Taiwan dialogue. This relationship will have pervasive global impacts along many tracks; military, political, and economic. 

Greatest Misconception: China as a threat to the US. Read arguments from both sides of the fence and weigh in at Opposing Views.

2009 Forecast

• The Obama Administration|
  Obama administration's path forward on US-China relations and trade agreements would be silly not to continue to engage China as the country's largest export market, though it is uncertain whether he will continue to employ the SED shell that was set forth under Bush/Paulson leadership.During the race, Obama was supported by the Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), the largest union in the US. The AFL-CIO's China stance has been published as one believing China to be a totalitarian country, artificially lowering labor costs through deprivation of basic rights, and providing China with a trade surplus, directly impacting cuts in American manufacturing jobs. AFL-CIO has also emphasized its support of Obama's promise to address blue-collar workers, saying that past presidencies have favored the financial industry and investors.Obama seems very conscious of the fact that his status as president-elect is the result of a strong showing by middle-America, and many would be surprised if he were to shy away from honoring his commitments to them. Obama has gone on record to criticizeBeijing's currency manipulation as recently as a few days before the election, in response to rising unemployment stateside. Failing to adjust current international trade policies would be a slap in the face for a lot of his primary constituents, and would counter a lot of the platforms that he built his campaign upon. During his campaign, his China stance became crystallized in a letter to the National Council on Textile Organizations, one evening on a stop in North Carolina, which is known for its dependence on the textile industry. Obama promised to "closely monitor textile shipments from China," as limits on Chinese-made apparel expire at the end of the year. He also pledged to make use of "trade-remedy laws to protect industries, like textile producers, if they are threatened by unfair competition from abroad."On the flip-side, the Chinese response to Obama's election has been overwhelmingly positive, with Chinese media outlets and interviewees describing him as "hip" and "unconventional:"  “Perhaps his age, energy and even complexion, which signify the American dream, are more appealing to the Chinese,” Song Zhiyuan, who analyzed the survey, told the China Daily.”Rebecca Zhu, a 29-year-old bank employee, agreed. “No Chinese leader is that young,” she said. “Obama is attractive because he is hip and unconventional. He has even used e-mails to advance his campaign.”Among those Chinese following the US presidential race who were polled, Obama supporters exceeded those for McCain by 17.8%. As with historical trends where the policies of Nixon, Reagan, and Clinton resonated with local Chinese, this statistic seems to suggest that Chinese simply follow popular beliefs held by Americans.

• The Taiwan Question
  Whether confrontation occurs between the US and China will be driven most by how each state manages its relationship with Taiwan. Where the US supports democracy, and is even obligated by the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 to respond to perceived Chinese use of force against Taiwan, it has been careful not to stack its moral and political commitment to Taiwan against its strengthening trade partnership with China.China, on the other hand, has consistently sent the message loud and clear that the One China policy is the only policy it recognizes, and the avoidance of domestic embarrassment alone fortifies the country's conviction on this issue.Although much is at stake for each when it comes to defending its stance on Taiwan's autonomy, the US and China seem to agree that the bigger pot is pursuing what benefits their collaborative partnership may yield. Neither party is ready to estrange itself from its most important trade partner, and risk losing favorable relations with a handful of directly-related third parties in the process.As the US and China actively work to genuinely understand each other, there will be little reason to find conflict over this issue. It seems that agreeing to disagree will keep this issue locked in a stalemate for some time.

It will behoove both countries to cooperate in order to individually advance their respective agendas. In order to better control outsourcing and provide more commitment to climate issues, Washington will need Beijing's endorsement and support. To improve economic reforms, raise domestic consumption, and increase energy efficiency, Beijing will look to guidance from Washington.

Thursday, December 4, 2008  marks the 5th round of US-China bilateral trade talks, formally named the Strategic Economic Dialogue, and jointly facilitated by US Sec Treas Henry Paulson and Chinese VP Wang Qishan. While topics for discussion include product safety, environmental issues, and revaluation of the Yuan, the heavyhitter this round centers around the global financial crisis. In his opening remarks, WQS emphasized, “Making joint efforts to tackle the current global economic crisis is the most urgent task before us.”

 WQS went on to urge Washington to proactively stabilize its economy, boost savings rates, and protect Chinese investments, while the governor of the Chinese central bank, Zho Xiaochun, gave his two cents: “Over-consumption and a high reliance on credit is the cause of the US financial crisis. . . As the largest and most important economy in the world, the US should take the initiative to adjust its policies, raise its savings ratio appropriately, and reduce its trade and fiscal deficits.”

Washington, on the other hand, will be pushing for talks surrounding revaluation of Chinese currency. Officials have focused on this issue for some time, claiming that undervaluation of the Yuan unfairly favors Chinese exports. Some are looking for measures that will penalize China for not allowing its currency to appreciate more quickly. Some say that the timing of this is unfortunate for the US, who, amidst its Presidential transition, may not be squarely positioned to press China on making concessions at this time.

With the US in an official recession and China bracing for an economic slowdown, each trade party comes to the table with a clear need for response and recovery. Paulson firmly believes that the objective for this session would be to produce results that would bolster support, suggesting that the future of the SED would be uncertain under the Obama administration, though it is unlikely that US-China talks would discontinue. Perhaps we will just be looking at a change in how the package is presented?

Though this round isn't expected to produce results of a major breakthrough, murmurs of agreement on an action plan for air quality and perhaps even eco-city partnerships are in the air.

Sec Treas Henry Paulson recently published an essay in CFR's Foreign Affairs magazine, which discusses leveraging trade as a platform to strengthen the SinoAmerican relationship. He writes hopeful that the next administration will engage China in a way that is responsive to its ”twin priorities” of “territorial integrity and economic growth.”

Paulson's theory revolves around the cornerstone that successful partnership will be better facilitated through pursuing issues and activities of shared interests:

The prosperity of both nations depends on the ability of each to achieve balanced economic growth on stable and vibrant trade and financial regimes, on diverse and dependable energy sources, and on sustainable progress that protects human health and the environment.

Paulson adds that the US’ engagement strategy is best served by working to improve understanding of China. Specifically, China's ongoing challenge of striking a balance between its ambitions to modernize/reform, and the stability of its nation. Being clear on Beijing's tendency to view its “international interactions primarily through an economic lens.”

Americans who worry that China might overtake the United States are worrying about the wrong thing. They should instead be concerned that Beijing may not make key reforms or that it will face significant economic difficulties down the road. Serious troubles in China's economy could threaten the stability of the US and global economies.

As the US does its best to manage current relations with China, it will be met with challenges when trying to steer the direction of its future. Paulson spells this out by saying that Washington needs to “understand China's perception of its self-interest, identify opportunities to persuade China that its interests and those of the United States often are the same, and narrow real differences whenever possible.”

As a means for a solution, Paulson advocates increasing emphasis on the SED, which has thus far proven successful as a communication channel between the two countries. Part of the reason for SED's success is that it is the first of its kind: an ongoing dialogue between the two that records and publicizes commitments made during sessions, which serves as a force function to hold each party accountable for its actions and promises.

Another unprecedented aspect of the SED is that it works to ensure that all levels of each government have direct interaction. There is cabinet-level representation from all ministries with responsibilities for various economic issues from both countries. Chinese ministers and US cabinet secretaries are involved in each session. Subject matter experts are given the opportunity to speak before high-level heads to provide accurate briefs and information to support the decision-making process. The discussions are fairly unstructured. All these aspects of the SED play into China's political decision-making process, which follows a team effort where its players are national ministries and officials.

An example that illustrates the success of the SED in facilitating breakthrough agreements is the recent conclusion of a bilateral air services agreement. Paulson explains that the agreement was originally bottlenecked by China's focus on developing its domestic aviation through limiting international aviation efforts. The SED provided a tabletop on which he was able to show Beijing that more access = more people = more goods. As a result, US passenger flights to/from China will enjoy increasing in frequency by more than double by 2012.

As the US works to further bridge partnership activities with China, Paulson encourages the country to re-package its agenda so that China favorably addresses its priorities. In doing so, he asserts that the Washington must work with Beijing to develop its financial sector in order to reduce personal savings rates/boost personal consumption, and find flexibility in its prices and exchange rate.  The growing surplus of an aging nation has forced China to turn to issue large quantities of RMB to quell it from appreciating too rapidly, which, in turn, has prompted inflation, exacerbating an already present issue of disparity of wealth between metropolitan cities and rural areas. If the US plays its cards right, this could be its “in,” allowing it to press on the following:

1. Mutual foreign investment — enable American banks, securities, and insurance companies to operate in China
2. Energy security — encourage China to move in the direction of a market-determined energy price
3. Trade practices – continue to promote the criticality of transparency and intellectual property rights

 
Wednesday, July 9 brought an outreach session during July 7-9, facilitated by the Group of Eight (G8 ) Summit in Tokayo, Japan.  The outreach session was convened at the Windsor Hotel, where the G8 leaders (Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, and US) invited leaders from key developing nations to weigh in on energy security and climate change.

As in invitee, China took the opportunity to submit a four-point proposal that would aim to strengthen the global economy.

1. Build a sustainable world economic system. Demonstrate a commitment to sustainable development by ramping up macro-economic policy activities and making concerted efforts to maintain the growth of the world economy.
2. Build an inclusive and orderly international financial system. Cooperate to ensure developing countries are given more opportunites with international financial institutions. The World Bank would help these countries adapt to economic globalization, The International Monetary Fund would strengthen monitoring and early-warning of the international financial market, specifically for short-term capital flows and risks of financial innovation.
3. Build a fair and equitable international trade regime. Countries should support jointly opposing trade protectionism, and supporting strengthening multilateral trade regimes.
4. Build a fair and effective global development system. Show of good faith in partnership by developed countries, by increasing assistance, opening markets, transferring more technologies, and relieving their debts. Developing countries to enhance capacity building.

Taking a step back, a more pressing issue for overall summit members is the question of what to do with the G5 - the five key developing nations - or, ”growing dynamos” - that represent nearly 3 billion people: China, India, Brazil, South Africa and Mexico. PRC's President Hu stands by the importance of participation by G5 members, saying that the combined make-up of the countries represented by G8+G5 =  60 percent of the world's total population = three-fourths of the world's total economic power. 

Hu's statement is delivered with poise,  equal parts a) nodding to key G8 leadership reluctant to acknowledge China's power in a global forum; and b) compensating for its recently unfavorable reputation by rising to carve a path for its fellow G5ers. It is rumored that leading up to the summit, Japan was reluctant to pursue dialogue with the G5 “for fear of too openly acknowledging the power of China,” resulting in the dilution of the summit, through the shortening of its duration and extending invitation to other major non-G8 contries to neutralize discussions: Indonesia, South Korea, and Australia.  

One particular article on the G8 Tokayo 2008 blog discusses China's role in the G8, and says that China has “hedged its options toward the G8, and emphasized meeting rather than joining, ” going on to discuss that although its priority reaches for international acceptance as a peaceful but key player with market-economy status, it must do so on its own terms . . . not as a sole nation joining the ranks of the other G8s, but with its G5 counterparts and ‘developing’ allies. As China continues to strategize its entry into more visible, large-scale forums, it must be sensitive to one pivotal consideration:

“. . . as China's international profile grows, so does pressure on Beijing to demonstrate that it is willing to act not only as a force for world peace and stability, but also as a responsible international stakeholder.” 

The reason why Hu's proposal is centered on qualifying successful coordination mechanisms that will best engage developing nations on emerging issues is become clear.

Other G5s seem to share the opinion that they aren't getting enough time at the table with their G8 counterparts. Lourdes Aranda, Mexico's deputy foreign minister and G5 coordinator believes that in addition to limited talk time, the 5 get are restricted to discussing platforms where "developed countries have basically set the agenda." Representative of the enthused spirit of G5, she advocates its wider stance, as its vast impoverished populations could play a stabilizing role.  

However rudimentary, the benefts of this Heiligendamm process cannot be overlooked. This channel alone has supported the gaining of G5 countries’ talking ground by providing:

• a “confidence-building” measure for the esteem of G5s in the eyes of G8s, and a symbol of commitment to G5s from G8s
• a useful “supplement” to formal negotiations with G8 countries in multilateral bodies such as the United Nations or World Trade Organisation
• increased partnership and coordination among G5s and between G5s and other international bodies.

SecState Condi Rice's visit to Beijing carried a number of items on Washington's agenda. She and China's Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi came to the table on a number of current events.

ZIM. With the recent swearing-in of Mugabe for his sixth term as President of Zimbabwe, Bush has called the UN to action against “Zimbabwe's illegitimate government,” which has been globally criticized for using tactics of violence and intimidation. Bush plans to present an arms embargo and travel ban as response measures to recent events in Zim to the UN Security Council this week. To aid US efforts to put an end to political violence in Zim, it has been growing its outreach to other UN Security Council members for some teeth behind its words (Rice is documented telling reporters that the US is pushing for action and ”not just another statement” from the United Nations).

As it is a permanent member of the UN Security Council, having China's vote (= veto-wielding abilities) is critical to securing and issuing UN-branded action against Mugabe and violence in Zim. Drawing-up the issue to partners and allies, the Washington is recruiting Beijing in particular to get Zim under its thumb. In a diplomatic and vague response to Washignton's proposal, Yang Jiechi told reporters at a news conference that “China, as a responsible country, will also play a constructive role in this process,” but that “the most pressing path is to stabilize the situation in Zimbabwe.” He went on to say say that he hoped that the Zimbabwe government and its political opposition will “engage in a serious dialogue to find a proper solution,” adding that China supports the engagement of “African countries in particular” on this issue.

China of course has a long-standing trade partnership with Zimbabwe, and has been reprimanded internationally for its alleged arms supply to African nations, getting tangled earlier this year in the web of tragedy and condemnation surrounding Darfur genocide activities. Yang clarified that a Chinese ship with a “very limited amount of conventional arms” did not deliver the cargo earlier this year after receiving a request from Zimbabwe. With China stepping back from trade that would be perceived as supplying arms to African countries - and Zimbabwe in particular - but not committing to the US’ proposed course of action, it seems that a stalemate has been reached on this particular issue.  Unless of course, another topic or incident comes into play, allowing Washington to leverage this one forward. From this point forward, the US will have to prioritize, choose carefully the topics necessitating Beijing's weight. In the meantime, both countries will continue to tally its haves and have-nots, dancing with a fluidity as dynamic and changing as its variable platforms and partnerships.

Coming to an informal quasi-agreement, Rice concluded her visit to Beijing on the issue of Zim saying “This is not an African issue alone … it is an issue for the Security Council. . . But I think we are all looking for something out of the African Union.”

NORTH KOREA. Status checks on the progress made on North Korea's nuclear program were a bright spot during the trip. Both countries took a moment to bask in the afterglow of recent successes in North Korea where it delivered a long-due list of its nuclear activities, as required by a disarmament-for-aid deal reached in talks hosted by China. In addition, North Korea made a symbolic move to show its commitment to the nuclear deal, toppling the cooling tower at its plutonium-producing reactor. 

While China maintains its hosting duties for six-party talks on this issue, it is expected to announce a new round of talks (which include North and South Korea, the United States, Japan and Russia). Rice reported that chief envoys would coordinate leading up to the talks, the objective of which would be to “. . .  get some steps forward on verification” of North Korean efforts to dismantle its nuclear progrm and activities, she said of the negotiations.

CHINA's QUAKE. Rice showed concern for affected Chinese people earlier Sunday when she visited the site of Sichuan's quake last month. Numbers now show total 88,000 dead or missing, and a staggering five million displaced.

“I’ve been tremendously impressed with the recovery, with the resilience of the people,” Rice told journalists after touring the wrecked city of Dujiangyan, near the epicentre.  “It is really a sign of how the human spirit can recover from great devastation.”

On the topics of recent natural disasters in greater Asia, Rice said she would investigate ways to persuade China's close neighbour and ally Myanmar to accept international aid to repair the nation, which suffered catastrophic damage from a cyclone in early May.

TIBET. Rice echoed the US’ concerns about China's hardline activities in Tibet. This was rebuked by Beijing's explanation that US views and media have created and exacerbated the problem. Moving forward on the Tibet piece, China announced Sunday that it would revisit fresh talks with the Dalai Lama's reps. The US’ initiative to bring attention to this issue in face-to-face format is the motivation that China needed to follow-up on an outstanding promise to maintain discussions with the exiled Tibetan leadership, which has long waited to sit down with China's political leadership.

“I hope there will be some positive developments and some momentum behind the [Tibet] talks,” Rice said, showing support for China's action. ”This is the way to deal with the issue.”

When: June 17 and 18

Where: US Naval Academy - Annapolis, MD

Who: Co-Chairs US Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr. and Vice Premier Wang Qishan

Why: To strengthen and deepen the bilateral economic relationship through actions to:

• raise questions
• seek consensus
• implement results
• prevent trade protectionism and conservatism from hampering the trade cooperation

What: An overview of China and the US coming to the table to discuss the following areas:

1. Macroeconomic Cooperation and Financial Services.  The countries pledge to work together toward sustained growth, stability in price and financial systems, and agreed to continue a collaborative approach to sharing information on issues of mutual interest.
2. Investment in people and Product Quality and Food Safety. Agreed the need to open up communication regardingt mitigating economic risks associated with aging populations in both countries, and to use this as a platform for investigating ways to provide better healthcare and retirement services. Bilateral efforts to continue activities determined at SED III for product safety on an ongoing basis.
3. Cooperation on Energy and the Environment. Mutual understanding of the importance of cooperating to address challenges. Both countries expressed the desire to strengthen commitments to energy and the environment.
4. Trade and Competitiveness. Challenges of trade were discussed, as well as actions that would support each nation's economy within the larger picture of globalization.
5. Investment. China and US came to an agreement on a series of actions that will be taken to create a mutually beneficial investment path for and between both.

In response to the May 12, 7.9-magnitude earthquake in Sichuan, Washington is stepping-up to help China in its aftermath. Most impressively, the US seems to be sharing lessons learned from domestic challenges in 2005 with Hurricane Katrina recovery efforts, and is pitching in with this act of good faith to show strength in partnership.

The Statistics:

Disaster Assistance:

• USAID provided $500M USD to the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies via the US Embassy in Beijing. The aid was for procurement and delivery of emergency relief commodities.
• American urban rescue workers from local fire brigardes (Los Angeles, CA and Fairfax County, VA) flew into China to perform “heavy rescues” to recover trapped and injured persons using state-of-the-art technology like diamond-tipped chain saws, generators, and oxygen-gasoline torches. In addition to manpower and expertise, equipment and training were provided in this effort.
• US aid also includes satellite images of resrvoirs, roads, and bridges sustaining damage as a result of the earthquake.
• Network for Good raised more than $215,000 for earthquake victims.
• The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has donated $1.3 M to the China Ministry of Health for safe water and disease control activities.

The challenge now is providing adequate coverage for China's internally displaced persons. The earthquake displaced approximately 5.4 million people, according to Sichuan provincial authorities.

CHINA - A student sits in the shambles of his school classroom. Photo by Imaginechina/AP Images.

China vs. Myanmar 

Everywhere, comparisons between the circumstances surrounding the recent disasters and Myanmar and China are cropping up.  One Brookings Institute article suggests that government disaster response actions are, by nature,  politically-driven: “Presently the apparent openness of news reporting on the Chinese earthquake stands in contrast to the staged scenes of disaster relief in Burma.” As media coverage directly impacts the receipt of donations, this is just one of many reasons why China seems to be having a better time salvaging aid than Myanmar.

Adding onto China's base of prolific media coverage the interest/investment of American companies and global attention with the coming Olympic games, China is eclisping Myanmar in the push for relief.

 
MYANMAR - A boy plays in front of his home, destroyed by Cyclone Nargis. Photo by REUTERS/Stringer.

To DONATE:

Committee of 100 China Earthquake Relief Fund

American Red Cross Donations

AmeriCares Aid