“JK has gone on record as saying that no pressure was brought to bear from China, and we have to believe him on that.”

Why?

Because it’s reasonable to believe what someone says unless you have some good reason not to. He hasn’t got a history of being found to be lying.

“The reason simply is I’ve decided that I wouldn’t get a lot out of that particular meeting. I don’t see every religious leader that comes to town”.

Today, NZPA reports:

Prime Minister John Key sought advice on the foreign policy consequences of meeting the Dalai Lama before deciding not to, Parliament was told today. …

“He did discuss the matter with me,” Mr McCully said.

“He sought some advice as to what other nations’ leaders were doing in similar situations and he also sought some advice as to foreign policy consequences that would follow from decisions he might make.” (NZPA)

That’s not surprising – it’s realpolitik. But why not cut the crap and say so? Instead, we get waffle yesterday and the truth today. Just makes it all look a lot worse.

Why?

The point was that there is just no point in a meeting that signifies nothing.

JK has gone on record as saying that no pressure was brought to bear from China, and we have to believe him on that. Anything else would just be wild speculation and irresponsible to boot.

I would like to see an improvement in China’s human rights situation as much as the next man, but one meeting, JK’s response in the scheme of things means nothing.

I think JK is just focussed on his “core business” which, as CEO of NZ Inc, is the responsible and sensible thing to do given the current issues NZ has on it’s plate.

Would enjoy Paul Buchanen’s opinion on this just to get a geo-political and geo-strategic view on the issue (shit, that was a lot of geo’s!).

The Dalai Lama on Wednesday appealed to China to take action to stop Tibet’s glaciers melting, saying the environmental crisis was more urgent than a political solution over Tibet’s future.

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSLI709928

After a year in office Key has little to show for his meek efforts. He hasn’t done anything bold and I doubt ever will, because of his appeasing nature.

National has already broken election promises: no more taxes, further tax cuts, but it’s unlikely National is thrown out of office in 2011 given the disarray socialist Labour is in.

Key lost my vote a few months ago. He’s toast in my book.

its a bit like the US stealing half of Mexico: we know it was wrong but bad luck. The US is a superpower.

Typical progressive dribblings.

You know, I get this weird feeling that when one becomes PM there are barriers there that you daren’t cross even if you wanted to; I get the same vibe with the smacking law – there really isn’t any reason not to change it otherwise.
Maybe I’m talking crazy, but still…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xsoc4-QnplY

I don’t have anytime for the DL; I’m just not into that stuff. But neither do I support what seems to be a pretty brutal oppression of Tibetans by China. I just wonder how much the West is to blame for China deciding to secure Tibet, once and for all. And I wonder if China is looking at the current demonisation of Iran and saying, quietly, been there, endured that.

I should also post a link if I can find it of an itunes audio item in which ex-CIA employees proudly proclaimed their, well, what we would now call support for regime change and Tibetan terrorists.

At the end of the day, its a bit like the US stealing half of Mexico: we know it was wrong but bad luck. The US is a superpower. Have another look in a 500 or so years if you are still holding a grudge.

Unlike Israel/Palestine where Israel is just not big enough to buck the world forever. Neither was South Africa.

KiwiGreg raises a good parallel in Taiwan. I guess it means Taiwan will return to mainland rule one day, but hopefully by the HK model, not the Tibet one.

As a practical matter China CANT dictate who “we” meet. But they can certainly make there be some consequences should “we” choose to.

Where is your outrage at the way we treat Taiwan?

“Hey Bill, I gotta go out for a while..yeah to meet some unelected scmo who gets around in a freak suit..dudes always grinning like a maniac, and wants me to majorly piss of the biggest country in the world. Yeah its gonna be really fun – NOT”

Er, he’s not, Yvette, but he has to make it look good to the global idiots who [claim to] believe fervently in AGW because we have a vital reputation to protect.

“When did we become puppets to Chinese diplomacy ?”

Since 1984 burt.

It would seem that the only answer to that questions is; Because although we have had a change of govt, we haven’t had a change of direction.

If there is no point, why is he cobbling together a faulted ETS so New Zealand is “first” in the world ?
Yet another sort of flip flop?

DPF, this is a meeting with the Dali Lama for tea and bikkies, not Hitler for the sale of Czechoslovakia. Its not that I don’t disagree with you per se, but China has more clout in APEC etc than we do at a time when we need to be involved in this yet to be finalized very large trading bloc. If we want to get at them over this sort of thing over meeting the Dali Lama, now is not the time to do it.