Like the rest of the world, the China milk scandal has alarmed Southeast Asian countries. China is the major trading partner of Southeast Asian nations. Chinese goods are popular and accessible in the region. It is not surprising to learn that Chinese milk products which are contaminated by melamine have already been sold in local markets.

How did governments react to the issue? Chinese milk products were scrutinized, strictly regulated and banned. Even the popular white rabbit candy was listed as a dangerous food item. Health agencies have published a list of safe products from China.

Because of the milk scare, consumers are changing their diet, while others refrain from drinking milk. As expected, milk companies are assuring customers that their products are safe. A consumer from Brunei wants the government to review its list of contaminated milk products. Now a Mummy is worried since she bought a biscuit from a company based in China.

What is the reaction of bloggers? A Singaporean describes the issue as “Weapons of Mass Consumption-Tainted Milk Saga.”

Bangkok Pundit advises the government not to overreact:

“The government needs to take appropriate action to ensure the safety of its citizens, but it likewise shouldn't overreact and create a panic - if the government overreacts, China could retaliate and this affects Thai exporters.”

A reader is shocked to see Chinese milk products still being sold in Thailand supermarkets:

“I think the Thai government's stance is totally unacceptable, it's not just a question of PR. How come you can still see the products on the shelves in supermarkets? The government should take a strong stance for the public safety and inform us clearly what products are contaminated and remove them.”

Alexisthetiny from Bangkok will now buy more local and unprocessed food products:

“Melamine is supposed to be toxic, right? How in the heck, then can we have ‘acceptable levels’ of that stuff in our food? I’d imagine that for something this disgustingly bad for our health, ‘acceptable levels’ would be nil. Jesus. How on earth have we gotten to a point where we would allow stuff like that to be added to our food? Actually, how on earth have we gotten to this point where we allow corporations to tell us what is ok in food even if it goes against our instincts? One thing for sure, this is going to change my food shopping habits. From now on, its as local and unprocessed as it can get.”

My Food for Thots from Malaysia writes about the difficulty of banning trade with China:

“But heck, what's not made in China? Even Nike shoes are made in China! Does this mean it's only safe buying stuff not made in China? Which only mean the expensive, branded stuff? Which leads to bigger inflation? Which means our salaries will not suffice? Sigh….”

Tumbleweed in Space from East Timor writes about what the milk scandal revealed on modern living:

“The recent milk scandal in China once again reminds us of how much contaminants there are in almost every aspect of our life. This time it's melamine, but recently studies have also shown that polycarbonate, a plastic commonly used for milk bottles, contains the hormone-disrupting Biphesonol-A.”

What is the possible impact of the scandal on Myanmar? Fear from Freedom explains:

“Chinese milk powder is used widely in Myanmar. Coffee and tea mixed packets are used widely as well. Since these packets contained milk powder the authorities should check the source of the milk. Singapore found tainted milk powder in tea packets and our imports are from Singapore. It is important to tell the people so they can avoid milk powder from China in any form until things are checked.”

House on a Hill from the Philippines reminds the government not to impose trade policies that hurt the poor:

“Instead of taking pains to determine whether Sanlu milk could have indeed been smuggled into the country and sold to the public, we have government officials overreacting by freezing imports and pulling off the supermarket shelves just about any milk and milk-based product from China. What kind of solution is that? That’s a double whammy. That’s discriminating against legitimate Chinese producers and exporters of milk and milk-based products. Worse, that is hurting poor Filipinos who can not afford the que horror prices of milk and milk products sold locally by multinational companies.”

Then she identifies alternative sources of calcium:

“So we have a government who has continually failed to educate the people of the dangers of buying unlabeled food products. That same government is cutting off the supply of cheap milk because it cannot curb smuggling. Where does that leave the consumers, especially the poor ones? For those with children below two years old, breastfeed them. For the rest, understand that while milk is a good source of calcium, it is not the only source of calcium. Sardines, okra, tofu and beans are all rich in calcium.”

The Curious Life of a Quirky Chef from the Philippines asks “Is China trying to kill the world one kid at a time?” The blogger adds:

“First, there was the global controversy about children's toys that were tainted with lead. Then, the issue about candies and biscuits from China that allegedly contain formaldehyde. Today, health officials all over the world, plus the millions of dairy consumers are panicking because of the Chinese milk products that are contaminated with the industrial chemical melamine.”

Rebecca Mackinnon from Rconversation blogs about the recent security trap problem of the Chinese Skype, or Tom-Skype. Imagethief suggests foreign Internet firms to operate their own business rather than surrender their brands to local partners.

The Hong Kong government has issued a consultation paper on the “Review of the Control of Obscene and Indecent Articles Ordinance” last Friday (Oct 3). The first round of consultation will be lasted until end of January.

A most controversial issue is the suggestion on introduction of an internet filtering system in Hong Kong. In part 4 of the consultation paper, it states that the main issue at stake is:

Given the emergence of new forms of media, particularly the growing popularity of the Internet, members of the public consider it important that measures are taken to protect youngsters from the dissemination of obscene and indecent materials on such new media systems.

The government layouts a number of options:

Option one: co-regulation approach that demands Internet Service Providers to:

1. tighten up their service contracts with subscribers by incorporating specific clauses which prohibit subscribers from publishing obscene or indecent articles;

2. formulate measures against repeated offenders, which may involve limiting the bandwidth made available to such offenders or imposing temporary suspension or termination of service in case of contravention of contractual terms;

3. implement a voluntary labelling system and encourage webmasters to label their websites to indicate whether they are suitable for children and youngsters;

4. provide filtering services to subscribers for the purpose of filtering out web content which is not suitable for children and youngsters.

Option two is mandatory approach via legislation:

to make it mandatory for ISPs to provide filtering service to their subscribers so that
children and youngsters will be protected from web content not suitable to them. This would enable filtering of content from both local and overseas websites.

Option three is statutory approach, which targets at content providers:

1. websites are required to provide warnings if they display indecent materials;

2. an access control system is to be established to authenticate the age of the web users. For example, web users are required to input their credit card data before getting access to webpage containing indecent materials to ensure that they have attained the age of 18;

3. empower enforcement agencies, upon receipt of a judicial warrant, to issue a “take-down notice” to the indecent websites or the ISPs concerned; and

4. prosecute content providers who fail to comply with the statutory requirements.

Martinoei criticizes that all the suggestions imply an introduction of Great Fire Wall in Hong Kong:

蘇錦樑呢條X建聯黨員，話咁快就要在香港引進防火長城，淫審處本來己經被指權力過大，依家權力仲要大到搞過濾名單，係咪想搞香港版防火長城。照香港有大衛像都係淫褻嘅硬膠前科，隨時成個高登都會列入過濾名單，咁樣仲成世界？仲惡過廿三條。

Although the government stresses that it doesn't have any fixed position, erynnyes from Those were the days is still angry at the government's suggestions:

當然，政府把一切說成諮詢，政府沒有立場，甚至在文件中提出反對者聲音，以顯示中立，可是在童工角度，有些立場、建議，根本提出也是罪，因為這是削弱香港互聯網自由，完全毋須討論，皆因沒有任何妥協之餘地！那份諮詢文件，就像互聯網的23 條，只想打造一個超越中國的打壓互聯自由的香港金盾！

Hystericireul posts a large picture of David Statue in his blog to protest against the Indecent censorship policy. He also makes a dozen points on the consultation:

10. 淫唔淫，根本就係同洩唔洩一樣，各施各法各隨心。除左少部分好明顯變態嘔心核突既物品之外，根本好多物品就無一個清晰定義去界定點為之「淫」，尤其是當你成班仆街連大衛像都可以覺得係「淫褻」既話，仲有乜野係唔淫？vv物語講西，淫唔淫？西廂記夢中交合，淫唔淫？莫非我地以後創作時就唔可以打破古人既曖昧，照樣講到扑野就「呵呵，哈哈，嗯嗯」算數？

11. 根本個問題係，健立一個健康健全既人格，咁佢睇乜都唔會變壞。而家係你班撚樣搞柒左個社會，成班小朋友未升中先西窿，3456789p玩齊，呢個係佢地腦荀未生埋既問題，我地要做既係好好教導佢地，而唔係一味禁絕囉。

There are also some discussions from Internet forums, such as from pumb.org:

User169167 criticizes the government's official ability in governing Hong Kong:

雞有病 = 唔俾賣活雞唔使煩
樹有病 = 斬晒佢唔使煩
色情網頁教壞細佬 = block晒佢唔使煩

政府班高薪厚職既天材知唔知咩叫教育？

說穿了其實就係借管制色情網頁為開端，繼而達至更容易收緊其它題材網頁(例如政治、社論)，壓抑社會另類渠道反對聲音。

User george2be said that the government power should stay out of the filtering mechanism:

家長同學校想filter, 應該自己裝軟件做. 政府可以提供資源同條件令呢d軟件更易買到 (如跟機可以加). 根本無需要立法賦予政府設立過濾機制既權力.

正如莫乃光講, 現在最大問題係淫審處裁決標準不一, 缺乏公信力. 連定標準既機構都亂七八糟, 在未解決呢個問題前, 點可能立法比佢權力去過濾更多既言論同資訊.

倒行逆施莫過於此.

User P-U-M-B pointed out that the internet would eventually become intranet under such policy direction:

咁搞法 !! internet 變左intranet

Kay sets up a facebook group on defending internet freedom to follow through the consultation.

The sweeping financial crisis that strikes U.S has brought a debate in the country and its congress whether the government should intervene and rescue the Wall Street, or even the entire economy. And It is not the only country pondering on a rescue plan.

Right in a recent interview by CNN, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao appealed for giving States a hand:

So this time we should join hands and meet the crisis together. If the financial and economic system in the United States go wrong, then the impact will be felt, not only in this country but also in China, in Asia and in the world at large.

Wen talked so with a certain reason, as blogger 百草止水 posted on discussion board Tianya.cn in a entry named “should China rescue U.S?” ; 中国到底该不该拯救美国;？

在这个世界上，美国是唯一牵一发而动全身的国家，不仅因为它是独一无二的超级大国，还因为它是全球最大的消费市场。你可以不从美国进口商品，但无法不向美国出口，如果这个消费市场停摆了，全球经济将无一幸免地跟着遭殃。

In this world, U.S i s the only state that may influence the entire world, not just that it’s the only super power, but that it owns th e largest consumption market all over the world. You can stop importing goods from U.S, but c an by no means ceas e exportin g to it. If such a market stagnates, the global economy has no way to avoid a disaster.

The plane named “subprime mortgage crisis” is running into “Dollar status” and “foreign debt”, illustrated by unknown netizen.

Besides the States’ significant influence over global market, more importantly, China is the largest holder of U.S. Treasury bills, and also maintained a strong trade tie with US where is the country’s major destination of export(21% of total). With its GDP’s reliance on export, the determination of China to help rescue U.S from another disastrous depression could be reasonable.

As Wen Jiabao said in the interview,

The U.S. finance is closely connected with the Chinese finance. If anything goes wrong in the U.S. financial sector, we are anxious about the safety and security of Chinese capital.

But does the situation allow China to rescue U.S?

Above all, the prospect of U.S economy is in deep uncertainty. No one could imagine how much the crisis that has destructed Bear Stern and Lehman Brothers is going to wreck anymore.

百草止水 pointed out that the crisis is rooted in the States’ inherent economic system, that

美国经济对金融产业的依赖很强：第一，美国以两亿多人口占据世界第一消费市场，不是因为美国世界最富，而是美国流行“寅吃卯粮”的消费文化，也就是说美国人习惯于拿明天的钱用于今天的享受。

Thus, the consequence could be

第一，美国人更加不敢将钱存入银行
第二，金融企业的不 景气会使其发行的债券无人问津，而且已发行的债券也可能成为白纸一张，华尔街的融资能力剧烈受挫，美国经济的前景更加堪虑。第三，美国银行的存款锐减，金 融企业的债券不再受欢迎，也就越来越无钱用于放贷和投资，缺乏了银行支持的消费市场便进一步萎缩，不仅美国经济陷入衰退，全球经济也会一片混乱。
第五，美国经济出现全面危机，美元更加疯狂地贬值，美元的世界货币地位彻底终结……
第六，美元的剧烈贬值将会使美国债券尤其是国债的持有人高度受损，作为美国国债的第一第二持有者的日本和中国将首当其冲。
第七，为转嫁危机，包括美国在内的世界各主要国家就会穷兵黩武，一场新的世界大战在所难免，核武器可能首次大规模使用，人类可能遭到灭绝。这不是百草止水危言耸听，1931年的欧洲金融危机就是这样子的，那场危 机成了第二次世界大战的导火索。

At the end of his article, the blogger posted a critical question

要知道，中国手里的外汇储备世界第一，在美国金融危机当中，中国有能力发挥积极作用。问题是美国一直在积极遏制和围堵中国，甚至一再阻扰中国的统一进程，对这样的国家我们需要以德报怨吗？

In 2 pages of comments followed, firespace1 scorned

支持楼主拿工资去救美国

7758521wan said:

你真是个牛人啊，据然想起来承救美国，他妈的你才吃饱饭几天啊，现在就出来救人，真是有种，你是真的有钱就到大街上去救几个同胞不是更好吗……我为你感到悲唉啊．

Accordingly, maybe people should ask “do we have the power to save America”.

零时三刻1970 said:

中国也没那能力去救美国
不落井下石抛国债已经是最大程度的支持了

But 推拖拉机的浣熊 thought the other way,

说楼主脑残的脑瘫患者.看不懂就闭嘴.别再那乱扣帽子.如果美国危机持续下去.最多十个月,国内经济必然失控.从金融开始到房地产后工业.国人到时不知多少人要自杀.

EileenZ　rebuked:

照楼主的说法，美国永远都不能倒下，全世界都应该用本国的力量去支持美国的强大，这样他才能不停的用别人的钱去消费，给其他国家带来订单？
这样的逻辑，真的很糟糕，就像你不停的给钱别人来买你的东西一样，而这个人最终不会付清它的债务，因为他自己没有钱，所有的钱都是借来得。

讨厌猫的男人 seconds, giving an analogy

中国好比就是给美国打工,然在老板说我没钱了,公司要倒了.打工的说不能倒啊,倒了我没饭吃了,老板说那就你借点钱给我继续开公司,你也可以继续为我打工.楼猪这叫什么逻辑

That might be why insins said:

要救，但要乘机提条件 为什么要救？美国是中国的最大出口市场，他衰退，中国也要损失惨重。
提条件虽然不厚道，但跟美国人提不要心怀不安，他们对我们一直如此的，我们可以在台湾问题，西藏等问题提条件，多好的筹码啊

More than the unwillingness to give a hand, there are voices criticizing U.S is trying to transfer his financial burden to all the rest of the world, nothing different with a rogue state's action.

In another discussion board, IronBlood, 大大跑 said

美国金融破产与９７年国企业改革之初有的企业采用破产方法甩债另立公司都是为了破壳逃债，不过本质不同的是：美国是破外国债权，美国实际资产一点也没少……对这样不讲信誉赖掉他国债务的国家，为什么还要进行投资救市

On the one hand, China fears the financial crisis would not only involve the States itself, but destroy the global market and economic order as well; while on the other hand, it is thrilled by the significant chance, as the States might have during the World War 2, that along with the shift on power map, China would escalate to a status of super power.

大大跑's comment is exactly the expression of this ambition:

中国老百姓不同意政府参与美国救市，一是美国金融破产信誉让中国损失严重；二是国际上不应以美元做为单一世界货币绑架世界经济；三是世界上需要经济重新洗 牌规避类似美国大举破产逃债经济事故。有的网友说“美国的经济危机就是世界经济权益的一次再分配，中国务必做好重建新秩序的各项准备”

ESWN translated an article, What has my country done for me? from Southern Weekend's special issue for the 59 anniversary of the Nation. Other articles in the special issue includes: What have I done for my country?[zh] What else can my country do for me?[zh] What else can I do for my country?[zh]

Brunei's Ministry of Health has published a list of contaminated products from China. Many of the food items are sold in Brunei markets.

Joel Martinsen from DANWEI translated a local report from Mirror about milk industry's promotion strategy - by buying pregnant woman's personal data from hospital.

Rebecca Mackinnon from Rconversation blogs about Jimmy Wales recent meeting with Cai Mingzhao, Vice Director of China's State Council Information Office - the government body whose “Internet Management Division” is in charge of censoring online content.

David Bandurski from China media project wrote a detailed article about Sanlu's public relation strategy in creating the high-quality image of its milk products and showed how the media is conspired in relaying the lie.

Do you still remember the South China Tigergate issue? The farmer, who claimed to have taken the photo is now facing criminal charge and may be put into prison because of that. ESWN has collected and translated local news on the case.