Twice in the last hundred years, China has had its Law of Rules stripped away. The first was what might best be called Confucianism, an imperfect but longstanding code of behavior rooted in a system of rigid interpersonal obligations. Ripped away in the aftermath of the 1911 overthrow of the Manchus, it died a slow death, and was eventually replaced by Maoism.

Maoism was battered by almost continuous challenge and upheaval, until finally its precepts of egalitarianism, service, self-sacrifice, and patriotism were abandoned in the 1990s. What replaced them were two simple maxims: "To Get Rich is Glorious," and "It doesn't matter if the cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice."

Now, we are told, all that we need to lay upon this highly practical foundation is a legal system backed with apolitical courts, and everything will be fine. Not bloody likely. If the fear of prison and death are not enough to keep the chief executive of a dairy from making decisions that will kill babies, no rule of law can hope to end such behavior.

There is no silver bullet solution to this problem for China, no simple path to change, because the change that must take place is not in institutions but in individuals. This is not one battle, but 1.3 billion battles. And for that reason, it is the greatest single challenge facing China today.

I was literally stopped in the streets of Yinchuan, due to my being easily spotted as an American, by people of all walks of life who spoke and gestured enthusiastically about the impact that this American president was having and would have on their very lives.  It was exhilarating for me, having all too often suffered through explanations about why American leadership doesn't "get it" where Asia is concerned.

Quote by The Article:

Citing sources in the defense contracting and intelligence consulting community, the iDefense report unambiguously declares that the Chinese government was, in fact, behind the effort.  [...]

"The source IPs and drop server of the attack correspond to a single foreign entity consisting either of agents of the Chinese state or proxies thereof," the report says.

Quote by China Law Blog:

With China being hailed as the world economy's savior, its government has concludedthis is its century. The West is irrelevant and China will lead a vanguard of new players -- and the game will be played by Beijing’s rules.

[...]

...Officials openly state they are no longer interested in encouraging foreign investment.

[...]

The idea is that Chinese business should no longer be required to pay for access to foreign technology.

[...]

Though an old civilization, China is actually a very recent entrant into the world system and it tends to view the legal and trade rules governing this system with extreme suspicion. As a result, many Chinese officials believe China should disregard these constraints and simply take what it wants.

"it's worth remembering that this is a lose-lose-lose scenario. The most likely outcome is that Google loses access to an important market, Chinese customers lose access to its services, and the government loses face."

The next step is to find some way to reduce the number of losses -- including, yes, for the Chinese government, since (believe me) absolutely no good will come to anyone anywhere from the government's feeling shamed, humiliated, or newly insecure. It is emotionally satisfying to see the Chinese government thrown off balance after its recent repressive moves. That won't make things better for most people in China.

Quote by NFG:

Though an old civilization, China is actually a very recent entrant into the world system and it tends to view the legal and trade rules governing this system with extreme suspicion. As a result, many Chinese officials believe China should disregard these constraints and simply take what it wants.

Hi, this is due to a dos attack from china - some ips from the range 118.116.*

It is about the perception that antiforeign attitudes and policies in China have been growing

[...]

...banquet-table chatter is now dominated by swapping tales of arrogant and insolent Chinese bureaucrats and business partners.

[...]

...purposefully inconsistent and nontransparent enforcement of regulations, rampant intellectual-property theft, state penetration of multinationals through union and Communist Party organizations, blatant market impediments through rigged product standards and testing, politicized courts and agencies that almost always favor local companies, creative and selective enforcement of WTO requirements ... The list goes on.

[...]

...many are looking ahead and losing sleep over expectations that their onetime partners are morphing into predators...

The Chinese people are generally pretty happy, but the Party leadership is terrified of their outsized expectations. People under age 40, the progeny of the one-child policy, didn't live through Maoist poverty and upheaval. They are pampered, impatient and demanding. They consider exponential growth as a basic benchmark of life, and access to information to be a civil right. China's rich are powerful opponents of further reform and opening. They made money the local way and are determined to block foreign competition so this can continue.

Quote by Wired:

An editorial in the People’s Daily — the primary mouthpiece for China’s Communist Party — accused the United States of doublespeak and of using “online warfare” to instigate violent unrest in Iran with Twitter and YouTube following that country’s national elections in June.

Quote by Silk Road:

China thinks that the rest of the world acts just like they do [...]  China assumes that Govt communication issues/companies in the US are tied to and part of the US national interests and that the corporations actions are directed by the govt—just like they are in China.

Quote by Silk Road:

...just because China is honestly acting in their own best interest does not mean that they are not, at the same time and by those very same actions, threatening others.  Just because you're not an overt threat does not mean that you are not threatening.

For precisely this reason, China is not a global partner or good neighbor.  Could they be?  Yes.  Will they?  I doubt it; only because they’ve determined that it’s not in their best interests to do so.

Quote by Silk Road:

But even in the midst of this Google mess, I don’t think that China is an inherent threat.   I do believe that China, for purely short-term domestic political goals thinks that the rest of the world is a threat to China (or at least wants the Chinese populace to think that the rest of the world see China as a threat).  Because the Chinese Government is scared (of the rest of the world or of losing domestic power) it then acts like a threat—a threat because it’s actions are based on an aggressive fearful position that it’s being attacked.