After college, I spent some time in New York learning my journalism craft, and came back to Hong Kong in 1974. I spent four years in Beijing (1979-1983), when China first opened up. I was one of the first four American newspaper reporters to be based in China since 1949, representing The Wall Street Journal. The other papers were The New York Times, The Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times.

After that, I took a few years off to write the book "Ancestors", and then joined the Far Eastern Economic Review, another Dow Jones publication.

In 1985, after the Sino-British Joint Declaration on Hong Kong was signed, I wrote a short book "Hong Kong and China: For Better or For Worse," jointly published by The Asia Society and the Foreign Policy Association in New York.

In 1999, I put out a book "The Li Dynasty: Hong Kong Aristocrats," published by Oxford University Press. There, I used the Bank of East Asia's Li family as a vehicle to talk about the history of Hong Kong from the time it became a British colony to the then present. I had previously, in the "Ancestors" book, used my own family history to talk about the history of China, from the Song Dynasty to the modern day.

Next month, Random House in the UK is putting out my latest book--very short--on the human rights situation in China.

I am currently editing a book on the history of surgery in Hong Kong, commissioned by the Hong Kong College of Surgeons.

In addition, I write three columns a week, two of which appear in the South China Morning Post, and the third, which I syndicate, appears in the Asian countries around the region.

I am now also teaching at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, where I teach one course on Mainland-Taiwan Relations and another on U.S.-China Relations. I also teach at the School of Business Management of the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, classes for students getting their MBAs. There, I teach China's External Relations and Their Economic Impact.

Frank Ching

******************************************************************

Here is a sample of Frank's writing -- Admin:

(To get a pdf copy of this article, click here.)

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
Last updated on Thursday, Jul. 23, 2009 09:04AM EDT

Two weeks after the outbreak of ethnic violence in Xinjiang, Chinese authorities are working hard to convince the world that those responsible were not only Uyghur "separatists" who want the region to gain independence from Beijing but are actually terrorists, part of the al-Qaeda network.

The official China Daily said last week that "evidence shows Uyghur separatists who orchestrated the July 5 riots in Urumqi, capital of the Xinjiang Uyghur autonomous region, have close relations with the Afghanistan-based al-Qaeda." On Monday, the People's Daily reported online that "terrorism is the real driving force behind the deadly killing" of nearly 200 people, mostly Han Chinese.

China has appealed to Muslim countries to see its side of the story and is working hard to maintain its position in the Islamic world. "We hope that the Islamic countries and our Muslim brothers could see the truth of the July 5 incident in Urumqi," said Qin Gang, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesman. "China and the Islamic countries have long been respecting and supporting each other, and the Chinese government and people always firmly support the just cause of the Islamic countries to pursue national independence and safeguard state sovereignty."

So far, Turkey has been the most outspoken country in condemning China, with its prime minister labelling as "genocide" Beijing's activities in Xinjiang.

While Muslim governments have been muted, their people have been loud. In Indonesia, for example, demonstrators clashed with guards outside the Chinese embassy in Jakarta and called for a jihad in support of the Uyghurs. In Kazakhstan, where there's a sizable Uyghur population, a rally was held on Sunday to protest against the crackdown in Xinjiang.

And in Iran, prominent clerics have criticized the government for remaining silent on events affecting Muslims in Xinjiang. Former president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, in a sermon on Friday, condemned China for its crackdown. After the sermon, many of those present shouted, "Death to China."

There is little doubt that Beijing will have to pay a price for its policy in Xinjiang. Even more worrying from China's standpoint was a call for vengeance against Chinese people issued by a North African organization known as al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM). Many thousands of Chinese live and work in North Africa and could become targets.

China alleges that the violence in Xinjiang was masterminded by the World Uyghur Congress, which is headed by Rebiya Kadeer, a Uyghur businesswoman living in exile in Washington. China has also linked the WUC to the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM), a group that seeks independence for Xinjiang and that has been labelled a terrorist organization by the Americans, largely on the strength of evidence provided by Beijing.

Hitherto, there has been little discernible connection between ETIM and al-Qaeda, which has not made direct threats against China. There seems little reason why the terrorist organization would want to take on China, in addition to the United States. But if Beijing continues to tar Uyghurs with the al-Qaeda brush, this situation may change.

If al-Qaeda does target Chinese interests in Africa or elsewhere, it is likely to push Beijing closer to Washington, which has been fighting insurgents in Afghanistan and in border areas of Pakistan for more than half a dozen years.In fact, Washington has been soliciting greater Chinese co-operation in its efforts, suggesting, for example, that Beijing could permit the Afghan government to buy food and fuel in western China, which adjoins Afghanistan.

Beijing appears to have an open mind regarding its role, although it understandably does not want to become directly involved in the war in South Asia. But if it sees Muslim fundamentalists as a threat, then it may well feel that China and the United States are up against the same enemy.

The two countries, of course, will not see eye to eye on all issues. The United States will continue to insist on viewing the struggle with international terrorists as being separate from attempts by Uyghurs - and Tibetans - to gain greater autonomy and religious freedom in China. It is inconceivable that Washington would support Beijing's domestic policy toward ethnic minorities.