Nothing Benign About Chinese Authoritarianism

This is an article in response to John V. Whitbeck’s Personal Reflection on Hypocrisy over Tibet (published in Counterpunch website).

It appears the writer feels that the ‘West’ should stop pressurising China to accede to human rights demands because as he put it, ‘the world has enough problems as it is’.

First, any form of human rights violations, no matter what kind it is, should be of concern. He highlighted the fact that China’s human rights violations in Tibet and to a certain extent in Sudan- Darfur are less serious than those in Iraq, Afghanistan or Palestine.

On the Tibetian issue, one must understand that it had self-rule before it was invaded by China. In that regard, it has as an equal right to independence or autonomy as much as the Palestinians. In addition, the monks and Tibetians are forced to denounce their spiritual leader, face environmental destruction due to economic expansion in the province and an influx of Chinese immigrants which diluted their sense of culture and community, utimately breeding ill-feelings. In what way hence, is their suffering or repression of less importance than the Palestinians? I would argue that both peoples have equal rights to self-determination.

Amnesty International (AI) has also reported that in the period between 10 to 25 March, between the period of 10 to 25 March, ‘overseas Tibetan organizations estimated that 79 to 140 have died during the crackdown across Tibet and its neighbouring areas. 1,200 to over 2000, were believed to be detained with at least 100 being disappeared.’(1) One shudders on the updated or real figures of casualties.

Second, human rights violations committed by any state should not be downplayed and in this case, Mr Whitbeck’s term of endearing reference to China, ‘a rather gentle and benign dragon’ is misleading and a gross disrespect to those who are suffering under the iron fist of China.

China is responsible for torturing, illegal detention and harassment of human rights activists and journalists. The more prominent cases of Hu Jia and Gao Zhisheng merely reflect the tip of the iceberg.

In addition, how can one forget the suppression including organ harvesting of Falungong members and the people it executed through its death penalty?

In the latest 2007 AI report on death penalty, the organisation estimated that at least 470 executions have occurred in China though ‘lack of transparency and limited access to information about the number of executions in China means that the true figure is undoubtedly much higher.’ (2)

Let us not forget that China is a main arms supplier to both Burma and Sudan. AI has reported that China is the ‘ ‘principal source of arms supplies to the Myanmar security forces’ when the Saffron Revolution occurred last year. (3). When Taiwan, a budding democracy, wanted to conduct a nation-wide referendum, it directed its missiles at what it considers its province.

There is nothing benign about the authoritarian regime in China. If we were to take Whitbeck’s logic, then perhaps Hitler would be in the same league as China. After all, under the Nazi government, he improved the economy though nationalisation and brought a economic stability to its citizens. Improving the economic security of peoples cannot be used as an excuse to justify human rights violations.

It does not help to sidetrack and paint a picture of the Chinese government as one of being on the defensive which is utterly untrue.

If we seek to be fair, then we should condemn any human rights violations perpetuated by any state, China or the US, as objectively as we can.

==

Note: I have sent this letter to Counterpunch for feedback/ publication on their website. Whether it gets published or not, would be on the discretion of the web editors.

=References=

1. ‘People’s Republic of China: The Olympics countdown – crackdown on Tibetan protesters’, Index Number: ASA 17/070/2008, Amnesty International, 31 March 2008

2. 2007 world death penalty statistics published, 15 April 2008, http://action.amnesty.org.au/news/comments/11957/

3. ‘Myanmar: Myanmar needs a comprehensive international arms embargo’, Amnesty International, Index Number: ASA 16/014/2007, 27 September 2007

Oil and Food Costs

A side effect of the rising price of fuel is the increase in the cost of food staples around the world, especially rice.

A recent AFP article quoted Kevin Cleaver (an assistant president in a department of the UN International Fund for Agricultural Development):

“in some 33 countries there is now civil disturbance, food riots caused by food shortages and higher prices”

Even if we ignore the effect that climate change could have on food production, it seems that the world will have some major problems in the coming years as the high cost of oil will continue to put pressure on food production costs.

Looking around the world this week - there seems to be a stream of stories about rice. Here are just two such stories.

Philippines
The price of a kilo of rice has now hit P20 in a country where some poor families only have an income of P120 per day. The National Food Authority is going to be distributing more than 15000 bags of rice to the poor families in 12 of the countries high population areas.

Haiti
Recent riots over the cost of food have prompted the government to bring the price of rice down by 15 percent. Haiti used to be self-sufficient in rice production, but that changed in the mid 1980 with trade liberalisation, where cheap (and subsidised) US rice has led to a collapse of the local rice production industry. Now that the cost of oil is increasing, the cost of imported rice is also increasing - leading to the recent riots over the cost of food.

Two countries on different sides of the world suffering from the same problem.

And it appears that countries such as India, Vietnam, Argentina and China will cut exports to protect their own people.

The cost of food production threatens us all, and may well be the biggest threat mankind faces in the coming years.

Time to boycott the China Olympics

When the Olympics were held in Berlin in 1936, there were calls to boycott the games because Germany was already under Hitler’s Nazi government. It did not materialise. That was also an eventful year as the Olympic torch was introduced. As BBC reporter Bowlby wrote,

… it was planned with immense care by the Nazi leadership to project the image of the Third Reich as a modern, economically dynamic state with growing international influence.

Therefore, it is with great irony that the torch bearers in this Olympic, were protected by “flame attendants” from Beijing who were paramilitary police, described by one of the top London Olympics official as “thugs”. An AP report revealed that these flame attendants were being rough on some of the torch bearers. Yolaine De La Bigne, a French environmental journalist and a torchbearer in Paris complained that her headband with a Tibetan flag was forcefully removed by these “Chinese agents”.

It appears that the Chinese authorities were determined to ensure that the torch was not just successfully relayed but also to remove any protestors or forms of protests that might portray the country in a negative light.

Unfortunately, the International Olympic Council and the participating countries have all bend over backwards to please the trading giant. This is despite the Chinese authorities refusal to improve its human rights record.

Let us recap the recent human rights violations committed by the Chinese authorities.

1. Suppression of pro-independence demonstrations in Tibet. According to an update from Amnesty International, ‘The Olympics countdown – crackdown on Tibetan protesters’, between the period of 10 to 25 March, overseas Tibetan organizations estimated that 79 to 140 have died during the crackdown across Tibet and its neighbouring areas. 1,200 to over 2000, were believed to be detained with at least 100 being disappeared. The arbitrary detention of the protestors violated their freedom to peaceful assembly.

2. The detention, imprisonment, harassement and torture of human rights activist - The sentencing of prominent human rights activist, Hu Jia to three and a half years of prison imprisonment for state subversive activities was widely reported. The man was imprisoned for merely writing 5 articles and two interviews which were critical of the government. Land rights activist, Yang Chunlin, was also reported to be tortured and sentenced to five years in prison for ‘inciting subversion’. His crime was to spearhead the petition campaign, “We don’t want the Olympics; we want human rights.” Gao Zhisheng and rights activist lawyer was sentenced to three years for a similar charge in December 2006. Teng Biao, human rights lawyer who co-wrote ‘The real China and the Olympics’ with Hu Jia claimed he was kidnapped and released two days later. He was subsequently warned not to talk to foreign journalists. These are just some of the more prominent cases documented by Amnesty International.

3. The supply of arms to military regimes such as Sudan and Burma. Amnesty International reported that China continued to supply Fantan jets, carrying air-to-ground missiles until 2006. In addition, according to Save Darfur, the Chinese government has played a prominent role in supporting the Sudan government which enabled the facilitation of atrocities in Darfur. As Sudan’s leading trade partner, it has been its major supplier of small arms which have been regularly used in Darfur. Moreover, ‘much of Sudan’s indigenous arms production capacity has been developed with Chinese technical assistance.’ Amnesty International also reported that China is the ‘principal source of arms supplies to the Myanmar security forces’ in its ‘Myanmar needs a comprehensive international arms embargo’ report when the Saffron revolution occurred in Burma last year. These weapons have been used to suppress and commit human rights violations in both countries.

Given that the Chinese authorities have not only refused to brush up its human rights records in China, but also continued to be implicit in supporting illiberal regimes in both Sudan and Burma, it is not unreasonable to propose drastic measures.

On hindsight, the world should have boycotted the Olympics in Berlin in 1936 because Hitler was a dictator who was guilty of genocide. The torch relay should have been discontinued for it was a tradition of glorifying the achievements of host countries, despite their human rights abuses. Given China’s record of human rights violations, a boycott is not entirely out of the question.

- References-

1. 1. Chris Bowlby, ‘The Olympic torch’s shadowy past’, BBC News, 5 April 2008.

2. Anita Chang, ‘Top Chinese cops protect Olympic flame’, Associated Press, 8 April 2008.

3. ‘People’s Republic of China: The Olympics countdown – crackdown on Tibetan protesters’, Index Number: ASA 17/070/2008, Amnesty International, 31 March 2008 (pdf).

4. Michael Bristow, ‘Anguish over China activist sentence’, BBC News, 3 April 2008.

5. ‘People’s Republic of China: The Olympics countdown – crackdown on activists threatens Olympics legacy’, Amnesty International, Index Number: ASA 17/050/2008, 31 March 2008, (pdf format).

6. New photos expose Sudan arms violations, Amnesty International, 4 September 2007.

7. ‘Less than Meets the Eye: Beijing’s Recent Statements and Actions on Darfur’, Save Darfur Coalition, 19 March 2008, (pdf format).

8. ‘Myanmar: Myanmar needs a comprehensive international arms embargo’, Amnesty International, Index Number: ASA 16/014/2007, 27 September 2007, (pdf format).