Torch Nears, Posing Test of Autonomy in Hong Kong
By KEITH BRADSHER , The New York Times
HONG KONG — The Olympic torch relay coming here on Friday, the first on Chinese soil, is turning into a broader struggle over Hong Kong’s evolving role as an autonomous territory of China.
On Saturday, the Hong Kong government denied entry to three Danish human rights advocates who had hoped to protest at the torch relay, detaining them for six hours and then putting them against their will on a flight to London. A Tibetan monk was stopped on arrival at the airport over the weekend and forced to fly elsewhere, according to the local news media.
But local critics of China’s human rights record are still planning to demonstrate, and more rights advocates from overseas are expected to try to enter the territory of Hong Kong to hold their own protests, notably the actress Mia Farrow, who is now one of the most prominent critics of China’s role in the Darfur region of Sudan.
The Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, which commemorates the Tiananmen Square killings in 1989 and seeks human rights improvements in Hong Kong, held a small demonstration on Monday to protest the government’s decision to block the entry of the Danish advocates.
“It really hurts the image of Hong Kong as an international city when we start restricting freedom of access,” said Lee Cheuk-yan, a union leader, Hong Kong legislator and vice chairman of the alliance.
Any protests that take place Friday could be an early glimpse of demonstrations to come during the Olympics in August. The International Olympic Committee moved all six Olympic equestrian events from Beijing to Hong Kong after Beijing failed to convince international veterinary groups that horses brought into mainland China could be kept free of equine diseases.
Groups critical of China are considering whether to hold protests at Olympic events here or in Beijing. Hong Kong has a tradition of tolerating peaceful protest, but Beijing will host more Olympic events, so protests there may receive greater attention.
Reached by telephone on Sunday night at her Connecticut home, Ms. Farrow said she had not been aware that rights advocates were being stopped at the airport. She still planned to fly to Hong Kong later in the week.
“I don’t think we have a choice; we have to go,” said Ms. Farrow, chairwoman of the advisory board of Dream for Darfur, a group that criticizes China for its diplomatic, military and commercial ties to Sudan.
The Hong Kong immigration authorities have a policy of not commenting on individual cases. But officials have said in recent weeks that any government has the right to refuse entry to those who may be disruptive, and they have denied suggestions that the city is taking orders from Beijing.
Before Britain returned Hong Kong to Chinese rule in 1997, the Chinese government promised to let Hong Kong run its own domestic affairs, including immigration policies, with considerable autonomy until 2047.
Chinese citizens and people of Chinese descent have shown up in large numbers at torch relay events from San Francisco to Sydney and have sometimes scuffled with critics of China’s policies in Tibet. Three Japanese citizens received blows when they tried to unfurl a pro-Tibet banner at the torch relay in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, but suffered no lasting injuries, according to the Japanese Embassy there. Pro-China demonstrators also threw rocks, water bottles, and plastic and metal pipes at critics of China during the torch relay on Sunday in Seoul, South Korea.
Official Chinese news media have exhorted citizens in recent days to “defend the torch” in each city on the relay route. “We are worried that we may be confronted by these nationalists,” said Mr. Lee, of the Hong Kong Alliance.
...
Read more
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Monday, April 28, 2008
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Friday, April 25, 2008
[+/-] : Coca-Cola Faces Critics of Its Olympics Support
Bradley C. Bower/Associated Press
Pro-Tibet demonstrators picketed and chanted outside Coca-Cola’s annual meeting in Wilmington, Del., on Wednesday.
Coca-Cola Faces Critics of Its Olympics Support
By STEPHANIE CLIFFORD , The New York Times
April 17, 2008
It is getting tougher to be a global brand these days. Just ask Coke.
As one of the most prominent sponsors of the Olympics, Coca-Cola found itself on the hot seat on Wednesday at its annual shareholder meeting in Wilmington, Del. Outside, protesters chanted and waved picket signs. Inside, they engaged the chief executive, E. Neville Isdell, in a rare public dialogue about China’s human rights record in Tibet.
“Will you tell the I.O.C. to stop taking the Olympic torch relay into Tibet, because Tibet belongs to Tibetans?” asked one protester in the audience, Lobsang Choefel, who described himself as a native Tibetan. He was referring to the International Olympic Committee.
Mr. Isdell — who had just described first-quarter results that rose on the strength of international sales in countries like China — stood firm. The torch relay “has symbolized openness, it has symbolized hopes,” he said. “I don’t believe that stopping the torch run is in any way over the long term going to be the right thing to do.”
The moment seemed to encapsulate the quandary the Olympics sponsors face as protests unfurl across various continents. In India, home to more than 100,000 Tibetans in exile and their religious leader, the Dalai Lama, even the official corporate sponsors avoided buying television and radio ads that were timed to the Olympic torch relay on Thursday, media executives there said.
And in China, a different sort of backlash has been taking shape — against the companies from countries that seem to be putting pressure on China. French companies like Carrefour are a particular target because of the mayhem during the Paris leg of the torch relay and because the French president has said he may skip the opening ceremony in Beijing over China’s human rights record.
“I think boycotting Carrefour is a peaceful and polite way to express our anger, our Chinese feelings got deeply hurt by France,” said Li Meng, a 25-year-old mechanic who is selling T-shirts in support of the boycott movement in the city of Yantai, in eastern China. “France humiliated China during the torch relay and keeps making trouble for the Olympics.”
American brands like McDonald’s and KFC have also been named as targets of a boycott because some American politicians seem to be supporting the Dalai Lama, whom Beijing blames for instigating violence in Tibet to disrupt plans for the Olympics.
No one knows whether there is widespread support for the boycotts, but the opposition comes at a time when many of the world’s biggest brands — including Coke — are expanding aggressively in China and planning huge sales and marketing campaigns to coincide with the Olympics.
Coca-Cola’s most recent quarterly results suggest the extent of its reliance on the Chinese market. During the first quarter, Coke’s unit case volume sales in China were up 20 percent in the quarter, one of the highest figures from any country. Over all, the company’s net income rose 19 percent in the quarter, to $1.5 billion, from $1.26 billion a year ago.
Bill Pecoriello, research analyst at Morgan Stanley, estimates that 5 to 6 percent of Coke’s total revenue comes from China (Coca-Cola does not break out the figure).
The importance of China for Coke should increase, Mr. Pecoriello said. He estimated that Coke sold 1.2 billion cases in China in 2007 and forecast that it would sell 1.5 billion cases there in 2008. That compares with larger but slower-growing sales in the United States: 5.4 billion cases in 2007 and 5.45 billion cases in 2008, Mr. Pecoriello said.
Neither Coca-Cola nor any of the other Olympic sponsors has flinched in its public support for the games, but the groups that are protesting China’s policies in Tibet and Darfur are vowing to step up their pressure. This could lead to showdowns, or even to a possible whipsaw for the companies if Chinese youths start protesting en masse in the other direction.
“We’re not asking Coke to solve Tibet’s problems,” Lhadon Tethong, the director of an organizing group called Students for a Free Tibet, told Mr. Isdell at the shareholder meeting on Wednesday. “We’re not asking you to do anything else but tell the I.O.C. this is not the time for the torch to go to Tibet.”
Ms. Tethong added, “You have influence, and you know you have influence. Please don’t hide behind a spin.”
Mr. Isdell — who will be succeeded by the company’s president and chief operating officer, Muhtar Kent, by the time the Olympics start in August — responded politely and at some length. “I want to thank you for your clarification and also for your declared integrity,” he said, adding that, technically, the route of the torch was not governed by the I.O.C., but by the Beijing Organizing Committee for the Olympic Games. On a philosophical note, Mr. Isdell added, “We still believe that the torch is a light of hope, and we trust that’s what it will be as it goes every single place in the world.”
In the future, Mr. Isdell suggested, the company does still want to buy the world a Coke. “We are already a sponsor of the Olympic games — wherever they may go — through 2020, and I trust that will continue through 2028,” he said.
Last week, several other sponsors, including Visa International, McDonald’s, Johnson & Johnson, Anheuser-Busch, Bank of America, Home Depot, United Parcel Service and AT&T reaffirmed their support of the Olympics and said that their marketing plans had not changed because of the protests.
“As critical as Tibet is, I think sponsors are looking at the situation saying, ‘We’ve still got days to go,’ ” said Damien Ryan, director of Ryan Financial Communications, a Hong Kong media relations firm that has sponsors as clients. “Things can change quite quickly, and from their point of view, they realize that Beijing has got a long memory.”
David Barboza contributed reporting from Shanghai and Heather Timmons from New Delhi.
...
Read more
[+/-] : Bracing for Games, China Sets Rules That Complicate Life for Foreigners
Christie Johnston , The New York Times
Outside a visa application office in Hong Kong. China has imposed new restrictions on visas that concern many foreigners.
Bracing for Games, China Sets Rules That Complicate Life for Foreigners
By ANDREW JACOBS for The New York Times
April 24, 2008
BEIJING — In little more than 100 days, China will open its arms to a deluge of foreigners, many of whom will be pleasantly surprised to find a dizzying array of designer boutiques and painfully hip martini bars that divert expatriates and middle-class Chinese in this once dowdy capital.
But even as Beijing is promising to welcome 1.5 million visitors to the Olympic Games, public security officials are tightening controls over daily life and introducing visa restrictions that are causing anxiety among the 250,000 foreigners who have settled here in recent years.
The visa rules, which were introduced last week with little explanation, restrict many visitors to 30-day stays, replacing flexible, multiple-entry visas that had allowed people to remain for up to a year. The new rules make it harder for foreigners to live and work in Beijing without applying for residency permits, which can be difficult to obtain. The restrictions are also complicating the lives of businesspeople in Hong Kong, Taiwan, South Korea and Singapore used to crossing the border with ease.
“I can’t begin to explain how serious this is going to be,” said Richard Vuylsteke, president of the American Chamber of Commerce in Hong Kong. “A barrier like this is going to have a real ripple effect on business.”
The government wants to present a blemish-free image of Beijing for the Olympics. Police officers have cleared away street beggars and closed down shops selling pirated DVDs, while also forcing some migrant workers to go back to the countryside.
Over the last month the police have raided bars and clubs suspected of harboring drug dealers. An operation two weeks ago that netted a group of French teenagers has provoked charges of heavy-handed police tactics.
Other restrictions can seem random, like a decision on Wednesday that forced the cancellation of a popular music festival a week before its start. Organizers of the eight-year-old event, the Midi Festival, said officials had told them they were concerned about security. More than 80 bands, many of them from abroad, were scheduled to perform.
But most of the fear and consternation has been prompted by the new visa rules, which have thousands of foreign residents scrambling for black market documents — or contemplating leaving. Residents who in the past could apply locally to extend yearlong tourist or business visas have been instructed to return home and apply for the short-term visas at the Chinese Embassy in their home countries.
Some, like Desmond McGarry, a jazz musician who has lived here since 2002, said they would probably leave. For Mr. McGarry, returning to Canada would mean abandoning his apartment and a network of friends. “It’s been very comfortable until now, even if we existed in a gray zone,” he said. “Maybe I’ll leave and try to come back in the fall when things calm down.”
The new visa rules come at a time of heightened tensions in Beijing and other cities, where public anger has been directed at Western governments and overseas news organizations seen as sympathetic to Tibetan independence. Over the last week, that discontent has fueled demonstrations at the French Embassy in Beijing and at outlets of Carrefour, a French supermarket chain whose executives have been accused of aligning themselves with the Dalai Lama. Some foreign residents are nervously awaiting next Thursday, the first day of a planned Carrefour boycott.
Although the majority of foreigners say they have seen no change in the behavior of their Chinese neighbors and co-workers, some French residents complain that nationalist ire is seeping into their daily lives. One businessman who plays tennis at a Chinese sports club said acquaintances refused to join him on the court last weekend.
More ominously, the owner of a popular French restaurant here said he was denied a visa extension on Wednesday by an official who simply told him, “It’s because you’re French.” The man, who asked that his name and business not be printed for fear of antagonizing the authorities, said he was in a panic. “My whole life is here,” he said.
Most Westerners readily acknowledge that they enjoy privileged lives, including unspoken immunity from the tangle of rules that can complicate the lives of average Chinese.
That may be about to change. Last week English-language signs began appearing on Beijing streets and in high-end apartment buildings directing foreigners not staying in hotels to register with the police. The regulations, which are not new but are rarely enforced, promise steep fines for those who do not comply.
Because the government has not issued formal guidelines about the new visa rules, rumors and uncertainty have been rife, and travel agents say that a handful of tourists have been denied visas without evident rationale.
Cloris Yip, the manager of Smiley Travel in Hong Kong, cited the example of two tourists, a Swiss and a German; the Swiss citizen received a 30-day visa while his German companion was given one for five days. The men, she said, canceled their trip.
“Maybe the Chinese government is not so happy with the Germans right now,” Ms. Yip said. “Maybe they think some foreigners want to protest Tibet during the Games. Either way, you cannot argue or negotiate.”
Businessmen are also feeling powerless. Hong Kong executives accustomed to visiting mainland factories or construction projects every few days are now spending one day each week waiting for new single- or double-entry visas.
“Everyone is affected by it, and they are very unhappy,” said Seth Peterson, a vice president of Techtronic Industries Company, which manufactures vacuum cleaners and power tools in southern China.
Asked about the restrictions, Jiang Yu, a Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, insisted that there had been no change in visa rules. “The Chinese people will welcome foreign friends in a warm, enthusiastic and open-minded way,” she said during a news conference on Tuesday.
Whether or not these are just temporary measures, those who depend on foreign expertise for their businesses say the impact has been real. Collin Crowell, the managing editor of City Weekend, an English-language entertainment guide in Beijing, said the new requirements were causing consternation among the magazine’s freelance writers.
And Raluca Riquet, an event planner who is organizing art shows for the summer, said she was struggling to find curators with valid visas.
“We’ll find a solution, but it’s not so easy,” said Ms. Riquet, who holds dual French and Romanian citizenship. “The government really wants to control everything and everybody before the Olympics. For us foreigners, it’s a really big change.”
...
Read more
[+/-] : Foreign Press Set for Curtailed Everest Torch Trip
Foreign Press Set for Curtailed Everest Torch Trip
By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
April 25, 2008
BEIJING (Agence France-Presse) — A group of foreign reporters prepared on Thursday to go to Tibet to cover the ascent of the Olympic torch to Mount Everest. They were the first overseas journalists allowed into the riot-scarred region in a month.
China plans to take a special high-altitude Olympic torch to the summit of Everest, the world’s tallest peak, in May, and had invited reporters from around the world to cover the event as a triumphal symbol of Beijing’s role as host of the Olympics in August.
The media delegation was to leave Beijing on Friday for the tightly managed trip. China made late changes this week to curtail reporting, in the wake of unrest in Tibet.
Olympic officials said no coverage would be allowed of a mountaineering team’s departure from base camp with the torch, tentatively set for Saturday, nor of anything unrelated to the torch.
Reporters have raised concerns about their health because a new schedule calls for a trip of about three days through Tibet to the Mount Everest base camp. The journalists said that ascending too quickly to the camp’s elevation of 16,900 feet could cause severe health problems.
Experts say the trip from Beijing, which is near sea level, to such a high altitude should not be made in less than a week.
Officials denied that the plans had been changed in response to the unrest in Tibet. The Olympic torch has become a magnet for protests against China’s crackdown on Tibetan unrest and China’s human rights record.
The trip appeared thrown into further chaos early Thursday when the organizers of the Olympics suddenly set a Thursday morning payment deadline for air tickets to Lhasa, the Tibetan capital. An Olympic official charged with collecting payments then inexplicably refused to accept fees from some news organizations. Later, several were invited to go ahead with the trip. The New York Times was not invited to participate.
Some news organizations decided not to participate. Agence France-Presse decided not to send a reporter, mainly because of health concerns.
China tightened control on Tibet after anti-Chinese rioting broke out in Lhasa on March 14, spreading across the Tibetan plateau, and expelled foreign reporters and tourists from the Himalayan region.
Reporters Without Borders, which advocates press freedom, has echoed widespread calls for unfettered news media access to Tibet. Human rights groups continue to report disturbances and arrests in the region.
”Things are clearly far from being back to normal as the authorities claim,” Reporters Without Borders said. “The few reports emerging suggest a very different situation, one of arrests and a climate of fear in the cities and around the monasteries.
Foreign journalists last were allowed to enter Tibet for a government-led news media trip to Lhasa in late March.
...
Read more
By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
April 25, 2008
BEIJING (Agence France-Presse) — A group of foreign reporters prepared on Thursday to go to Tibet to cover the ascent of the Olympic torch to Mount Everest. They were the first overseas journalists allowed into the riot-scarred region in a month.
China plans to take a special high-altitude Olympic torch to the summit of Everest, the world’s tallest peak, in May, and had invited reporters from around the world to cover the event as a triumphal symbol of Beijing’s role as host of the Olympics in August.
The media delegation was to leave Beijing on Friday for the tightly managed trip. China made late changes this week to curtail reporting, in the wake of unrest in Tibet.
Olympic officials said no coverage would be allowed of a mountaineering team’s departure from base camp with the torch, tentatively set for Saturday, nor of anything unrelated to the torch.
Reporters have raised concerns about their health because a new schedule calls for a trip of about three days through Tibet to the Mount Everest base camp. The journalists said that ascending too quickly to the camp’s elevation of 16,900 feet could cause severe health problems.
Experts say the trip from Beijing, which is near sea level, to such a high altitude should not be made in less than a week.
Officials denied that the plans had been changed in response to the unrest in Tibet. The Olympic torch has become a magnet for protests against China’s crackdown on Tibetan unrest and China’s human rights record.
The trip appeared thrown into further chaos early Thursday when the organizers of the Olympics suddenly set a Thursday morning payment deadline for air tickets to Lhasa, the Tibetan capital. An Olympic official charged with collecting payments then inexplicably refused to accept fees from some news organizations. Later, several were invited to go ahead with the trip. The New York Times was not invited to participate.
Some news organizations decided not to participate. Agence France-Presse decided not to send a reporter, mainly because of health concerns.
China tightened control on Tibet after anti-Chinese rioting broke out in Lhasa on March 14, spreading across the Tibetan plateau, and expelled foreign reporters and tourists from the Himalayan region.
Reporters Without Borders, which advocates press freedom, has echoed widespread calls for unfettered news media access to Tibet. Human rights groups continue to report disturbances and arrests in the region.
”Things are clearly far from being back to normal as the authorities claim,” Reporters Without Borders said. “The few reports emerging suggest a very different situation, one of arrests and a climate of fear in the cities and around the monasteries.
Foreign journalists last were allowed to enter Tibet for a government-led news media trip to Lhasa in late March.
...
Read more
Thursday, April 24, 2008
[+/-] : President Bush: Boycott Olympics Opening Ceremony
President Bush: Boycott Olympics Opening Ceremony
Target: President George Bush
Sponsored by: Care2
When China was awarded the 2008 games seven years ago, the international community expected that this opportunity would help improve China's human rights record. Yet the world has witnessed exactly the opposite. Despite rallying cries around the world, China continues its harsh crackdown on protesters in Tibet and internal dissent, most recently by imprisoning noted human rights activist Hu Jia. But with the blazing tour of the Olympic torch, millions of protesters from Paris to San Francisco have been speaking out passionately for human rights in China, Tibet, Darfur and Burma. President Bush has a unique opportunity to speak out for those who are silenced. By boycotting the opening ceremonies of the Beijing Olympics, President Bush can join other world leaders in urging China to stop its repression of activists and work to improve human rights at home and in Darfur and Burma where China wields great influence....
Read more
Sunday, April 20, 2008
[+/-] : Boycott Opening Ceremonies
Boycott Opening Ceremonies
Set aside Tibet and other legit grievances.
Make Chinese action on Darfur a condition of attending.
Jonathan Alter NEWSWEEK
It's a 100-day dash, and the world had better get at least a silver. In the time before the Beijing Olympics opens in August, the West has a chance to bring China further into the community of responsible nations. If we fail, we may spend the rest of the 21st century regretting that we didn't use some leverage when we had it. Half a dozen European leaders and the Democratic presidential candidates are urging a mini-boycott of Beijing's opening ceremonies. They're right to do so; it's the best shot we've got.
After promising Jacques Rogge and the International Olympic Committee that it would respect human rights, at least until the Games end, the regime moved in the opposite direction by stepping up its harassment of dissidents. While showing some important signs of maturity in joining regional efforts to deal with North Korean nukes, the government has found it hard to break bad habits: it took the bait in Tibet, indulging in stale denunciations of the Dalai Lama after cracking heads in the worst violence there in 20 years; it continues to back the military thugs in Burma, and promises of unfettered international press coverage and Internet access are proving worthless.
So are the efforts of the regime's public-relations geniuses. Just as images were being broadcast of the latest Olympic sport (hide-and-seek with the torch and demonstrators on the streets of San Francisco), China made a big announcement. More than three dozen Islamic extremists of Chinese extraction had been arrested and charged with plotting to kidnap athletes when they arrive in Beijing. Could be legit, but I wouldn't bet the subprime mortgage on it. The timing is highly suspicious.
The worst example of Chinese global irresponsibility is in Darfur. Andrew Natsios, President George W. Bush's special envoy in the region, is praising China's efforts to push the Sudanese regime to end the war and ease the plight of 3 million refugees. Where's the proof? China buys two thirds of Sudan's oil and thus calls the tune there. But it continues to violate the United Nations arms embargo by shipping weapons to Sudan, which are then passed on to the Janjaweed goons who, by some estimates, have killed or intentionally starved to death nearly half a million people. And they've raped on a scale the Chinese should remember from their own World War II experience with the Japanese in Nanking. Those vehicles the soldiers use for their genocide are called Dongfeng military trucks.
Foreign-policy realists say that human rights are important but should be far down the list of American issues with the Chinese—below restraining nukes (China has influence in Iran as well as North Korea), climate change (on average, one new Chinese coal-fired plant opens there every week) and balance of trade (the company you work for may be in hock to a Chinese bank). But these concerns are interrelated, and can be addressed only when China moves beyond lip service and actually abides by the norms of what, for lack of a more felicitous phrase, we call the global community.
Bush's private phone chats with Hu Jintao every six weeks aren't getting that done, but shaming the Chinese by withholding athletes from the Games won't work either. The insult would be felt not just by the Chinese government but by nearly all the Chinese people, who have made astonishing progress in the past three decades and deserve the recognition the Games offer. This isn't exactly the best time to make enemies of a billion more people around the globe. Their nationalist fervor and hair-trigger resentment of foreign intervention in Chinese affairs is grounded in bitter historical experience from the imperialist opium wars forward. So any comparison to the 1936 Games, when Hitler had been in power only three years, is misplaced. This is a coming-out party for a country, not for a murderous regime in power for 60 years.
There's a middle ground in all this, and that's where the threat of head-of-state no-shows at the opening ceremonies comes in. The beauty of the idea, first raised by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, is that avoiding this mini-boycott will require the Chinese to sit down with all the European countries now considering it, and to do so outside the stultifying confines of the G8 summit.
The best way forward would be to temporarily set aside Tibet and the many other legitimate grievances animating the flame-chasing demonstrators in cities around the world and focus on Darfur. Nicholas Kristof of The New York Times proposed a conference on genocide, with the intriguing idea that it be held in Rwanda, site of the worst mass killing of the past 25 years. If a meeting were held somewhere, if China signed a meaningful agreement and if the commitments were carried out on the ground in Darfur, then all the presidents and prime ministers show up in Beijing and watch the parade.
That's a lot of ifs. While the Chinese don't want their party spoiled, they aren't about to lose face by being forced to capitulate. But let's remember how high the stakes are. We have a window of only a couple of decades at most before China dislodges us as the largest economy in the world. At that point, it will either be a responsible (if likely still undemocratic) superpower, or it will be moving the planet in an authoritarian direction. The Olympics may be the world's last lever. A medal—maybe even a Nobel Prize—for the diplomats who can pull it properly.
...
Read more
Set aside Tibet and other legit grievances.
Make Chinese action on Darfur a condition of attending.
Jonathan Alter NEWSWEEK
It's a 100-day dash, and the world had better get at least a silver. In the time before the Beijing Olympics opens in August, the West has a chance to bring China further into the community of responsible nations. If we fail, we may spend the rest of the 21st century regretting that we didn't use some leverage when we had it. Half a dozen European leaders and the Democratic presidential candidates are urging a mini-boycott of Beijing's opening ceremonies. They're right to do so; it's the best shot we've got.
After promising Jacques Rogge and the International Olympic Committee that it would respect human rights, at least until the Games end, the regime moved in the opposite direction by stepping up its harassment of dissidents. While showing some important signs of maturity in joining regional efforts to deal with North Korean nukes, the government has found it hard to break bad habits: it took the bait in Tibet, indulging in stale denunciations of the Dalai Lama after cracking heads in the worst violence there in 20 years; it continues to back the military thugs in Burma, and promises of unfettered international press coverage and Internet access are proving worthless.
So are the efforts of the regime's public-relations geniuses. Just as images were being broadcast of the latest Olympic sport (hide-and-seek with the torch and demonstrators on the streets of San Francisco), China made a big announcement. More than three dozen Islamic extremists of Chinese extraction had been arrested and charged with plotting to kidnap athletes when they arrive in Beijing. Could be legit, but I wouldn't bet the subprime mortgage on it. The timing is highly suspicious.
The worst example of Chinese global irresponsibility is in Darfur. Andrew Natsios, President George W. Bush's special envoy in the region, is praising China's efforts to push the Sudanese regime to end the war and ease the plight of 3 million refugees. Where's the proof? China buys two thirds of Sudan's oil and thus calls the tune there. But it continues to violate the United Nations arms embargo by shipping weapons to Sudan, which are then passed on to the Janjaweed goons who, by some estimates, have killed or intentionally starved to death nearly half a million people. And they've raped on a scale the Chinese should remember from their own World War II experience with the Japanese in Nanking. Those vehicles the soldiers use for their genocide are called Dongfeng military trucks.
Foreign-policy realists say that human rights are important but should be far down the list of American issues with the Chinese—below restraining nukes (China has influence in Iran as well as North Korea), climate change (on average, one new Chinese coal-fired plant opens there every week) and balance of trade (the company you work for may be in hock to a Chinese bank). But these concerns are interrelated, and can be addressed only when China moves beyond lip service and actually abides by the norms of what, for lack of a more felicitous phrase, we call the global community.
Bush's private phone chats with Hu Jintao every six weeks aren't getting that done, but shaming the Chinese by withholding athletes from the Games won't work either. The insult would be felt not just by the Chinese government but by nearly all the Chinese people, who have made astonishing progress in the past three decades and deserve the recognition the Games offer. This isn't exactly the best time to make enemies of a billion more people around the globe. Their nationalist fervor and hair-trigger resentment of foreign intervention in Chinese affairs is grounded in bitter historical experience from the imperialist opium wars forward. So any comparison to the 1936 Games, when Hitler had been in power only three years, is misplaced. This is a coming-out party for a country, not for a murderous regime in power for 60 years.
There's a middle ground in all this, and that's where the threat of head-of-state no-shows at the opening ceremonies comes in. The beauty of the idea, first raised by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, is that avoiding this mini-boycott will require the Chinese to sit down with all the European countries now considering it, and to do so outside the stultifying confines of the G8 summit.
The best way forward would be to temporarily set aside Tibet and the many other legitimate grievances animating the flame-chasing demonstrators in cities around the world and focus on Darfur. Nicholas Kristof of The New York Times proposed a conference on genocide, with the intriguing idea that it be held in Rwanda, site of the worst mass killing of the past 25 years. If a meeting were held somewhere, if China signed a meaningful agreement and if the commitments were carried out on the ground in Darfur, then all the presidents and prime ministers show up in Beijing and watch the parade.
That's a lot of ifs. While the Chinese don't want their party spoiled, they aren't about to lose face by being forced to capitulate. But let's remember how high the stakes are. We have a window of only a couple of decades at most before China dislodges us as the largest economy in the world. At that point, it will either be a responsible (if likely still undemocratic) superpower, or it will be moving the planet in an authoritarian direction. The Olympics may be the world's last lever. A medal—maybe even a Nobel Prize—for the diplomats who can pull it properly.
...
Read more
Friday, April 18, 2008
[+/-] : Torch lights up China's shame
Torch lights up China's shame
M R Narisa's decision preceded the growing international call on Beijing to take concrete steps to save the Olympic Games from turning into a national embarrassment for China. The best way they can do this is by heeding the Dalai Lama's request to open a dialogue on Tibet.
The Games were created to build "a peaceful and better world" through sports played with the "Olympic spirit" of mutual understanding, friendship, solidarity and fair play, according to the International Olympic Committee (IOC). As the host of this world-renowned sporting event, China has every reason to follow in that spirit.
The Dalai Lama has shown great courage in his proposal for a discussion over the possibility of Tibet having some autonomy over its social and cultural life - a proposal many of his own people view as too mild. Instead of condemning the spiritual leader as the hand behind the chaos, China could have gained the trust of Tibetans and the international community had it shown a willingness to find a peaceful solution to the conflict.
While China would insist on its need to keep its vast territory whole as one country and press on with the Olympic activities despite the outcry, pro-Tibet protesters have every right to counter this global roadshow. If the tug-of-war is allowed to continue, it is the spirit of the Olympics that will be disgraced; so will the credibility and prestige of China.
China wanted to host the Olympic Games to show the world that it is an increasingly important player in the international community. But to do that, it must begin to adhere to international norms on democracy and human rights. The Games are a symbol of world unity, but the spirit of the Games doesn't simply mean holding hands and looking past grave human rights abuses. It also means standing up for the values that we, as a human race, hold dear.
The Olympic torch run has so far shown the success of those who want to prove this. Through London, Paris and San Francisco, the torch was met with pro-Tibet protesters who managed to put the heat on image-conscious China to take real action on easing its tight grip on political dissent. In doing so, the protesters have inspired countless stories on Tibet and a focus on China's other human rights abuses. Anti-junta activists in Burma have belatedly sought to use the Olympics to highlight their plight.
It is good for our world to join together in sport, to find common ground where much divides us. It is not the protesters that continue to divide the world on China, but rather China's hard-line approach to Tibet, Taiwan and others who question the regime.
On the global stage, China cannot manage the show like it does routinely at home. Beijing must realise that the world does not accept its human rights policies, even if it is essential to continue doing business with China.
Hopefully, the international uproar will prompt China to realise that the status quo is unacceptable. China should take steps now to open a dialogue with Tibet, end its weapons sales to Sudan and withdraw support for Burma's generals. Otherwise, the protests will follow the torch all the way to Beijing.
...EDITORIAL of Bangkok Post, April 18 2008
The Olympic torch continues its perilous journey to Beijing, making a stop in Bangkok over the weekend. Last month, environmentalist M R Narisa Chakrabongse, one of the six torchbearers chosen to carry the flame through Thailand, withdrew in protest against China's crackdown on dissidents in Tibet.
M R Narisa's decision preceded the growing international call on Beijing to take concrete steps to save the Olympic Games from turning into a national embarrassment for China. The best way they can do this is by heeding the Dalai Lama's request to open a dialogue on Tibet.
The Games were created to build "a peaceful and better world" through sports played with the "Olympic spirit" of mutual understanding, friendship, solidarity and fair play, according to the International Olympic Committee (IOC). As the host of this world-renowned sporting event, China has every reason to follow in that spirit.
The Dalai Lama has shown great courage in his proposal for a discussion over the possibility of Tibet having some autonomy over its social and cultural life - a proposal many of his own people view as too mild. Instead of condemning the spiritual leader as the hand behind the chaos, China could have gained the trust of Tibetans and the international community had it shown a willingness to find a peaceful solution to the conflict.
While China would insist on its need to keep its vast territory whole as one country and press on with the Olympic activities despite the outcry, pro-Tibet protesters have every right to counter this global roadshow. If the tug-of-war is allowed to continue, it is the spirit of the Olympics that will be disgraced; so will the credibility and prestige of China.
China wanted to host the Olympic Games to show the world that it is an increasingly important player in the international community. But to do that, it must begin to adhere to international norms on democracy and human rights. The Games are a symbol of world unity, but the spirit of the Games doesn't simply mean holding hands and looking past grave human rights abuses. It also means standing up for the values that we, as a human race, hold dear.
The Olympic torch run has so far shown the success of those who want to prove this. Through London, Paris and San Francisco, the torch was met with pro-Tibet protesters who managed to put the heat on image-conscious China to take real action on easing its tight grip on political dissent. In doing so, the protesters have inspired countless stories on Tibet and a focus on China's other human rights abuses. Anti-junta activists in Burma have belatedly sought to use the Olympics to highlight their plight.
It is good for our world to join together in sport, to find common ground where much divides us. It is not the protesters that continue to divide the world on China, but rather China's hard-line approach to Tibet, Taiwan and others who question the regime.
On the global stage, China cannot manage the show like it does routinely at home. Beijing must realise that the world does not accept its human rights policies, even if it is essential to continue doing business with China.
Hopefully, the international uproar will prompt China to realise that the status quo is unacceptable. China should take steps now to open a dialogue with Tibet, end its weapons sales to Sudan and withdraw support for Burma's generals. Otherwise, the protests will follow the torch all the way to Beijing.
Read more
Saturday, April 12, 2008
[+/-] : China's Olympic Shame
China's Olympic Shame
Thursday, Apr. 10, 2008 By SIMON ELEGANT/BEIJING
Why didn't they see this coming? Despite more than seven years' worth of meticulous, down-to-the-last-detail planning that has gone into the Beijing Olympics, China's leaders have seemingly been caught off guard by the most predictable of challenges: discontent in Tibet and international condemnation of Beijing's record of repression. The extent of their surprise can be gauged by their reaction--a brutal crackdown on dissent at home and a deaf ear to criticism from abroad--which is more reminiscent of the heavy-handed communist regime of old than the modern, moderate Beijing that the Olympics are meant to showcase.
China's response to the mid-March riots in Tibet has galvanized its critics around the world, who intend to use the run-up to the Olympics as a showcase of their own. The Olympic-torch relay has been hounded at practically every step--in London, Paris and San Francisco--by pro-Tibet activists. In the French capital, security officials were obliged to turn off the flame on several occasions to protect it from protesters. Even before it arrived in the U.S. on April 8, activists unfurled FREE TIBET banners from the cables of the Golden Gate Bridge. On April 9, San Francisco police were forced to shorten the relay in the city, citing security concerns. Beijing vowed to proceed with the relay unchanged, but more protests are expected in the 15 places the torch will visit before returning to Chinese soil on May 4.
So far, Chinese authorities have responded to the clamor by further tightening the clamps on domestic dissent. On April 3, prominent human-rights activist Hu Jia received a 3 1/2-year prison sentence on charges of inciting subversion of state power. Hu's conviction, apparently stemming from articles he wrote and interviews he gave linking the Olympics with human rights in China, was the latest in what rights advocates in China say is a string of detentions of activists all over the country. Beijing is also applying pressure on China's huge online population of some 230 million, which is often cited as the country's most powerful force for greater openness. Thousands of websites have been shuttered, and government control and blocking of sites outside China have intensified in recent months. As Irene Khan, secretary-general of Amnesty International, put it in a report released April 1, despite assurances by both the International Olympic Committee and Chinese officials that restraint would be exercised, "the crackdown ... has deepened, not lessened, because of the Olympics."
The question is, Why? Given the international scrutiny of Beijing's actions, the hard line has left many observers puzzled. The wiser course would seem to be a more measured response: to practice better crowd control, manage the media better, try negotiation instead of knee-jerk repression. But China's rulers have shown little such dexterity. Some of the reasons are straightforward. The Communist Party is deeply secretive and highly bureaucratic, and its members are steeped in a long-standing culture of self-preservation. "Part of the head-in-sand problem has to do with entrenched bureaucratic interests," says China expert Perry Link of Princeton University. Officials who have devoted most of their careers to defending authoritarian rule "can't stop chanting that mantra without puzzlement over what to say instead and without a bit of panic about their own rice bowls and even, almost, their own identities," Link says.
Leaders like President Hu Jintao are of a generation that received a Soviet-style education in the 1950s. "They don't have the knowledge or imagination to make better decisions," Link says. They operate under a system of collective decision-making that constrains the state's ability to be flexible in the face of new challenges. "Like the bureaucrats beneath them," Link says, top officials "are frightened about their own positions and don't want to be seen as making 'mistakes,' especially mistakes of softness." This insecurity underlies the central government's heavy-handed tactics and rhetoric, even though repression reduces the country's stature in the global community. "When the rest of the world looks at China, they see this increasingly powerful and confident country," says Wenran Jiang, director of the China Institute at the University of Alberta. "But when the Chinese leadership looks at the country, they see the exact opposite: weaknesses everywhere, rising inflation and civil unrest, environmental disasters and corruption. So the overall mentality of the central authorities is very insecure and nervous." In the case of Tibet, Chinese leaders are now trapped by their own words, which have fueled nationalist sentiments among ordinary Chinese, who believe that Tibet is Chinese territory. Any appearance of compromise by Beijing would likely be intolerable to the public.
China's problems are not confined to Tibet. There have also been rumblings in the far-western Xinjiang province, populated largely by the Uighur Muslim minority group. Protests by hundreds of Uighurs over religious issues were reported by rights groups in late March. The Chinese press has meanwhile reported several recent clashes with separatist rebels in the province, and in early March the press reported that a Uighur woman had attempted to bring down a domestic passenger jet with a homemade bomb. Add to that widespread discontent over issues such as corruption and rapidly worsening inflation (the price of pork has gone up two-thirds in the past year), and you have the makings of a perfect storm.
It's a storm that threatens to blow in just when everyone's watching--and deciding whether to participate in--China's Olympics. The Prime Minister of Poland has already indicated he will boycott the opening ceremony because of events in Tibet; French President Nicolas Sarkozy has said he wouldn't rule out a similar move.
The authorities will no doubt make it virtually impossible for journalists to enter Tibet in the months leading up to the Olympics. But it remains unclear exactly how they intend to deal with the estimated 30,000 foreign reporters expected to witness the event, all of them eager to take advantage of Beijing's regulations specifying that they can interview any Chinese people who agree to talk. "They still don't have any idea what is going to hit them," a senior Western academic with close ties to the upper echelons of the Beijing establishment said months before the Tibet eruption, "or how bad they will look to the outside world." They're already starting to find out.
...
Read more
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
