Antony Loewenstein

My following article appears in the Amnesty International Australia’s Uncensor campaign about human rights in China:

With only 100 days until the Beijing Games, human rights activists are continuing to pressure the Chinese regime and authorities may be starting to feel the pressure, writes Antony Loewenstein.

After months of criticism of its human rights record, a conference in Beijing in late April attempted to challenge the Western perception. Luo Haocai, director of the China Society for Human Rights, said that, “China believes human rights like other rights are not ‘absolute’ and the rights enjoyed should conform to obligations fulfilled”.

After 30 years of rapid growth, he said, the Chinese people enjoyed religious freedom, political and social rights. Wang Chen, director of the Information Office at the State Council, agreed. “China is a developing country with a population of 1.3 billion and China’s human rights development still faces many problems and difficulties.” It’s a view unlikely to be shared by many in the West.

The Beijing Olympics continue to be a rallying cry for human rights activists. Advocacy group Dream for Darfur is now targeting corporate sponsors of the Games, including Coca Cola and McDonalds. BHP Billiton is accused of not speaking out on the ongoing genocide in Darfur. BHP was one of only eight companies to receive an “F” grade for its “moral failings” over Sudan.

Even the Germany Foreign Ministry, in a confidential report leaked to Spiegel, found “significant” failings over human rights, including excessive use of the death penalty, holding dissidents for no apparent reason, censoring the media and an inability to handle criticism. Torture was rampant.

None of these concerns seem to concern most Western companies, however. At a recent China International Exhibition of Police Equipment, countless multinationals displayed goods specifically designed to repress Chinese citizens. The New York Times questioned whether the export of such items might have breached a law passed in Congress after the 1989 Tiananmen Square killings. Like for many internet companies, China is a booming market, seemingly difficult to resist.

There are growing signs, however, that some companies are learning from past mistakes. Yahoo, after launching a Human Rights Funds last year to provide legal and humanitarian assistance for political dissidents, appears to be at least trying to mitigate its previous collusion with the Chinese regime. Yahoo boss Jerry Yang said last week: “I think that I’m a big believer in the American values (but) as we operate around the world, we don’t walk around having a very heavy-handed American point of view.”

Google’s recent announcement of an expanded Chinese workforce is cause for concern, however as was Yahoo’s recent involvement in a “One World, One Web” conference in Beijing.

The Chinese people themselves remain defiant and hurt by the international criticism of their government’s human rights record (though there is some dissent online). Chinese students in the US are battling what they see as biased media coverage and in China itself citizens recently said they trusted state media more than Western outlets to accurately report the Olympic torch relay.

CNN remains in the firing line and Chinese hackers are operating with tacit government support to disable foreign websites.

With 100 days until the beginning of the Beijing Games, now is the time to increase pressure on the weak spots of the Chinese regime (though a recent report suggests the US government is currently trying to scuttle a human rights lawsuit against a senior Chinese leader fearing a chill in trade relations).

Perhaps China watcher John Pomfret, writing in the Washington Post, gets it right. He argues that although the current protests in China are against the foreign media and Tibet, it wouldn’t take much to switch anger towards the Communist Party. In other words, Chinese nationalism is a constantly evolving entity.

Many Chinese are critical of their government; they simply have nowhere to vent their frustrations. This doesn’t mean they want to embrace Western-style capitalism.

My following article appears in the Amnesty International Australia’s Uncensor campaign about human rights in China:

The nationalistic genie has escaped the Chinese bottle. Citizens across the world have reacted strongly to the perceived anti-Chinese political and media elite in the West. Protests have mushroomed throughout China against what demonstrators view as a slight against benevolent rule in Tibet. The government is clearly behind much of the reaction.

The internet, mobile phones and chat rooms have become the new meeting place for such activities. More than twenty million people have signed a petition against the French retailer Carrefour because of the failure of authorities in Paris to protect the Olympic torch. Conspiracy theories abound in the Chinese blogosphere about these events.

Student Zhu Xiaomeng made comments to the New York Times that reminded me of similar sentiments I heard in China last year. “Tibet is our country’s territory. You have no right to interfere in our interior affairs.” Microsoft’s China homepage has become a natural home for this kind of venting.

“Love Our China” is a familiar refrain of the protestors. The relationship between the West and China is inevitably being affected, with both sides seemingly incapable or unwilling to engage rationally with the other. Surely now is the time to reach out to Chinese people and try and explain why many Westerners are upset with Beijing’s role in Tibet.

I’ve even tried to contact a few Chinese friends in China to gauge their perspective, and many of them have oscillated between damning the violence on both sides and not fully understanding why pro-Tibetan activists in London, Paris and San Francisco were so vehemently critical of their regime. Evidence that now proves Chinese regime meddling in San Francisco’s pro-China protests reveals the level of paranoia in Beijing.

A recent study found that a majority of Australians wanted the Olympic sponsors to speak out strongly about China’s human rights record. This is unsurprising considering the fact that Amnesty International and Chinese human rights activists have found China falling short of the commitments it made when negotiating the 2008 Games. Arresting a leading Tibetan performer, writer and blogger only reinforces this belief. Equally problematic is a forthcoming museum in Beijing dedicated to the “official” version of Tibetan history.

One prominent, former Chinese diplomat turned spy novelist has argued that pro-China protests will only inflame racial tensions. I was more encouraged to see a recently released Beijing-based news researcher for the New York Times call this week for greater press freedom.

However, the ongoing controversy over China’s human rights record is not just about the Beijing Olympic Games. As the West wrestles with the notion of an “after-America” world, despotic regimes are increasingly turning to China for moral, military and diplomatic assistance. Recent evidence suggests that China is providing arms and troops to save Robert Mugabe’s embattled Zimbabwean dictatorship.

London’s Independent warned that after years of complaining about Washington’s support of barbaric regimes, it’s time to worry about the dawning of a new age:

“As for Mr Mugabe, he marked Zimbabwean Independence Day yesterday by complaining of neo-colonialism and how Britain wants to retake control of Zimbabwe. He and other African leaders should think more carefully. There is a danger of their countries becoming a victim of a re-colonisation. But the threat is not from the West. It comes from the East.”

While it’s never healthy to romanticise the Tibetan cause or the Dalai Lama and the history often paints a contradictory picture, one can hope that the Olympic Games provides international attention to an occupation that is largely forgotten in the Western media.

My following article appears in the Amnesty International Australia’s Uncensor campaign about human rights in China:

The international outcry over China’s human rights abuses was temporarily disrupted this week with news from Beijing that the regime was determined to manage the city’s pollution problems by halting building construction after July for two months. Unfortunately, many of the Games’ venues are not yet finished and it remains to be seen whether they will be completed in time. The exact plans remain a state secret, but at least half of Beijing’s 3.3 million cars will probably be banned during the Games.

The real story, however, remains the growing international calls for action on China’s belligerence. Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s recent trip to Beijing highlighted the difficulties of this position. The British press fawned over him. London’s Independent praised him for speaking “unpalatable home truths” about the troubles in China. “The world needs more leaders like this”, they gushed. “We hope he has started as he means to go on.”

The Guardian warned China not to parade the Olympic torch through Tibet, calling it “cultural imperialism”. Murdoch’s Sun tabloid, however, appeared unwilling to upset the Chinese. At least Olympic organisers finally admitted the protests were a “crisis” and Secretary General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-Moon, announced he would boycott the opening ceremonies.

Leading Australian Sinologist Professor Geremie Barme explained that the Chinese people were aware that Rudd had spoken Mandarin at Peking University, “but all mention of Tibet, apart from Tibet being part of China’s sovereign territory, has been expunged from the record.” One brave Chinese dissident even challenged the Chinese people to seriously examine the country’s record in Tibet. “I urge the Chinese people to take a long, hard look at themselves”, Jonathan Li said, “and stop being so uptight”.

Rudd was walking a fine line, of course. Amnesty International Australia has called on the Australian government to engage in a “strong and robust dialogue” between Australia and China, especially the promotion of human rights and minority rights. Human Rights Watch’s position is similar.

The expected backlash against protestors is starting to occur – and not just Chinese President Hu Jintao defending his crackdown in Tibet as “a problem of safeguarding national unification”. One leading human rights campaigner, Liu Xiaobo, warns demonstrators that: “If the Games fail, human rights will suffer. The government would stop paying attention to the rest of the world. I personally think: We want the Games and we want human rights to be respected.” One Chinese-American woman, Helen Zia, explained why she wanted to carry the torch in San Francisco, in a show of solidarity towards a “changing” China.

The global outrage over the torch relay has sparked a dormant nationalistic surge in China. “Tibetans have a strong case against Beijing”, wrote Philip Bowring in the International Herald Tribune, “but mixing it in with the Olympics and Darfur is a red rag to a wounded, young bull”. Some Chinese bloggers are calling for a blacklist of French goods after the recent scuffles in Paris. Chinese hackers are targeting pro-Tibetan websites and remain unforgiving of perceived slights against their Olympic moment.

A former Beijing chief for the New York Times explained the majority of Chinese youth have been beneficiaries of massive economic growth and “can’t imagine why Tibetans would turn up their noses at rising incomes and the promise of a more prosperous future. The loss of a homeland just doesn’t compute as a valid concern.” Perhaps the Tibet protests have backfired?.

The most moving news of the week was the words of Zeng Jinyan, the wife of recently imprisoned dissident Hu Jia. “I feel great pain and hopelessness”, she wrote. “But no matter what, I will do my best to protect my family, and do all I can to allow Hu Jia to come back home as soon as possible.”

Gideon Levy of Haaretz articulates the hypocrisy at the heart of the current Zionist campaign against Chinese oppression in Tibet:

Israelis have no moral right to fight the Chinese occupation of Tibet. The president of the Israeli Friends of the Tibetan People, the psychologist Nahi Alon, who was involved in the murder of two Palestinians in Gaza in 1967 – as was revealed in Haaretz Magazine last weekend – chose to make his private “atonement” by fighting to free Tibet, of all places. He is not alone among Israelis calling to stop the occupation – but not ours. No small number of other good Israelis have recently joined the wave of global protest that broke out over the Olympics, set to take place in Beijing this summer. It is easy; it engenders no controversy – who would not be in favor of liberating Tibet? But that is not the fight that Israeli human rights supporters should be waging.

Chinese human rights advocate Liu Xiaobo, Spiegel Online, April 7:

That [Olympic boycotts] wouldn’t be a good way to punish China. If the Games fail, human rights will suffer. The government would stop paying any attention to the rest of the world. I personally think: We want the Games and we want human rights to be respected.

Forward editorial, April 10:

Passover is a time, first of all, to speak of real liberation from all-too-real bondage. This Passover is a time to speak of Zimbabwe and Tibet — and perhaps even Gaza.

The following letter in today’s Age newspaper simply explains Kevin Rudd’s selective belief in human rights:

How dare Kevin Rudd tell the Chinese that there have been human rights violations in Tibet. Would he do the same and tell the Israelis that there are gross human rights violations in Palestine? On the contrary, at a recent dinner organised by an Australian Jewish organisation, he went to great lengths to say that Australians and Israelis are the same type of people.

Simon Chan, Port Melbourne

While the Chinese people are mainly hostile to the Tibetan cause and nationalism is thriving, some savvy tech-heads are causing chaos:

Several websites running pro-Tibet campaigns have been targeted by internet criminals, it has been claimed.

Experts at ScanSafe, an internet security firm, said that two popular websites – SaveTibet.org and FreeTibet.org – have been specifically targeted by hackers.

It is not clear who is behind the attacks, or what their motivation is, but the cyberstrikes are believed to emanate from computer servers in Taiwan and used a well-known vulnerability in some websites to link to invisible pages. These then attempt to force computers with inadequate protection to download spying programs, which can be used to track their habits or take control of their machines.

My following article appears in the Amnesty International Australia’s Uncensor campaign about human rights in China:

The Beijing Games is shaping up as a public relations disaster for the Chinese Communist Party. Four months from the opening ceremony and global protests against the torch relay are gathering speed. Tibetan activists are successfully highlighting their cause to the world, and the international route of the torch is now in serious doubt.

Demonstrators in London caused a security breach and severe embarrassment to the organisers. The London 2012 Olympics chief was overheard calling Chinese officials guarding the torch as “thugs”. The Paris leg of the relay was cancelled after protests, although China’s Foreign Ministry denied this was the case.

Australia’s Olympic chief, John Coates, appears resigned to the reality of months of controversy surrounding Beijing’s authoritarianism and pressure is growing on Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to boycott the opening ceremony. Former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser has urged avoiding a boycott, though Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton has encouraged President George W. Bush to take a stand.

International calls to boycott the Games are accelerating. London’s Independent editorialised this week that London’s torch fiasco was reminiscent of Hitler’s attempt at the 1936 Olympics to showcase Nazi Germany. The paper’s columnist Johann Hari argued that British athletes should take part in the August Games if the Chinese release the country’s 10 greatest human rights activists, invite the Dalai Lama to Beijing to talk and allow a legitimate UN peacekeeping force into Darfur.

The Chinese people have been largely shielded from the torch relay protests though the local media showed brief shots of the London scuffles. Chinese bloggers were incensed at what they viewed as anti-Beijing media coverage on CNN and BBC and millions of web users signed an online petition protesting biased Western media coverage of the recent Tibetan uprising. Interestingly, one of the Chinese torchbearers was interviewed before arriving in London and spoke of his pride at being involved and dreamed that “one day one of my kids will be able to compete in a future Olympic Games and even win a gold medal.”

Chinese authorities have attempted to counter the negative global coverage of its aggression in Tibet. One online story quoted a Tibetan author who said the Dalai Lama had “never done anything good” and was ruining Tibet in the name of human rights and religion. An opinion piece warned America to butt out of criticising China’s behaviour and again alleged that the Dalai Lama was the organiser of the recent violence. An Australian eyewitness has provided an alternative view.

More ominously, China has threatened to increase its “re-education” campaign against Tibetans. Officials called on Buddhist monks to be Chinese patriots. Another oppressed ethnic group, the Uighur Muslims, are also now openly rebelling against Chinese rule in a clear attempt to gain international attention.

Human rights activists are determined to use the Olympics as a platform to highlight China’s global responsibilities. A leading New York Times columnist wrote this week that China had to face some “greater truths” about its failed policies in Tibet. Pressure is increasing on Western internet multinationals doing business in repressive regimes to institute better mechanisms to avoid assisting persecution of dissidents.

It is always important to maintain perspective, however. A recent study by the Pew Internet and American Life Project found that a majority of Chinese polled believe that the internet should be “controlled” by the government, a majority believed the information they read on government websites and “an influential and highly informed group of elite Chinese bloggers continues to test the limits and vigilance of the censors.”

Censorship is clearly in the eye of the beholder.

Leading Israeli commentator Uri Avnery on the Tibetan protests:

I support the Tibetans in spite of it being obvious that the Americans are exploiting the struggle for their own purposes. Clearly, the CIA has planned and organized the riots, and the American media are leading the world-wide campaign. It is a part of the hidden struggle between the US, the reigning super-power, and China, the rising super-power – a new version of the “Great Game” that was played in central Asia in the 19th century by the British Empire and Russia. Tibet is a token in this game…

No, what is really bugging me is the hypocrisy of the world media. They storm and thunder about Tibet. In thousands of editorials and talk-shows they heap curses and invective on the evil China. It seems as if the Tibetans are the only people on earth whose right to independence is being denied by brutal force, that if only Beijing would take its dirty hands off the saffron-robed monks, everything would be alright in this, the best of all possible worlds.

An eyewitness account of the recent Tibetan uprising.

Even jogging is a crime post-March 14 (in Lhasa).