China behaving badly. Yet again
Peter Terpstra
They scupper climate talks, jail dissidents and execute prisoners.
Some leaders just don't care what the world thinks
By Joan Smith
ON THE WEB, 27 December 2009 (The Independent)
They didn’t even wait until the dust had settled on the disastrous Copenhagen
climate summit. In the middle of last week, China’s leaders watched
approvingly as a leading dissident, Liu Xiaobo, was hauled into court and
tried on charges of “incitement to subvert state power”. Relatives,
journalists and foreign diplomats were barred from the hearing, leaving two
dozen consular officials from Europe, Canada and the US waiting impotently
outside the courthouse. Two days later, on Christmas Day, Liu was sentenced to
11 years in prison. Post-Copenhagen, the message to the rest of the world
could hardly be clearer: China’s leaders will go on doing exactly what they
like, at home and on the international stage.
Liu’s trial has rightly attracted widespread condemnation; the rituals of
disapproval must be observed, even if the Chinese leadership insists it will
take no notice. For the same reason, Ed Miliband, the UK’s Climate Change
Secretary, was right to single out China in a newspaper article, arguing that
the Chinese government had set out to “hold the world to ransom” at the
summit. It is clear that China’s intransigence emboldened other developing
countries, with India admitting — boasting might be a better word — that it
worked with the Chinese to get a weak accord. This is a hugely worrying
development, but even now China has apologists as well as critics. They ask
why it should accept binding limits on development when industrialised Western
countries, principally the US, have such a terrible record; they hail China’s
willingness to open up to the outside world, see opportunities in its markets
and envy its economic growth.
Some of them are willing to overlook grotesque human rights abuses on the
grounds that they are an internal matter or claim, in the face of all the
evidence to the contrary, that economic freedom will eventually drag political
liberalisation in its wake. The reality is that China has developed a brand of
authoritarian capitalism, heavily dependent on coal, in which the state is
unchecked by any of the constraints of civil society. It enthusiastically uses
the death penalty, “harvesting” organs from dead prisoners; the Foreign Office
is making last-ditch attempts to prevent the execution of a British man this
week. The leadership’s engagement with the outside world is ruthlessly
mercantilist, focused on trade and hostile to both political reform and
binding international agreements which might limit economic development.
Liu’s trial last week was a two-fingered gesture to the outside world, and a
warning to potential dissidents. Neither Liu nor the handful of other
dissidents whose names are known outside China pose a threat to the entrenched
power of the Communist Party; his offence was to publish six articles and help
draft an online petition calling for greater political freedom, an apparently
intolerable affront to a regime which employs 30,000 people to close down such
sites. Liu has been in prison before and also served three years in a labour
camp for calling for the release of demonstrators after the Tiananmen Square
protests. These camps have been used to get rid of journalists who accuse
local officials of corruption, petitioners who seek redress for police
brutality and anguished parents who want to know why so many children died in
shoddily built schools that collapsed during last year’s earthquake. Accurate
figures are hard to come by, but another leading dissident, Harry Wu, claims
that between three and five million people are being held in labour camps.
Dazzled by China’s economic growth, the world’s democratic leaders have
responded with muted protests, sending confused signals to the regime. It is
just over a year since presidents and prime ministers trooped to Beijing to
gawp at the spectacular displays that opened and closed the Olympic Games,
seemingly oblivious to the thousands of people whose houses had been torn down
to build Olympic venues and the brave few who were carted off to camps when
they protested about losing their homes. In that sense, what world leaders
experienced at Copenhagen last weekend was a taste of the total disregard
China displays for anything but its own narrow economic interests; that’s why
Miliband’s frank remarks last week were so refreshing.
It is a species of suicidal madness to argue that because Western
industrialised nations have done so much harm to the environment, it is only
fair for developing countries to have their turn. That is the rhetoric which
carried the day at Copenhagen, allowing China to posture as the champion of
emerging countries even though its refusal to countenance emissions limits
will have catastrophic consequences on some of the world’s smallest nations.
It was left to my old friend Mohamed Nasheed, a former political prisoner who
is now president of the Maldives, to challenge China’s bogus claim to speak on
behalf of the developing world: “How can you ask my country to go extinct?” he
demanded. Sadly, Nasheed is in a minority among leaders of developing nations;
even India’s admission that it worked with China to frustrate a binding
agreement is not that surprising, for both countries are characterised by an
absence of civil society. India’s concept of democracy is superficial,
allowing staggering inequalities of wealth while millions cannot read and lack
even the basic necessities of everyday life.
We can see now that China used last weekend’s summit to position itself as the
leader of the world’s emerging nations, and that’s as much a political
disaster as an environmental one. In the last few days, Western leaders have
discovered that their short-sighted policy of indulging China’s hard-line
regime has produced very little co-operation, and nothing in terms of
political freedom. Tougher economic measures may be necessary, such as a
carbon tax on Chinese exports. But no one should be surprised by the regime
behaving as badly on climate change as it habitually does on human rights.
About the author
Joan Smith is known for her human rights activism and writing on subjects such
as atheism and feminism. She is also a regular contributor to BBC radio, and
has written five detective novels.
http://www.tibetsun.com/opinions/2009/12/27/china-behaving-badly-yet-again/
--
Amnesty International Report 2009 on China:
http://report2009.amnesty.org/en/regions/asia-pacific/china