CHINA . 1
New Nobel,
Old Signal
The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to imprisoned Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo
represented both an admonishment and a provocative effort to tell Beijing that being a global
.
The West tried bringing it into line following
the brutal Tiananmen Square crackdown in
1989.
.
The fact is that the Chinese just
don’t like being told what to do.
by Rita
.
Barbieri
n October, the imprisoned journalist and dissident
writer Liu Xiaobo was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize
for his commitment to non-violent human rights in
China. He became the first Chinese national to receive
Nobel. Since his name first appeared on the peace prize
short list, the Chinese government was openly hostile to
his nomination. Fu Jing, the country’s deputy foreign
minister, said the awarding of the prize to Liu could lead
to negative consequences China and Norway. He didn’t
specify further.
According to Beijing, Liu is unconnected to the promotion of peace between peoples, which underpins the
award. In jail since 2008 (though he was formally arrested only after his incarceration), Liu has been citied for
“inciting subversion of state power,” an official violation
of the Chinese criminal code. His disqualification from
ever holding public office and 11-year jail term came was
meted out as a result of the so-called “Charter 08” manifesto, a document prepared in late 2008 to mark the 60th
anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights Human. It took its inspiration from Charter 77, a
pro-human rights document written by 70 Czech dissi-
I
8 . east . europe and asia strategies
Yet China has been down this road before.
.
dents when the country was still under Communist rule.
On of the movement’s key leaders, Vaclav Havel, the former president of the Czech Republic, is a member of the
Nobel Peace Prize jury.
Charter 08, published online and signed by over 10,000
people, called for sweeping democratic reforms in China’s political system, particularly regarding freedom of
thought and expression, which the document said should
be respected as a fundamental human right. According to
Article 35 of the Chinese Constitution, citizens already
possess freedom of speech, press, assembly, expression,
as well as the right to protest. In reality, however, a “gray
area” governs all anti-government criticism, which can
accept some forms of criticism but chafes at open dissent.
Intellectuals can assail the government in principle so
long as such criticism doesn’t directly undermine the
country’s governing foundation, which includes deferring to the pre-eminence of the one-party state.
Breaching that line, which Liu Xiaobo is officially seen
to have done, turns a critic into a full-fledged “enemy of
the state” guilty of promoting “propaganda and counterrevolutionary incitement” or of “disturbing the peace,”
which special “re-education camps” (Laogai) exist to
punish. Liu already served three years in one such camp.
These controversial events are occurring in a country
whose economy is now the world’s second most powerful and whose global presence is becoming increasingly
vital and imperative. By awarding the prize to Liu, the
Nobel committee sought to send a strong message to China about the price of global “fame.” Being a world economic power, the Nobel judges said between the lines,
means abiding by human rights and permitting fundamental freedoms that go with them.
Afp / Getty Images / C. Henriette
player means playing by democratic rules.
Judging from recent facts, however, the appeal fell on
deaf ears. Liu remains imprisoned and his wife can see
him only with a police escort (though reliable sources
claim say he is being fed better now than before the Nobel announcement). As for the prize itself, Chinese television immediately shut down live feeds of the awards
and censored information that contained supportive remarks by Western political leaders.
Several hundred of the estimated 200,000 pro-democracy
protesters face off against police in front of the Great Hall
of the People in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square on April 22, 1989.
At the time, they were participating in funeral ceremonies
for former Communist Party leader and liberal reformer Hu Yaobang.
Hu’s death in April trigged unprecedented pro-democracy
demonstrations. The April-to-June movement was eventually
crushed by Chinese troops in June when army
tanks rolled into Tiananmen Square.
he overall response was strikingly similar to the
aftermath of the bloody Tiananmen Square student uprising in 1989, which Liu attended. Both
the protest and its quashing were almost completely censored domestically. According to a survey by Reporters
Sans Frontiers, most Chinese youth knows little of the
genesis and aftermath of the Tiananmen Square incident.
T
China’s sensitivity to managing its own recent history is
evident. On the 20th anniversary of Tiananmen Square,
access to dozens of online and social networking sites
(including Twitter, Facebook, and Hotmail...) was denied
to Chinese users. Restrictions were strengthened for oth-
number 33 . december 2010 . 9
a speaks of a “a new generation anesthetized by
the ideology of money,” a reference to the idea
that since 1989 many intellectuals have literally been “bought out,” with the government offering promotions and career opportunities to those willing to support “the infallibility of party dogma” and promote a
Deng Xiaoping-style, materialist vision of the future to
restive students who were once on the verge of dragging
the country into a bloody civil war.
But was Tiananmen Square really and organized precursor to more general upheaval? At the start, the answer
would appear to be no. At the end 1970s, students and
intellectuals were already among Deng’s most ardent
supporters (who endured a new wave of social and political rehabilitation following the persecutions enacted
during the Cultural Revolution of the 1960s).
But a decade after Deng’s early promises, many began
to see that the country’s economic realities didn’t match
up with the expectations created by reforms. Instead, the
changes had created a gap between a new Chinese “nouveau riche” (whether cab drivers or small businessmen)
and the rest of the population, including intellectuals
and students.
Moreover, China finally began opening up to the rest of
the world. Foreign news, literature and ideas begin filtering into China from abroad. Thus began the conversation
(albeit muted and conducted only university and literary
circles) about democracy and human rights. Literary and
artistic avant-garde currents grew and flourished. All this
worried the Deng government. It worried in particular
that “literary” criticism could turn into a political trend.
Things were also changing within the Communist Party. Internal corruption began to rival growing social discontent. A case in point was the TV series “He Shang”
(River Elegy), broadcast in the summer of 1988. It openly
denounced corruption and the decline of Chinese society, which it portrayed as permanently locked in on itself.
Meanwhile, the government established new domestic security legislation, creating the People’s Armed Police to spy on citizen activities. The Beijing would later
begin a kind of collective self-criticism, trying to deter-
Getty Images / F.M. Anderson
M
er popular sites, including Youtube, Blogspot, Skype,
Wordpress and Chinese versions of international networks such as CNN and the BBC.
Trying to trawl the Web for Tiananmen Square information was generally fruitless. China’s leading search engine, Baidu, told Web users that the search couldn’t be
completed because it failed “to comply with laws, regulations and government policies.” Beijing justified its system of Internet firewalls by saying they exist to prevent
and discourage the online distribution of child porn.
At the same time, “unwelcome” search engine terms
go well beyond pornography and pedophilia. Words,
phrases and names such as democracy, human rights,
Dalai Lama, Falun Gong, and Tiananmen Square are all
off limits. Searches for current events that are seen as
having the potential to cause public scandal are also cut
short (including ongoing allegations of baby milk contaminated with chemical compound melamine.)
Efforts to conceal information remains an important
government tool in the effort to maintain the Chinese
public’s unshakable “faith” of citizens in the state. It is
seen as essential to safeguarding the commitment of pop-
10 . east . europe and asia strategies
ABOVE View of demonstrators gathered in Tiananmen Square
to hear singer-composer Hou Dejian speak in June 1989
(center, white T-shirt with red lettering). Also visible are literary
critic Liu Xiaobo (pale blue shirt and sunglasses, smoking cigarette)
and sociologist Zhou Duo (green jacket).
Liu won the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize.
FACING PAGE A handout in support of jailed Chinese
dissident and civil rights activist Liu Xiabo.
ulation that has been able to move from extreme poverty to the status of a major world power in less than halfa-century. The country’s recent two-decade economic
boom is seen by many as having deepened already strong
public deference to Communist Party management. Recent advances in the overall Chinese quality of life, particularly in urban settings, have been both unprecedented and astonishing.
Exiled dissident writer Ma Jian’s latest novel “Beijing
Coma,” published in 2008 and banned in China, tells the
story of the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 from the
mine the pros and cons of modernization, the scapegoat
ending up being Zhao Ziyang, the Communist Party general secretary and a member of the party’s reformist wing.
At the funeral of former party secretary Hu Yaobang
(who had been criticized by the party for “laxness” and
encouraging “bourgeois liberalization “) students began
expressing open discontent, using the pretext of homage
to the funeral. The 100,000-strong protest was consciously non-violent and demonstrated both loyalty to the party and to the memory of one of its great leaders.
The government was unable to suppress what had been
carefully phrased as a public act of mourning. But on
April 26, 1989, came an editorial in “Renmin Ribao”
(“The People’s Daily”) that cautioned against the formation of revolutionary groups and prohibited any further
demonstrations. The warning galvanized students. On
April 27, they protested again. A few days later, on May
Dpa / Corbis / L. Xia
point of view of the fictional Dai Wei, a participant in the
events left in a coma by the violent end of the protests.
The comatose narrator functions as a metaphor for the ability to remember and the inability to act.
number 33 . december 2010 . 11
he date was chosen carefully, since Soviet leader
Mikhail Gorbachev was scheduled to visit Beijing
on May 15. They hoped the Chinese regime
would appear visibly split, with Deng, who saw the
protests a sort of destabilizing conspiracy, on the one
hand, and Zhao Ziyang, who was favorable to reform and
open to dialogue, on the other. Some students hoped Gorbachev’s presence could provide a jolt, particularly since
China and Russia had always been seen as the two cathedrals of world communism. Moreover, they knew that
Gorbachev’s presence would also draw the attention of
global media, giving the student upheaval an unprecedented international platform.
As a result, the Tiananmen Square students erected a
Statue of Liberty look-like, which they called the God-
T
12 . east . europe and asia strategies
ABOVE Protestors demanding Liu Xiaobo’s release gathered
in front of the China Liason Office in Hong Kong on October 8, 2010.
FACING PAGE Writer Bo Xiaobo and his girlfriend at home in Shanghai.
dess of Democracy. It was intended to incarnate their demands, which consisted of political change, democratic
social reforms, and economic reform.
But when Deng and Zhao finally faced off, it was grand
old man Deng who prevailed. On May 18, Zhao made a
final and desperate attempt to get students to end their
hunger strike. He failed. The next day, martial law was
imposed, giving the military full control over the situation. The next two weeks saw a stalemate, in which the
civilian population rejected army control. This profoundly alarmed party leaders. Tiananmen Square now
appeared out of their control. The students attempted to
strengthen their negotiating position to police by surrendering protesters who had vandalized a portrait of Mao.
The situation stalled. Foreign news agencies began fearing the worst, namely the outbreak of civil war.
Corbis / R. van der Hilst
Afp / Getty Images / M. Clarke
4 (the anniversary The Movement of 1919, a major student uprising), they requested the opening of a formal dialogue between student representatives and the party officials. Their demands were summarily turned down. On
May 13, some students began a hunger strike.
But everything changed on June 4. Army troops entered the square and fired on the assembled crowd, moving in behind advancing tanks. The revolt was suppressed and the student movement stigmatized as an
aborted attempt to overthrow the Communist Party, the
socialist system, and throw China into chaos. Protest
leaders were rounded up. Most were arrested, silenced,
or forced into exile. No official casualty count was ever
released. The events were not even chronicled. Instead,
the protest was systematically marginalized and covered
up to pave the way for the restoration of conservative national leadership. If described at all, the Tiananmen
Square uprising was laid at the feet of a small and desperate group of rebels that savagely attacked the army.
Thankfully, the army resisted provocation, maintained
order, and saved socialism. Abroad, the events of Tiananmen Square had a powerful impact of millions of people
were who watched some of the events on television. The
summary trials that followed and China’s refusal to acknowledge the ugliness of the events shocked public
opinion and provoked strong condemnation from many
Western countries. Some impose embargo on arms sales.
As Italian journalist Sandro Viola observed at the time in
the national daily “La Repubblica,” the profitable trade
ties that Deng’s China had developed over time with the
West were insufficient to plaster over the gravity of the
Tiananmen Square events.
From the Western perspective, one photo said it all. It
showed a young man poised in front of a tank attempting to advance toward the square. His David-vs.-Goliath
pose became emblematic of what happened on June 4,
1989. He became the symbol of unarmed people, composed mostly students and scholars, opposed to military
force. But in China the same photo was used to tell a very
different story, namely that of army restraint and its unwillingness to crush the civilian population.
Now, as in 1989, the West seems determined to issue
the same warning to China: That economic development
alone can’t make it a major world power. To make that
leap, it must undertake sweeping reforms. The awarding
of the Nobel Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobo is best seen in those
terms only.
.
number 33 . december 2010 . 13