Our Chinese "masters"?

Is the West being effectively being placed under Chinese rule?

British Olympic chiefs are to force athletes to sign a contract promising not to speak out about China's appalling human rights record – or face being banned from travelling to Beijing. The move – which raises the spectre of the order given to the England football team to give a Nazi salute in Berlin in 1938 – immediately provoked a storm of protest.

The Mail on Sunday is certainly giving that impression - but surely this isn't China's doing? It's us, right? Surely China would have better sense than to appear to be gagging British athletes?

Chinese Olympic officials said yesterday they supported bans on athletes engaging in political protests ... Chinese dictators, no matter how obsessive or efficient, will be unable to stage a politics-free Games on their own. They will need help in suppressing democracy advocates, Tibetan activists, and Falun Gong adherents, and so far some Western nations seem willing to lend a hand.

Gordon Chang over at commentarymagazine.com says otherwise. China has been able to suppress it's opposition thus far becaus they have been left largely on their own. Now, though, with the eyes of the world on them, they need a little help, from us. And so it seems as though the choice is clear for our athletes: shut up or stay at home!

And here's me thinking that we lived in a Country which championed free speech!

When Strategic Interests Conflict

What's the difference between human rights abuses in China and human rights abuses in Turkey? On one the US is willing to ignore threats from its counterpart, bestowing the Congressional Gold Medal, its highest civilian honour on the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama today. On the other the US is backing off from legislation approved last week by a congressional panel to call a vote on a measure declaring the World War I-era killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks an act of genocide.

The proximity of Turkey to the ongoing conflict in Iraq might explain the apparent inconsistency...

Beyond Disgrace and Disbelief

So, once again, China's economic interests and veto on the UN Security Council prevents the UN from taking any effective action in another world crisis. First Zimbabwe and Sudan, now Burma. And just yesterday UN chief Ban Ki-moon was saying, "To deliver on the world’s high expectations for us, we need to be faster, more flexible and mobile. We need to pay less attention to rhetoric and more attention to results — to getting things done... The Human Rights Council must live up to its responsibilities as the torchbearer for human rights consistently and equitably around the world. I will strive to translate the concept of our Responsibility to Protect from words to deeds, to ensure timely action so that populations do not face genocide, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity." Sadly, all just talk, once again...

The UN has proven itself this summer to be wholly irrelevant. There can be no more second chances for this sorry institution, not when so many lives are at stake. It is time for reform. At least France, Burma's biggest Western investor, is now talking about trade sanctions and even disinvestment.

UPDATE: Apparently Russia has also taken the opportunity to play games throw its weight around once more, threatening France instead of helping to send a unanimous message to the Burmese military.

Germany's Ethical Foreign Policy

Credit to the German Chancellor Angela Merkel for consistently taking a stand on human rights, defying Chinese threats in order to meet the Dalai Lama, the 72-year-old spiritual leader of Tibet.

An example for other Western leaders to learn from, perhaps...

China's Lucky Eights

At 8pm on 8th August 2008, China will showcase itself to what will probably be the world's largest television audience. In response to international pressure and a threatened boycott, the country yesterday announced that it is to withdraw all its support for Robert Mugabe's regime in Zimbabwe except humanitarian aid. The largely unpublicised move represents a significant shift for Chinese foreign policy and holds out hope that they will also soon start making concessions over their support of the Sudanese regime.

Here are the results of our recent poll, which showed a surprisingly high level of support for the boycott proposed by Conservative MEP Edward McMillan-Scott. Keep an eye on the sidebar in the coming days for our next poll!

Should British athletes boycott the Beijing Olympics?

Yes  16% (18 votes)

If no improvement nearer the time  12% (14 votes)

No  72% (82 votes)

Not sure  0% (0 votes)

Total voters for this poll: 114

Sarkozy & Brown's Darfur Push

"It is the combination of a ceasefire, a peacekeeping force, economic reconstruction and the threat of sanctions that can bring a political solution to the region –– and we will spare no efforts in making this happen."

At first glance, the call in today's Times (and Le Monde) by Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy for intense action to secure a ceasefire in Darfur appears a welcome step towards stopping the genocide in Sudan. They acknowledge that the ceasefire "cannot on its own resolve such a complex conflict" and that "we need a political settlement that addresses the root causes of the violence." They also go further than last month's UN Resolution 1769 in that they threaten "further sanctions against those who fail to fulfil their commitments, obstruct the political process or continue to violate the ceasefire." They are also right to "look beyond Darfur, to the issues affecting Sudan and the region," including the need for better security and greater humanitarian assistance among the hundreds of thousands of people fleeing the conflict across the border into Chad.

And yet, underneath, they seem to be accepting a number of false presuppositions:

• They describe the weak UNAMID operation as the deployment of a "robust force," though it has no authority to disarm the militias or to pursue and arrest suspected war criminals indicted by the International Criminal Court.
• They make reference to the meeting of Darfur's rebel groups in Tanzania earlier this month, but neglect to mention that the Sudanese Government's subsequent escalation of violence is already causing the rebels to reconsider attending full negotiations.
• They also make no mention of breaches in existing sanctions, notably by China and Russia, including photographs (such as the one above) published by Amnesty International just last Friday showing military equipment being supplied by Russia at West Darfur's Geneina airport.
• Perhaps most fundamentally, they appear to believe that a political solution will be the inevitable outcome of the supposed ceasefire and the recently agreed peacekeeping force, whereas in reality a political solution must be found first if any ceasefire is to hold.

To quote both Rodolphe Adada, the new UN-AU mission head, and Mark Kroeker, the retiring UN police chief, once again, although UNAMID is sure to be one of the main tools for forwarding peace in Darfur, "it's only a peace operation — you need to have peace to keep," and "The countries that have been talking about Darfur need to now do something about Darfur with their deployment of police in probably the most desperate place in the world."

A Scanner Darkly

What does a scanner see? Into the head? Into the heart?
Does it see into me? Clearly? Or darkly?

"If they do not get the permanent card, they cannot live here, they cannot get government benefits, and that is a way for the government to control the population in the future."

Remember all those science fiction films/books showcasing police states that feature retina or face recognition scanners? Well, the future has arrived:

At least 20,000 police surveillance cameras are being installed along streets here in southern China and will soon be guided by sophisticated computer software from an American-financed company to recognize automatically the faces of police suspects and detect unusual activity.

Starting this month in a port neighborhood and then spreading across Shenzhen, a city of 12.4 million people, residency cards fitted with powerful computer chips programmed by the same company will be issued to most citizens.

Data on the chip will include not just the citizen's name and address but also work history, educational background, religion, ethnicity, police record, medical insurance status and landlord's phone number. Even personal reproductive history will be included, for enforcement of China's controversial "one child" policy. Plans are being studied to add credit histories, subway travel payments and small purchases charged to the card.

The article in yesterday's New York Times goes on to note that "New York police announced last month that they would install more than 100 security cameras to monitor license plates in Lower Manhattan by the end of the year. Police officials also said they hoped to obtain financing to establish links to 3,000 public and private cameras in the area by the end of next year; no decision has been made on whether face recognition technology has become reliable enough to use without the risk of false arrests."

What do you think? How do you feel about Britain's "surveillance society" and the prospect of face recognition software being used to enhance the power of the 4,000,000+ CCTV cameras already operating across the country? Are civil rights activists right to fear that cameras are a violation of the right of privacy contained in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights? What about identity cards? Are you happy to pay the Government to track your movements in the name of improved security?

Olympic Boycott

Edward McMillan-Scott, Conservative MEP for Yorkshire & the Humber and a vice-president of the European Parliament, is calling for a Europe-wide debate on whether athletes should boycott the Beijing Olympics in response to continuing evidence of persecution, and even genocide, in China. He says, "The civilised world must seriously consider shunning China - and using the Beijing Olympics to send the clear message that such abuses of human rights are not acceptable."

What do you think? Should British athletes stay away next year? Take the poll in the sidebar and leave any further thoughts in the comments.

See also: The Genocide Olympics and Olympics Rights Torches

The Genocide Olympics

Rumours first broken by ABC News a couple of days ago that Hollywood film director Steven Spielberg is threatening to quit as artistic director of next year's Olympics have now been confirmed, although no final decision has yet been taken.

Director of the Oscar-winning film Schindler's List and founder of the Shoah Foundation, which records the testimony of survivors of the holocaust, Spielberg has been working for several months to develop the opening ceremony for the Beijing Games but has been accused of complicity by human rights activists concerned about China's involvement in the Darfur crisis.

China is coming under increasing pressure to improve its human rights situation and to review its economic support of the military regime in Sudan ahead of next year's Olympic Games.

Olympics Rights Torches

With just over a year to go before the start of the Beijing Summer Olympics, the Chinese authorities have not kept the promises they made when awarded the Games in 2001 that they would improve the country's human rights situation.

Human Rights Watch is therefore spearheading a campaign calling for users to "Light a Torch for Human Rights in China" while Reporters Without Borders is calling on media and Internet communities to print ads or post website banners of the Olympic rings made up of handcuffs.

Having previously drawn attention to China's lax attitude to human rights in connection with the Olympics, The Difference is happy to join with others doing so once again ahead of next year's Olympics.

Korea's Oskar Schindler

"There is no food here. We've had terrible floods. A kilo of rice costs 50 cents, and I only earn 70 cents a month. We are trying to change things, but it is very hard."If you only read one thing in the papers this weekend, make it the Daily Mail's Korea's Oskar Schindler.

Each month, hundreds of North Koreans flee their homeland. More than 7,000 are captured each year by the Chinese, Mr Lee tells me, and returned to face labour camps or the public executions I have just read about. And the risks are growing higher and higher, as the Chinese, with the 2008 Beijing Olympics in the offing, are becoming ever tougher in an attempt to clean up their country.

For the few who manage to evade capture, the road to freedom can often simply lead to another harrowing underground existence. A grotesque industry has grown up to exploit the escapees. Mr Lee explains that more than 95 per cent of the women who come out of North Korea are sold into prostitution or as "wives" to lonely Chinese farmers. Mr Lee is one of the few brokers who is trying to help the escaping refugees.

A number of people have confirmed that Mr Lee has helped more than 1,000 North Koreans. Each refugee costs him between £1,250 and £1,500.

I had been told that he was a wealthy entrepreneur who used his very successful fishing business to finance his altruism. So I was shocked when I was invited into this tiny, sparsely furnished flat. The sitting room, with its cheap TV and cooker hidden in a cupboard, was probably only 12ft by 8ft, and half of Mr Lee's belongings were piled on the balcony. This is the price the well-dressed, soft-faced South Korean has had to pay for his goodness.

Mr Lee is a hunted man, wanted by both the Chinese and North Korean authorities. He has already spent time in a Chinese prison, been beaten on another occasion and has had to bribe his way out of capture. And now he has to live in this small safe house.

Birthday Behind Bars

Today is the 62nd birthday of the world's only imprisoned Nobel Peace Prize recipient, the leader of Burma's democracy movement, Aung San Suu Kyi, whose political party won a landslide 82% victory in Burma's last democratic election, in 1990, since when she has spent the majority of her time under house arrest.

Earlier this year, hopes for constructive change in Burma were raised as the United Nations Security Council held it's first ever vote on Burma. This garnered enough votes to pass but the measure was vetoed by China and Russia. As with Sudan, China is the Burmese military regime's primary benefactor, sending billions in arms and weaponry and importing massive quantities of natural resources.

Besides locking up Suu Kyi, Burma's military regime has destroyed 3,000 villages in eastern Burma, forcing 1,500,000 people to flee their homes as refugees and internally displaced people. It has also recruited up to 70,000 child soldiers, far more than any other country in the world. Up to 1,300 political prisoners remain behind bars, including elected members of Suu Kyi's political party.

Those of us in free nations must do what it takes for freedom to prevail.

More Darfur Dithering

"China appeals to all parties to maintain restraint and patience."

Over what, you might ask? Proposed new sanctions against Sudan, which the Chinese claim, "would only complicate the issue" — by which they presumably mean the issue of Chinese economic interests and their sale of weapons and aircraft to Khartoum.

In contrast, President Bush ordered new American sanctions against Sudan on Tuesday and is demanding new United Nations sanctions to pressure the Sudanese government to halt the bloodshed in Darfur. The American President insists, "We will continue to insist on the full implementation of the Darfur peace agreement. We will continue to promote a broadly supported and inclusive political settlement that is the only long-term solution to the crisis in Darfur." However, like China, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon says he wants more time for diplomacy and last month urged Britain to delay a push for tougher sanctions.

Once again, we are left wondering what it will take before the international community takes the effective action that is so desperately needed.

China's Forced Abortions

Having been away for a long bank holiday weekend, I am just now catching up on some of the news and comment that I missed. Probably the most interesting is this from yesterday's International Herald Tribune:

Corruption in China: The anger boils over

For the past two months, local officials in the southwestern Chinese province of Guangxi have pursued a harsh campaign aimed at enforcing China's population planning laws.

In order to meet targets for allowable births, they forced pregnant women to have abortions. They threatened to demolish homes to make residents cough up fines demanded for excess children.

This month citizen anger boiled over. Thousands of angry rural residents took to the streets, smashing cars and sacking government offices.

Examining the reasons for the social unrest, Carl Minzner, international affairs fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, concludes that official abuses and riots in Guangxi are natural outcomes of China's authoritarian controls and warns that if Chinese leaders are serious about addressing these problems, they need to undertake institutional reform.

Sadly, if our Foreign Secretary's recent visit is any indicator of the kind of international pressure being placed on China, local demonstrators are going to have an uphill battle before they see any substantial improvements.

Beckett Condones Chinese Genocide Support

Zimbabwe, Sudan and Burma, three of the world's most oppressive regimes, all benefit from Chinese aid and trade. For instance, China sells the Sudanese government military equipment and purchases two-thirds of Sudan's oil exports. Given the country's economic interests, it is perhaps unsurprising that China should continue to use its veto on the United Nations Security Council to block efforts to send peacekeepers to Darfur.

However, even I am astonished by the support expressed by our own Foreign Secretary, Margaret Beckett, for China's role in financing the Sudanese genocide: "I noticed there have been some criticism of China, but actually China has played a really quite positive role, particularly in the negotiation of the Darfur peace agreement."

One would have hoped that the Foreign Secretary, who is in the middle of a six-day visit to China, would be able to exert some pressure on her Chinese counterpart that it would be in China's interests to adopt a more principled and ethical approach to its foreign affairs. However, Mrs Beckett is clearly even less likely to achieve any results in this area than will Wednesday's call by the United States Congress for China to use its economic leverage with Sudan to stop the violence.

The American resolution noted that the spirit of the Olympics is "incompatible with any actions supporting acts of genocide," but a defiant Beijing is so far rejecting attempts to use the conflict to "politicise the Olympic Games."

Playing Climate Politics With China

The New Scientist has an unintentionally amusing juxtaposition of items this evening. The first announces that fossil evidence of a hippopotamus-like creature found on an Arctic island, together with existing evidence of sequoia-type trees and crocodile-like beasts in the Arctic millions of years ago, "hints at a once-balmy climate – 'rather like Florida' – in the polar region," when carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, was at about 1000 parts per million in the atmosphere as a result of natural swings in the climate (cf. present levels stand at a mere 390 per million).

The second warns that China's CO2 emissions are to surpass the US within months, and quotes the International Energy Agency's chief economist as calling for bold international initiatives to persuade China and India to address climate change issues.

One has a degree of sympathy for the head of China's Office of the National Coordination Committee for Climate Change, quoted as saying, "For some international organisations to reach the conclusion that China's carbon dioxide emissions are about to surpass the United States' is not only irresponsible, but is also being used to apply pressure on the Chinese government."