This is great news, but also fascinating from an international communication perspective. China is furious at Norway for the Nobel Committee's decision and is very vocal about their condemnation of the decision. Why do you think this is the case? And why did the Committee choose this particular person to award the prize? The decision has big implications for international relations, not only between China and Norway, but also watch the reactions of other countries and how they handle this delicate situation, particularly as it may affect their own relations with China.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11499098
Also listen to an excellent interview by Amy Goodman on Democracy Now (independent news) with Minky Worden, Director of Global Initiatives at Human Rights Watch. In 2008, Liu Xiaobo contributed a chapter to a book Worden edited titled China’s Great Leap: The Beijing Games and Olympian Human Rights Challenges.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/10/8/jailed_chinese_dissident_liu_xiaobo_awarded
China does not like its dirty laundry aired all over the global press, which is exactly what is happening in light of Liu Xiaobo's prize reception. Perhaps this was a factor in the Nobel committee's decision to award Liu, since it puts pressure on China to release him and other silenced political prisoners. This topic also raises an issue we've discussed in class - the distinction the CPC makes between public and private criticism. As a result of globalization, public criticism is far more damaging to the government's image. Liu's various subversive published works threaten the stability of the CPC, and pose a potential pilfering of government power; hence his imprisonment. He has undoubtedly exposed countless people, in China and elsewhere, to the dictatorial actions of the CPC, and will continue to do so through his Nobel Prize award, even behind bars. The bravery of this one man - who took on the machine despite the consequences - is empowering, especially to a skeptic like me. Further, this situation is much like the notion of the butterfly effect, since we may not be able to see the extent of these ripples until much later. One man’s decision to speak out against the powerful elite has already affected the world, and will possibly limit the power of that elite in the long run. Certainly the CPC must be feeling insecurity; otherwise, they would remain silent.
ReplyDeleteChina, the rich bull that it is, has traditionally done whatever it wants despite international pressure. I don't think this "incident" will change their immediate course, but it has successfully gotten a rise out of the CPC due to its high profile nature; their outrage speaks to perhaps the tiniest sliver of vulnerability and one wonders how things will transpire from here. For now, this event has proven to me once again just how adept China is at maintaining silence: news reports on local television, radio and the internet are virtually non-existent; Google search terms "Nobel Peace Prize" and "Liu Xiaobo" have been blocked; Liu's wife is being closely monitored, her words and actions confined to her home; celebrations have been quickly snuffed and dissidents on the ground are being shadowed; some Chinese citizens have even reported an inability to text Liu's name. Ironically, the international community is provided with details of the CPC's swift and systematic censorship by way of microblogs and twitter feeds. You would think that the CPC would get savvy to social media at some point...
ReplyDeleteAlso: I was reading some reader comments on related articles, and it's frustrating to see people internalizing the CPC's dogged cultural relativism line, in which the Western imperialist world is trying to impose a system/set of values that is culturally incompatible with the East, thus justifying China's actions. This is so tired. Charter 08 does indeed argue for expanded political rights, but it is NOT a call for the immediate dissolution of the Communist party in favor of a Western-style democracy. Further, key to the document is the acknowledgment and protection/enforcement of universal human rights. The enjoyment of civil, political, social and economic rights is not inherently Western; they are universal to human beings, period. How a particular nation-state goes about implementing such rights is, of course, where the system is most flawed, since there is no supranational body that can legally dictate how a state runs itself. So yeah - round and round we go.