Post-Game Wrap on Tibet

By: Emil Guillermo, Apr 20, 2008

Tags: Emil Amok, Opinion |

In the aftermath of the Tibet/China/torch protests, one thing is clear: What we have here is a failure to communicate.

From City Hall to the Board of Supervisors, from street protestors to pro-China counter-protestors to the Olympic committee to China — no one has found an effective way to persuade the other side to move an inch.

So we end up with last week’s intransigent mess. A lot of noise. High stress levels. Parallel lines of communications, just like the parallel torch route that left real Olympics fans high and dry.

That was some brilliant act of deception on the part of San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, who hid behind the issue of public safety as his plausible excuse for the route debacle. But where was his concern for public safety at the city’s recent anti-war demonstrations? But, of course, the torch protest was different. With the whole world watching, what politician wants a riot on his resume?

Meanwhile, everything stays the same because China isn’t listening to any of it anyway. And the Olympics remain the full-body deodorizer to China’s questionable policies, including the iron-hand rule of Tibet. To this, people show their support by visiting the de facto Chinese Embassy: Wal-Mart.

The more vocal pro-China folks show their support by invoking the Cold War, charging racist meddling by U.S. protestors. It’s the only thing they can do to not be seen as apologists. Sure, they can claim that China’s record is improving. Amnesty International this week reported that China only executed 470 people in 2007. That’s down from 1,010 in 2006. Of course, these are the killings we know about. China’s still No.1 in the world in executions. Iran is No. 2. And the old hypocritical U.S. is No. 5 with 42 executions.

Then there are the protestors who clamor for human rights and global responsibility. In their protest, everything is qualified. They’re not anti-Olympics, anti-sports, nor anti-Chinese. But they end up communicating only with other humanitarians who dread injustice and bloodshed. They’re the ones who stand out in the cold to hear Richard Gere and Desmond Tutu.

China? Again, it’s not listening.

To add to the futility, after the protests, what are demonstrators left to urge? That George Bush not go to Beijing?

This is George W. Bush, former governor and master executioner of Texas, who as president has regaled torture as standard operating procedure. Does anyone really think George Bush’s presence anywhere would make a difference?

But until that cherished day in January 2009, we’re stuck with him. He’s our symbol in this clash of symbols. And he’s not even as bright as the Olympic torch. If he went to China, he’d be one lame Peking duck.

Does anybody out there speak Chinese?
If the goal is to change China’s policy, everybody seems to have been doing it the wrong way last week.

That leaves the tried and true ways as the only things available. Not public communications, but private and out of view. Of course, that’s anathema to true advocates of democracy, who clamor for everything out in the open. Transparency is a virtue after all. But that’s not how to influence China.

Maybe we all should take a lesson in communicating with China from Australian Prime Minister Kevin Ruud, one of the few world leaders who actually speaks Chinese.

Geremie Barme, a professor of Chinese history at the Australian National University, analyzed the speech in the Sydney Morning Herald and remarked on the significance of Ruud’s use of the word “zhengyou.” It means “friend” but is vastly different from the more commonly used “youyi.”

A youyi friend never presumes to disagree in public. Friendship means that the privilege of being a friend comes at a price, especially for foreigners. You shut up and accept all of China’s actions because you value what that friendship brings.

But Barme says Ruud’s use of zhengyou puts the friendship on a different level. It’s “true friendship” where disagreement with the party line is possible.

It’s clear that Ruud’s use of the word has struck a chord, one that may have opened up a path to more constructive communication. If the example is followed, it could help bring China more in line with the responsibilities of a global partner. Protest and free speech may work in America. To influence China may require us to communicate in the way China understands.

So should our dim symbol Bush pick up some Chinese? What’s the Chinese word for being “overly optimistic”? Given Bush’s facility with his native tongue, a Chinese malaprop is likely to start World War III.

Read about the death of Chinese student Ming-hui Yu: amok.asianweek.com.

Comments

in star wars universe

dalai lama & tibet=jedi knight & republic

china = sith , also see empire

–kwaninator on Apr 20, 2008
I don’t think a true friend will publicly criticize you Chinese or not Chinese. I don’t think any country has taken criticicism publicly from another country without being on the defensive. When the Europeans criticized our war in Iraq, they were met with fury. “Freedom Fries” and “Old Europe” comes to mind. Did it stop America from conquering Iraq? If China is such a good friend and deserves public criticism, why save it all for China? Why not the dictator of Saudi Arabia? No human rights violation there? Why not India? No child abuse, no slavery, no violent crack downs in Kashmire, no thugs attacking citizens against Enron plants, no child labor, no burning wives to death? China is a developing country, why are we imposing the standards of a rich developed country on them.
I have lived under the Khmer Rouge of Cambodia. That is what you called Hell on earth. I would never support such abuse on their citizens. I have also travel to China 4 times. The majority of the citizens I talked to are quite happy. Lots of trying to keep up with the Huangs. They openly criticize their government, they just can’t assemble into groups without permission. They are free to travel. I even lived in a poor town and yet the people looks well fed. Freedom of speech and more Democracy is great, but let the Chinese fight for it when the time is ripe. Wherever the West sticks its ugly nose, the area just collapses into chaos. Look at the Middle East and Africa. I would not wish such unrest for China. Why are we getting so much resentments from South America, “once bitten, twice shy.” The West stays rich by creating managed instability outside their country.
Huang Fong
Ps. Remember how the public booed Richard Gere, when he told them to turn the other cheek after 911. Just imagine if that message came from a Chinese official.

–Huang Fong on Apr 20, 2008
Huang Fong, the Khymer Rouge was avidly supported by the People’s Republic of China. Indeed, many of Pol Pot’s butchers were granted asylum in the PRC after the heroic Vietnamese army liberated Kampuchea in 1979 (after which the pseudo-socialist China invaded Vietnam). It’s possible, indeed absolutely essential, to condemn oppression throughout the globe, be it in China, Saudi Arabia or the United States. The notion that the world is “ganging up” on China is absurd.

–Christian on Apr 21, 2008
Christian,

Yes, the PRC did support the Khmer Rouge and so did the USA. But the Chinese government of today is not the same Chinese government then. China was closed like North Korea of today. China has changed so much in the right direction that they should be encouraged to keep improving, not whipped like an ox. The level of oppression is about the same as any country at their level of development. It’s true they are harder on criminals, but in a country of 1.3 billion, it may be necessary.

I don’t think the world is ganging up on China though, if I wrote that, it was a mistake. I really meant the West as in the rich developed countries are ganging up on China. Poor developing countries have a better understanding of the situation since they are in the same boat. Actually, I did not just come out and state that the West is ganging up on China. It was mostly the millions and millions of Chinese who were complaining that they were being singled out. I just happen to verify and agreed.

–Huang Fong on Apr 21, 2008
Huang, I’m in absolute accord with you that the U.S. also supported Pol Pot and his murderous Khymer Rouge; indeed, the U.S. invasion of Cambodia in 1970s prepared the way for the Khymer Rouge to seize power. During the last three decades of the 20th century, China and the U.S. frequently colluded with one another (i.e., they both supported the UNITA rebels in Angola, pseudo-revolutionary formations and the apartheid government in South Africa, Pinochet in Chile, etc., etc.). What most astonishes me is that the Chinese Communist Party paid an enormous amount of lip service to notions like international solidarity while propping up reactionary and fascist governments and movements throughout the globe. While China may have become more open economically (i.e., individuals are allowed and indeed encouraged to own their own companies), it remains a bastion of repression.

–Christian on Apr 21, 2008
Yes, China has plenty to learn from the world’s leading democratic free countries.

Perhap China should take a page or two from the leader of the freeworld, the USA, on how to treat unruly natives. China should start a military campain to kill as many fighting age Tibetans as possible just like Uncle Sam did to the Indian tribes. And then China should round up the remaining young, old and women, march them across the country to some barren wasteland we call reservations. Who knows, maybe in a couple of hundred years, the Chinese will allow the what’s left of the Tibetans to operate slot machines and casinos on their reservations.

Let’s make a deal, China will get out of Tibet as soon as the US gives back the land to the Indians, or the white austrilians give back to the natives. Or the British, French, German and Dutch pay back all the riches they expoited from their colonies in Asia and Africa.

–Dave on Apr 21, 2008
Christian,

From what I recall, international solidarity, does not mean that every country must be a Democracy or a Communist in order to join hands. China has its hands opened to cooperate with any country who wants to cooperate. They’re not going to stick their nose into your internal affairs. They are not interested in regime change. They will love you whether you’ve been good or bad. It’s the Western media that highlights all the bad. They are ignoring all the roads, schools and hospitals that China built in Africa. For the West everything must come down to politics. If you are not with me, then you are against me.

–Huang Fong on Apr 21, 2008
Christian:
You’re totally outmatched here, kiddo.
Huang Fong has LIVED there, in Cambodia, and has, of late, made FOUR trips to the Mainland.
More to the point, he has demolished EVERY “wlld,” well, today at least, claim you are staking all your rants on, and without demonizing you or even calling you names or questioning your smarts.
Make waves here “at home,” where you might score some points, since you appear, in fact, to “agree” with much if not all of Fong’s facts and witnessings. Personally, I must admit to at least one eyebrow rising at the idea that ‘WE’ supported Pol Pot.
And, MY point, such as it is, is that you and the likes of Erbes on these posts are adding dangerous fuel to bigot fires here, against fellow citizens you claim to be exhorting in global “brotherhood.”
And the bottom-line, end-game agenda of the neocons remains Armageddon/Apocalypse.
In light of which, both “Games” and “Flame” are small change indeed.
Frank Eng
P.S.: Huang Fong, I remain in awe at the clarity of your vision here, much of which I always suspected or “knew in my bones” but had no way of supplying your first-hand witness. To which I repeat, the CIA in Cambodia was a plague in more ways than one, just as it is likely in far too many outposts today. But what can one expect, when retired, beribboned “generals” pimp to the media for personal gain, not to mention in-service types who perform identical dog-and-pony antics for the neocons, ignoring their sworn service AND loyalty to the Republic?

–Frank Eng on Apr 21, 2008
“Yellow Peril” is making a comeback in today’s Penn.Primary. See http://www.amok.asianweek.com

–Emil Guillermo on Apr 22, 2008
How many of these “Tibet supporters” have been ever in Tibet ? How many have thoroughly studied the history of Tibet and have followed their development history ?
What source of info have they obtained from ?
Simple romantic idealism or blind belief of political propaganda or counter-propaganda is dangerous and unwise.
Simply bashing China for anything would not solve any problems but only arouse unwanted anti-West nationalistic feelings within China, even against Beijing’s wishes.
China of course is not perfect. No country is perfect, ever. But China has been improving steadily since 1979 to become far more open, liberal, and prosperous. Hating China because China is big, or because it is non-white, or becaue it still carries a “Communist” label and you feel “threatened”, feared, jealous or disdainful, is probably normal human behavior but such behavior should not be encouraged.
This world already has enough troubles of all sorts, blaming China for everything is stupid.

–WW on Apr 27, 2008

Post your comments.

Comments using inappropriate language will not be posted. AsianWeek reserves the right to re-publish comments, into "Letters to the Editor," in which case, we reserve the right to edit comments for length and style. If you would like to write a letter to our editor, please email: asianweek@asianweek.com.