By English Analyst of Initiatives for China
08-25-2008
Initiatives for China
Contact: Jim Geheran
Tel: 202-290-1423
initiatives4china@gmail.com
www.initiativesforchina.org

The Chinese government, in a moment of understandable hyperbole, has said that hosting the Olympics has been a dream of the Chinese people for a hundred years. Exaggeration aside, the yearning for an international pilgrimage to Beijing to pay homage to the leaders of China has been a centuries old dream of China’s elite. Perhaps a dream as old as Chinese history itself.

Alas, the dream is finally realized. The heads of more than 80 nations, including more than 14 democracies and the leader of the Free World, George W. Bush, have dutifully taken an appointed perch in the Olympic Stadium, the Bird’s Nest, to witness the splendor of Olympic pageantry and in so doing, pay homage to the leaders of China.

From the bird’s nest they applaud the wonders woven before them. Below, outside the nest, a city cowers under virtual martial law.

Just a few miles away from the spectacle of One World, One Dream, lie prisons which house numerous prisoners of conscience and citizens who came to Beijing to petition the government about corruption only to be beaten and incarcerated. Just a few miles away, stand people rendered homeless by Olympic Beautification projects, their land seized and their homes demolished, and with no hope for redress.

(Two women sentenced to ‘re-education’ in China by New York Times)

The fact is, President Bush’s presence at the Olympic Games in Beijing spoke far louder than any words he may have spoken about human rights in China. In actuality, Chinese leaders care little about what President Bush said. They know his statements were for domestic consumption. They are also confident they can control the information flow to the people inside of China. His presence in the Birds nest paying unconditional homage is what the Chinese government wanted and that is what they got.

President Bush said he attended the games out of respect for the Chinese people. Given the discord surrounding the Olympic Games and the unprecedented security imposed by the Chinese government, President Bush’s rationale begs the question: To which Chinese people was he showing respect? Was it the thousands of Chinese citizens who are languishing in jail because they spoke freely, or worshiped openly? Or, was he respecting the tens of millions of Chinese peasants who lost their land and workers who lost their jobs due to official predation? Or perhaps the 1.5 million residents of Beijing whose homes were destroyed to make way for Olympic beautification projects? Or the Tibetans whose culture is being systematically dismantled? How about Chinese citizens in hospitals whose blood supply was diverted to stockpiles for Olympic emergencies? Or even the millions of Falun Gong practitioners and underground Christians who practice their religion at grave risk?

One quickly concludes that the only people for whom President Bush was showing respect was the Chinese leaders, the very perpetrators of the indignities to the people President Bush claims to be respecting. How can fawning before tormentors be construed as paying respect to the tormented?

President Bush’s fawning before the Chinese leaders was driven by a self imposed fear. It was a fear that the Chinese government holds too much economic power for the U.S. to be assertive about human rights abuses. How else can one explain the obvious disparity between the U.S. total diplomatic and economic embargo of Cuba and its virtually unconditional embrace of the Chinese leadership?

What the Bush administration fails to realize is that the Chinese government needs the U.S. far more than the U.S needs the Chinese government. Rigorous economic growth is the only claim on legitimacy for the CCP. If the economic engine stalls, the CCP knows that the political pool will quickly drain to reveal a swamp of corruption with its people entrapped in a quicksand of fear.

Rather than showing respect for the Chinese people, Bush’s attendance demonstrated acquiescence to tyranny on a grand scale. His attendance marked a missed opportunity of historic proportions. It was an opportunity to send a clear message to the Chinese government that international acceptance is irrevocably tied to advancement in political liberties for its citizens. It was also an opportunity to provide hope to the Chinese people and to ensure a stable and peaceful future for the world.

Many people, even accomplished scholars often tout anecdotal evidence, and even professional surveys to claim that the overwhelming majority of Chinese citizens give very high approval ratings to the Chinese government. Where is the logic here? How does one gauge the validity of such surveys conducted in a society ruled by fear. How does one measure the truthfulness of responses from people who know that speaking their mind could land them in jail? Only God knows the margin of error in such surveys. One can easily imagine the different results that would be obtained from a survey about the popularity of Saddam Hussein taken before he was deposed and after. A much more logical approach to ascertaining a government’s popularity in a fear society is to measure not the participation in, or lip service to government approved activities, but rather the participation in non government approved activities. Viewed in this way one can easily see the torrent of frustration and hatred toward the Chinese government. Despite the very real risk to themselves and their families, millions of people protest government corruption each year. In 2007 alone, Human Rights Watch in its annual report, that there were over 100,000 protests of governmental corruption and misdeeds. As recently as this past June, a huge protest of over 20,000 people erupted in Weng An county to condemn an alleged cover up of the rape and murder of a young girl. The victim’s relative went to the police station demanding justice; instead he was badly beaten by the police. This event sent thousands of people to the street. While exceptional in its size and ferocity, protests such a these are common in China, despite the fact that protesters face almost certain retribution.

If President Bush really desired to show respect for the Chinese people and not just homage to the government leaders, and if he really believes that an open democratic society is the best way for China to realize its full potential, actions must follow his words. He and future administrations must put aside self-imposed fear and link relations with the U.S. to real and measurable progress on human rights. If president Bush and future administrations really want to show respect for the Chinese people he would have left the bird’s nest and entered the streets to meet people, to look into their eyes, to feel their frustration, and to sense their fear. These actions, more than any words, however well crafted, would have sent a clear and cogent message to the Chinese government and would have earned him the undying gratitude of millions of Chinese people.