China's largest telecommunications company, China Mobile Communications Corp, dropped jaws in Davos, Switzerland, last week when its chief executive revealed the extent of its access to the personal details of its subscribers.
Wang Jianzhou (
One delegate, US Representative Ed Markey, told Agence France-Presse after the session: "I have my eyebrows arched so high they're hitting the ceiling."
But there was very little newsworthy in Wang's statement to delegates at the World Economic Forum. Close surveillance of its population remains a staple of Beijing's style. With the advent of information technology, its ability to monitor dissidents has steadily improved over the last decade.
Nor should it come as a surprise that the country's largest telecoms operator, with more than 300 million users, would contribute to this surveillance. Observers have been warning for years about the complicity of the corporate world in Beijing's surveillance and the suppression of freedoms.
In fact, the only revelation at the forum session was Wang's statement stunning a room full of information technology (IT) and telecom experts and government representatives. What shocked them, however, was probably not the message so much as the nonchalance with which it was delivered.
Democratic countries have largely turned a blind eye as their IT firms profit from helping China develop the technology to monitor its population. Too little has been said, for example, about Canadian firm Nortel's operations in China. In a project funded by Beijing, the company has continued developing speech-recognition technology that it originally created for the FBI in the US, apparently to analyze tapped phone conversations.
US lawmakers in particular should be up to date on the abuse of IT since a series of congressional hearings were held last year at which Internet companies discussed their operations in China. At these hearings, it became clear that Yahoo, too, has helped Chinese police identify dissidents who use its Internet services.
But although it is clear that companies from democratic countries have helped censor Internet access in China, transferred surveillance technology to the authorities and helped track Beijing's critics, little has been done.
Western firms and governments are more interested in feigning shock and disapproval than recognizing their responsibilities. Attempts to flesh out the UN's Norms for Business -- which detail corporate responsibilities not to facilitate human rights abuses -- have stalled, largely because of US opposition.
Likewise, the US congressional hearings resulted in a lot of tongue-clicking, but little in the way of improving corporate accountability. Legislation such as the Global Online Freedom Bill, which would have barred US Internet firms from providing Chinese authorities with information to identify dissidents using the Web, failed to pass.
Meanwhile, many Western IT firms are still unwilling to disclose the details of their cooperation with Beijing or to take action to avoid future abuses. Observers have suggested relocating servers storing personal data of users outside China. But as the Chinese market expands, these firms are in no rush to make any move that could compromise their access to the market.
Until governments take steps to demand such measures, however, the democratic world will hardly have the credibility to bat an eyelid when a Chinese firm openly mentions its cooperation with police.
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
RSS