Although this year’s Nobel Peace Prize was given to Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo (劉曉波), who was thrown behind bars by the Chinese authorities and Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤), I really think the award was not aimed at rewarding Liu so much as it was aimed against Hu and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP.)
Have you ever heard of Carl von Ossietzky? Who was he? He was also a Nobel Peace Prize laureate and he had something else in common with Liu. He was a prisoner of war and was locked up by Adolf Hitler. He was a reporter and his ideas opposing German military expansion angered the Nazis, in a way very similar to how Liu’s Charter 08 struck at the heart of tyrannical rule in China.
In 1936, when the Nobel Peace Prize was given to Ossietzky, the precedent for the prize representing an interest in and even “meddling” in the internal affairs of nation states was set, and the prize became associated with the protection of human rights and standing against -tyranny. In 1971, when then-German chancellor Willy Brandt was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, he said that Ossietzky’s receiving the prize was a moral victory over barbarism.
The only difference this time around is that the barbarians the prize is aimed at defeating are Hu and China. Therefore, the crux of the matter is that the prize is like a “temple” and while the “god” the prize represents is not always something everyone can agree on, the “temple” always exists. This is why after Liu was awarded the prize, the chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, Thorbjorn Jagland, said the following in an article in the New York Times: “The authorities assert that no one has the right to interfere in China’s internal affairs, but they are wrong.”
Jagland also said that the Norwegian Nobel Committee uses the prize to encourage people who have fought for human rights over long periods of time, citing people like Andrei Sakharov and the Reverend Dr Martin Luther King Jr as examples. This shows how all the threats and fear tactics that China employs have been dented by the Nobel Peace Prize Committee.
The award will be presented on Dec. 15 and China will find itself in a very delicate situation indeed because the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will be damaged whether it keeps Liu in jail or lets him out. Will they let Liu or his wife attend the award ceremony? The CCP, of course, will not dare allow this and the fact that Liu’s wife, Liu Xia (劉霞), has been placed under house arrest proves the truth of Jagland’s comments even more.
However, the issue China really has to face is whether Liu’s receiving the prize will be the last straw in bringing down the CCP.
In Jagland’s words: “China has every reason to be proud of what it has achieved in the last 20 years. We want to see that progress continue, and that is why we awarded the Peace Prize to Mr Liu.”
French political thinker Alexis de Tocqueville predicted a long time ago in his work The Old Regime and the Revolution that revolutions do not always happen because people’s circumstances are getting worse and that the most dangerous time for bad governments is normally the start of revolutions. Before it was announced that Liu would be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶) said in an interview with CNN that he would promote political reforms as much as he could for as long as he could despite social criticism and resistance. Will this be the case? I guess we will all have to wait until Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping (習近平) takes over the reins to learn the answer.
Chin Heng-wei is the editor-in-chief of Contemporary Monthly magazine.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken