What would it have taken for China to avoid the onslaught of criticism that has rained on its Olympic parade? Just days into the Games that China has spent seven years preparing as a symbol of its rising strength and wealth, concern about Beijing’s iron grip on basic freedoms continues to cast a shadow on the celebration.
What has become a public relations disaster for Beijing might have been stemmed with some key — if ultimately insincere — concessions to its critics. Instead, the Games have again illustrated China’s poor understanding of what makes the free world tick.
Even basic public relations in dealing with the West seem to elude its decision-makers. China never stood to gain from blocking “sensitive” Web sites at its foreign media center, a move that was bound to spark an outcry. The majority of the thousands of international reporters covering the Games come from countries with unfettered Web access. They very likely had no interest in spending their time in Beijing browsing Falun Gong Web sites. Censoring the Web, however, quickly turned Beijing’s fear of international news sites and repression of dissident voices into a top story just a week before the opening ceremony.
The ensuing clash between Beijing and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) — ending in the IOC backing down on uncensored Web access for reporters — only hammered this impression into the minds of a global audience.
With the Games now in full swing, the furor over media restrictions shows no sign of receding. Although Radio Free Asia received permission from the IOC to send two reporters to the Games, Beijing let its Chinese-speaking correspondent into the country, but blocked its Tibetan-speaking reporter. And despite reports of unrest in Xinjiang, journalists are being denied access, while two Japanese reporters were mistreated by police there last week.
China has been equally inept at presenting a positive face to Taiwanese spectators. Where a little respect would have gone a long way in building trust, Beijing instead rolled out the title Zhongguo Taibei in the lead-up to the Games, blocked Taiwanese cheerleaders from entering the country and insisted on referring to Taiwan’s “home team” advantage in Beijing.
From the day China bound itself to human rights pledges in exchange for hosting the 2008 Olympics, a barrage of criticism from activists of its rights record was inevitable. But offering even a few concessions would have helped China convince observers that it is making gradual progress.
The Duihua Foundation, arguably the group that has made the most progress in securing the release of prisoners of conscience in China, suggested Beijing offer a gesture of progress ahead of the Games. An “Olympic pardon” of long-term prisoners — freeing the remaining Tiananmen activists jailed since 1989 — could make a lasting, positive impression, Duihua argued.
Instead, Beijing has stepped up its “war on terrorism” and clamped down even more tightly on dissidents, particularly in the capital, carrying out a series of “clean-up” detentions and arrests to silence domestic critics in time for the Games.
Beijing must now deal with the consequences of its choice: an international community that has only grown more skeptical and is concerned that, rather than improving its record to meet Olympic pledges, China has backtracked on the freedoms that it grants its population.
In a summer of intense political maneuvering, Taiwanese, whose democratic vibrancy is a constant rebuke to Beijing’s authoritarianism, delivered a powerful verdict not on China, but on their own political leaders. Two high-profile recall campaigns, driven by the ruling party against its opposition, collapsed in failure. It was a clear signal that after months of bitter confrontation, the Taiwanese public is demanding a shift from perpetual campaign mode to the hard work of governing. For Washington and other world capitals, this is more than a distant political drama. The stability of Taiwan is vital, as it serves as a key player
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Much like the first round on July 26, Saturday’s second wave of recall elections — this time targeting seven Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers — also failed. With all 31 KMT legislators who faced recall this summer secure in their posts, the mass recall campaign has come to an end. The outcome was unsurprising. Last month’s across-the-board defeats had already dealt a heavy blow to the morale of recall advocates and the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), while bolstering the confidence of the KMT and its ally the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP). It seemed a foregone conclusion that recalls would falter, as
The fallout from the mass recalls and the referendum on restarting the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant continues to monopolize the news. The general consensus is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been bloodied and found wanting, and is in need of reflection and a course correction if it is to avoid electoral defeat. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has not emerged unscathed, either, but has the opportunity of making a relatively clean break. That depends on who the party on Oct. 18 picks to replace outgoing KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫). What is certain is that, with the dust settling
RSS