Asia silent on Nobel winner

Much of Asia Silent on Nobel Peace Prize Winner

AOL News

TAIPEI, Taiwan (Oct. 13) -- In the wake of Chinese pro-democracy activist Liu Xiaobo's Nobel Peace Prize win, congratulations -- and some criticisms -- have poured in from governments the world over. But in Asia, the silence has been deafening.

With the exception of Taiwan, and a low-key statement from Japan, Asian governments have kept quiet on the Nobel controversy -- neither supporting Liu nor taking the side of Beijing, which has furiously denounced the Nobel committee for the "blasphemy" of honoring a "convicted criminal."

The muted response reflects China's growing regional influence, Asia's authoritarian tendencies and a lack of regional leadership on human rights, says one activist.

"In general, developing countries, and especially Asian developing countries, try to stay on good terms with China," said Wang Songlian, research coordinator for China Human Rights Defenders, in a phone interview. "Asia continues to lag behind in promoting human rights, even though it has made great strides in economic development."

Liu is serving an 11-year jail sentence for "inciting subversion," a charge based on his peaceful calls for political reform in China, specifically through the Charter 08 manifesto he co-authored.

Wang said human rights activists "weren't expecting so much from Asian countries" in response to Liu's prize, because many of those countries, such as Vietnam and Burma, are also authoritarian, while others are "emerging from those tendencies."

But she singled out India as a democratic regional power that could do more but so far hasn't. "India is the only country big enough to counter this [China's] influence," said Wang. "But we're not seeing India providing leadership in this area. It's a bit disappointing that it's not saying anything."

Taiwan's government called for Liu's immediate release and for political reform in China, albeit after a day's delay that earned it criticism from the opposition. Despite warming ties with China, Taiwan prides itself on having shed an authoritarian past and changing into a vibrant, raucous democracy.

Japan's foreign minister made a bland statement saying that "fundamental human rights and freedom are important in any country."

An Indian official told The Times of India that "the decolonized world has learnt not to interfere in the internal affairs of each other," by way of explaining New Delhi's silence. The Times noted that the last time India congratulated an Asian democracy activist for winning the Peace Prize -- Burma's Aung San Suu Kyi in 1991 -- it lost out on "lucrative oil, gas and other business contracts."

Elsewhere, reaction to Liu's prize was a litmus test of a country's relations with China and support for human rights. Unconditional calls for Liu's release came from the U.S., U.K., Canada, France, Germany, Australia, New Zealand (belatedly) and the European Parliament.

On the other side, condemnation of Liu's honor came from Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and Cuban state-controlled media, which accused Liu of being a U.S. stooge. "The curriculum vitae of Liu Xiaobo is, as a matter of fact, not the least bit different from the type of 'dissident' the United States has for decades employed," wrote M.H. Lagarde on cubadebate.

Brazil, Russia and South Africa are among those countries that said little or nothing. The ruling African National Congress in the latter country came in for scathing criticism from one columnist, who noted the ANC's ties with past Nobel Peace Prize winner Nelson Mandela.

"So where we should be identifying with Liu in his long-standing fight for freedom for his fellow oppressed Chinese, you won't be hearing a congratulations from the ANC anytime soon," wrote Verashni Pillay in South Africa's Mail & Guardian. "Our freedom has been won and we'll be damned if we'll let someone else's fight interfere with our lucrative relationship with their oppressors."

The rest of Africa was mostly mum too ("The continent's new dependence on good relations with China has not gone unnoted," wrote one commentator), as was much of Latin America.

Latin America has made great strides in "transitions to democracy, and truth and reconciliation commissions dealing internally with countries' pasts," said China Human Rights Defenders' Wang. "But internationally, it hasn't stood up for human rights very constructively, either."

The European Commission, made up of appointed civil servants rather than elected officials, issued only a tepid statement that stopped short of calling for Liu's release.

And the United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon was also vague, saying in a statement only that the award was "a recognition of the growing international consensus for improving human rights practices and culture around the world," while going on to praise China for its economic progress.

Article 35 of China's own Constitution and Article 19 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights list freedom of speech as a basic right of all citizens and peoples.

See Russia Today video on Liu and this year's Nobel Prize:



Original post

Chinese Twitter clones

Twitter Clone Helps Chinese Family Thwart Authorities

AOL News

TAIPEI, Taiwan (Sept. 21) -- It was a typical case of property seizure, like those that happen nearly every day in China, but with a key difference.

This time microblogs blasted the story across the Chinese Internet, causing an immediate outpouring of sympathy this month for the Zhong family at the center of the dispute, and outrage against the local officials that tried to evict them.

By the end of the Internet drama, eight local officials had been removed from their posts or were under investigation, according to Chinese media reports. And the Zhong family's home remains standing.

The Zhongs' story shows how powerful social media have become in China as citizens turn to Twitter-like services in the absence of effective legal recourse, government help or a free media.

The drama unfolded in a small town in Jiangxi Province, according to a Southern Metropolis Daily article translated at the popular blog EastSouthWestNorth.

The local government had planned since 2007 to build a bus depot and was relocating residents, the report said. The Zhongs, who owned a three-story home on the planned site, were the last hold-outs -- and one of several families unhappy with the government's compensation offer.

In May the government cut off the family's electricity. Then, on the morning of Sept. 10, scores of local officials and police officers came to evict them by force.

In the struggle that ensued, the mother, Luo Zhifeng, an elderly male friend of the family, Ye Zhongcheng, and a daughter, Zhong Rujin, doused themselves with gasoline and lit themselves on fire in protest. The daughter, Zhong Rujin, tumbled out of the second floor to the ground outside the home like a "human fireball," according to the Southern Metropolis Daily, a scene caught in graphic photos taken by a neighbor.

All three were taken to a burn center; the man later died of his injuries.

Two other daughters of the family, Zhong Rujiu and Zhong Rucui, then attempted to take a plane to Beijing to petition the central government -- a common, if often ineffective, recourse for Chinese who feel local governments have violated their rights.

Local officials surrounded them in a ladies' restroom at the airport, forbidding them to go to Beijing. And that's where the microblogs -- weibo in Chinese -- came in.

A reporter for Phoenix Weekly "tweeted" about the restroom showdown on a microblog at Sina.com and posted local officials' cell phone numbers -- posts that quickly got over a million views, before Sina.com contacted the reporter to ask him to delete his posts.

The two sisters then launched two microblogs of their own to plead for help and support and to post the latest developments of their case.

In her first post on a Sina.com microblog on Sept. 17, one sister wrote, according to Chinabroadcast.cn: "How are you? My name is Zhong Rujiu. I am the youngest daughter in the family involved in the self-immolations in Yihuang county, Fuzhou city, Jiangxi province. I have seen how everybody on the Internet has been concerned about my family. I am very grateful."

Her posts notified net-users of each new development in the real-life drama, including the arrival of scores of local officials to seize her uncle's body, despite the family's protests. Later, when officials took the sisters and other relatives away on a bus, a picture of Zhong Rujiu pressed against the window was posted and re-posted on the Internet, faster than censors could delete it.

The case shows how social media is becoming an increasingly influential force in the lives of many Chinese, as well as a source of breaking -- if not always 100 percent accurate -- news.

According to a count from one social media consultant earlier this year, there are 221 million blogs and 176 million social network users in China, out of a total Internet population of 420 million.

In a recent poll by China Youth Daily reported at China Daily, half of survey respondents, most of whom were under 40, said they browse microblogs frequently, with more than 94 percent saying microblogging is "changing their life." More than 73 percent view microblogs as an important news source.

Sina.com hosts China's most popular Twitter clone, or microblog, with 20 million users since its launch just over a year ago, according to the website micgadget.com. Twitter itself is blocked in China.

In July, several Chinese microblogs were briefly inaccessible, fueling speculation that the government was tweaking them to allow them to be more easily blocked or censored when necessary. When the sites relaunched, all links to websites outside China were blocked.

Chinese authorities recently decided to require microblogs to appoint "self-discipline commissioners" responsible for censorship, according to the media group Reporters Without Borders.

China maintains a vast army of Internet censors who rapidly delete content deemed subversive from chat rooms, or block entire sites and blogs.

Forbidden content includes excessive criticism of the central government, promotion of Tibet or Taiwan independence, and discussion of the banned religious group Falun Gong.

Original site

Reform, or hot air?

China Buzzes With Political Reform Talk -- or Is It Hot Air?

Aug 28, 2010

TAIPEI, Taiwan (Aug. 28) -- Is political reform afoot in China? Or did "Grandpa Wen" just forget to take his meds?

Popular Chinese Premier Wen Jia-bao, No. 2 in Beijing's political hierarchy, set the Chinese Internet abuzz this week with comments that China badly needs political reform.

The context was his visit to the southern boom town Shenzhen to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the city's founding as one of four "special economic zones" that have been on the vanguard in China's spectacular rise. But the folksy Wen dampened the festive mood when he said in unusually sharp and sweeping terms that China's political reforms had lagged too far behind economic reforms.

"Without political reform, China may lose what it has already achieved through economic restructuring, and the targets of its modernization drive might not be reached," said Wen, according to the Global Times, which is affiliated with China's state-run People's Daily.

China's communist autocrats remain firmly in the driver's seat, quickly quashing any organized challenge to their rule and often operating above the law. Several officials and commentators quoted by Global Times backed Wen's views, which followed similar eyebrow-raising remarks from a well-connected Peoples' Liberation Army general known for his maverick views.

"In the coming 10 years, a transformation from power politics to democracy will inevitably take place," wrote the PLA's Liu Yazhou in a Hong Kong magazine, according to a translation by the Australian newspaper The Age. "China will see great changes. Political reform is our mission, endowed by history. We have no leeway. So far, China has reformed all the easy parts, and everything that is left is the most difficult; there is a land mine at every step."

The comments made some Chinese wonder whether the winds of political change are blowing -- or whether it's all just hot air.

Some cynical Chinese bloggers leaned toward the latter. Taiwan's Want Daily described their reaction as "the east wind blows again" -- an idiom roughly meaning "same old song."

"It's two steps forward and three steps back," one wrote. "The key point in promoting political reform is whether normal people get any benefit," said another. "Inviting everyone to criticize would mean having to arrest and lock up the whole country," wrote another wit. "How can we really have criticism and monitoring [of the government]?"

Only Small-Bore Reforms Likely

Analysts also cautioned not to read too much into Wen's remarks. His personal views aside -- and he's generally seen as a sincere supporter of reform -- China is now ruled by committee, and a highly conservative and cautious one at that.

"I think he [Wen] is willing to experiment, but the problem is, he functions within a gigantic bureaucracy and a system of collective leadership -- and the party is concerned about stability," said Dali Yang, head of the University of Chicago Center in Beijing, in a phone interview.

"He speaks his heart, and that's what makes him endearing, but he's in his last two years as premier, and there's a limit to how much he can do," Yang said.

He said that China was already pursuing some political reforms that shouldn't be dismissed, such as experimental local elections at the village, township and even county level (though not yet for county chiefs); use of informal and formal polls to take the public's pulse on its leaders; and more competitive, open processes for civil service promotions in cities like Shenzhen to try to reduce bribery and nepotism.

But the reform process is likely to be incremental, slow and small-bore, and won't soon result in anything an American would recognize as democracy. Many reforms focus on how China's communist party functions internally, not on China's overall system.

It's not clear how much support Wen has in China's leadership, either. Party leader and President Hu Jintao has remained something of a cipher despite nearly eight years in power. His historical legacy is likely to be his key role in adopting a savvier, carrot-and-stick approach to Taiwan -- helping to make the Taiwan Strait more stable than it's been in decades -- rather than any meaningful reforms or his clunky slogans about creating a "harmonious society."

Xi's Gotta Have It?

Hu's most likely successor, Xi Jinping, doesn't promise anything sexier, either. Veteran China watcher Willy Lam, who is writing a book about Xi, said that Xi is a shadow of his father, who was a noted, high-ranking liberal in the communist party hierarchy.

"Xi Jinping is a conservative -- he has not been able to pick up the liberal genes from his father," said Lam at a talk in Taipei earlier this year. "Xi lacks charisma and a strong base in the party. ... He was picked as a compromise candidate accepted by all [party] factions. He's not seen as a person who has strong values."

Xi is expected to be appointed soon to a post on China's powerful Central Military Commission, according to the South China Morning Post, which China watchers say is a sign that he's on track to take over the reins from Hu in the fall of 2012.

If anything, the role of the People's Liberation Army within China's system may become more important than any reform drive by civilian leaders. "The PLA is a very dangerous institution," said Lam. "There are no checks and balances. The generals have too much power; they are not subject to scrutiny."

For that reason, PLA Air Force Gen. Liu's high-profile prediction of "great changes" were of particular interest, but analysts were left scratching their heads over what he meant. Lin Chong-Pin, a China watcher in Taipei, said he believed that Liu had been invited to Beijing around 2004 and "recruited" or co-opted by the leadership after similar, outspoken remarks early this decade. That makes his re-emergence in the Hong Kong press something of a mystery.

Varied Media Response

China's media have a typically schizophrenic response to all the talk of political reform. Southern Chinese outlets known for their more freewheeling ways ran enthusiastic commentaries, while central, state-run media buried Wen's remarks or didn't report them at all, according to The Economist.

China's state-run Xinhua news service quickly produced excerpts of a 2008 speech from Hu Jintao also calling for reforms, in an apparent effort to show that China's two top leaders were singing from the same songbook, according to Taiwan's Want Daily. And the Global Times even ran an English-language commentary warning foreigners not to get carried away. "Overseas analysts should not get over-excited about the prospect of major political reforms," it said.

"Chinese leaders have made it clear that China will never directly copy Western-style political systems. Under the leadership of the Communist Party of China, the country will explore its own socialist path that fits its own domestic situation," the commentary continued.

That's the kind of typical line that makes skepticism the default position for most longtime watchers of China's political scene. "The CCP will muddle through, but it is incapable of greatness, self-reflection or self-correction," said Lam.

"Imagine a party with this manifesto: We just want to hang on to power, period."

Original site

Killer cop stirs debate

Police Shooting Video Stirs Debate in China

AOL News

TAIPEI, Taiwan (July 14) -- A video of a plainclothes policewoman shooting dead a hostage-taker in Guangzhou has sparked sharp debate among the Chinese about how far police should go in dealing with higher crime rates.

Some are disturbed that the cop shot the hostage-taker four times, killing him, even though he appeared to have been taken out of action by the first shot and was armed only with a pair of scissors.

But others are celebrating her as a hero.

The incident highlights the ambivalence in China toward widespread, Dirty Harry-style police methods that, while at times effectively ruthless against wrongdoers, often show scant concern for human rights and sometimes compound the bloodshed.

The drama was broadcast live on Chinese TV, with the action beginning at around the 5:00 mark in the clip below.

The incident started around 8 p.m. July 6, after a botched robbery by an assailant wielding a pair of scissors, according to a report at Tianxue.com translated at Chinasmack.

The perp stabbed his robbery victim with the scissors when he resisted, then took a young woman hostage and made his standoff on a public sidewalk just in front of a bank's ATM alcove. Cops and snipers moved in, and the standoff dragged on as the robber clutched the bleeding hostage in a headlock.

Around 9:30 p.m., a plainclothes policewoman wearing a white pantsuit and elegant scarf approached close to the hostage. She put the robber off-guard by tossing him a bottle of cola, according to Tianxue. Then she reached under her blouse and retrieved a handgun.

Seconds later, as the perp reached down to get the bottle, she charged and fired. The robber and his hostage fell backward into the ATM alcove out of view of news cameras, and it was unclear whether he was hit. The plainclothes cop is then seen in videos moving into the alcove and shooting three more times. The hostage was quickly taken away to safety, while the perp died at the scene.

Video shows the daring plainclothes officer smiling and laughing in response to a reporter who told her, "Big sister, you're so impressive," minutes after the shooting.



In a commentary on Tianya.com, one commentator wrote: "The story of the brave policewoman was everywhere in the media today. I have doubts. What I think is that one shot already did the job. If she wanted to be on the safe side, after one shot, shouldn't she have run forward and kicked away the robber's weapon?"

Another person posting to Tianya wrote, according to a translation at EastSouthWestNorth, "If it was possible to arrest the suspect without killing him, then he should be kept alive. His crime does not deserve death. Even if he deserves to die, it should be decided by the judiciary. The present action shows utter disregard for human life."

Such posts led to angry reactions from other netizens, who had little sympathy for the robber and applauded the policewoman. "Hostage-takers are utterly evil, and reason demands that they be shot dead," wrote one, according to Chinasmack. "Hostage-takers are not bad people? Are you the robber's partner in crime?"

But others criticized the cop for being able to laugh just minutes after shooting someone dead. "No matter what, killing someone, especially if it was the first time killing someone, and then still being able to laugh afterward ...," wrote one. "This is China, everything is possible, nothing makes sense."

"Very stimulating, very realistic, much more enjoyable than cops-and-robber films," another chipped in. "Stop arguing, go to bed and wait to watch the next killing show."

The Tianxue report said that until killing the man, the 40-something policewoman, nicknamed "Ah Xiu," had only fired her weapon at the shooting range in the course of 27 years of service.

But she had extensive experience dealing with hostage situations, the report said, and was nicknamed the "female Sherlock Holmes" by her squadron for her skills in evaluating crime scenes. She comes from a police family, the report said.

In an interview posted with the article, Ah Xiu said she seized an opportunity to move on the hostage-taker because she was the closest cop and the one he was least "on guard" against. She said the situation was "hanging by a thread" and the cops had no choice but to move in. "If we didn't use force, there was no way to guarantee the hostage's safety," she said, according to the Tianxue report.

China executes by far the most people of any nation, according to Amnesty International, with more than 1,000 put to death in 2009, compared to some 388 in Iran and 52 in the U.S. Other human rights groups have higher estimates; the exact number is a state secret. Just last week, China executed the top justice official of crime-plagued Chongqing, who had also doubled as the metropolis' top mob boss, according to reports.

Crime jumped in China in 2009, according to a report by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, and the Beijing Times said it was the first such spike in a decade. Guangzhou in particular has seen a rise in brazen robberies in recent years, amid a shortage of beat cops on the streets, according to another report.

Original site

Taiwan's gods of metal

They're loud. They're angry. They hate the Chinese government

Meet Chthonic, Taiwan's premier metal act. Don't expect to see them in China anytime soon.

Global Post, January 24, 2010

TAIPEI, Taiwan — The first time Taiwanese metal band Chthonic toured America, audiences didn't exactly give them a warm welcome.

"They stood there with open mouths, and some shouted that they wanted to see the headline band instead," recalled bassist Doris Yeh, in an interview early this month.

But Chthonic would typically silence the hecklers with their first tight, bone-crunching number. "I don't think they were prepared for seeing a band from the Orient," said Yeh. "They were shocked by our outfits and songs."

Chthonic has played Taiwan since the mid-1990s, mixing an "extreme metal" sound, derived from Scandinavian bands, with Asian flavors and a strong pro-Taiwan political stance.

Now, the band is starting to win converts abroad, too. They're recently back from a second tour of the U.S. and Europe, which featured songs from their latest album, "Mirror of Retribution," slickly produced by Anthrax guitarist Rob Caggiano in English and Chinese versions.

Chthonic was named second best band in Terrorizer magazine's 2009 reader poll, after Behemoth. Chad Bowar, the heavy metal editor at About.com, said in an email that when it comes to the best-known Asian metal band on the scene now, it's now a "toss-up" between Chthonic and two Japanese acts, Sigh and Dir En Grey.

"Their look is definitely unique, with the makeup, and using traditional Taiwanese instruments like the erhu (a mournful string instrument) also sets them apart," said Bowar, explaining Chthonic's appeal. "Their political activities help keep them in the spotlight."

"The music is also very good, and without that the other things wouldn't matter."

Bassist Yeh's sex appeal can't hurt, either. She's posed for FHM Taiwan and, to judge by fan websites, has already inspired more than a few metalhead crushes. "She's like three or four fetishes rolled into one," quipped one fan at Chthonic's recent show in Taipei.

Yeh's on a roll: She was voted the second most popular bassist in the Terrorizer reader poll, made Revolver magazine's "Hottest Chicks in Metal" calendar and was featured as GQ Taiwan's "GQ girl" for this January.

Strong politics

In Taiwan, the band — especially 33-year-old songwriter and vocalist Freddy Lim — is well known for their outspoken politics. "Freddy," as he's known here, was a regular on political talk shows in the lead-up to the 2008 presidential election, and rallied youth support for the pro-independence party.

Now, Lim says he's told producers he's not interested in more talk show appearances, despite the easy pay (about $150 per show). He'd rather go on the unpaid university lecture circuit to speak out on his favorite causes.

"I want to influence young people on issues like Tibet, and global human rights," said Lim. "Tibetans, Uighurs, people in Myanmar — they face even worse situations than Taiwan. As Taiwanese, I feel we have the power and responsibility to support them."

Such causes haven't made Chthonic any friends in the Chinese government. Lim says he's been to China seven times, but hasn't been able to go after he organized a "Free Tibet" concert in 2003. Said Yeh: "We know we're on the blacklist."

Lim says he would love to tour China again, and that he stands on the side of Chinese human rights fighters. "I'm not anti-China, I'm anti-Chinese government," he emphasizes. The problem isn't the Chinese Communist Party's ideology, but its repression.

"China's communists aren't communists," said Lim. "They're communist in name, but they're really just tyrannical bastards."

Historical anger

Lim started the band in 1996, inspired by Scandinavian acts like Norway's Emperor and Sweden's At the Gates. But though he loved such music, he couldn't relate to the cultural symbols and messages, especially the anti-Christian themes.

"I'm always an outsider in their culture," said Lim. "The percentage of Christians here is very low, so there's no reason for us to be anti-Christian."

A search for themes to inspire Chthonic's lyrics and message led him to local history instead. "I felt like, if I want to write my own extreme metal songs with the same anger and feeling, it wouldn't be anti-Christian, or Satanic, because I have no emotion or passion about that."

"So I started to think more locally. What I really care about is my homeland."

In Taiwan's history, Lim found plenty to be angry about. "The whole of Taiwan's history is one of oppression by different empires — Dutch, Spanish, Japanese and Chinese," he said.

The oppression persists, this time from China's current government, which has some 1,300 missiles pointed at Taiwan and has vowed to some day absorb the self-ruled island, by military force if need be.

"We're under another kind of oppression, so we write our songs from these roots, and we put in stories from history," said Yeh.

Hear more from Yeh in this interview:

One album's theme was Taiwan Aborigines' resistance to Japanese colonial rule (1895-1945). The latest album, "Mirror of Retribution," tells the story of a spirit medium who journeys to hell to try to steal the book of life and death so he can rewrite Taiwan's history.

The backdrop is the real-life 228 massacre of 1947, when Kuomintang troops under Chiang Kai-shek slaughtered tens of thousands of local Taiwanese who had risen up against the KMT's bumbling, tyrannical rule.

Lim said the story was one way to introduce fans to the "oriental philosophy of hell," which includes 18 levels, 100 small levels and 10 courts presided over by 10 ghost kings.

Welcoming confrontation

In a packed basement club in Taipei in late December, scores of Taiwanese banged their heads in unison and made the "devil's horns" sign with their upraised hands.

Now and then a fan threw in the air a fistful of paper "ghost money," traditionally burned here to appease ancestors or wandering spirits.

On stage, Lim screamed into the microphone between strands of long black hair, one booted foot planted on a monitor. His voice was nearly drowned out by a thunderous wall of distorted guitar and furious drumming.

When the number was over, two well-dressed youngsters took the stage to hand Freddy a bouquet of flowers. The gift was from a pro-independence candidate, who just won a county commissioner's post, to thank Freddy for his support.

It was clearly a love-fest for Chthonic and their loyal Taiwanese fans. On the first U.S. tour, though, Freddy said they heard that some Chinese students — angered by the band's pro-Taiwan stance — wanted to protest outside one of their gigs in California. In the end, it didn't happen.

"Most of our fans there were very strong guys with tattoos — Mexicans, white guys — and some older Taiwanese-Americans too," said Lim, with a chuckle. "I don't think the Chinese students wanted to fight them."

He said he hasn't yet been confronted by Chinese students at lectures, as happened recently here to a prominent, exiled Chinese democracy activist. (Taiwan's government is allowing Chinese students to study here in increasing numbers.) In any case, Lim welcomes such showdowns and said they're healthy for Taiwan.

"If you don't deal with Chinese people and talk to them, you don't know how different you are, and how different your values are," said Lim. "Without the people you hate, you don't know the people you love."

Chthonic hopes to tour the U.S. and Europe again before September, when their American visas expire. Another album is in the works for 2011. They're currently looking for a new manager.

Original site

China charges activist

In a closely-watched case, Liu Xiaobo faces a 15-year jail sentence for "inciting subversion."

Global Post, December 11, 2009

TAIPEI, Taiwan — Chinese prosecutors have formally charged democracy activist Liu Xiaobo with "inciting subversion," a year after he co-authored a call for sweeping political change in China.

The lawyer, Shang Baojun, said by phone that he received the prosecution papers Friday, and that Liu had been formally charged the day before. The lawyer expects a trial anytime after Dec. 20, and likely lasting only a half-day.

Liu could get up to 15 years jail time, with a five- to 15-year sentence "very likely," his lawyer said.

"Charter 08" is a blueprint for political reform in China (see text in English). It calls for an end to the Chinese Communist Party's monopoly on power, multiparty elections, rule of law and the separation of powers.

Upon its release on the internet a year ago, Liu was taken into custody. He has been in detention since then — without charge, until Thursday.

In the past, China has released jailed activists under international pressure. Rights groups were hoping Beijing might do the same for Liu Xiaobo before or after President Obama's visit.

"A lot of people have great hopes for Obama as a person who really believes in human rights," said Wang Songlian, a research coordinator with Chinese Human Rights Defenders. "And a lot of people were hoping that he would come out stronger and raise Liu Xiaobo's name publicly. Unfortunately that didn't happen, and that was very disappointing."

Wang said that for many Chinese activists, Obama's public silence on the issue had let to speculation on a shift in "power dynamics" between the U.S. and China.

"We're afraid that might be true that the U.S. is dependent on China in the financial crisis and feels that it needs to be kinder to China, and not criticize," said Wang. "But we believe it's in the interests of both the U.S. and the Chinese people that the U.S. come out strongly with what it believes, refer specially to China's human rights issues, and not avoid sensitive topics."

While Obama talked in general terms about U.S. values during his China visit, he didn't publicly address China's poor human rights record, she said. That may be an intentional effort to downplay criticism and focus on areas of cooperation, said Wang. But if so, she said, the approach is misguided.

"We think China's lack of transparency on human rights issues has implications on all kinds of topics — pollution targets, carbon dioxide targets, trade — that the U.S. wants to work with China on," said Wang. "You can't divorce these things."

Wang said her group now fears that Charter 08's other authors may be charged too. Zhang Zuhua, a Beijing-based expert on constitutional development, is one co-author. In an interview last year, he said Charter 08 embodied "universal values" which China should gradually adopt, and that he didn't expect change "overnight."

Zhang was detained, questioned and released a year ago. His home was then put under round-the-clock surveillance. According to Chinese Human Rights Defenders, this year security officials "warned him not to give interviews, meet with others or write articles about the anniversary, and threatened to imprison him if he does not comply."

Repeated calls to Zhang's home and cell phone went unanswered Friday.

A Guangzhou-based signer of Charter 08 who goes by the pen name "Ye Du" said he believed the Chinese government had charged Liu because it calculated the costs would be low.

"Foreign governments, especially the U.S., haven't given China much pressure on human rights, so they [the Chinese government] think this won't give rise to much opposition from abroad," he said in a phone interview.

Ye said President Obama has shown the most "sharp regression" in 20 years in terms of U.S. pressure on China's human rights. He mused that this must have something to do with the massive amount of U.S. Treasuries now held by China.

Ye said he was one of the original 303 signers of Charter 08; some 10,000 have now signed the document. On Dec. 9 last year, shortly after Ye signed it, the police came and questioned him for three or four hours, he said.

China's 30 years of economic reforms had achieved "huge improvements" in people's standard of living, Ye said. But he said Charter 08 was critical because the lack of accompanying political reforms had led to many "contradictions" in Chinese society.

Ye is one of some 200 charter signers who on Thursday issued another open letter titled, "We are willing to share responsibility with Liu Xiaobo." (See text in simplified Chinese).

"We're all afraid of being charged," said Ye. "But we must do this. If we didn't, we would let down Liu Xiaobo, and let ourselves down, too — our commitment to freedom and democracy."

Original site

Xu Wenli speaks out

Leading Chinese dissident talks about his recent release from prison and what it means for prospects for democracy in China

Newsweek Web, January 27, 2003

Leading Chinese dissident Xu Wenli has gone to prison twice for the cause of democracy: once for 12 years for his involvement in the 1978-79 Democracy Wall movement, when he edited a political journal, and again in 1998 for founding a pro-democracy opposition party. His plight was well-documented, and he became a cause celebre for human rights and democracy activists around the world.

On December 24, the Chinese government released him early, citing medical reasons (Xu suffers from hepatitis B), and put him on a plane with his wife to the United States. Though on its face a major concession, many see his release as merely a token gesture, and question whether there has been any real change on human rights in China.

NEWSWEEK's Jonathan Adams spoke to Xu recently about his release, and what it means for the prospects for democracy in China.

NEWSWEEK: Why do you think the Chinese government decided to release you now?

Xu Wenli: I think it's the relationship between the U.S. and China. America needs to have support from the Chinese government on terrorism, and China needs America's support for money, managers and experience. So the Chinese government can take credit for releasing someone like me. They're playing cards with the human rights issue with America; release one or two people, but arrest 10 or 20 more. That doesn't add up to any improvement.

The Chinese dissident community here in the U.S. has a reputation for being divided over how best to achieve democracy and respect for human rights in China. How has the U.S. community received you?

That's one of the reasons that the Chinese government wanted to release me, because with my release the conflict may worsen within the dissident community. It's quite normal that there's disagreement between the dissidents. There's a limitation on money and support. So for people to try to fight for a tiny bit of support, that's understandable. So after my release I have three points: one, I don't want to criticize others. Second, if others criticize me I will not respond. And third, I don't want to be the leader of the dissident community.

What were the prison conditions like?

I was in a prison within a prison, basically a special area. There were seven policemen and three criminal prisoners. They lived with me and they also watched me. And there were eight cameras. Around the windows there was a metal fence and around the metal fence there was sheet metal that went all around, so I couldn't see the scenery, and which also prevented people from seeing me. They actually put sheet metal on their windows as well, whoever could see down in the yard. It was intensively monitored.

When I heard my wife tell me that she hadn't known where I was held and if I was alive or dead, and had taken my daughter everywhere in Beijing to look for me. The police were not friendly back then, it was in 1981. They refused to tell my wife and daughter where I was held for about a year and a half. Their attitude was really harsh. When my wife described that to me, it was the toughest time to experience.

One argument the Chinese government and others have made is that economic modernization must come before democratization, that it's too dangerous to have both at the same time. How do you respond to that?

I think that political reform should be done carefully, because of China's lack of a democratic tradition. The Chinese people have little understanding of how to express their rights and how that works. But that shouldn't be the reason why the Chinese government refuses to have democratic political reform.

The Chinese one-party rule is not a party rule, it's a personal rule. Mao decided to have the Cultural Revolution. Deng Xiaoping decided to have the Tiananmen massacre in 1989. And Jiang Zemin decided not to fully retire, but to keep his power in the military. So the Chinese government is not much different from the last 5,000 years of the Chinese emperors. Even though the living situation for Chinese people has changed, there's a lot of unhappiness. And that unhappiness has to do with not having political rights.

Do you think another Tiananmen Square massacre could happen today?

I don't think there's much chance for another massacre today, because after 1989, both sides were wounded. The students today are such different people than the 1989 students. Today's students are more practical. They don't have as much desire for democracy. A lot of young students don't like politics and they're sick of it. But there are always some students out there who want Chinese society to become democratic.

There is a girl named Liu Di, a student at a Beijing university. She criticized the Chinese government online. She's been arrested, but not sentenced yet. There are about 700 well-known Chinese scholars asking for her release online.

If you had to say how long it will take for China to become democratic, what would you guess?

I think in 20 to 30 years, that shouldn't be a problem.

What was the first thing you did when you got off the plane in New York?

I went to Ground Zero. I wanted to pay my respects to the people who were lost. And I also thought, there's a place you can go to pay your respects in New York, but there's no place you can do that in China for the students who died in 1989.

Original site

"You want me; I am here."

Interview: Wu'er Kaixi is barred from returning to China after 20 years in exile.

Global Post, June 4, 2009

TAIPEI — On China's "most wanted" list of 1989 student protest leaders, Wu'er Kaixi is No. 2. He rocketed to fame as a 21-year-old youngster, lecturing the Chinese premier in a nationally televised showdown.

After 20 years in exile, he tried to return to China via Macau on Wednesday, to turn himself in. He says he wanted to see his parents, who are barred from leaving China.

But officials at the Macau airport refused him entry, and forced him onto a flight back to Taiwan today. GlobalPost's Jonathan Adams spoke to him by phone after his return.

GlobalPost: So what happened in Macau?

Wu'er Kaixi: I went there hoping I could enter — I've entered Macau in the past with no problem. But of course June 4 is a more sensitive time. I arrived there at 6 p.m., hoping I could go to the liaison office of the central [Chinese] government, to turn myself in.

What did they say to you?

At the airport, they rejected my entrance without explanation — that's the official side of the story. Unofficially, they said quite openly, "Come on, look at the date. We can't let you in."

Why do you think they didn't arrest you?

That's a really good question for the [Chinese] Communist Party. I can try to answer.

China has adopted this exile policy, exiling dissident voices. Basically they want to keep everything outside.

Sometimes, China wants nothing but "face" from the world. But when it comes to Tiananmen, to June 4, all of the sudden they don't care about face anymore. Or, the only way to save face is to cover it.

That's something we already knew, but it's absurd. One message I want to get across this time is, don't take absurdity as it's given [by China]. There are certain absurdities that the West, the world, seems to take when China gives it. So anything absurd, ridiculous or wrong, when it's done by the Chinese, is no longer a surprise.

I am challenging the Chinese government, eye to eye: "You want me, I am here." And they decided to hide behind the Macau government. Or as one Macau police officer said, "We are one country, two systems — sometimes we're one country, sometimes we're two systems. This time we're one country."

Why did you want to go back?

I haven't seen my parents in 20 years, and they're not in good health. They're not getting any younger, and they're not getting any healthier. I learned that my mom had a stroke in 1989 when I was in hiding; I learned about it a decade later, the family decided to keep that news from me. When I learned about it, it was devastating.

Now, 20 years, it's a time period where I felt, I can no longer take it. I am willing to explore any option, including turning myself in, so that I can go back to China and hopefully one day see them [his parents] again.

What message do you have for China's leadership on this day?

Before challenging them, I begged, I asked many different channels to convey my message. I begged them to issue passports to my parents. I begged them not to conduct such a barbaric and primitive act. My parents didn't do anything. Let me take the consequences, not them.

And they had a chance to correct such a little mistake. But somehow, when it comes to anything related to dissidents, this government becomes deaf and blind and incapable of any communication.

That is not the behavior of a big country, that's my message. China is making this very personal, not only to me but for similar activists. These kinds of things are not the behavior of a mature, great nation that China so wants the world to acknowledge it [to be].

You now live in Taiwan. What do you think Taiwan's democracy?

Taiwan's democracy is a role model, not only for China but for the world. To begin with, the process of democratization was one of the most swift, and thorough, and with the least costs to pay.

And then if you look at the Taiwanese people. In such a short period of time they not only adopted the [political] system, they adopted the mentality, the central values of democracy. Which are freedom, equality, respect for diversity. Taiwanese people love democracy. They practice democracy every day. That's why it's a little noisy.

When Jackie Chan — the internationally acclaimed action star Jackie Chan — accused Taiwan of being "chaotic" and having too much freedom … he has no idea what chaos is.

Having the [Chinese] military crack down on Changan Avenue (a main avenue in Beijing leading to Tiananmen Square), that's chaotic. The Cultural Revolution, that's chaotic.

But having people shouting rally speeches the day before the election [in Taiwan], then on the day of the election it's so quiet, and people accept the election result — that's not chaotic at all.

Have you linked up with the movement around Charter 08 [a document published last year calling for sweeping political reform in China]?

I've signed it. Liu Xiaobo [Charter 08's main author, who has been held in police custody since early December last year] is not only a close friend and teacher of mine, he was a mentor during the 1989 student movement. Before he launched [Charter 08], I already knew about it, we discussed it. I'm very proud to be a signatory.

When you think back on 1989, do you have any regrets?

No regrets at all. I have done nothing wrong. The consequences were a little hard to take. Nevertheless, we did anticipate there would be consequences. We were prepared.

Original site

'A Universal Idea'

Charter 08 — A 'Universal Idea'

by Jonathan Adams, FEER.com, February 6, 2009

Published online in early December 2008, "Charter 08" is a blistering indictment of Chinese Communist Party rule. It lays out a bold, detailed vision of a new China: one with the rule of law, multiparty elections, and the separation of powers.

One of the drafters, Liu Xiaobo, remains in Chinese police custody, facing charges of "inciting subversion" or worse. The police have questioned and warned at least dozens of Charter signers, muzzled state media, and blocked Web sites mentioning the Charter.

By now, the initial buzz about Charter 08 has died down, but some commentary continues. In two recent entries, Roland Soong at the widely-read EastSouthWestNorth blog (read here and here) dismissed the charter as holding little interest for most Chinese. (He quoted from an article I wrote for the Christian Science Monitor.) Rebecca MacKinnon also had a long essay on Charter 08 at her Web site.

I talked to Zhang Zuhua, one of the drafters of Charter 08, in Beijing last Dec. 26. In that interview, he made clear that Charter 08 was intended only as a political blueprint, and that reform could take decades, even generations. "We don't expect this change overnight," he said.

Mr. Zhang himself is a lesson in the rapid reversals possible within one lifetime in China. A 53-year-old Beijing native, he was "sent down" with other privileged youth to the countryside for "re-education" during the Cultural Revolution. He ended up making missile parts in a cave in Sichuan Province for eight years.

With the end of the Cultural Revolution's madness, he was part of the first generation to return to school. He studied at Sichuan Normal University, where he focused on Western constitutionalism. Later he rose through the ranks in the Communist Party Youth League, where he worked in the 1980s with Li Keqiang—now vice premier.

Mr. Zhang's own political career ended when he spoke out in support of the Tiananmen Square protests. He's been under off-and-on surveillance ever since. Most recently, police interrogated him for 12 hours on Dec. 8, 2008, over his involvement in Charter 08.

Here, in his own words, are his thoughts on Charter 08 and China's future. (The transcript has been edited and rearranged for readability.)

Jonathan Adams: Some critics say the ideas in Charter 08 are "Western" ideas, that China is in a special situation and so these ideas don't apply.

Zhang Zuhua: First of all, we have a very moderate attitude to such comments and critics. We welcome people to comment on this Charter, and we can learn from them.

I'm one of the charter's main drafters. When the police questioned me, I acknowledged that most of the ideas are Western ideas. The ideas of the charter come not only from the U.S. Bill of Rights, but also from the 1215 reforms in England [the Magna Carta], from the French Declaration of the Rights of Man, and from the Czech Charter 77 [a 1977 call for political reform by Czech activists during the days of Communist rule].

But we also have a "native" (bentu) inspiration: that is, Taiwan. Before 1986, there were also many activists, people fighting for democracy and human rights in Taiwan, and publishing calls for those things. [Taiwan began democratizing in the late 1980s].

JA: Many Chinese say that China needs stability most of all, that it must focus on economic growth, and political reform can wait.

ZZ: Personally, I agree with this. China should take time to develop. [This] year will be the 20th anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen Square incident. And so we hope China can move toward democracy and the rule of law with a very low cost. I hope China can accomplish this transition in a peaceful and nonviolent way.

JA: What will be needed for China to change?

ZZ: In my writings, I use a method of analyzing called "three plus one" analysis. Looking at all of the factors affecting China's future, I came up with three political elements and one economic. The political ones are the ruling party, civil society and international society.

The CCP is the ruling party and its choices about the future are obviously very important to Chinese society. However, the efforts of the ruling party are not enough. Without the participation of civil society and international society, it will be difficult to lead China down the right path.

JA: How soon do you think change can happen?

ZZ: I think it wouldn't be so difficult to accomplish a change in the [political] system, if the four factors that I mentioned are all ready. So I think in the next decade or two, this kind of change can be accomplished. However, consolidating and perfecting democracy—that will take a long time. Maybe it will require the efforts of several generations. So we don't expect to achieve this change overnight.

JA: Analysts I've spoken to say the Chinese government worries foreign influence is behind Charter 08—that foreign elements want to destabilize China from within.

ZZ: Personally, I don't agree with the opinion which rejects interference from other countries. I think this runs against the global trend of civil society. In Charter 08, we adopt a universal idea shared with the entire human race. It's not American, it's not European, it's not African. It works for all human beings. However, the CCP disagrees with this universal idea and criticizes it. That's our difference with them.

JA: What kind of response have you personally received to Charter 08?

ZZ: When we drafted Charter 08 we were concerned that it was only for elites, that it wouldn't be accepted by the common people. However, according to the response on the Internet, that's not the case. A lot of people, including peasants and workers, agree with Charter 08, and it's popular among more and more people.

Charter 08 calls for an independent judiciary and abolishing inequality. Ordinary people approve of all of these suggestions.

Actually, one of the most important suggestions in Charter 08 is to abolish the unfair principle of discrimination against peasants—or to abolish the difference between urban and rural residents, because many peasants are treated unfairly. I've received a lot of phone calls from peasants who advocate this proposal.

JA: What else explains the Charter's broad appeal?

ZZ: I think this Charter articulated what many Chinese people want to say. It's very rational and very constructive. First, a lot of people don't dare to speak out. Second, there's no place for them to speak out, because no media will publish them. And third, the first 303 people who signed the charter were very famous scholars.

For example, the first one to sign was Yu Haocheng [a prominent advocate of constitutional change]. Second was Zhang Sizhi [one of China's most famous lawyers]. And third was Mao Yushi [a very respected economist], and then He Weifang [a prominent advocate of legal reform in China].

And of course, they [the government] put people in jail—that attracts more attention.

JA: To what extent was the government's reaction to Charter 08 related to the upcoming anniversary of the Tiananmen Square crackdown?

ZZ: The government has acknowledged that publicly. They have two concerns. One is the 1989 anniversary. The other is that the economy is very bad now—they're afraid of the chaos and problems caused by unemployment. … Actually, when the police interrogated me, they mentioned that high levels of the central government are really concerned about [this] year, because the situation may become quite serious.

JA: How important was the role of technology in distributing Charter 08?

ZZ: Thirty-one years ago, in the era of Charter 77, there was no Internet, so it was difficult to spread the document. Yesterday, I "Googled" Charter 08. Right now there are already more than 300,000 links about Charter 08. A lot of young people use blogs or QQ [referring to popular instant message software in China] groups to make friends, and they've also spread this new Charter. The English version of Charter 08 was spread rapidly. So thanks to the Internet, it's impossible to block information from society now.

JA: What is your situation now? Are you under surveillance, have you been questioned recently by police?

ZZ: Since Dec. 9, they haven't harassed me directly. However they [Chinese police] have people guarding our [his family's] building, and they've bugged my home phone and cell phone. They cut the home line from 11 p.m. to 9 a.m. I was joking that I will protest, because that means they aren't very professional—they don't work very hard at night, because they want to rest.

JA: How worried are you that you'll be sent to jail?

ZZ: I'm not concerned, but my family and wife are. When I started to work on this project, I predicted that the government would react like this, that I might be detained. So I was mentally prepared. When the police questioned me, they also said that this wasn't over, that they would investigate further and maybe talk to me again. So I'm facing the risk of being detained again.

JA: Why are you willing to speak out?

ZZ: When I was in the police station, I told the police, "In every country, the situation is the same. The people who stand up and fight for human rights and freedom—they're the ones who lose those things first. They have to pay the price for other people's democracy and freedom."

I really don't want to be jailed, but I may have no choice. The system [of CCP rule] is like this—it doesn't allow people to oppose them, to disagree with the system. So we have to stand up and fight for democracy—it's our responsibility.

Original site

Charter 08 worries China

Charter 08 worries China

Police have detained activists behind the democracy petition, which has drawn diverse support.

Jonathan Adams
The Christian Science Monitor
January 7, 2009

Beijing -- On Dec. 8, the police took Zhang Zuhua into a room in Beijing and sat him in a chair.

For 12 hours, they questioned him. They brought him water, but no food. And they debated the document that had led him here: Charter 08, a call for sweeping political change in China.

It's gotten to be an old story here: A clutch of activists challenges the government; the government jails one or two to scare others into silence.

But the movement around Charter 08 is different, say human rights groups and Mr. Zhang, who helped draft the document.

A month after its release, Charter 08 is still making waves in China. A wide cross-section of citizens has expressed support online. And the government, nervous about social unrest and the approaching anniversary of Tiananmen Square, has contacted – and in some cases, interrogated and threatened – at least dozens of the manifesto's original signers.

"This text is having a lot of impact – people are debating and signing it online," says Nicholas Bequelin, China researcher for Human Rights Watch. "This is a landmark in terms of its appeal, and [the] attention that it has provoked."

Charter 08 calls for an end to one-party authoritarian rule and lays out a vision for a rights-based society – an electoral democracy, under the rule of law, with equality for peasants and city-dwellers and protected freedoms of speech and expression.

Similar calls have been made before; all have failed to weaken the Chinese Communist Party's grip on power. But activists say this manifesto is significant in several respects.

First, thousands of citizens of all backgrounds – peasants, teenage netizens, prominent lawyers, former party members – have added their names to the petition, not just the usual gadflies. They reflect a minority unwilling to accept the party's vision for China.

Second, the Internet has vastly expanded the charter's reach, with no central organization. That makes it a new kind of threat to a government concerned about organized challenges to its rule.

"It's a testament to the power of the Internet," says Joshua Rosenzweig, of the Dui Hua Foundation, a group that promotes human rights in China. "[It's] allowed Charter 08 to galvanize and bring together a lot of people from different walks of life and locations."

Meanwhile, the government has gone after key players behind the document. Liu Xiaobo, a coauthor of Charter 08, was detained on Dec. 8, the eve of the charter's scheduled publication online. He is being held by authorities at a Beijing hotel, according to Human Rights Watch.

The group has called Mr. Liu's detention "the most significant Chinese dissident case in a decade." "He was seen as being pretty untouchable," says Mr. Bequelin. "The fact he was taken away shatters that notion, and indicates an escalation in the repression of independent thought in China."

Zhang was also arrested on Dec. 8, but later released. Less then three weeks after the pair's detention, sitting in a private back room of a Beijing coffeeshop, he explained the appeal of the document he helped craft. "I think Charter 08 articulates what many Chinese people want to say," he says.

The direct inspiration is Czech activists' call for freedom in 1977, during the days of Soviet occupation. Charter 08's critique is blunt: "The political reality, which is plain for anyone to see, is that China has many laws but no rule of law; it has a constitution but no constitutional government. The ruling elite continues to cling to its authoritarian power and fights off any move toward political change."

Zhang says more than 300,000 websites now link to the charter, and it's being discussed on blogs, QQ (a popular Chinese instant message service and website) groups, and other chat rooms. "It's impossible to block information in society now," he says.

One user posted the following on the Independent Review, an online forum: "The CCP cannot even accept such peaceful and rational suggestions? I will sign the charter!"

Zhang says police seized from his home four computers, books, documents, DVDs, and all of his, his wife's, and their parents' cash and credit cards. Just hours after the Monitor interviewed him on Dec. 26, Zhang was detained again, according to the group China Human Rights Defenders.

"His interrogators sternly warned Mr. Zhang about 'severe consequences' to his family and friends if he continued to give media interviews or engage in any other activities promoting Charter 08," the group wrote in a press release.

Zhang and other activists say the government's reaction to the document reflects its worries ahead of the 20th anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown, and as China's economic engine begins to sputter.

Beijing has banned state-run media interviews with charter signers, banned articles by charter signers, and ordered a crackdown on journalists who signed the charter, according to Radio Free Asia. Websites publishing Charter 08 have been blocked, though it's easily found using a proxy server.

Zhang says he expected this reaction to Charter 08 and is "mentally prepared" for jail. He notes police have treated him well so far – due to his party background, he guesses.

"Sent down" to Sichuan Province during the Cultural Revolution to make missile parts in cave factories, Zhang later became a high-ranking party youth league official – only to be stripped of his post in 1989 after he spoke out in support of protesters. Now he's vulnerable to charges of "inciting subversion" for his role in Charter 08.

Zhang says his home is watched around the clock by at least two men, whom he brings hot water and magazines. "We get along very well. We're all humans, they're only doing their job," says Zhang. "We're not enemies."

"I don't want to be jailed, but I have no choice," he continues. "We have to stand up and fight for democracy."

• Zhang Yajun contributed to this story.

Original site

Street justice in Fujian

Street Justice in Fujian

by Jonathan Adams
Far Eastern Economic Review, "Author's Corner"
November 14, 2008

XIAMEN, CHINA — The timing was impeccable. I had just walked out of my hotel to Zhongshan Road, in the waterfront tourist district, to find lunch.

In front of me, a crowd—maybe 30 people—had gathered around an irate couple on the pedestrian shopping boulevard. The middle-aged couple were holding signs and ranting. I couldn’t make out everything on the signs, but gathered they were railing against the government and the police.

This can’t end well, I thought.

I asked one of the bystanders what the couple was so mad about. “They say the police took their daughter, and won’t release her,” the woman said. “The man says his mother killed herself because of the situation, and he blames the police.”

The couple was clutching several papers, which they showed to the crowd while keeping up a steady patter of complaint. “They say the police promised to give their daughter back, but they haven’t,” the woman explained. The crowd got bigger.

A man appeared, telling the bystanders to disperse. Black polo shirt with striped collar, nice pants, crew cut, hard beady stare: plainclothes cop. One of millions across China who come out of the woodwork at the first sign of any public disturbance. This agitated the couple even more.

“Ni shi shei? Ni shi shei?” [“Who are you?”], they screamed at him, demanding identification.

The cop ignored them.

I loitered, talking to the hotel worker, like everyone else curious to see how this would end.

A police car sped to the scene, screeched to a halt. A tall, bespectacled man in camouflage got out of the passenger side, a uniformed cop out the other. They joined the plainclothes cop in urging the crowd—about 50 by now—to disperse. To no avail.

Onlookers would shrink back when approached, then flood back in as soon as the cops turned their back. The couple began yelling at the other cops too, and shoving papers in their faces.

Bystanders inspected the papers, like an impromptu jury evaluating the evidence. None of the cops engaged the couple.

This went on for quite some time. More cops came. They put up a red-band partition—like one you’d see in an airport waiting line—to keep space between the angry couple and the crowd. Another cop began filming the crowd, myself likely included, with a hand-cam.

Like others, I began to get bored. “Why don’t the cops just take the couple away?” I asked the hotel worker. “They don’t dare do that. There’s too many people here,” she said. At one point, the couple spotted a young man with a television camera. The wife ran after him, trying to get him to come back and film the scene. The young man wasn’t interested.

Back turned, carrying his camera, he walked down Zhongshan Road away from the scene. As did I, not long after.

When I came back after lunch about 30 minutes later, everyone—the couple, the cops and the crowd—was gone. It was an everyday occurrence in China, where cops and local officials enjoy immunity, courts are in the Chinese Communist Party’s pocket, and the media’s too afraid to roll film.

And so, in sleek, modern Xiamen of 2008 -- as in a Chinese village hundreds of years ago, I imagined -- a desperate couple with little left to lose takes their appeal directly to the people. There was no-one else for them to turn to.

Of course, there was no way for me, or the crowd, to evaluate this particular couple’s claims.

Regardless, there’s a larger point. The biggest -- and perhaps fatal -- flaw with Chinese Communist Party rule is not a lack of electoral democracy. Rather, it’s the absence of the rule of law. More specifically, it’s the systemic injustice of a nation whose government wields the “law” like a club, to stifle dissent and silence its critics.

The crowd I saw in Xiamen was relatively mild-mannered. They dispersed quickly. But across China, crowds like this are pouncing on some injustice or another, and often turning violent. What such crowds usually demand is not elections, but justice. And since China’s sham courts provide little help, the result is often mob justice.

Sometimes mob justice is effective -— as in Xiamen itself last year, where street protests organized by text message forced local officials to scotch plans for a chemical plant near a residential area. But surely this isn’t a sustainable way for China’s leaders to address grievances.

Does this mean China must embrace democracy, or collapse?

No. China can and likely will remain undemocratic; perhaps, over the next few decades, becoming something akin to a Singapore of 1.4 billion people.

The real question is, how long will the Chinese people tolerate a government that’s above the law?

Original site