RE: Chinese brothers lose court battle to stay in Canada

AFP - Saturday, September 22
VANCOUVER, Canada (AFP) - - Two Chinese brothers accused by China of embezzling tens of millions of dollars lost a legal battle Friday in their fight to avoid deportation from Canada.
The Federal Court of Canada refused to overturn orders to deport the brothers, Li Dongzhe and Li Donghu, from the country.
The siblings also lost their appeal of Canada's refusal to consider their refugee applications, which had been denied on the grounds that they were already under a removal order.
The Federal Court said their applications were "without foundation in fact and in law."
The brothers, who arrived the Pacific coast city of Vancouver in December 2004, were arrested on February 23.
China accuses the Li brothers, along with a third man, Chinese banker Gao Shan, of involvement in embezzling more than 100 million dollars from a Chinese bank.
The Federal Court's ruling allows Canadian official to begin a process to determine if siblings are at risk of facing the death penalty if they are sent back to China.
Canada does not have capital punishment, and therefore cannot legally deport people to countries where they could be killed or tortured.
The Pre-Removal Risk Assessment process can take more than six months, said Citizenship and Immigration Department spokeswoman Lois Reimer.
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/afp/20070922/tap-canada-china-crime-immigration-court-8d4ea94.html

Comment by me: It seems it is impossible under present conditions for Canada to return fugitives from Chinese justice to China to be made accountable for their crimes. This is due to Canadian judges' rulings questioning whether Chinese Government assurances that the returnees will not suffer unnatural death after return or be subject to treatment in prison that falls short of UN-mandated standards can be relied upon. Problem is that Canada does not want to become a haven for Chinese corrupt officials/mobsters and that their "getting away with it" by touching base in Canada and making a refugee claim is clearly morally wrong.

Re: AFP Report : China orders strict curbs on 'Idol'-style TV shows

AFP - Saturday, September 22
BEIJING (AFP) - - China has ordered strict curbs on "American Idol"-style TV shows, including a ban on voting via the Internet, telephone or text messages, state media reported Saturday.
The rules also say participants must be healthy and mature, while hosts of the reality TV programmes should not flirt with each other or be nasty.
Such talent shows have become hugely popular in China, with new programmes based on the same basic concept proliferating on TV channels right across the vast nation.
Inviting the public to cast votes had been seen by some observers as, in a small way, education in democratic procedures.
But when the latest rules from the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television take effect October 1, only the studio audience will be allowed to vote, the Xinhua news agency reported.
Also, the shows will no longer be broadcast during prime time evening hours between 7:30 pm and 10:30 pm, Xinhua said, presumably a measure meant to curb the viewership.
It appeared one reason for the crackdown was a view that participants were negative role models for the young.
"TV stations must select qualified candidates who show characteristics such as perseverance, maturity, confidence, and health," Xinhua quoted the rules as saying.
"The hairstyle, dress and remarks of candidates should accord with aesthetic values of the general public."
The rules also warned hosts against "flirting with each other," and making "inflammatory or sensational remarks," according to Xinhua.
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/afp/20070922/tap-entertainment-china-television-8d4ea94.html

Comment by me: But another aspect is that these shows are hard for the State Ministry of Radio, TV and Film and for the Party Central Committee Ministry of Propaganda to fully control due to the aspect of democratic vote by ordinary people inherent in their design. I believe that the régime sees them as a potential threat to the established order under leadership of the Party, if entertainment continued to develop along these "wild" lines.

My List of 5 Great Political Science Books as Requested by the Brock University Political Science Students Association

Mencius, The Mencius
Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War
Alexis DeTocqueville, Democracy in America
Karl Polanyi, The Great Transformation
George Grant, Lament for a Nation

Translation of report in Singtao Daily about Human Rights Dialogue based on internal Government materials obtained through Access to Information

Chinese Department Downgraded, Canada China Human Rights Dialogue Takes an Unexpected Turn (rough translation by me)

Report by Singtao Daily correspondent Mary Yang; September 7, 2007
A Federal Government internal communication indicates that the Chinese Government agreed to postpone the Canada-China Bilateral Human Rights Dialogue, so as to allow for mutually agreed reformatting of the activity. But Beijing shortly thereafter at the beginning of this year transferred the responsibility for the Dialogue from the Human Rights Division of the Chinese Foreign Ministry to the geographic branch (the Americas and Oceania Directorate). This has caused concern.
Internal documents that Singtao Daily was able to obtain through the "Access to Information Act" indicate that Ottawa finds it difficult to measure the effectiveness and progress made by the annual Canada-China annual human rights dialogue. The Canadian authorities have already begun initial discussions on the 10th round of Dialogue. The Chinese Foreign Ministry initially adopted an open attitude to reforming the dialogue and agreed to postponing it to allow for sufficient time to come up with a mutually agreed reformatting of the activity.
The Human Rights Dialogue between Canada and China was initiated in 1997 by the previous Liberal government. There have been 9 rounds to far, the most recent one held in 2005. A report assessing the Dialogue, that the authorities commissioned the scholar Charles Burton to write, stresses that if the Dialogue is to become a more effective instrument to promote human rights in China, it is necessary to reconsider its structure and content.
An internal document obtained by the Singtao Daily written to as a brief last December in preparation for a meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister, Yang Jiechi, indicates that the Canadian side intended to solicit the views of of Mr. Yang on reforming the Bilateral Human Rights Dialogue.
An e-mailed internal communication from an Ottawa official, issued prior to a January meeting between Canadian officials in Beijing and officials of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, expressed the hope that both the Canadian and Chinese sides would recognize that the Bilateral Human Rights Dialogue needs to be improved. The Canadian side would draft up some proposals and a work plan and hoped that they could work collaboratively with the Chinese Foreign Ministry in fulfilling this plan for improvement. They then could discuss the timing of the next round of the Dialogue.
But after this meeting an e-mailed report from a Canadian official reveals that the Chinese Foreign Ministry made a formal diplomatic communication to the Canadian side indicating that the department responsible for the Bilateral Human Rights Dialogue would no longer be the Human Rights Division, but that it would be transferred to the geographic branch (the Americans and Oceania Directorate). This decision to take effect immediately and to be irrevocable. The Canadian official stressed the importance of the Dialogue to Canada and expressed concern that the geographic branch lacks capacity and expertise in human rights.
Charles Burton indicated that this sort of adjustment is unprecedented, "a clear downgrading" as the Americas and Oceanian Directorate is responsible for Canada, the United States and Oceanian affairs and has no functional responsibility for human rights. He pointed out that this shift indicates that China is reversing itself on human rights and weakening the Human Rights Dialogue. This will make is more difficult for Canada to engage in dialogue with China in future.
The Canadian official also expressed the wish that the Human Rights Division would continue with the Dialogue and share their experience and knowledge with the Americas and Oceanian Directorate.
The Chinese official indicated that if the Americas and Oceanian Directorate requested it, the Human Rights Division could provide them with advice.
The Singtao Daily telephoned the Chinese Embassy in Ottawa but up to press time did not receive any response.
Charles Burton believes that if China is not willing to make the Human Rights Dialogue a meaningful activity, then Canada can adopt other means to promote human rights in China, through the United Nations, or by establishing a new institution to promote democracy, or in other ways.


Chinese original of this report can be found at: http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcfd6fxz_261gvkp74. Please advise me of any errors in translation (cb@charlesburton.org)

Comment on Xinhua Report "China clamps 'hostile forces' for congress"

This report appeared in the China Daily and other Chinese media this week:

(Xinhua)Updated: 2007-09-07 20:50
The Chinese police will intensify its crackdown on "hostile forces and evil cults" in the run-up to the 17th national congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC), police chief Zhou Yongkang has said.
"All police should strengthen information collecting work to closely monitor and strike hard on overseas and domestic hostile forces, ethnic splittists, religious extremists, violent terrorists and the Falun Gong cult so as to safeguard national security and social stability," Zhou, minister of public security, told a police meeting.
He warned "the country was going through a period of outstanding disputes among the people, increased crime rates and complex struggles against hostile forces".


Comment by me: It is hard to assess to what extent these "outstanding disputes among the people" and "complex struggles against hostile forces" threaten the bases for the authority of the current régime in China. But their nature seems qualitatively more significant than the purported threat of "class struggle" and "hostile foreign forces" railed against when the Chinese Communist Party was still actively promoting revolution (culiminating in the Cultural Revolution which is now officially deemed by the régime as "ten years of disaster").

Comment to the Asia Pacific Foundation's "Canada-Asia News"

RE: "CHINA: Leading NGO Says Gov't Will Ban All Tobacco Advertising by 2011" (August 28)

The Chinese Association on Tobacco Control is not actually an NGO as NGOs are understood here in Canada. It is rather a GONGO (Government Organized "NGO") that is subject to the authority of the state, which in China is fully under the control of the Chinese Communist Party. The sine qua non of the non-government organization is that it freely exist in the civil public space separate from the governing apparatus. But the Chinese Communist Party has not defined any aspects of China's society as beyond its authority. The Chinese Association on Tobacco Control is an "official" Party organization sanctioned by the Chinese state's Ministry of Civil Affairs' registration process for "people's mass organizations." It is therefore a "front organization," not a freely formed association of concerned citizens. True NGOs remain illegal under Chinese law.

Joy

While working in my office early this morning, in the 5:00am silence, I could hear the gentle sound of my 3-year old son laughing in his sleep in the room next door.

The Guantanamo Uighurs

According to a Canadian Press report released yesterday, Canada was approached by the U.S. on several occasions to accept as refugees in Canada 23 Uighurs that were transported to their Prison Camp at Guantanamo Bay ("Canada balked at Guantanamo refugees: documents" by Jennifer Ditchburn: http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcfd6fxz_246d6hx4f). But we refused to take them. According to the report: "The sticking point seemed to be a point of principle. Under the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement, refugees cannot make claims to enter Canada from the United States except under a few specific exceptions, such as fear they would face the death penalty in America." Presently 17 of the men are still being held in the Camp and live in isolation for 22 hours a day. Five of them were accepted by Albania where they live under difficult conditions and face the risk of Albania giving in to Chinese pressure and being repatriated to China.

I am unclear why it is deemed to be a case that falls under the "Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement." Actually those Uighurs have never been in the USA to my knowledge. The Guantanamo Bay Prison Camp is purposively located outside the USA. Seems to me that Canada could have negotiated concessions in other matters out of the USA if Canada had agreed to help the USA, who apparently feel embarrassed about their incarceration and very harsh treatment of men who are evidently not terrorists or guilty of any crimes. Now Canada bears some responsibility for whatever happens to the 5 Uighurs presently in Albania. Surely we don't want to add another tragedy after the DFAIT mishandling of Mr. Celil's case. Best thing would be to bring them to safety here in Canada.

Why China Sells Poisoned Toothpaste and Poisoned Toys and Defective Tires

The Chinese Government promises to strengthen regulation of product safety and punish severely those who manufacture substandard stuff that is dangerous and unhealthy. But the issue is not simply greedy factory owners who put maximizing their profits over the public good or Government inspectors who can be bribed or intimidated to look the other way. The more fundamental cause is systemic. Under China's one-Party dictatorship, non-governmental organizations such as consumer advocacy groups are not allowed to form. Journalists who expose malfeasance are charged with "false reporting" or "endangering state security." The judiciary is not independent of Government, so the powerful are always protected. The upshot is that when buying a bottle of water in China one is never absolutely sure that the water inside the bottle is what the label on the outside promises and is safe to drink. The prevalence of above legal levels of preservatives, insecticides and other chemicals and bacteria in fresh and prepared foods is also a cause for concern. Fake products and consumer fraud is a fact of life in China today that one learns to live with.

The other negative characteristic of China's current political system is that no one truly represents the interests of ordinary Chinese people. When China's Communist Party abandoned Marxist ideology 20 years ago, it evidently also abandoned its commitment to furthering social justice.

So until China achieves democracy, I'm brushing my teeth with Canadian paste.



An editorial in the National Post on this topic can be found here: http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcfd6fxz_253c8mw8g
My letter in response to this editorial can be found here: http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcfd6fxz_254c7f74c
A letter to the Globe and Mail on this topic can be found here:
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcfd6fxz_252rm469
An interesting report on fake Vineland, Ontario icewine on sale in China can be found here: http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcfd6fxz_251gj2wpq

The Commons Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs Report on Democratic Development and Reflections on My Career to Date

I have finished a careful read of all 224 pages of the Report of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development, Advancing Canada's Role in International Support for Democratic Development which was released last month (http://cmte.parl.gc.ca/Content/HOC/committee/391/faae/reports/rp3066139/391_FAAE_Rpt08_PDF/391_FAAE_Rpt08-e.pdf). This topic, "democratic development," has been the focus of my career for over 25 years, so this Foreign Affairs Committee Report is of compelling interest to me. It also has prompted me to reflect on what I have accomplished in my career in government service, research and teaching. And mostly where my work has fallen short of my aspiration to make the world a better place by doing things that will bring justice to people who have not been fairly treated . Fortunately I am not temperamentally inclined to despair, but there are elements of a Shakespeare "Sonnet 30" kind of moment here:

When to the sessions of sweet silent thought
I summon up remembrance of things past,
I sigh the lack of many a thing I sought,
And with old woes new wail my dear time's waste;

or putting it more plainly "Thinking it all over, I wish I could point to more evidence that my work had actually made a difference for the people I had been hoping to help and in retrospect wish that I had not had to put so much time into things that in the end did not achieve the desired justice-promoting result."

In my "Rights Across Borders" second-year course for undergrads and in my "Core Seminar in Comparative Politics" course that I teach in Brock's graduate program, I attempt to identify the conditions under which democracy and respect for human rights will flourish. In both classes, I do a lot of "one the one hand . . . and on the other hand" prevaricating. My only clear and unambiguous conclusion is that there is not a lot of "science" in political science. Similarly, in my research work for some years now, I have been struggling with developing scenarios under which North Korea can make a stable transition to democracy. The more political theory I read in search of some analytical framework to structure my metres-thick piles of files on the DPRK, the further I seem to be from completion of this project. But I will persist in it to the end. I reckon it is too important to give it up.

Even though it is now 18 years past, I remember like yesterday watching a TV interview from Tiananmen Square in May 1989. A young student asked about what he understood was meant by "democracy" responding: "I am not exactly sure what it is, but I do know that we need a lot more of it." Actually there is not much consensus among political scientists and other "democracy specialists" beyond this sort of formulation. The Foreign Affairs Committee Report makes note of this fact in several places and urges that we work harder to get the definition of what we are dealing with when we talk about "democratic development" clarified.

My own introduction to democratic deveopment programming was after I was approached in 1992 in my capacity as Counsellor at the Canadian Embassy in Beijing by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences with a request that Canada assist the Chinese Government in examining policy options for democratic political reform. So I set up the "CASS-Royal Society of Canada Democracy Project" which had 18 exchanges and conferences between '93 and '98. The idea was that after we provided the final report, President Jiang Zemin would announce a comprehensive program of political reform in his December 1998 speech to mark the 20th anniversary of Deng Xiaoping's opening economic reform program which Deng had launched at the Third Plenary Session of the Eleventh Central Committee in December 1978. But it did not come to pass. The rather watered down and platitudinous speech that Jiang did give did not allow Jiang to retire as "the father of China's post-Mao democracy."

It was disappointing for me, but by this time I was back working in the Political Section of the Canadian Embassy and able to hatch new schemes. I became responsible for coordinating the Bilateral and Plurilateral Human Rights Dialogues with the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs --- quiet diplomacy was our new tack. But as I have discussed in earlier postings, it did not fulfil its promise. Staring in the fall of 1998, I oversaw the Civil Society Program for CIDA (changing the name from "Social Initiatives Program" to this more edgy name that means "Citizens'-Society-Program" in Chinese). The purpose of the Civil Society program is to support the development of a non-government public space in China, but the growth of the NGO sector has also proved mostly disappointing ten years on. All in all, lots of good will and trust have been built up, but things have not been going as we had hoped 10 years ago. For example we were pretty excited about the village elections in the early-'90s but there is little progress in extending the electoral process to higher levels of government now over 15 years later and the Village Party Secretary, the most critical local functionary, remains unelected.

The Advancing Canada's Role in International Support for Democratic Development Report which was released last month calls for a review of all the Government of Canada-funded activities to promote respect for democracy and human rights abroad and for the establishment of a new institution to ensure better coordination and effectiveness of future Government-funded democratic development projects. This strikes me as important in light of the above. Especially as the Foreign Affairs Committee could not meet with recipients of governance developmental assistance. They only were able to interview experts in "Democratic Development" and hear reports from representatives of Government agencies and NGOs providing this sort of aid. Moreover with this kind of thing there is a tendency on all sides to report success to protect the income and jobs and career success of the people working in the implementing agencies. So independent disinterested assessment is pretty essential.

The idea is that these "democratic development" activities should empower local agents of change by transfer of knowledge. Actually it is hard to spend large sums of money on this sort of project purpose. But from the bureaucratic point of view of CIDA small projects are not amenable to their administration and reporting requirements. So big projects are proposed. And this leads to the tendency of self-generated sham NGOs to form to attract generous foreign funding. Many of the same NGOs seem to exist on a variety of foreign government and NGO contracts, but democratic engagement evidently only penetrates to a small group and does not sustain once the foreign grant money for foreign travel and other project activities dries up. In China the agencies that have the capacity to successfully apply for foreign funding are actually GONGOS ("Government Organized NGOs") that is to say part of and subject to the direction of the Party/State and not actually in a public space. They are therefore held in check and only give the appearance of representing not civil society. For example, The All-China Women's Federation. the All-China Lawyers Federation, etc., etc.

But still I don't seem able to give this "democratic development" enterprise up. I am scheduled to speak at the Central Party School in Beijing on next month, as part of the Party School's exchange with Rights & Democracy. The project is very controversial. But how could I refuse the invitation of people who ask to know more about "Human Rights and Education in the 21st Century"? I will try my best to not let this be "a dialogue of the deaf." Mainly I do really try to listen. And I will speak openly and honestly. And hope for the best.

Yuquan Temple in Yuxi

Yesterday I travelled by coach from Kunming to the town of Yuxi to visit friends. The journey is only 70 minutes in air conditioned comfort through some outstanding mountainous scenery.

I was quite astonished to find a large new temple compound, completed in 2001, on 60 mu (about 10 acres) just outside the town. The Yuquan (Jade Spring) Temple has 5 large pavilions modelled on the Lingyin Temple in Hangzhou. The Sakyamuni Buddha image is 32 metres high making it, according to the sign outside, "the largest indoor Buddha in Asia" . There is also a very fine enormous lying Buddha image in jade that was imported from Burma.

Evidently this complex cost 150 million yuan (over $20 million Canadian dollars) to build. The money apparently came largely from local people in this prosperous town. Yuxi derives its considerable wealth from the Hongtashan (Red Pagoda) cigarette factory. That is a popular brand which does a lot of sales abroad. The entire town is very beautifully maintained with tropical vegetation and flowering bushes throughout. Yuxi is encircled by misty mountains. The general aspect of the place is paradise-like.

There is nothing modern about the construction of the Yuquan Temple's massive buildings and the beautifully landscaped courtyards. No concession to modern methods has been made in its construction. Elaborate traditional woodwork including unique carving of every window and screen (and there are hundreds of them) dominates, so the Temple compound has the air of having been a place of worship for hundreds of years, not just 6 years. This exquisite temple is just 6 years old! That aspect of it gave me pause for thought.

When I was a student in China in the 1970s, I would use old guide books to try and locate ancient temples in the mountains. All I ever found was the charred and battered remains of buildings that had been destroyed by Red Guards in the Cultural Revolution only a few years before. It was quite discouraging.

But on the Sunday morning I went to the Yuquan Temple there were no tourists aside from us, but I saw some people praying. And the fragrance of incense burning and the faint sound of monks chanting in the distance gently permeated the pavilions and courtyards.

Comments to a Friend on Prospects for an Extradition Treaty Between Canada and China

Yes. I absolutely agree. It is a bit of a long shot, but I think we have to try and work with the Chinese authorities on this. Everybody agrees that Chinese people who have committed serious crimes should not "get away with it" by simply landing in Canada. It is primarily about how to bring the Chinese judicial system up to international standards, but that would mean the judiciary would have to be truly independent of the Party. But that one is already evidently ruled out as an option for the next Party Congress. But I think independence of the judiciary has to come to pass in China sooner or later. Primarily due to domestic reasons, but the international factor is also of increasing importance as it will get easier and easier for Chinese people to travel abroad so more and more embezzlers and gangsters will be able to flee Chinese justice by getting on a 'plane to Canada or other like-minded countries. As the Lai Changxing case demonstrates, Canada really has trouble expelling these people to face trial in China under current conditions.

My Concerns about President Hu Jintao's Recent Speech

Chinese President Hu Jintao delivered a major address at the Central Party School in Beijing on June 25. It was attended by members of the Politburo, the Central Committee, leaders of the military and security services, representatives of all cities, provinces and regions and the heads of top government organizations. It was front page news on the June 26 People's Daily newspaper under the title: "Firmly and Steadfastly Follow the Path of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, Struggle to Achieve New Victories in Building a Basically Well-Off Society" (in Chinese: 坚定不移走中国特色社会主义伟大道路为夺取全面建设小康社会新胜利而奋斗). This speech presumably is intended to set the tone of the Party's 17th Congress coming up this fall.

After a careful reading of this long and comprehensive document, I came away with a sense of relative despair. The speech offers little hope that the pervasive problem of Communist Party officials placing serving the public good second to enriching themselves (and their cronies and families) will be effectively addressed in years ahead. The speech suggests to me that the Party cannot come up with any comprehensive policies beyond "more of the same." The speech makes promises (always short on specifics) similar to those that have not been fulfilled before; particularly the professed "unswerving" determination to somehow or other address official corruption which has been reiterated in speech after speech year after year . But the close collaboration of Communist Party officials with business people, sometimes with links to organized crime goes on unabated. The consequences: poor people forced out of their homes with little compensation often involving police intimidation and violence, child slavery in brick-making factories tolerated by officials in Shanxi with greased palms for years, deaths in coal mines where the Government inspectors were instructed to turn a blind eye, etc., etc., go on and on. Measures to encourage the development of a free and independent press and the development of a free and independent judiciary are really the only answer to this sort of thing, in my view. But President Hu's speech makes clear that Party control of the press and Party control of the judicial system will not be open to debate this fall.

Their is an increasingly awareness among ordinary citizens that their Government is not serving the interests of the people at large but rather primarily represents a hugely monied élite and an increasingly prosperous middle class co-opted by them. As the gap between rich and poor ever widens in China, class tensions grow. The Party's measures to respond to this are not proving adequate to the enormity of this issue.

I am increasingly concerned that the period after the 2008 Olympics may prove a "dangerous" one for the Party as ordinary Chinese people start to wonder "what next?"

Comments to a Student on 50th Anniversary of the Anti-Rightist Campaign and Taiwan Issue

I suppose that one could argue that the CCP's failed policies in the 50s, 60s and 70s are "responsible" for the alienation of Taiwan today. I tend to think that the launch of the Anti-Rightist campaign (50 years ago this year, but no one seems to have noticed much) in response to the "Hundred Flowers" was a signal moment in this. US-Soviet rivalry surely played a role in the enforced Taiwan separation from China as did Chiang Kai-Shek personally, but imagine if China had made a liberal choice in 1957 how much better things might have been if there had been no Great Leap Forward famine and no Cultural Revolution political, social and cultural disaster and no reason for Taiwan not to re-unite with the Mainland?

When I return to Shanghai next month I am staying in a new luxury guesthouse on the campus of Fudan that has been built exactly where my student dormitory (Building 4) was located. But when I was back on the campus last month, I was haunted by memories of those bleak days in the '70s when most of my friends were still suffering from the lingering effects of the various forms of torture that intellectuals had suffered until just shortly before I turned up there. People at Brock have no idea about any of this. But I find it hard to slough off the burden of memory of this past.

And ever today, there is still a need for intellectuals in China to "exercise caution."

Comment to a Student on Conflating "American Hegemony" and "Liberal International Order"

Let me comment briefly on the popular view expressed by many Chinese people that you put on p. 17 "Washington wants China to be responsible to America, that is, responsible to the liberal international order that is under its (hegemonic) leadership. According to the hegemony theory, to make China a reasonable power from this perspective would only reinforce American hegemonic rule in the world. It will serve a core American interest." This goes along with the idea (that I believe has no empirical basis) that U.S. and China have "incompatible" "values." All the Chinese people that I know recognize liberal values as good and noble. A liberal international order is not something that the U.S. necessarily fully supports, but it is not something to be lightly discarded as a naive aspiration --- there could be international democracy just as there is domestic democracy in some places. But the same dictators who pay lip service to liberal ideals but justify their non-democratic rule and denial of social and economic justice to those outside their élite group as necessary due to limiting national conditions, tend to espouse a foreign policy doctrine that conflates a liberal international order with "American hegemonic rule." This assertion is demeaning to all democracies. If one asks the average Czech citizens if their decades under Stalinist-style dictators with their secret police and Party member privilege was justified to preserve Czech values and Czech prosperity against the challenge of U.S. bourgeois liberalization, they would likely tell you that things are much better now and their people are proud to be living in a democratic and free Czech Republic. Chinese people deserve the same dignity. And I think it will come, possibly relatively soon. But we can re-visit this question in a few years.

Views of Dalai Lama on How to Approach China's Rise

The Dalai Lama made this comment at the Australian National Press Club on June 12:
"It is absolutely wrong to isolate China and also contain China. It's wrong, morally also wrong. China must be brought into the mainstream of the world community, and now fortunately China themselves want to join the world community. Most welcome. Very good. However ... while you are making good relations, genuine friendship with China, certain principles such as human rights and also democracy, rule of law, free press, these things you should stand firm. That means you are a true friend of China."

Australian Prime Minister's Views on Visit of Dalai Lama to Australia

Prime Minister John Howard is quoted by Sky News as saying this on June 13:
"China has a very different political system to Australia's but I'd ask the Chinese to respect the way our culture and our political system works. This is one of the world's great liberal democracies and someone like the Dalai Lama would always be able to come to Australia."

Rough translation by me of report about Canada-China Bilateral Human Rights Dialogue published in Singtao Daily News June 12, 2007

Request for financial aid in exchange for sensitive topics, Chinese human rights have a price, Canada proposes to suspend Dialogue

By Singtao Daily reporter Mary Yang

The Government of China has requested that the Government of Canada provide financial aid in exchange for Canada being allowed to bring up more sensitive issues in the Canada-China Human Rights Dialogue and for greater participation by NGOs. According to unnamed sources, Canada has never responded to China's demand. Liberal Member of Parliament, Bryon Wilfert condemns this proposal by China as unacceptable. Amnesty International calls upon the Parliamentary Foreign Affairs Committee to immediately make public the report on China's human rights. On Monday, The Globe and Mail reported on the content of the report assessing the Canada-China Human Rights Dialogue, indicating that China has requested "financial aid in exchange for discussion of sensitive human rights issues." Charles Burton who was responsible for writing the assessment report told the Sing Tao Daily News that officials of the Chinese Foreign Ministry made two requests of Canada during a meeting that took place in 2005. These were a request that Canada provide scholarships for Chinese officials to pursue M.A. degrees in Canada and for short term study visits, and a request that Canada provide a $60,000 contribution to Yunnan Province.

The Chinese officials indicated that if Canada responded favourably to their requests that it would establish a friendship relationship between Canada and China, and that this would lead to benefits. It would lead to a higher quality of Chinese officials coming to work in agencies that deal with human rights. It would make it easier for them to request permission from higher levels and get permission for more issues of a more sensitive nature to be discussed in the bilateral human rights dialogues, and to gain permission for more NGOs to participate in the dialogues. But the Chinese officials did not specify what sensitive topics these would be.

Charles Burton said that this was not the first time has brought up these requests. If he remembers correctly, Australia donated money to construct a school in China. The Chinese officials suggested that Canada could do the same as Australia.

Charles Burton indicated that Canada made clear to China that Ottawa could not fulfil these requests from China because Canada has no means to provide the requested funds. Yunnan is also not one of the Chinese provinces that Canada has identified as priority areas for poverty relief. Moreover, Canada feels that it would be inappropriate to do this.

He speculates that the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been assigned responsibility to assist in alleviating poverty in Yunnan, so they would like Canada to lend a hand with this. This incident reflects the Chinese view that the human rights dialogue is designed to help the Government of Canada respond to Canadian citizens' concerns about human rights in China. "They do not feel that China derives any benefit from participating in the human rights dialogue."

Bryon Wilfert believes that the means proposed by China is "completely unacceptable." Human rights is a matter of principle.

Alex Neve, the Secretary General of the Canadian Branch of Amnesty International, also believes that it is unacceptable. "Human rights will never have a price." He points out, this should not be about the "degree of friendship" between Canada and China, but is about the two sides taking objective measures to improve China's human rights.

The House of Commons Human Rights Subcommittee has already adopted a report on China's human rights. One of its purposes is to examine the Canada-China Human Rights Dialogue. It is presently slated to be further reviewed by the Foreign Affairs Committee.

The Singtao Daily News has learnt that this secret report recommends suspending the Canada-China Human Rights Dialogue until major changes are made in it. The Foreign Affairs Committee has reviewed this report in-camera in one session, but has not put this report back on its agenda since.

Information from a source close to the Committee indicates that officials representing the Government had taken the Standing Committee as a rubber stamp and had expected a rapid adoption of the report. But members of opposition parties opposed acting in haste because the 19 recommendations of the report touch on sensitive areas. There is also information suggesting that some members and Party supporters hold views at odds with those of the Human Rights Subcommittee.

Looking at the current Parliamentary agenda, it is unlikely that the Committee will be able to review the China human rights report until Parliament meets again in the fall.

Alex Neve characterized the Foreign Affairs Committee's actions as extremely disappointing. The Committee should immediately make public the report.






For Chinese original of this text see: http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcfd6fxz_204hjtzb5. Please advise me of any errors in the above translation.

Prime Minister's Comments on China at G-8

G8 summit ends in finger pointing
Andrew Mayeda, CanWest News Service
Published: Friday, June 08, 2007

. . .


On the final day of the three-day summit, Harper also met with Chinese President Hu Jintao. Afterwards, he warned that, as China's power grows, the country will come under "increasing pressure" from the international community on issues such as democracy and human rights.
"As it grows in importance and wealth, it will face increasing pressure from the world community on issues of democratic development and human rights, on issues like climate change and environmental protection, and on issues of corporate social responsibility, in particular the responsibilities of Chinese enterprises and commercial activities in the Third World," Harper warned.
China is not a member of the G8 but, as a major developing country, it was invited to attend, along with India, Brazil, Mexico and South Africa.
Harper reported from his bilateral meeting that he emphasized the need to "grow and deepen" the ties between the two countries, but that did not stop him "from aggressively and appropriately raising very legitimate concerns."
Next year's summer Olympics in Beijing will be a test of China's standing on the world stage, predicted Harper.
"When you open your country to the world that way and ask every television camera in the world to come in, I think it would be in your own self-interest to make that image as positive as it can be."
In Ottawa, China's ambassador to Canada, Lu Shumin, said his government is open to continuing a dialogue with Canadian officials to discuss human rights. "I still believe the relations between China and Canada are basically moving forward," Lu told a news conference.
Harper's remarks in Germany came a day after he reproached fellow G8 leader Vladimir Putin for being unwilling to accept criticism about democratic reform and human rights in Russia.
The prime minister also ruffled feathers in Beijing last fall when he pressed China on its human-rights record. He vowed that Canada would not "sell out" its beliefs in democracy, freedom and human rights to the "almighty dollar."

Taken from http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=a272a3fb-8360-43db-b874-2c2976f8c763&k=68189

Very Insightful Article About the Nature of the Chinese Stock Market

This is an article from the International Herald Tribune openly available at http://www.iht.com/bin/print.php?id=6106030

Communist capitalists
By Philip Bowring
Tuesday, June 12, 2007

HONG KONG: Some of the reasons why the Chinese stock market continues to defy both gravity and the half-hearted efforts of the government to cool it are normal and obvious. But there is another reason that says a lot about a particularly Chinese situation: the relationship between Communist party power and wealth accumulation.
The normal ingredients are a combination of high household savings, low real interest rates and buoyant corporate profits. The nation is awash in cash, in part the domestic counterpart of its trillion dollars of foreign exchange reserves.
Add to this fuel the Chinese love of gambling and the novelty of stock markets, and one has the same combination of circumstances that created mega stock booms in Hong Kong in the early 1970s and in Taiwan in the late 1980s.
But China has an additional ingredient, one that partly explains why the government is ambivalent towards the boom, which has seen stock prices double in six months and price-earnings ratios reach the stratosphere.
For every speech by a mainland official urging caution and for every small dampening measure ranging from taxes on share transactions to increases in bank reserve requirement, there is a speech from another official suggesting that the market buoyancy simply reflects the strength of the economy and the promise of the future.
Of course there are officials who fear that a sudden market collapse could cause unrest among the millions of new small investors who have rushed to take part in this modern form of alchemy, aiming to turn low yielding bank deposits into quick returns on stocks. Although in other countries Chinese have ascribed their stock market losses to bad luck rather than bad government, there is just a chance that the mainland could be different.
The main reason is that the stock market has become the quickest way for officials themselves, as insiders, to get rich quick - and to do so legally.
Even the normally very discreet World Bank recently noted the losses to public coffers resulting from the underpricing of initial public offerings of Chinese shares.
Billions of yuan which might have been collected from the state's sale of shares and put to use improving health and education for the masses had, by implication, ended up in the pockets of those who got first crack at the undervalued shares.
Of course, every company listing on every exchange wants its shares to go to a premium when trading begins. China also had reason to want to spread acceptance of the stock market as a place for investment, as a proper location for household savings. It needs a popular market if it is to continue to sell down its stakes and gradually privatize the economy.
However, there is another reason why the China Securities Regulatory Commission, which oversees the markets, and officials in general, like to see underpricing: The people who mainly benefits are the insiders, the directors, managers, underwriters and other insiders who are favored with share allotments and, if necessary, provided with cheap loans with which to acquire stock.
The absolute loser is the public; the relative loser is the small investor who cannot get stock at the IPO and must buy at a higher price in the secondary market.
The way it works for dozens of relatively small mainland listings has been seen on a grand scale with listings of major mainland enterprises in Hong Kong.
In addition to well-placed mainlanders themselves, very large blocks of stock are first offered to local tycoons and their companies. These placements to anchor investors help ensure the success of the offering, even though the price has already been pitched at a level which is most likely to ensure success. The net result is that relatively few shares are available for the public. One consequence there is a massive oversubscription leading to a stampede for stock when trading begins.
Even though the anchor investors and some of the insiders may be locked in for a while, they are still in a position to make huge profits by virtue of their connections. The investment banks are also huge winners. The listing companies also benefit from interest earned on the oversubscriptions, which have run into billions of dollars. The losers again: the state and the small investors who couldn't get allotments and had to bid up stock in the secondary market.
The listing of mainland companies is in principle beneficial for the economy and corporate governance. But the way it happens is more reminiscent of the Russian version of privatization than of that practiced in established capitalist economies.
Tens of thousands of party officials and company managers are still waiting for their chance to make money from an IPO. So the leadership is nervous about any measure which might kill the goose laying golden eggs for officialdom