Replug: Noble Peace Prize win of Lie Xiaobo

Liu Xiaobo

I wrote this piece in 2010. Since then I have lived in China for two years and Xiaobo has died. My opinions have further clarified about somethings. 





The 2010 Nobel Peace Prize winner, Liu Xiaobo, has caused more frenzy than the winners usually
do.

The Peace Prize is given by Oslo, Norway and not Stockholm, Sweden. The nominees come through politicians, heads of states, parliamentarians, former winners, advisors and academics etc. Awards are persistently presented to people promoting the western and particularly American foreign objectives like Yasser Arafat (initially labelled terrorist, but awarded after supporting the US-backed Oslo Accords), Shimon Peres (who developed Israel's nuclear arsenal) and Yitzhak Rabin (expelled Arabs and violently fractured the first Intifada). Organisations and protestors who voiced against the Afghan invasions, Guantanamo Bay, Iraq and Vietnam wars (which saw mass peaceful protests in the West) never won. Unlike the "non-violent" Liu, many non-violent activists like Mahatma Gandhi were "regretfully" omitted.

Prizes had been presented to Menachem Begin, the former prime minister of Israel, for his role in the Camp David Accords. His record of supporting Zionist group Irgun was ignored. The 1945 winner, Cordell Hull, was a former American Senator who had demanded President Roosevelt's rejection of several German asylum seekers. Al Gore's Global Warming awareness spree, despite doubts about his contribution and nine factual errors, was rewarded nevertheless.

However, the worst was when Henry Kissinger was finally presented the peace torch to enlighten the world. The accusations of bombing North Vietnamese Army in Cambodia, involvement in Operation Condor -- crusades that included abduction and assassination by the secret and security agencies in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay and Uruguay -- did not do much to tick Oslo off.

Last year's winner, Barrack Obama, had only been in office for a year when the committee decided to bestow some pocket money on him. Few commentators, like the former winner Al Gore, thought it is "very well deserved", while US politician Gresham Barrett, questioned Obama's victory: "I'm not sure what the international community loved best; his waffling on Afghanistan, pulling defense missiles out of Eastern Europe, turning his back on freedom fighters in Honduras, coddling Castro, siding with Palestinians against Israel, or almost getting tough on Iran."

China has had a dreary human rights record. According to the Amnesty International, some 500,000 detainees lack any charge or trial, and millions cannot access the legal system. Persecution and different types of censorship keep increasing. Repression of minorities, including Tibetans and Mongolians, Falun Gong practitioners and Christians continues. The Chinese government has itself recognised that the legal system lacks laws, due processes and civil liberties. China's demand of a definition of human rights that includes social and economic rights along with political rights, in relation to the national culture and development rates, isn't approved internationally.

China's human rights disorder has a deep dilemma. It is either identified by foreign organisations like the US State Department, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International or else remains unreported due to the strict government suppression. So either you buy what might be western political propaganda or else you don't buy anything.

Countries like India, Latin American states and Israel, with equally stained human rights and corruption records, are never put on the international activism centre-stage. This probably has a connection with the West-Chinese economic rivalry. And economics is precisely where the Chinese government finds justifications for its current totalitarian communistic regime.

"The Chinese position is simple that development comes first ahead of individual human rights," says Professor Ian Taylor, an expert on China-Africa relations at the University of St. Andrews, Scotland. "The Chinese authorities would argue that in providing infrastructure, you lay the groundwork for development. So the Chinese position is not coherent because they argue that they are involved in development, but they are also involved with some authorities with anti-development policies. China does, however, have a different approach to human rights of the West and this has to be understood."

However, an editorial from the Guardian newspaper stated the same fact differently: "to many Western ears, the clamour of China's markets is louder than the pleas of its dissidents. Its most coveted prize can now amplify Mr Liu's voice."

Liu's activism obviously has enormous value. It is worth celebrating that amidst a sea of oppression, one beam of resistance exists.

Liu, a human rights and political activist, has demanded democratic elections, liberty, separation of powers and political accountability. Since 1989, he has been in and out of prison, under spells of strict monitoring, document confiscation, phone tapping/internet tapping and house arrest.

In 1996, he served three years in prison on counts of "disturbing public order" by criticising the Communist Party of China. Following the death of former Chinese premier Zhao Ziyang in 2005, Liu was immediately put under house arrest.

In 2008, Liu actively participated in the writing of Charter 08 -- a manifesto released on the 60th birthday of the adoption of Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It was styled after the Czech Charter 77, and asked for human rights, democracy and freedom of speech. Initially some 400 Chinese intellectuals and activists signed it, but eventually more then 10,000 people from all across the world signed it.

Liu has been decorated by organisations like the PEN and Amnesty International, supported by authors like Rushdie, Atwood, Ha Jin and heads of states like Angela Merkel and Ma Ying-jiu. But the Nobel Peace Prize committee isn't a charity organisation awarding goodwill and amnesty. The winners are chosen with care.

But Liu is carrying a human rights agenda that the West approves of i.e. democracy and freedom of speech etc. Western patronage will probably increase the Chinese legal onslaught on him. It would be too optimistic to believe that supporting one figure would bring China out of this socio-economic trap. Liu's peace prize was denounced as "blasphemous", censored by the print and electronic media -- China Central Television's prime-time evening news broadcast didn't mention him. Anyone attempting to celebrate was arrested. Historically, peace and prosperity is best when it arises within a state, instead of external benefactions, which often come with implicit vested interests and strings.

There is no jubilation within China or even in Asian countries like Myanmar, Vietnam, Japan or India. African and Latin American states are also mum (and politically correct due to the Chinese influence). However, Liu, of course, has become a powerful international celebrity and networking abroad might help in his release. Countries like Taiwan, US, France, Canada, Australia, Germany and even the European Parliament have asked for his release. However, Liu's victory has not made the prize any less controversial or suspicious.

The piece was first ublished