In the world of international politics where nations who do not toe the Western line are often considered pariah states that ought to be ridiculed and demonized by finding excuses even when there exists none, awarding Liu with the Peace prize, as I see it, is just to hype the media campaign to build the world opinion against China. Or, in other words, China, which has many times went against the West´s (read America´s) attempts to impose its views on the world, has become a victim of a renewed Western campaign aimed at making it appear irresponsible internationally and repressive domestically.
China was a Western ally, a good friend of America and the West when their interests lay in teaming up with China for America’s withdrawal from Vietnam, and to forge a strategic partnership against the Soviet Union in the 70s and 80s, just as the anachronistic regimes of the Middle East because of their oil wealth are now. And just as the West turns a blind eye to human rights violations there today, it then turned a blind eye to the excesses of Chairman Mao´s rule and the atrocities committed against the Chinese intellectuals then. The then US President Richard Nixon made a trip to China to sing praises of Chairman Mao. The West did not care when Wei Jingsheng, the author of Fifth Modernization and a Chinese democracy activist who waged a campaign for political reforms in the aftermath of Deng Xiaoping´s four reforms programs in the late 70s and who is more widely known in China than Liu, was jailed because it wasn´t in their best interests to antagonize China then. However, with the disintegration of the Soviet Union and a strong and stable China asserting its rightful place literally in the world stage, China bashing is again making a comeback as it was during the 50s and 60s.
Although, it’s too early to say what role did China´s handling of the fishing boat row with Japan, its continued support to the North Korean regime and its call to handle the Iranian nuclear issue diplomatically played in making the Nobel committee award it to a dissident Chinese, these factors cannot be dismissed outright.
Chinese economy has grown by many folds after its reforms and opening up campaign of the late 1970s. Nobody thought that China, a country that was faring badly, politically, socially and economically in the aftermath of the disastrous Cultural Revolution (1966-1976), would in less than 30 years time become the world´s second-largest economy. With the success of economic reforms, the Chinese military spending too began to increase because now the strategic alliance changed, and it had to be strong militarily and stable politically to avoid the Soviet Union´s fate. And to the chagrin of many in the West, China has so far avoided it and there´s no likelihood of the ruling Communist Party being ousted from power through a popular revolt, as it happened in the Eastern European countries in the late 80s and early 90s. The argument that the government does not allow anti-government protests to take place and that´s the reason for the Chinese regime´s survival rests on a flawed premise: Which functioning government in the world would allow a revolt/revolution whether peaceful or violent to oust it from power? Hypothetically speaking, would the American or the British or even the world´s largest democracy India allow, say, a communist revolt aimed at changing their political systems?
Besides political and strategic reasons to demonize China, there´s ideological reason as well. The Chinese model of development has now appeared attractive to many third world countries. With the failure of democracy in many post-1990 countries, somewhere there exists a fascination with the Chinese model of development, in which the state creates a conducive environment for economic growth and lifts millions out of poverty in a short period. However, the powerful democracies are yet to come to grips with this reality. West´s most powerful appeal and export, democracy, is now being questioned and debated. The success of China and failures of neo-democracies have proved that the Western notion of "one model fits all" is as much flawed as Marxism. In this context, to defend its position, it has become necessary for the West to prove that its system is the only system that allows for full realization of human potentials and aspirations. And for this reason too, China needs to be demonized and ridiculed, no matter what the Chinese state and the people have achieved in the last 30 years. As Randall Peerenboom, director of the Oxford Foundation for Law, Justice and Society´s China Rule of Law Program argues in his brilliant and well-researched book China Modernizes: Threat to the west or model for the rest? (2007), China is being subject to double standards and instead of comparing China ´s political reforms and human rights conditions with the middle income countries – as China despite its impressive economic growth, is still a developing country – we are comparing it with the developed countries like Sweden and Germany. For a developing country, China has made tremendous progress in improving the living conditions of its people and today Chinese enjoy more freedom than any time in the past.
To come back to the Nobel award, it’s hard to believe that it will have any impact on the way the majority of Chinese view their government. Of course, no government in the world can claim that it is liked by all its people, and maybe it would give the minority not happy with the Communist Party´s rule something to celebrate about, but the majority of Chinese, who have benefited immensely from the stability and opportunities offered by the present regime would view the awarding of Peace prize to Liu as a coordinated Western effort to undermine their government´s efforts at economic development and pursuing an independent foreign policy. At best, it will be forgotten and the Chinese state will initiate reforms it deems necessary, gradually as Chinese premier Wen Jiabao hinted recently. At worst, it will lead to a flurry of nationalistic publications calling for China to chart its future course independently – quite similar to what happened after the West’s criticism of the way China handled the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989. Further, the Chinese rightly ask: Why the team that implemented the economic reforms that has transformed China from a poor country to an economically sound country in the last 30 years is yet to be awarded with the Nobel in economics. Lifting 400 million people out of poverty in 20 years time is no small feat, but this feat is not yet recognized internationally. And I think this question leaves us much to ponder on the politics behind the prizes.
Writer is a Republica staff. He holds a BA degree in Chinese Studies from a US college and MA in International Relations from a Chinese university
trailokyaa@yahoo.com
Related story
Politics and Business
