Famed Tibetan poet and blogger Woeser has a new piece that has been translated and posted on the unmissable blog High Peaks, Pure Earth. In it she writes about legal rights in Tibet and China and how the Chinese government has railroaded not only Tibetans who peacefully protested Chinese rule during the spring 2008 national uprising in Tibet, but the Chinese lawyers who sought to defend them from the absurd charges levied against them. Not only has the Chinese government tortured and disappeared Tibetans suspected of being involved in protess during the uprising, but they have denied those they do take the time to try fair and public trials and adequate legal represenation of their own choosing. The lawyers that have bravely represented them, where possible, have been subjec to sanctions on a massive scale. In short, the Chinese government’s handling of its prosecution of Tibetans who have spoken out for independence has dramatically undercut all pillars of the rule of law which should be protected by the Chinese constitution. Their fear of Tibetans’ desire for freedom has caused them to sever what little ties their constitution gave them to rule of law as maintained in a nation that is an upstanding member of the international community.

Woeser poetically closes her article with a paean to standing up for human rights:

It must be said that in real life, many of us do not understand at all, as citizens, which rights we are entitled to enjoy, or how many rights we have. Also, what does the legal system, often described as holy and sublime, eventually mean as far as citizens are concerned? I wrote in a previous article that many Tibetans have always lacked the consciousness of their rights and of how to safeguard their rights. Especially when there is high political pressure, because of extreme fear, they will not dare to fight for their own rights. However, whatever circumstances may be, we must understand what our rights are as human beings, even if under the system in this country, human rights have already been cut down greatly. We must not only understand, but also fight for and most importantly defend our rights. This is because human rights are strongly linked to human dignity and humans’ intuitive knowledge of what is right or wrong. Therefore, human rights are worth fighting for.

Progressive writer David Sirota has a must-read column on China in his regular space at the San Francisco Chronicle. Sirota highlights the massive economic disparity that exists in China as a result of Communist Party rule. He aptly describes the CCP as “an extreme version of the Republican Party that couples Genghis Khan’s intolerance with Hank Paulson’s authoritarian capitalism.” Sirota spends a great deal of time narrating the parallel between the current Chinese economic structure and America’s Gilded Age. In addition to unimaginable poverty, Sirota sees China in the midst of commiting environmental destruction with global repercussions.

It’s rare that an American political observer has such clear-sighted views of China, including looking past the gilded coastal cities dominating global capitalism and seeing a corrupt and destructive ruling party, massive poverty, and destructive environmental policies. Trust me, Sirota’s piece will not be mistaken for the usual clap-trap we see from Nick Kristof and Tom Friedman. Go give it a read.

Philip Bowring had an op-ed in the New York Times yesterday on the uprising in Xinjiang and the sympathetic response East Turkestan’s Muslim Uighur population has received from other Asian and Muslim nations. I have some problems with his essay, including his glossing over of the invasion of East Turkestan by the Mao’s PLA in 1949 as settlement that occurred “postwar,” but there are some real gems of analysis in his piece. Notably his take on the Chinese government’s failure to recognize the underlying causes of unrest in Xinjiang, as in Tibet, are being ignored at the risk of further unrest.

It may not be too late for China to address Uighur grievances, but the Chinese Communist Party’s centralist tendencies and cultural chauvinism make it unlikely. The Chinese media’s presentation of the disturbances suggests that few lessons are being learned. Underlying issues go unaddressed, the Hans are presented as the main victims and Uighurs as ungrateful for the material progress that China has bestowed on what was once known as East Turkestan.

Then there is the Islamic issue. Central Asian Islam is mostly of a relaxed and unfanatical sort, but Muslim identity in Xinjiang has been strengthened both by restrictions on religious activities and by the rise in Muslim consciousness globally.

China has tried to pin the Al Qaeda label on Xinjiang separatists and will doubtless do so again — helped by Al Qaeda proclaiming that it will retaliate for the Urumqi killings.

Bowring is spot-on in identifying Han chauvinism as a fundamental problem in the Chinese government’s response to unrest in occupied territories.  As far as I know, the Chinese government has yet to concede that a single Uighur was killed by government forces or Han vigilantes yet – despite numerous reports from exile groups and independent media that Uighurs are being killed in great numbers.

Moreover, Bowring is right to identify the error the Chinese government is making in trying to pin the terrorist label on Uighur students holding protests. If you call someone a violent terrorist long enough and treat them as the same, before to long it won’t be shocking if some of these young men do turn to violent ways. This is why it is so fundamentally wrong for the Chinese government to try to pin the blame for this unrest and all instances of violence on Rebiya Kadeer of the World Uighur Congress. She is one of the strongest bulwarks against Uighurs turning to violence. She is an advocate of finding political resolution through non-violent means. Notably the tactic of trying to demonize the leading non-violent leader as a violent terrorist in East Turkestan is exactly the same one the Chinese government used, with no success, in Tibet with the Dalai Lama last year.

Bowring concludes that East Turkestan  will remain “a “pebble in the shoe” for China’s diplomacy” but will not become an issue of international prominence. Sadly he is right unless people of conscience make efforts to hold the Chinese government to account for their violent military crackdown in East Turkestan. Just as in Tibet, China’s ongoing military occupations and how they treat the occupied peoples must be fundamental in consideration of the relationship foreign governments are willing to build with China. Few countries are willing to make Tibet and East Turkestan issues in their diplomatic relations with China, but that doesn’t mean the quietism of world governments is morally right.

In an article by the Times of India which reports the Chinese government is reaching out to Pakistan and other countries to try to find ties (which do not exist) between the World Uighur Congress and protests in Urumqi and elsewhere in East Turkestan, there’s this tidbit about how the Chinese government plans to handle some of the thousands of Uighurs that have already been detained.

The Communist Party boss of Urumqi said the local government will seek death penalty for those involved in the killing of 156 people during the orgy of violence on Sunday. Li Zhi, the local party boss, said the streets of the city are totally under the control of security forces.

The authorities also launched a concentrated effort to connect with all communities with the help of leaflets dropped from airplanes and appeals made through loud speakers telling people to stay calm and eschew violence.

Li made a significant revelation saying most of those detained for the violence were young students. This may not be good news for authorities, who were hoping that the young would be charmed by promises of modern development instead of carrying forward the old struggle for an independent East Turkmenistan nation.

Of course, the Chinese government has only made statements in connection to violence allegedly committed by Uighurs against Han Chinese. But we know for a fact that bands of Han vigilantes are killing Uighurs on the street. Al Jazeera reporter Melissa Chan has reported via twitter:

Uighurs tell us Han mob of 300 attacked neighborhood around 9 pm Tuesday night — at least 6 killed.
https://twitter.com/melissakchan/status/2528622613

Will the Chinese government seek the death penalty for groups of Han vigilantes who have murdered Uighurs? Have any Han Chinese been arrested for their crimes? Will the government even try to stop this kind of ethnic violence?

If the fallout of the Tibetan national uprising of spring 2008 is any indication, Uighurs will be prosecuted with extreme prejudice and sentenced to long terms, death, or simply disappeared. There won’t be a single prosecution of a Han Chinese vigilante. And state media will only report the deaths and injuries of Han Chinese, with no regard for the reports Uighurs give of the violence they have suffered at the hands of the Chinese army, police, and vigilantes.

Over the last few days there have been major protests – largely peaceful – in Urumqi, Xinjiang, China. Urumqi is in East Turkestan (Xinjiang), a country that was invaded by the PLA in 1949 and has been militarily occupied by China since then. At some point, the protesters were fired upon by Chinese security and since then things have devolved dramatically. Chinese state media is reporting 150-200 people dead and about 1,000 injured, though no distinctions are yet being made about the ethnic disparity of the dead. It sounds like over 2,000 Uighur men have been arrested. Reports include that in addition to continued peaceful protests (many by the wives and children of the arrested men), there are bands of Han Chinese vigilantes and some Uighurs who are committing violence. Additionally, Urumqi has been put under martial law and the Chinese army is being used to crack down on Uighur protests. A number of foreign journalists have been detained or arrested. Finally, the Chinese government has shut down access to the internet and cell service. What’s happening in Urumqi is so bad that Hu Jintao has left the G8 and returned to China to oversee the situation. Obviously that is a great loss of face for Hu in the front of world leaders.

The BBC has had a lot of good reports, here’s their latest.

Al-Jazeera journalist Melissa Chan is in Urumqi and providing insight through twitter: http://twitter.com/melissakchan.

There are a few things to note. The Chinese government is deploying a very similar set of tactics that they used to crack down on the national uprising in Tibet in the spring of 2008. Foreign press is either blacked out or greatly restricted from covering events. Channels for communication with the outside world have largely been blocked. Chinese state media is reporting deaths at the hands of “violent rioters,” but has not acknowledged the likely hundreds of dead Uighurs who were shot demonstrating peacefully. Lastly, and in many ways this is the most disturbing, the Chinese government is already claiming that the protests in Urumqi were orchestrated by “separatists” outside of China — in this case, specifically Rebiya Kadeer. Kadeer is a Nobel Peace Prize nominee and the head of the World Uighur Congress, an organization that promotes non-violent efforts for East Turkestan independence. Here’s a clip from today’s Chinese foreign ministry press briefing, which was dominated by discussion of Urumqi:

Q: Chairperson Rebiya Kadeer of the World Uygur Congress said during her interview with British TV 4 that she has nothing to do with the violence. Do you have any specific evidence to prove that she is behind the whole thing?

A: This is a violent crime remotely directed and incited from abroad, and executed inside the country. The evidence is well established and beyond doubt. In the past couple of days, competent authorities have released facts that foreign separatist forces led by the “World Uygur Congress” and represented by Rebiya Kadeer plotted and instigated the violence. As the investigation goes on, I believe the truth will come out eventually. Rebiya can make lies all she likes, but the international community will not be fooled. Even if she could make a fool of people for now, people will not be fooled forever. More and more people in the international community will recognize the terrorist and violent nature and the attempt of the Eastern Turkish separatist forces to undermine national unity and separate China.

During the spring 2008 uprising in Tibet, the Chinese government repeatedly cast blame on the Dalai Lama for inciting  the protests from abroad, calling him a “wolf in sheep’s clothing”, despite never producing an ounce of evidence to support their charges. They’re doing the same thing to Rebiya Kadeer. This uprising will likely be used as further justifications for crackdowns on Uighurs, the increased militarization of East Turkestan, and stricter rules for journalists and tourists to visit East Turkestan (all consequences of the Tibet uprising of 2008).Rebiya Kadeer also has a must-read op-ed in the Wall Street Journal in which she talks about the protests and the Chinese government’s violent crackdown.

Q: Chairperson Rebiya Kadeer of the World Uygur Congress said during her interview with British TV 4 that she has nothing to do with the violence. Do you have any specific evidence to prove that she is behind the whole thing?

A: This is a violent crime remotely directed and incited from abroad, and executed inside the country. The evidence is well established and beyond doubt. In the past couple of days, competent authorities have released facts that foreign separatist forces led by the “World Uygur
Congress” and represented by Rebiya Kadeer plotted and instigated the violence. As the investigation goes on, I believe the truth will come out eventually. Rebiya can make lies all she likes, but the international community will not be fooled. Even if she could make a fool of people for now, people will not be fooled forever. More and more people in the international community will recognize the terrorist and violent nature and the attempt of the Eastern Turkish separatist forces to undermine national unity and separate China.

During the spring 2008 uprising in Tibet, the Chinese government repeatedly cast blame on the Dalai Lama for inciting  the protests from abroad, calling him a “wolf in sheep’s clothing”, despite never producing an ounce of evidence to support their charges. They’re doing the same thing to Rebiya Kadeer. This uprising will likely be used as further justifications for crackdowns on Uighurs, the increased militarization of East Turkestan, and stricter rules for journalists and tourists to visit East Turkestan (all consequences of the Tibet uprising of 2008).

Keith Bradsher of the New York Times reports on the growth of censorship of the internet by the Chinese government and the close connection between efforts to monitor and censor pornography and political thought online. This comes at a time when the Chinese government has already received much international attention for its Green Dam-Youth Escort censorship and monitoring program required to be preinstalled on all new computers in China.

Liu Xiaobo, one of China’s best-known dissidents, was formally arrested Tuesday on suspicion of subversion, six months after he was detained for joining other intellectuals in signing a document calling for democracy. This month, the authorities refused to renew the licenses of more than a dozen lawyers after they agreed to represent clients in human rights cases.

The same public security agencies charged with fighting pornography are responsible for suppressing illegal political activity, said Nicholas Bequelin, a researcher in Hong Kong for Human Rights Watch. The government’s statistics for seizures of illegal publications tend to include both pornographic and political documents, he noted.

“The two are closely associated,” Mr. Bequelin said. “These campaigns work hand in hand.”

It’s not shocking that tools used to censor one type of information would be well-suited to censor another type of information. It’s just rare that a government would engage in such brazen efforts to limit what information their citizenry would have about key historic events, territories occupied by the Chinese military, and religious groups.

Additionally, the Bradsher piece includes this bit of information about China’s surveillance state infrastructure that I was unaware of:

For example, Chinese law requires that karaoke bars, nightclubs and Internet cafes be monitored 24 hours a day by closed-circuit television cameras on the grounds that prostitutes may try to find clients at such locations. But according to security industry executives, China’s anti-prostitution surveillance regulations are stricter on the Internet cafes.

While nightclubs and karaoke bars are required to store their video records on their premises, Internet cafes must be wired to the nearest police station and provide a continuous, instantaneous record of who is using which computer. If an e-mail message from a cafe’s computer later catches the attention of investigators, the police can review the video records to see who was using the computer.

Good to know that if I’m ever in China, I probably shouldn’t use a public internet cafe.

This information about the Chinese government’s censorship of the internet and intense efforts to monitor everything that their citizenry searches for online is deeply disturbing. It’s yet another instantiation of the Chinese government using high tech tools and software – many of them made by American technology companies – to maintain their control of political power. These are not the actions of a government that finds its authority in the support of the people. And it certainly isn’t how a respected member of the global community behaves. Most importantly, the systemic distrust of the government of its people can only, on a long enough time line, lead to its downfall.

The Dui Hua Foundation has translated documents from the indictment and verdict of a Tibetan tour guide, Gonpo Tserang, who has been jailed for three years for text messages he sent during the spring 2008 national uprising in Tibet.

These messages, which prosecutors claim “distorted the facts and true situation regarding social stability in the Tibetan area following the ‘March 14 incident” were considered by the court to be deserving of severe punishment.

Dui Hua has important analysis of this sentencing:

Gonpo Tserang’s case illustrates both the extent to which Chinese police were engaged in monitoring communications between Tibetans and outsiders during the period after the protests and the low threshold for criminal liability in such situations. We do not know the content of Gonpo Tserang’s messages, but sending this handful of messages to individuals outside of China resulted in a three-year sentence. Such intense monitoring and the potential consequences of being caught saying the wrong things to outsiders help to explain the wariness of many Tibetans to report what they witnessed. To a large extent, this wariness has allowed the official Chinese narrative of events to become dominant. It also compels observers to wonder what punishments might be handed down to Tibetans who have been reported detained for saying or doing even more.

This is simply chilling. While we have seen massive Chinese censorship of the internet and availability of information about Tibet to people within Tibet and China, we have also seen a half century of the Chinese government criminalizing the idea of Tibetan independence. The history of China’s occupation of Tibet is filled with patriotic monks, nuns, and lay people being sentenced to jail time, beaten, and tortured for saying “free Tibet,” carrying the Tibetan national flag, singing the Tibetan national anthem, or carrying a picture of the Dalai Lama. But I don’t know of any instances where the Chinese government jailed a Tibetan for the contents of a text message. Sadly, it is a natural evolution of the Chinese government’s crackdown on Tibetans and their effort to eradicate Tibetan’s unquenchable desire for independence.

Despite reports earlier this week that the Chinese government was backing off its requirement that all new computers sold after July 1 have the censor-spyware platform Green Dam-Youth Escort installed, it now looks like there has been no such let-up in their commitment to this program. The New York Times reports:

American computer makers say the Chinese government has not backed down from a requirement that Internet censorship software be preinstalled on all computers sold in China after July 1, despite reports this week that the rule had been relaxed.

In a further sign that Chinese officials are trying to assert more Internet control, the city of Beijing wants to recruit 10,000 volunteers by summer’s end to monitor online content, said an employee of the city government’s Spiritual Civilization Office.
…
Four trade groups based in the United States have sent a statement to the Chinese government asking it to “reconsider implementing its new mandatory filtering software requirement.”

On Wednesday, the major American computer makers said they had yet to hear anything concrete from China regarding the possibility of making installations of Green Dam optional.
…
Confusion was sown Monday when China Daily, the country’s official English-language newspaper, quoted an unnamed official in the software department of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology saying that the government was requiring that the software be offered on a CD-ROM packaged with new computers or be placed on hard drives as setup files only.

Some people interpreted that as the government backing down from its rule that Green Dam be installed, but soon it became clear that the official was not speaking in an authoritative role. Employees at the ministry’s software department, reached by telephone, refused to clarify the government’s position. No government official has given any statement this week indicating that the policy has changed.

Well, there you go. China hasn’t back down yet and it’s not clear if they will. The question then becomes, will foreign tech companies comply with this unethical request? Will American computer companies like HP and Dell help the Chinese government spy on their citizenry and limit what information they can find on the internet? Or will they show some spine and commit to not doing the Chinese government’s dirty work for them? We’ll see what happens, but I’m not about to place any sum of money betting that American tech companies will do the right thing at the expense of access to the Chinese market.

It now looks like the Chinese government has fully backed down in the face of international pressure to not use their Green Dam Youth Escort spyware. Now instead of being mandatory for all new computers sold in China, it will be optional. Given how bad this episode, especially now that they’ve caved, this makes the Chinese government look internally, I’ll be curious to find out how widespread this program is. I’d expect there still be heavy pressure to have it installed so the ruling Chinese Communist Party doesn’t lose any more face than they already have in this incident.

On an unrelated note, the British press is able to use a lot of words that you won’t find in the mainstream American press (especially given that this article is ostensible about a pornography censorship tool).

Not that it’s surprising, but after a lot of public debate and international attention to their Green Dam-Youth Escort spyware program, the Chinese government will still press forward and require it be installed on every new computer sold after July 1st. The Chinese Communist Party has their heart set on a new toy that will help them monitor what their citizenry are reading, saying and doing online – and apparently they won’t be dissuaded.

Rather than agreeing to scrap the software altogether, the Chinese government has responded to the technical criticisms by ordering that the potential security breaches be eliminated.

“The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology told us to make the software safer as soon as a series of security vulnerabilities were found,” Zhang Chenmin, the general manager of Jinhui Computer System Engineering, which helped design the software, told China Daily.

To say that the concern of critics was that non-governmental hackers could break into the system and see what people are doing is to misstate and fail to address legitimate concerns about this software. It isn’t just that it was poorly designed and had security holes, it’s that it fundamentally enables the government to do more than the stated purpose. It’s a tool for the Chinese government to spy on their citizens and control what they see and do. The extent to which this particular program aides those goals is subsidiary to the massive existing structures the Chinese government has already put in place to block the free flow of ideas in China and to monitor what people are saying to each other. To that end, it’s somewhat irrelevant if the software updates to this particular program do make it harder for the program to reach beyond pornography. The addition to the Chinese government’s censorship system is smaller than it might have been otherwise, but the system itself remains large and fundamentally totalitarian in nature.