With a fortnight in the UK came an almost total (self-imposed and needed) disconnection from the China news mill and blogosphere. The sense of detachment was magnified by the fact news coverage over the Christmas period was of course dominated by Pakistan or Kenya. The two China-related stories I did stumble across when dipping into my real ale accompaniment of choice, The Guardian, were the beheaded tiger tale and news that the dam project at the Tiger Leaping Gorge had been scrapped.
In hindsight (a quick flick through Google News), it was remarkable that I managed to come into contact with the important and welcome announcement that one of the most visually stunning parts of China will not be submerged in Yangtze river water. The story sneaked past all the major news agencies busily preparing their year-end ”Best Of” pieces and appeared to be broken by the Guardian on December 29. Subsequently, it was picked up by United Press International and that’s about it in terms of news outlets. It goes to show what happens when the Big Three (AP, Reuters and AFP) are not on hand to spoon feed. Fortunately, blogging provided valuable assistance in spreading the word (shameless support of the craft I know, but it’s true) with Go Kunming and Shanghaiist following up.
In fact, the South China Morning Post broke the story more than a week earlier on December 20. The Hong Kong newspaper does itself no favours in terms of reputation by shielding its online stories behind a paywall. As a result, its ability to pick up regular exclusives is often overlooked. The Chinese Publicity Department’s favourite Tibetan website Phayul.com quotes chunks of the SCMP report though, drawing attention to the Yunnan provinicial government’s gag on the local media about the Tiger Leaping Gorge affair:
“Muzzled in its reporting of the controversial project over the past two years, local media have been told not to report the scrapping of the dam proposal,” SCMP noted.
On one hand, it seems strange the local government is so reluctant to play up the fact it has mulled over the deeply unpopular dam proposal, taken the local people’s concerns into consideration and decided for the good of mankind to ditch the idea. They wouldn’t even have to admit that the tourist revenue generated by the Tiger Leaping Gorge was a major factor in their decision. It is a sharp turnaround in intention. When I visited the gorge last April, the owner of Sean’s Guesthouse, located along the hiking trail, had already resigned himself to the project definitely going ahead and suggested the high population of bulldozers in the area was because of preliminary work on the dam - and not the huge quarry nearby.
However, given the local media have been prevented from discussing the project in recent years, it would be strange if the issue just popped up again in print. Also, any hint that the government has given into public opposition could be seized upon by the people living at the next proposed site. Phayul quotes SCMP as saying:
The new location, which had yet to be chosen from three options available, is expected to displace some 20,000 people; SCMP reported sources as saying.
As far as cold, hard figures go, 20,000 people beats the 100,000 set to be relocated by the Tiger Leaping Gorge dam. I wonder if all these 100,000 people actually know they are staying in the area. I remember some friends learning that a decision to replace their house with a new runway at Stansted Airport (recognised as London’s third airport - although a world away from London - for the benefit of non-UK readers) had been overturned through the Herts and Essex Observer. Yunnan residents, on this occasion, do not have such a luxurious form of communication.
Returning to Xinhua after a two-week break always brings the stagnancy of the office atmosphere back to the foreground. I’m relieved to be leaving although I cringed when I explained why I was abandoning a well-paid job to the taxi driver (he established my salary early on, which I halved out of embarrassment) who picked up me from my night shift yesterday. “I need a change,” I said. The guy drives taxis from 10am to 2am every day seven days a week and only sees his wife in bed between 2.30 am and 7.30am, when she gets up to go to work. That’s better than never seeing your wife in bed at all, but still.
Two stories grabbed my attention at Xinhua in recent days, the rest just drifted onto my screen and off to the releasers’ desk without me noticing I had edited them. The world’s media has naturally been spewing out Top Ten Moments of 2007 and thankfully Xinhuanet.com (Chinese version) was no exception. The popular news portal, as I think it is described, gave the country’s netizens the chance to vote for their favourite domestic news story of the year. Naturally, the Party Congress came in first.
BEIJING, Jan. 4 (Xinhua) — The successful staging of the 17th National Congress of Communist Party of China has been selected by the country’s netizens as the top domestic news in 2007, Xinhuanet.com said on Friday.
About 800,000 Internet users voted for news items on 38 major news websites across the country, including People.com.cn, China.com.cn, cctv.com and Xinhuanet.com.
“China succeeds in its first moon-probing mission” came second and “China’s National Congress passes Property Law” was the third, according to Xinhuanet.com, which posted the top ten news events on its website on Friday.
The major news events were selected by Internet users from a pool of 20 items, an executive with Xinhuanet.com told Xinhua. The executive declined to provide information on detailed voting results.
The top three international news stories were: “World oil price close to 100 U.S. dollars a barrel”, “U.S. sub-prime mortgage market crisis shakes global financial market” and “National theme years fuel momentum for Sino-Russian cooperation.”
Clearly the most important piece of information came in the fourth paragraph, which wasn’t included in the Chinese version. A “panel of experts”, chose their top 20 for netizens to get stuck into, removing any references to cardboard dumplings, fake tigers and the slave trade. What the story doesn’t mention is that voters were required to pick 15 out of the 20 provided for them. The 15 most popular choices were then rearranged according to the “panel’s” preference. Maybe Will Hutton was right to hyperbolise the Congress’ importance last October. Or maybe he wasn’t.
The other story of interest goes a long way in reflecting the comprehensive - and often insensitive - nature of China’s tourism drive in Tibet.
LHASA, Jan. 5 (Xinhua) — Tibetan authorities are beginning restoration work on former residences and office buildings of some of the first Communist Party members to be sent to Tibet in the early 1950s, which have been turned into “revolutionary” tourist attractions.
“The government has worked out a list of the revolutionary sites which need restoring and the second list is soon to be submitted,” said an official with the Tibetan Regional CPC Committee.
Money will be spent on sprucing up buildings used by the PLA as they “liberated” Tibet in 1951 and the site used for the first branch of the Communist Party in a Tibetan village in 1959. I feel the following line from a local official will be hard for the majority of Tibetans to swallow:
“By visiting the buildings, people can experience the hard times that their forefathers had to pull through and the sacrifices they made so that we can be inspired to treasure the peace and prosperity we have today.”
I remarked to the translator of this article that Tibetans would absolutely love that paragraph. Recognising that a foreigner was making a typically snide Tibet-related remark, she quickly snapped back, “Well it’s not for the native people and the majority of people in Tibet are Chinese, Han Chinese.” According to the census in 2000, 92.8 percent of the population of the Tibet Autonomous Region were Tibetan. It’s always worrying when some journalists have so little knowledge about a place they write about on an almost daily basis.
Tsetenp | 07-Jan-08 at 4:12 am | Permalink
I’m a Tibetan living in exile. I too cringed when I read the piece about the development of “revolutionary” tourist attractions in Tibet. It seems that the PRC just cannot resist rubbing salt in our wounds. In the last few months, the PRC authorities are in overdrive to figure out how to beat down and insult Tibetans in every way imaginable - dictate reincarnation, jail nomads and children, beat monks. What next to celebrate the great Beijing Olympics?
Richardlee | 08-Jan-08 at 5:36 am | Permalink
I am Chinese. I agree some reporters have little knowledge about Tibet.But they did it out of good intention. You can not deny there was a servitude under Dalai Lama’s rule. Without the liberation, most of Tibetans would have still stayed in this servitude. Don’t say i am brainwashed. You are. For Tibetans inside Tibet, people usually would forget those hard time after so many years past and would like to focus on their current life.
And if you really think highly of democracy, please remember two ” don’t care”s. The first, we don’t care about what official propaganda media say. So only you and small bunch of chinese would pay attention to XInhua’s shits. YOu should notice that nobody would pay money to subscribe,let’s say, People’s daily etc.
Secondly, we don’t care about what western media says about China, especially among well-educated Chinese. Let time tell us everything. We should not pay price for your ignorance. You have freedom to yell. we have freedom to do our OWN business.
wk | 08-Jan-08 at 7:08 am | Permalink
you mentioned phayul.com and you want fair reporting on Tibet, what are you smoking?
FlewOverBird'sNest | 08-Jan-08 at 11:38 am | Permalink
@Richardlee
Your argument reminds me what Americans think may justify their invasion to Iraq–to save them out of dictatorship.
Seems all imperialism around our little planet , east or west, capitalist or communist, are not very different, and that’s eactly why I believe–Proletariat of the World, Unite!
Chris O'Brien | 08-Jan-08 at 11:39 am | Permalink
Well aware of Phayul’s agenda - was just using it as a vessel for two short SCMP quotes as I can’t access the original article.
Samuel | 08-Jan-08 at 7:33 pm | Permalink
Mr. Lee,
Who’s to say that Tibetan society wouldn’t have evolved out of feudalism by itself? And didn’t the communist government simply replace one autocratic government with another, I don’t know just some thoughts… I understand that it is a very complicated situation, but it seems to me like there is something to hide if the Chinese government is going through all these efforts to basically twist the facts.
Shanghaiist | 09-Jan-08 at 7:25 am | Permalink
Is it me or is it getting hot in here?…
Well it’s the fault of global warming elves, who have been wreaking havoc on China of late. First they…
Michael | 09-Jan-08 at 2:35 pm | Permalink
“You can not deny there was a servitude under Dalai Lama’s rule. Without the liberation, most of Tibetans would have still stayed in this servitude.”
This is the most common defense the Han Chinese have of their occupation of Tibet. They think that Tibet then would be the same now. Feihua, nonsense. Is the undemocratic and backward Japan of 1940 the same as it is now. Ditto for Korea (south) of 1950. How about Taiwan? Although China is growing at a faster rate than those societies now, all are way ahead of China in both democratic processes, civil society, and economic wealth. Most likely a free Tibet right now would find the Dalai Lama in a strictly religious role with a political structure that could very well be democratic or very well be like the ’stans’ in central Asia (somewhat democratic) and an economy probably slightly, but not much, better than it is now.
“we have freedom to do our OWN business.” I wish the Tibetans could say the same.
nanheyangrouchuan | 10-Jan-08 at 1:42 pm | Permalink
““You can not deny there was a servitude under Dalai Lama’s rule. Without the liberation, most of Tibetans would have still stayed in this servitude.”
This is the most common defense the Han Chinese have of their occupation of Tibet.”
That is the most common defense of every country China liberates. Big commie forgets that Tibetans accepted this way due to their religious beliefs…and all of China still lives under feudalism, including Beijing and Shanghai (hukou system) and now China plans to “liberate” northern Korea as well:
China planning to secure North Korea’s nuclear arsenal: report by P. Parameswaran
23 minutes ago
WASHINGTON (AFP) - China has contingency plans to dispatch troops into North Korea and secure nuclear weapons in the event of instability in the hardline communist state, according to US experts who have talked to Chinese military researchers.
ADVERTISEMENT
Any intervention by Beijing would be done as far as possible after consultations with the United Nations, but unilateral action was not ruled out, the experts said in a report published on the websites of two US think tanks.
“If deemed necessary, PLA troops would be dispatched into North Korea,” the report said, referring to the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA).
“China’s strong preference is to receive formal authorization and coordinate closely with the UN in such an endeavor,” it said.
“However, if the international community did not react in a timely manner as the internal order in North Korea deteriorated rapidly, China would seek to take the initiative in restoring stability.”
The report was compiled by experts from the Center for Strategic and International Studies and the US Institute of Peace — which published the report — and Asia Foundation following their visit to China in June last year.
North Korea, which reportedly has up to 10 nuclear bombs, is currently involved in a de-nuclearization program in return for energy aid and diplomatic and security guarantees under a six-party mechanism involving also the United States, China, Russia, South Korea and Japan.
The program hit a snag recently after Washington accused Pyongyang of not meeting a December 31 deadline for a full declaration of its nuclear programs.
“According to PLA researchers, contingency plans are in place for the PLA to perform three possible missions” in North Korea — humanitarian and peacekeeping missions and “environmental control” measures, the report said.
The measures are intended “to clean up nuclear contamination resulting from a strike on North Korean nuclear facilities” near the Sino-North Korean border and “to secure nuclear weapons and fissile materials.”
The report — entitled “Keeping An Eye On An Unruly Neighbor: Chinese views of economic reform and stability in North Korea” — said that in the event of instability in North Korea, China’s main priority would be to prevent a flood of refugees.
This would be done by assuring supplies of food and strengthening border controls, it said.
“PLA officers maintain that they would attempt to close the border, but admit a lack of confidence that they could do so successfully, since the border extends 866 miles (1,394 kimometers) and can be easily penetrated,” the report said.
US experts took pains to emphasize that nuclear concern was only one part of the US-China dialogue on North Korea issues among the think tank community.
“The range of issues discussed is comprehensive,” Korea expert John Park of the US Institute of Peace told AFP. “Discussion of hypothetical scenarios enables various parties to achieve a better understanding of nuanced views.”
China’s overall concerns about instability in North Korea, including on the nuclear issue, are not new as they share a long border, said China expert Bonnie Glaser of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
“Just as the US is concerned about the possibility of instability in terms of nuclear weapons in Pakistan, the Chinese not surprisingly have concerns about control and security of nuclear facilities and nuclear weapons in the event of instability in North Korea,” she said.
The US experts also discussed with Chinese specialists trends in North KoreaÂ’s economy and prospects for reform, current trends in Sino-North Korean economic relations and ChinaÂ’s policy toward North Korea in the wake of Pyongyang’s October 2006 nuclear weapons test.
“I think the most important thing that has come out of it has really been increased understanding between experts on both sides about how we look at North Korea,” Glaser said.
hi beijing 2008 | 10-Jan-08 at 2:15 pm | Permalink
Dear Chris O’Brien,
I have visited your site and feel that the content about beijing would be of interest to the visitors to my site located at: “http://www.hibeijing2008.com/”.
I have already placed a link to your site along with a description at http://www.hibeijing2008.com/. I would appreciate if you would place a link back to my site using the following description:
site name:hi beijing 2008
URL:http://www.hibeijing2008.com/
If you would like the description of your site modified or you have any other cross-promotion ideas let me know.
Best regards,
sora
E-mail:seosora@gmail.com
Jeremiah | 11-Jan-08 at 5:20 pm | Permalink
I think one of the great ironies of the debate is the extent to which pre-1949 history is butchered—by both sides—in the service of contemporary political exigencies. Was Tibet a wonderland of freedom and love prior to 1949? Of course not. Was it a hell-hole of lamas and slaves? No. I’m not sure that history is the best argument here, why not focus on contemporary angles such as the right of self-determination?
I’ve said it before, but if the PRC government had a sense of humor, which we know it does not, it would simply say: “You want to talk history and Tibet? Listen, we invaded it. Twice. It’s ours. We’ll talk ‘free Tibet,’ just as soon as the US gives San Diego back to the Mexicans. Until then, have another toke, put another bumpersticker on the VW Bus, and go buy more of our stuff from Wal-Mart.”
To Richardlee,
I think flatly refusing to read or care about ideas, opinions, or arguments simply because of their provenance, rather than deciding to accept or reject them based on the merits of the information presented, is really the grossest form of ignorance. Such a statement shows a severe lack of critical thinking skills. I’m not sure what your definition of ‘well-educated’ might be, but surely you could not include the narrow-minded and small person who wrote your comment in that group.