Disclaimer: The following commentary is by no means anti-Chinese. Like most countries, the problem is the system and members of government, not the average people just trying to get by. Many Chinese have improved their standard of living and are optimistic for the future. The majority are not oppressed by their leaders to the degree of North Korea or Myanmar, but autocracy and injustices do exist that are not becoming of a burgeoning and aspiring "superpower". I believe that the Beijing government deserves it's share of credit for China's economic success, as well as blame for the country's many lingering and worsening sociopolitical problems, of which the Olympics may play a role.
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?source=hptextfeature&story_id=11848192
http://www.newsweek.com/id/148997
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90408961
------- PART 1: CHINA'S EVOLUTION -------
These Olympic Games have placed China in the spotlight (and under the microscope) like never before. I know it's impossible to tackle such a huge topic with my limited knowledge and time (plus most major news services have been heavily covering the "Rise of China" storyline for the last two years, not to mention many PhD students like Andu!), but I wanted to at least start a conversation and see what people think. China's collective psychology regarding the Games, ever-evolving perceptions of their history/national identity, and dealing with the growing pains of their rapid economic rise is complex and fascinating, as the links above describe. You PolSci grad students are better suited to chime in here, though I guess they're too busy doing real research, instead of responding to my sophomoric emails!
These Summer Games are supposedly China's time in the spotlight, and their biggest opportunity to show the world that they have arrived. Economically, we already know this to be true, yet China is not yet the slayer of the West that some xenophobes envision. Its GDP is #2 in the world (though smaller than the combined EU I think), but still just 55% of America's and not expected to equal ours any time soon. I know their huge population works against them for some economic metrics, but their per capita GDP ($5,500 in 2003) is just ranked #122 worldwide, in between Peru and Swaziland, so clearly many Chinese have not yet arrived. But after their inclusion in the WTO in 2001 (despite rampant corruption, poor environmental/worker protections, currency devaluation, and other unfair trade practices), their growth has soared as the West's thirst for cheap, mass-manufactured goods has risen in parallel.
In terms of macroeconomics and global development, China is a major success story, especially considering how far she had to pick herself up from the disaster of the Cultural Revolution. China seems very hungry for outside respect and recognition. But great nations don't need to convince anyone that they're great; it should be obvious based on their behavior and accomplishments. China has the wealth and military might (relatively, for Asia standards) for sure, but not the political maturity. A great nation doesn't cut lucrative deals with Myanmar and Sudan, then forego their international responsibilities by as those states commit all sorts of mayhem on their own people. Though some experts feel that China has responded to the Olympics publicity and international pressure, drastically adjusting its dealings with Khartoum this year (see reference 1 at end). A great nation doesn't ethnically cleanse its minority provinces, and try to convince the world that the Dalai Lama is actually a villain. A great nation doesn't profit from rampant counterfeiting and exporting of tainted products. A great nation doesn't censor its people, force foreign internet service providers to rat out dissidents, jail them without cause, and sell their organs on the black market. A great nation should let the people decide their laws and leaders, instead of an inner circle of Communist Party elites (who don't even believe in communism anymore, and appoint their corrupt, incompetent cronies to key posts in provincial government).
However, the problem is that other prominent nations of the last 50 years have committed all those misdeeds too and worse (well, maybe not the organs part). Europe and the US often criticize China for the very things that they used to do (or may still be doing). I know that Europe especially has learned a great deal from WWII and the dissolution of their overseas empires, and are often leading the way in terms of fair diplomacy, social welfare, and environmentalism. But Russia and the US are still thumbing their noses at legitimate criticism (often from each other), and engaging in some of the same self-destructive Cold War ideologies and tendencies. So it's hard for the teapot to call the kettle black and guilt-trip China into behaving better, which is unfortunate, because there are several Third World conflicts where their economic relationships could be useful leverage.
As the Newsweek article describes, China has a major chip on their shoulder after nearly a century of "humiliating" history with the West and Japan. The Chinese Empire, once so advanced and the envy of the world, fell apart from the inside. Tens of millions of Chinese perished during WWII, and many other millions died due to civil conflicts, famines, disasters, and mismanagement from Beijing. Finally their time to shine has come, and they'll be damned if they allow protesters or critics to rain on their glorious parade (though some rain to clear the Beijing skies would be welcomed!). It seems that the more outside criticism that China receives, the more stubbornly intransigent and anti-progressive they become. Though that is the case with most nations and regimes. When under attack by foreign critics, people circle the wagons and cling to their nationalism, while their repressive governments find their grip on power conveniently augmented. So I guess protesting China during the Olympics may be a double-edged sword, or even counter-productive if the goal is social reform.
To enhance our understanding, we have to consider China in the context of her leaders, whose #1 priority is political control of 1.3B people (who are mostly poor and rural). The Western powers were more scared of the Soviet Union than Nazi Germany in the 1930s, because the prospect of Bolshevism spreading was much scarier than fascist National Socialism. Workers vastly outnumber the powerful elites in every industrialized country, so they were deathly scared of a "proletarian revolt". Yet China has managed to keep relative control of its workers with the help of, and in spite of, Marxism. Now "Mao is dead", his social visions dismantled, and China has totally moved past communist ideology as their social glue. I guess witnessing the USSR's failed attempt to compete economically with the West encouraged China's leaders to modernize and adopt a market economy. However, they have skillfully managed to enact these changes without significantly expanding personal freedoms and political rights. A traditionally Confucian society with a history of deference to authority would appear to be a prime candidate to embrace centralized socialist rule. But some Chinese observed that their Confucian traditions failed them in the face of Western competition and colonialism, so some adjustments and innovations had to be made. Clearly the primitive, agrarian China of the 1970s couldn't survive on Marxist ideology alone, especially as their population growth outpaced their economic development. So instead, their leaders embarked on a massive social engineering experiment, as a means of helping China modernize and extending their grip on power. The "one child" policy took effect, social safety nets were dismantled, and a market economy emerged. So capitalism and nationalism have replaced Maoism in China's social fabric. Now their ethos is making as much money as possible, and increase glory and influence for China (hopefully through peaceful, economic means).
But a free market and reduced public services means that some people, or many people, will be left behind. Most Chinese cannot afford cars or the fancy new products that their factories produce, not to mention basic lodging and health care in the cities. Their modernized economy has saved millions of Chinese from starvation and other suffering, but thousands of workers have been sacrificed at the altar of capitalism during huge mining or construction disasters, not to mention unhealthy working conditions in their massive factories. Their traditional agrarian way of life is threatened by the mass exodus of young, temporary laborers to the urban centers. People were displaced left and right to make way for massive public works projects, such as the disappointing Three Gorges Dam. Yes the government has reduced or eliminated food shortages, droughts, and flooding, but their economy has also poisoned their skies and water table, and their social engineering may come to haunt them when the ratio of young workers to retirees becomes unsustainable, and too many poor men can't find brides. Many older Chinese actually lament all the recent growth and change (2). They yearn from the "old days" of real socialism when people weren't fixated on consumption, and there was work and health care for all (albeit low quality). For the generation that grew up with the Little Red Book as their bible, this massive shift doesn't make sense. But they can't deny that the free market has done for China what Mao never could.
But if the previous political economy models hold true, China's prosperity will eventually lead to expanded freedoms and democratic reforms. Though we will see how the ruling party reacts to that movement in a post-Tiananmen Internet age. In addition, with huge wealth gains and sustained autocratic leadership comes China's aspirations to restore their imperial glory. But some of China's economic practices are creating a lot of bad karma overseas, and there's a thin line between trade and exploitation, or even soft colonialism. After the US and UK's major loss of international goodwill due to its handling of the War on Terror, China should heed that warning and realize that their actions do carry consequences. Negative perceptions can be very bad for business. Already they have made waves or caused friction with their worldwide shopping spree (legal but gaudy) of natural resources and foreign companies, or uncompetitive trade practices like devaluing their currency in order to make their exports artificially cheap (but maybe that time is over, since inflation is finally catching up with them). Chinese immigrants have spread across the globe, and many have succeeded financially, working hard and often out-competing local businesses (3). They also tend to sell Chinese-made products and hire other Chinese instead of local goods/workers, so their commercial gains aren't really shared with their neighbors. The Chinese can do business as they like and have every right to be unapologetic, but as we all know, disproportionate success (even if honest) can often breed resentment and jealousy. Sinophobic backlash is common from the US to Australia, which also makes the Chinese more defiant and jingoistic, especially those who are aware of their racist history with the West, like during the Gold Rush and Chinese Exclusion Act.
In a recent special for the Discovery Channel, Ted Koppel visited China and observed that 80% of Chinese think favorably of their government, mostly out of appreciation for the large standard of living gains during their economic boom, as well as nationalistic pride for China's return to world power status (4). Well, a government with an 80% approval rating is either unbelievably wonderful or really screwed up. Saddam and Kim Jong Il got very high marks from their people too, but you can easily question the validity and credibility of such data. On the other hand, "near perfect" nations like Singapore, Switzerland, and Sweden don't even enjoy 80% approval ratings for their leaders. Iceland seems to be the exception, with a very happy populace and 83% government approval rating (from a recent Capacent Gallup poll). Speaking of happiness index, China was ranked #76 worldwide by the New Economics Foundation (they defined their happiness metric as 50% life expectancy + 50% life satisfaction survey), well below those other nations, and even war-torn Sri Lanka and impoverished Guatemala (5). So the Chinese aren't happy about something, but tend to not blame the government. I attribute this to censorship and propaganda, along with an underlying sentiment among average Chinese that they desperately want to be proud of their nation, even to the point of delusion. Chinese children don't learn anything negative about China (but I guess that can be said of any nation), and all the hard times were the fault of foreigners. Speaking badly of the government is a crime, just like in Iran or Turkey. Chinese media is heavily controlled, though Internet bloggers are trying their best to offer alternative viewpoints to the official Party Line. I think the information is available if the Chinese really care to find out. But maybe many of them are content to support their government 100%, and actually believe that Tibet and Taiwan belong to them. Just as long as they are making a decent wage, maybe they are content with an autocratic government and few channels for political redress. But of course there are still dissenters who have made their case to Beijing and won at times, or at least made headlines (6). Their system can't sustain itself indefinitely. With more commerce and wealth comes more exchange of ideas and demand for improvements.
------- PART II: CHINA AND THE GAMES --------
So with China's recent history as the backdrop, we can see how the Olympics situation may become problematic. China's economic growth has made them the darling of Asia and globalization, yet also resented, if not outright loathed, in many places for perceived or real uncompetitive, brusque commercial practices (not to mention human rights abuses). The Chinese people and government are quite nationalistic, and a lot is riding on these games. They fear that insurgents, dissidents, and critics will spoil their glorious moment of triumph, so then they clamp down even harder, thereby giving those same critics more ammunition and validation. They want and need these games to go off without a hitch, and their athletes to sweep up many medals. It seems that the Chinese are using the Games as an opportunity to show off how impressive and mighty their nation and people have become (similar to the Nazi Games of 1936, but of course I don't equate the two countries). But that very attitude of flaunting success and "Middle Kingdom" ethnocentrism is what partially inspires Sinophobic sentiments aross the globe.
Welcoming the world to your Olympic Games should be a great honor and huge responsibility for the host nation, and the IOC should not dangle that privilege as "reward" for a developing state or prosperous city. Hosting the Olympics should not be a right of passage to show that a city/society has made the big time, yet at times it has been exactly that (Hitler's Berlin in 1936 to show they had recovered from WWI and Versailles, Tokyo and Seoul hosting in the 1980s to demonstrate the rise of Asia). Well, the IOC is definitely NOT the UN, and economic/publicity motives seem to drive Olympic decisions much more than the "good of sport" and international goodwill.
Their innovative stadiums and public works projects in preparation for the Olympics are impressive and deserve praise, but a nation is truly weak if it relies on festivals and edifices to prove its prowess. China arrogantly belies that these Games will be the "best ever". The ATHLETES and the COMPETITION make the Olympics great, not the host nation and their propaganda. The Olympics will go on with or without China, and even poorer, smaller places like Rio or Jakarta could put on a decent Games if given the chance. Even if their prediction comes true, do they expect everyone to suddenly sing China's praises and overlook her many other faults, just because they put on a good show for three weeks? All their problems will still be around after the Closing Ceremony, and in fact some problems have worsened while the nation was fixated with the Olympics for the last seven years.
In the face of foreign criticism, China claims that the Olympics should be apolitical, and I tend to agree. But if they expect to use these Olympics as an opportunity to ameliorate their image and announce their arrival on the world stage, then their objectives are purely nationalistic - and therefore political. Of course their primary goals are to win as many medals as possible (their sports system is also a major source of nationalism), and make sure the Games proceed smoothly and visitors have a positive experience. That sounds fine and fairly ubiquitous, but one problem with nationalism is that it breeds competition, superiority, and often requires an "enemy" to make sense. China seems to have many enemies to choose from when politically convenient.
There's always the ill will from decades of Western exploitation and colonial humiliation (Opium Wars, Boxer Rebellion, etc.). After the People's Revolution, the decadent and capitalistic "dogs" were still the enemy, but then Nixon reached out to Mao and later Deng Xiaopeng started to move the country towards a market-based economy. Then it was Tibet, Taiwan, Vietnam, the USSR, and/or India. Sometimes Chinese politicians invoked past WWII scars and lashed out at Japan for its indifference or denial over atrocities like Nanking. They must have a particular sense of rivalry versus Japan. The perpetrator of much WWII carnage in Asia recovered from the war quicker than the victims, and got its "revenge" against the West by rising to economic dominance in the auto and electronics industries. And they did it faster and better than China. Now of course China's GDP has surpassed Japan's on the strength of its cheap renminbi, endless labor force, and massive manufacturing sector. Maybe they get the last laugh, though the quality of life differences in the two nations are like night and day. I suppose leading up to the Olympic games, the enemy has now shifted to Tibet supporters and the critical Western media, who are ostensibly bitter at China's success and hesitant to give her due respect on the world stage.
But getting back to the actual Games... of course every nations tries to impress and showcase its assets to the world during highly publicized events. Yes China employed some talented people to construct amazing creations like the new airport, Bird's Nest, and Water Cube (and they finished on time and within budget, unlike struggling Athens), but a stadium is just a place where people sit and watch athletes run around. It won't help China at all during the next socioeconomic crisis or natural disaster. Would they rather have a really fancy stadium that will go mostly unused after August, or maybe they could have spent some of those millions on enforcing safer building codes, so their shoddy Sichuan schools didn't crush scores of only children in a hail of concrete? I know with a quake that strong, some structures will fall and some people will die, but their public schools seemed to topple at a higher rate than neighboring private structures (7).
Any schmuck can build a fancy monument. Saddam and the two Kim dictators of North Korea had their slaves build huge palaces and statues to their glory, but it didn't convince anyone on the outside to think of them any better. Robert Mugabe spent millions on his birthday party, while his people starved and inflation soared (their treasury recently printed ten billion notes, which can't even buy bread). And let us not forget that thousands of poor Chinese were forcibly evicted or saw their livelihoods affected in order to make room for the new airport, transit systems, stadiums, and the "greater good and glory of China". That is partially why the UK's Amnesty International proclaimed in a recent study that human rights have actually declined in China because of the Olympics, versus the IOC's expectations to the contrary. In addition, an investigation suggests that several workers died during the rushed construction of the Bird's Nest, but the government denies this (8). Well, China is still blessed with is an endless supply of expendable rural laborers, just like the "glory days" of old when their imperial dynasties were supported literally by the blood and sweat of the peasantry.
How glorious is a nation that needs to censor/monitor/revoke visas of foreign journalists, suppress/assault dissenters, and shut down auto traffic and factories so the air during the Games has a slight chance of being breathable? And through all this, the IOC has been totally complicit (or at least neutral), because despite the bad PR and compromising of their "values", they know they will make mountains of cash on these Games. And sometimes controversy is good because it generates more attention, and therefore more revenues. But how about all the "unsightly" lower-class individuals like homeless, migrants, and prostitutes who were herded from Beijing and out of sight from the tourists? They are just hiding and stacking their problems in the closet while the guests are over, in order to present the false impression that all is well in their perfect, happy family. Probably most host cities have implemented similar "clean up" projects prior to the Games, but China has taken it to a new level. I know that terrorism is an unfortunate modern reality that all major international event planners must deal with, but does that give them the right to randomly pat-down visitors and make it so complicated for totally non-threatening people to obtain travel visas (9,10)? Are they playing host or jailer?
If hosting the Games is like inviting the world to your home, some nations have very strange hospitality habits indeed. If Nazi Germany and the USSR have hosted previous Games, then we can't really use the argument that China isn't qualified to host based on her poor human rights record and lack of freedoms. But still, China not only wants to convince the world that she deserves to host the Games, but also that she should be taken seriously as a world power and global player. Yet leading up to these Games, China has sometimes behaved like a second-rate banana republic rather than one of the five most powerful nations on Earth. Violently suppressing revolts in Tibet and attempting to demonize the Dalai Lama, sending pro-China thugs overseas to fight against Torch Rally protesters, and clamping down on journalists/Internet access are just a few of their recent transgressions. The tragic Sichuan earthquake forced Beijing to increase media and aid worker freedoms in their country (and the mostly positive PR from their response to help the survivors was worth it), but I doubt those expanded freedoms will persist.
Self-assured nations don't have to forcibly project their power and authority wherever they go, but can accomplish their objectives quietly through dialog and negotiation. That is true power. Only insecure leaders and governments feel the need to pick fights or pull off political stunts to remind the world that they are relevant (hostility and arrogance over Taiwan and Tibet, buying and spying for military technology, border disputes with neighbors, Falun Gong, using the War on Terror as an excuse to clamp down on Muslim minorities, who are mostly not actual security threats). China is not all evil or all good, like any other state. Though if pro-China groups declared war on the Torch Rally protesters and Western media, then that means Beijing actually feels threatened by them. How can they expect us to take them seriously as a world power if they act so childish and tempermental in the face of puny Richard Gere and laughable CNN? Even if some prominent Americans make ludicrous comments and Sinophobic Congressmen irrationally block Chinese companies from purchasing US holdings, the Middle Kingdom is not exactly persecuted by the West. After all, they still have permanent veto power on the Security Council, Most Favorable Nation trade status with the US and others, and billions of T-bonds in the bank that they could ruin us with if they ever decide to collect. Their economy is still growing by double-digits while the West is in recession, and no one in Asia can seriously threaten them militarily. The Chinese government is often schizophrenic in this regard, playing both victim and bully simultaneously.
In closing (thank you for reading this far), "Noblesse oblige" is an old French proverb meaning that nobility are obligated to act like nobility, especially when situations tempt you to compromise your values or take an undignified shortcut. Forget for now that many nobles throughout history have behaved lower than pond scum, but the intended meaning of the proverb has some validity. If China wants the accolades and respect that she thinks she deserves as a legit world power, then she should act like one, plain and simple. Then I guarantee she will obtain what she desires. Despite all her pressing problems, the sky is the limit for the Middle Kingdom, and only China can keep China down (their government at least). We'll see how these Olympics and the near future play out for them, especially with rising resource costs, an aging population, and manufacturing competition from smaller, cheaper nations. Great nations and peoples show their true greatness in the face of daunting challenges. Will this be China's "Greatest Generation", or will they fade like their empire of the past?
------- REFERENCES --------
(1) http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93293361
(2) http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89253125
(3) http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93143915
(4) http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/koppel/highlights/highlights.html
(5) http://www.socyberty.com/Sociology/World-Happiness-Rankings.116999
(6) http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/news/248218.php
(7) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7400524.stm
(8) http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/china/article3216569.ece
(9) http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-07-31-voa17.cfm?rss=sports
(10) http://www.visabureau.com/worldwide/news/23-07-2008/china-increases-visa-and-security-measures-for-olympics.aspx
No comments:
Post a Comment