Search This Blog

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Chinese TV in Canada opens door to propaganda

An excellent piece by Elaine Xie, co-chair of Canadians Against Propaganda, a coalition of 29 organizations founded to stop the spread of China's propaganda in Canada. The association is appealing to have the CRTC's decision overturned. This is followed by a great editorial called Channels of distortion. Related articles on CRTC’s decision to allow 9 Communist TV channels to air in Canada can be found here, here, here, here and here! Let's keep on reminding CRTC about the scope of their mandate. Tell your MP to speak out for your/our rights.

AP/Winnipeg Press - Jan 14 2007: On the Friday before Christmas, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission quietly released a long-awaited decision, approving nine controversial state-run television channels from China for broadcast on Canada's digital cable network.

With this approval, the CRTC has opened the door for a foreign communist regime to incite hatred against targeted groups in Canada, using our own airwaves. Worse, the CRTC acknowledged this threat but did not act to stop it.

These nine services, collectively known as the Great Wall Package, are represented by China International Television Corporation (CITVC), a wholly owned subsidiary of China Central Television (CCTV), the main television station of China's ruling Communist party. They are sponsored in Canada by media giant Rogers Communications.

Canadians Against Propaganda was among more than 2,500 groups and individuals to submit letters to the CRTC against the Great Wall application when the CRTC made the unprecedented move earlier this year to reopen public comments for evidence of hate incitement. More than 2,000 others signed petition signatures against the application.

CAP made clear in its submission the well-documented fact that state-run media in China, including television networks, have for decades been used by the Communist party to incite hatred against persecuted groups. They are weapons of a repressive and deceitful regime.

The CRTC was presented with a comprehensive investigation published by international media watchdog Reporters Without Borders, which called the Chinese regime's news agency, Xinhua, "the world's biggest propaganda agency."

Other submissions made clear that the Communist regime continues its persecutions of Tibetans, Falun Gong practitioners, Christian house churches, democracy advocates, Muslim Uighurs and others, and that CCTV is obligated to toe the Communist party's line on these persecutions through its programming.

The CRTC, however, chose not to see the big picture. In its decision, the CRTC overlooked the context in which these stations operate. Instead, it chose to consider only "issues that relate directly to the sponsored services themselves." For the CRTC, that meant taped broadcasts that had aired on the networks.

Despite the extreme difficulty in acquiring taped evidence of spontaneous broadcasts in a foreign country, in a foreign language – a difficulty that was communicated to the CRTC -- several tapes were provided. And the CRTC found many of the programs abusive.

CRTC concluded that on multiple occasions CCTV-4, one of the nine networks, had exposed "the targeted group or individual to hatred or contempt."

The CRTC called comments in several of the broadcasts targeting Falun Gong "clearly abusive, in that they are expressions of extreme ill will against Falun Gong and its founder, Li Hongzhi." The CRTC added: "The derision, hostility and abuse encouraged by such comments could expose the targeted group or individual to hatred or contempt" and in some cases the statements could even "incite violence and threaten the physical security of Falun Gong practitioners."

The CRTC then approved CCTV-4, allowing it to air freely in Canada with no monitoring precautions whatsoever.

The rationale for this decision is foggy at best. The CRTC said in its ruling that it was "unable to conclude that the offending stories" -- programs aired between 1999 and 2001 -- "are typical of the content currently aired on CCTV-4."

However, in April 2006, CAP had couriered a request to CITVC -- in which the CRTC was copied -- calling for tapes of six specific programs aired as recently as November 2005, offering to pay shipping costs. The request was ignored. The CRTC made only a brief mention of this in its decision. Apparently, the CRTC believes the refusal to provide more recent programming is evidence that the programs did not incite hatred. The CRTC went on to say it will "expect that the CCTV-4 service that will be distributed in Canada will be free of abusive comment."

It is hard to understand what this expectation is based on. In fact, a Canadian Chinese-language broadcaster was already reprimanded in 2002 after it aired a CCTV-4 program attacking Falun Gong. The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council ruled that the program breached five separate articles of the broadcaster and journalist ethics codes. Its contents were "nothing more or less than a biased attack on Falun Gong by the producer of that news item." And an on-air apology was ordered of the Canadian carrier.

CCTV has never apologized. They have never accepted that they have broadcast abusive comments, despite CRTC's finding that they have done so numerous times. And they have never promised to cease such programming.

Nonetheless, they have somehow earned the CRTC's blind trust.

As Canadians we value freedom of expression of the press. We deserve to be exposed to a variety of viewpoints from a variety of sources. This is part of our democracy. However, Canadians also expect that these media will not be used to inflict hatred, discrimination, or worse yet violence against groups in Canada. It is the CRTC's job to protect Canadians from this. Sadly, in this case they have failed. The CRTC's unfounded faith in CCTV has put thousands of Canadians at risk.

Channels of distortion

Asian Pacific Post: Editorial: 12 January - Over Christmas and without much ado, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), our guardian of the airwaves, approved nine Chinese state-run television networks to broadcast their shows in Canada.

The networks called the “Great Wall package” are wholly-owned by China Central Television, the main state-run television network in China.

The nine channels will carry news, sports, and entertainment programming in several Chinese dialects to capitalize on Canada’s rapidly growing Chinese-speaking market.

The networks’ journalists and producers are overseen in China by the China Radio Film and Television Group, which describes itself as “an important mouthpiece of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Central Committee, an important cultural battlefield for the CCP and our country.”

As such these channels give voice to Beijing’s defamation of the Dalai Lama, why China should rule democratic Taiwan, attack Falun Gong practitioners as members of an evil cult and promote the defiance of the Vatican in the middle kingdom.

China-state run media is also infamous for its reality-deficient reports laden with political prejudice.

Remember how China suppressed the outbreak of SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) epidemic in the summer of 2003, which killed 800 people around the world, including 44 in Toronto.

In June 2005, the Publicity Department of the Communist Party told China Central Television, which owns the nine stations given the green light by CRTC, that national press must “communicate” with officials in the area being investigated and inform them of the content of the critical reporting before publishing the article or airing the programme.

Chinese television news producers were also instructed to highlight the positive. Even in exposés on corruption, they must emphasise that the sleaze was an exception while the overwhelming majority of officials had high moral standards.

This simply means there will be no coverage by these channels on China’s lack of accountability or the destruction of its environment.

Don’t expect news on the air pollution that kills 400,000 people a year, chemical spills that contaminate rivers or that 660 Chinese cities face extreme water shortages.

What you will get is the Communist party’s version that will paint the internationally acclaimed human rights advocate as corrupt or the whistleblower as being an agent for a foreign government.

You will be force fed views that the individual being detained without trial for years in a Chinese labour camp is a terrorist.

You will be told that nothing untoward happened in Tiananmen Square, there is no cultural genocide in Tibet, Taiwan is a rebel province and there is no widespread torture and killing of thousands of Falun Gong practitioners in China.

The core mandate of CRTC is to ensure that what is broadcast in Canada reflects Canadian identity, attitudes and opinions.

Maybe the CRTC can tell us when the suppression and distortion of news became a Canadian value.

The Chinese ambassador to Canada, Shumin Lu says the nine new channels would “help diversify the cultural life of the Canadian people.”

We say thanks but no thanks.

Sunday, January 14, 2007

New Book: China's Psychiatric Inquisition: Dissent, Psychiatry and the Law

WSJ Jasper Becker gives an explosive account of Robin Munro’s new book “China's Psychiatric Inquisition: Dissent, Psychiatry and the Law in Post-1949 China. The Chinese Law Prof blog 's review is equally good. I’ve read Munro’s excellent response to critics regarding his past articles pertaining to Falun Gong’s abusive psychiatric treatment. The simple fact that the Communist regime coined the term “evil-cult-induced-mental-disorder” especially to send Falun Gong in mental assylums proves again their ability to manipulate the medical profession in executing their dirty work. Remember organ harvesting and this statement from the WPA?

WSJ: Scarring China's Psyche - Just when you thought China's cabinet of horrors has finally been emptied, along comes fresh research that plumbs even deeper into Mao's inequities and the legacy he left behind.

In "China's Psychiatric Inquisition," Robin Munro shows how China emulated the Soviet Union's methods of destroying political dissidents -- and then surpassed it, thanks to the authorities' obsession with enforcing "thought control" over its citizens. Mr. Munro's book chronicles this gruesome tale of violence, which became acceptable within society. He observes, "As the Cultural Revolution unfolded. . .the distinction between political crime and mental illness -- one that had apparently been tenuous even at the best of times--was effectively abandoned in Chinese public life."

Consider the figures. While in the Soviet Union, political dissidents never constituted more than 1% of mental asylum inmates, more than half of those incarcerated in China were political prisoners. At one Shanghai mental hospital run by the local police, 73% of patients were political prisoners; a common occurrence. Conditions were horrible. One cadre detained for 16 years in a police-run asylum close to Shanghai's Fudan University gave this description after his 1979 release: "The whole 'institute' was a large cage from within which one could not see the skies. Inside this large cage there were many small chicken cages, which were only half as high as an average person. One could only squat or lie in them, and I had to crawl in or out of mine."

He was lucky. Some patients were dragged out of the asylums and brutally coerced into "confessing" their sanity. After reclassification as counterrevolutionaries, they were jailed or summarily shot. Genuine political prisoners were sent to top secret prisons such as Qincheng and deliberately force-fed hallucinatory drugs. Many ended up insane. Their ravings were recorded and later used against them.

Even after the end of the Cultural Revolution and Mao's death in 1976, a substantial proportion who openly contradicted the new Party line risked being labeled as criminally insane. In the 1980s, the number of dissidents in police-run asylums ranged between 7% and 15% of all inmates, as the authorities still found it a convenient method of extralegal and arbitrary detention. Since Deng Xiaoping's relatively more moderate regime was no longer eager to execute its opponents, it needed a "more elaborate mechanism for inducing long term fear," writes Mr. Munro.

After 1987 the Ministry of Public Security established a network of around 25 so-called ankang, or "peace and health" hospitals -- highly secretive institutions that ran themselves without need of outside supervision. The police used the ankang system to diagnose cases of "paranoid psychotics" or "political paranoia" or "litigation mania." One of these cases was Wang Wanxing, held for 13 years after he unfurled a banner in Tiananmen Square in 1992 protesting the June 4th massacre three years earlier. After his release, he described fellow patients dying as they were tied to their beds and punished by nurses using electric acupuncture at excessive currents or by being force-fed during hunger strikes, among other horrors.

Following the failure of the 1989 democracy movement, the number of political cases started to decline. It wasn't until the Falun Gong demonstration outside Zhongnanhai 10 years later that authorities resorted once again to the old Maoist methods of thought correction. Thousands of Falun Gong members have since been persecuted and tortured in a systemized way, justified by Chinese psychiatrists inventing maladies like "dysphrenia" or sometimes "evil-cult induced mental disorder."

No Chinese psychiatrist seems troubled by such abuse of professional ethics. It took Mr. Munro years of meticulous research, combing medical and legal publications in China such as the Chinese Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases, to piece together the documentary evidence. Such tactics are now increasingly being used by the police to destroy citizens who are fighting injustice or corruption. Once the victim is labeled as mad, he has no civil rights, no recourse to any lawyers and cannot appeal against the police psychiatrist's diagnosis. The "troublemaker" is thus comprehensively silenced.

The one bright spot Mr. Munro identifies is that political victims of the ankang system have sued the police for wrongful arrest after their release. Some cases have been heard in the courts. None have succeeded, but some cases have been highlighted by the media since 2004, sparking a debate about the need for systematic safeguards, a code of ethics and outside supervision. This is partly in response to Mr. Munro's efforts to illuminate the abuses.

The response by the World Psychiatric Association, however, has been lamentable. The group's general assembly voted unanimously to investigate the allegations in 2002, after Mr. Munro's original report appeared, but after two years gave up trying to negotiate the terms of an on-site visit. The Chinese side refused to grant access to detainees or police-run asylums. Instead, the matter was dropped after China conceded "some misdiagnosis [had] occurred" -- but only with respect to Falun Gong cases.

Long after his death, Mao's evil has been institutionalized. The abuse of psychiatry by the state is responsible for destroying countless lives in China. Despite the widespread belief that China's human rights record has greatly improved, the sad fact is, as Mr. Munro's research proves, much is still hidden from sight and urgently in need of change.

Mr. Becker is the author of "Dragon Rising," (National Geographic, 2006).

DowJones

Beijing 2008 - China's Olympic reputation risk

Read the excerpt first. "What will the police do?" Good question -- take their pictures and torture them later so that they can project the image that they're a harmonious society -- when in fact everybody knows that they're not.

Phayul Excerpt: To avoid criticism China will have to sell tickets for events to anyone who wants them. It will be politically problematic and bad press to start denying entry visas to ticket holders. The fear is that organisations like Free Tibet and the Falun Gong will buy up large numbers of tickets and the final of the 100 metres will see the stands full of little old ladies protesting by doing tai chi live on camera. What will the police do? (more)

Kilgour's Speech: Is peace just wishful thinking?

Address by Hon. David Kilgour

Un Colloque

Palais du Luxembourg-15 rue de Vaugirard-75006

Paris

11 janvier 2007

The word peace conveys different meanings depending on context; my talk will relate primarily to matters where the term is intended to convey the absence of violent conflict or unfair economic competition.


It will include some thoughts on democracy building; treating all peoples as equally important internationally; better explanations of crises to our respective publics; human rights, fair trade and other issues with China; and life with Russia today.

1. The community of democracies across the world must work harder, smarter and more effectively to promote the emergence of democracy everywhere for, among other compelling reasons, the sake of a more peaceful planet .

A great European, Immanuel Kant, was the first thinker who noted in a book, Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch , that governments which are elected by people, i.e. democratic governments, do not go to war with each other. Today, the notion that democracies don't fight among themselves is known as "Democratic Peace Theory".


Some of the 40 or so dictators still in power are causing enormous damage both domestically and internationally. One study indicated that between 1816 and 1991 among the 353 conflicts classified as "major international wars" every one involved non-democracies as one or more of the participants. As not one war occurred between two democratic countries, one major lesson is clear: to prevent violence between nations, promote democracy.

EU member countries and Canada should be encouraging new, restored and emerging democracies effectively. Are our respective governments making it clear to the world's dictators that we stand with their respective peoples by adopting policies and actions which are supportive of civilian well-being and human rights and not complicit with tyrants of any political hue? Are our embassies and consulates actively encouraging the governments in such states to move in this direction, and encouraging their civil societies where they exist to implement the elements of democratic institutions? To be certain, democracy in its myriad forms does not imply any particular economic model. I might also add here that in most of the 67 dictatorships that have reportedly fallen since 1972 peaceful civic resistance--strikes, boycotts, protests, civil disobedience etc--was a strong causative factor.


2. The United Nations and the world community as a whole must treat all peoples as having equal worth and importance.


This implies both major and subtle changes in policies and attitudes, but I'll attempt to illustrate the point only with the case of Burma (Myanmar). The military regimes, which have been running Burma's kind peoples and beautiful country ever deeper into the ground since 1962, have been among the most ruthless, violent and bloody in terms of systematic human rights violations, ignoring an HIV/AIDS epidemic, rampant human and narcotics trafficking and creating thousands upon thousands of internally-displaced persons and refugees.


Many ask why it took until Sept.15, 2006 for the UN Security Council to add Burma to its peace-making agenda. Will the permanent members of the Council with large commercial interests in Burma (China and France) now permit that body to do something effective about the chaos and military slaughter of civilians, such as referring members of the junta to the International Criminal Court and providing adequate protection to victim groups? Will the Council manage to free the Nobel Peace Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest after more than ten very difficult years for this much-admired heroine of democracy? Can the rest of us across the world who are so troubled by the plight of 50 million Burmese now establish an effective coalition for a democratic Burma?


3. World media, governments, educators and parliamentarians ought to explain better outbreaks of violence and their underlying causes to promote effective action by the international community and to avoid worsening such crises.

Consider, for example, the continuing catastrophe in Darfur. How many French, other European, and Canadian nationals know that hundreds of thousands of civilians of civilians throughout Sudan's Darfur province have died over the past four years, probably about half murdered by agents of the government in Khartoum and the rest from related causes such as starvation? How many of us know that girls as young as eight have been gang-raped by allies of the same racist dictatorship? How many still believe the self-serving nonsense that the tragedy unfolding in Darfur is only a "tribal war"? Where are most of the world's independent media--with the honourable exceptions of a few--while such atrocities continue unabated?


Where is the UN Security Council when needed? To be certain, the major obstacle to saving Darfur is indifference among leaders in too many governments, who were after Srebrenica and other atrocities prepared to intervene in Bosnia and Kosovo to stop similarly-motivated violence in the 1990s, but will not yet do the same in Sudan. They justify their inaction partly by telling themselves that governments closer, having the means to stop the carnage, will not act. They wait and more people die every day.


4. A major factor in peace is the world's largest remaining party dictatorship — China; world leaders should be calling now for action on the human rights and other commitments Beijing made to win the Olympic Games for 2008.


If things don't improve rapidly, I think there is a good possibility that various governments, NGOs and individuals will speak up on human rights and other issues in China even while the Olympics are underway in August, 2008. The genuine friends of the Chinese people around the world should thus remain engaged continuously with the government in Beijing, while at the same time endorsing its peaceful transformation to a democratic and open society, with all the essential features of any modern responsible country, including the rule of law.

The spectrum of EU-China relations is already deep and growing. For example, EU trade with China grew fully 25% in 2003 and was up nearly 40% in 2004, with two-way trade now in the 200 billion Euros range annually, albeit with the surplus hugely in China's favor. I understand that France's yearly deficit alone with China alone is now running at $US 19 billion. How many lost French job are represented by this phenomenon?


Moreover, have EU governments, businesses and civil societies considered these factors?


When Chinese manufacturers go after a specialty sector in virtually any country, the businesses in it and their employees suffer severe consequences. Take the Czech Republic: in late 2004, its unemployment rate rose to 9.5% - 541,675 jobless in a population of about ten million. In the case of South Africa, I'm told that at least 67,000 badly-needed textile jobs have been lost in recent years for the same reason. The textile industries world-wide are under enormous pressure, primarily because the economic system in place now in China-which I've termed 'carnivore capitalism'- exploits China's working people and their natural environment grievously.


Canada's own trade deficit with China was in the $Can17 billion range in 2004; this phenomenon could be costing Canadians more than 50,000 jobs yearly. It's good for fighting inflation, but at what other human costs? Only last week, Goodyear Tire near Montreal announced that it will stop tire production there, thereby terminating 800 livelihoods. Does any economist think this is sustainable over the longer term? Is the government of China, moreover, still subsidizing its exports through currency interventions and indirect grants, contrary to solemn obligations it gave to the World Trade Organization? Does the People's Bank of China, for example, accurately report its business affairs to its own people, foreign investors and the world?


Have policy makers asked whether our respective private sector investments in China are exacerbating existing social inequalities there? In the case of the rural-urban disparity in incomes, one World Bank project discovered that in 35 poor rural areas four in ten children aged 7-15 received no schooling whatsoever.


HUMAN RIGHTS

Are cabinet ministers in Europe and Canada raising in a continuous way with the government of China concerns about basic human rights within that country? The annual human rights dialogues in some of our countries-and the larger international one held annually in Berne- appear for some observers to have become essentially meaningless charades. Moreover, will victims not feel forgotten when such talks take place behind closed doors?

What about China's probably best-known and most courageous lawyer, Gao Zhisheng, and his family? How can a lawyer be convicted in private, as he recently was, of "inciting subversion" by calling for independent judges, the rule of law, democracy and basic human rights in any country hosting the Olympic Games today? How can his wife and children be followed, harassed and even struck by squads of police who follow them constantly? If any more such abuses occur to any of them, I believe many governments, NGOs and individuals will speak out.

Independent observers of human rights in China, including a meeting of about twenty country heads of Amnesty International last year, concluded with much regret that since Hu Jintao became president in 2003 the overall situation has deteriorated significantly. Falun Gong, Uyghurs, democrats, Muslims, Christians, journalists, Tibetans, Buddhists, internet users﹘all and many others have experienced a worsened Party oppression. Permit me to provide a couple of thoughts about the repression of practitioners of Falun Gong and the Uyghurs (a longer statement is available on my website .

Falun Gong: The independent study David Matas and I did last summer, which concluded to our great regret that the government of China and its agencies are stealing vital organs from Falun Gong prisoners of conscience on a large scale, can be found now in 18 languages at www.organharvestinvestigation.net . We've also traveled as volunteers to about 30 national capitals since to raise awareness and pressure on the government in Beijing to stop the killing of some of its own citizens for profit immediately. A revised report which includes damning new evidence should be out later this month.


Uyghurs (a 4000-year-old Turkish ethnic community living in central Asia): The continuing "strike hard" campaign against them from China's central government resulted in even more arrests during the 50 th anniversary of the Uyghur region. Religious and other repressions continue. For example, many Uyghurs are jobless, but the government in Beijing brought in many thousands of persons from the mainland for the cotton harvest. The Uyghur language is barred from being taught in schools even though it is the official language of their region.


COMPREHENSIVE ENGAGEMENT

Is it not time for a comprehensive engagement strategy, which calls for friendly cooperation with China 's government, but also includes discussions on such issues as human rights, labour conditions, the rule of law and the natural environment? Over the longer term, our national interests are complementary. Ignoring or downplaying such matters does not encourage more responsible conduct.


Better environmental practices: Take China's emissions of carbon dioxide, the most common greenhouse gas and the major cause of global warming. Over the next seven years, Beijing expects to commence operations in fully 562 coal-fired plants, which will be nearly half the world's total. An estimated 400,000 Chinese nationals already die annually from lung and heart diseases related to air pollution. Sixteen of the 20 most polluted cities in the world are in China. What is the government of China doing that is effective to combat global warning?


Human Rights issues: Amnesty International has noted: "(T) rade contracts worth millions of US dollars are determining the European Union's policy on human rights in China" The same was equally true for Canada until Prime Minister Harper began last year to call for a more balanced approach to China.


Why not offer incentives to reform? For example, India-with whom all democracies should seek a strategic relationship-should be invited to join the G-8 because it is a democracy with human rights standards, competing free media, rule of law and independent courts. Why don't EU members and Canada vigorously seek to increase trade with countries like India to further promote the democratic values they represent? Surprisingly, the last time I looked India accounted for only 1.7% of total EU trade, most of it coming from the UK. By positive actions, we indicate to China's government that progress in these areas is essential to acceptance in the responsible international community.


5. Consider another major player in world peace - Russia

Despite a long history of disagreement between the EU and Russia (Canada's other immediate neighbour) on human rights, bilateral trade is growing rapidly, especially in the energy sector. More than half of Russia's foreign trade now is with EU countries. Germany and Russia have agreed to build a gas pipeline through the Baltic Sea. Poland protested, saying that Russia is using its oil to apply political pressure on Europe. Moscow certainly does not want Europe to be more politically and economically involved with the former Soviet republics, especially in Central Asia. Turkey, as a prospective member of the EU, promises to bring better access to Central Asian regions, thus making Europeans less dependant on Russian oil.


In fact, the diplomacy of oil is becoming a powerful tool of political manipulation. And Russian political leadership demonstrates fluency in this new diplomatic language by threatening to discontinue oil supply or to increase prices to neighbouring nations if they happen to displease the Kremlin in one way or another.


Being dependent on Russian oil will probably make European leaders less willing to bring pressure on Russia on transparency and human rights violations. Yet the Russian leadership should be reminded, constantly, that Russia has belonged to the Council of Europe since 1996 and therefore must comply with the European Convention of Human Rights. Was not its membership bid based on the condition that it would meet the Council's standards for a pluralistic democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights? Some of us thought that improving its human rights record in Chechnya was the main condition of Russia's acceptance into the Assembly (Resolution 1055). Are enough governments speaking out about the decline of democracy and human rights in Russia? What are all our governments doing to register our continuing concern about the indicated murders of 43 journalists in Russia since 1993, including the much-respected Anna Politkovskaya?


Legitimacy in the eyes of the world is one of the central goals of diplomacy virtually everywhere today. A county's reputation is now connected with the degree that it can influence others. If in the past influence was mainly defined by nuclear arsenals, bombs and rockets, having them today is not enough to have real influence in the community of nations. Even the US has come to accept this new reality. The aura of legitimacy has become a very precious commodity, which the governments of Russia and China understand too.


Since there is realistically no probability that Russia will be evicted from the Council of Europe, where can constructive engagement be best employed? Strasbourg urged Moscow to join the International Criminal Court to make the country more accountable for its conduct in Chechnya and elsewhere. The court is becoming more important as an integral part of the structure of international law. Unfortunately, three out of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council ( China, Russia and the US) refuse to be accountable to the court, whose main objective is to punish perpetrators of crimes against humanity.


6. International Stability

Unfortunately, many conflicts around the world are either exacerbated or proxies for the interests of other nations. Can democratic nations join to create a solid set of principles which ensure the sustainable growth of representative democracy and good governance across the world? How should those principles guide our relationships with other nations to ensure that the broadly-accepted principles which guide the international community today are not consistently compromised and ignored?


China and Russia are (with the US) adept at manipulating the international community through trade or access to oil and other natural resources. Can France, the EU, Canada and other nations willingly accept a political order in which major powers have different and often incompatible positions in their treatment of the environment, respect for rules and principles embedded in international law?


CONCLUSION

The EU members and Canada should demonstrate stronger leadership in advancing the fundamental truths of peace so dear to us. We should stop allowing our foreign policies to be driven mostly by the profit expectations of multinationals or blatant often short-term self-interest. Economic policy and international policy should have separate foundations and different objectives.


The EU and Canada should promote the values of democracy, human dignity and respect for human rights everywhere. This is also our joint responsibility as members of the democratic community in the United Nations.

The United Nations itself must be reformed through expansion of the Security Council membership and transformation of the veto power.


All of us here in this hall today, whether civic organizations, elected officials, journalists or individuals, must play a proactive role in pressuring our respective governments to advance policies and decisions that promote peace, justice and democracy, both domestically and internationally.


You can call it idealism, but ideas do come to fruition one day. It was Europe and the Europeans who created the idea of Perpetual Peace. In the last century, this ideal was not taken seriously enough, and was often regarded as too idealistic. Yet ideas, their history, their maturation have tremendous power, as argued by your fellow French citizen and thinker Michel Foucault. Today, almost a hundred years after the creation of the League of Nation, the first international organization, we have come to understand that peace is not mere wishful thinking. It requires much hard work, patience, courage and principles shared by our peoples, civil societies and leaders. Canada and its citizens take these ideals very seriously. This makes Canada very close to Europe, despite the geographic distance between our continents.


Thank you.

David Kilgour is a former Canadian Secretary of State (Asia-Pacific, 2002-2003; Latin America and Africa, 1997-2002) and a Member of Parliament from 1979 to 2006.

Friday, January 12, 2007

Now is Harper's chance to defend rights of Falun Gong

As always, Daphne Bramham is right on the mark and captures the big picture about the CRTC's impact to allow 9 Communist channels to air their abusive stuff in Canada. They usually target the Falun Gong, the Japanese and the Taiwanese. More on this debacle. And, it's no accident that Jason Kenney was recently appointed minister of state for multiculturalism and Canadian values. Let morality become top priority best described here by CBC Larry Zolf.

Vancouver Sun - January 12, 2007: Why is Canada opening door to Chinese propaganda against the group?

'We have to stand against Falun Gong and thoroughly cleanse such non-religious and anti-humanity cults from our society." Chinese government-controlled CCTV-4 aired that comment by a Chinese citizen on Jan. 31, 2001.

It is just one of many hate-filled rants against the Falun Gong broadcast in China by the tightly controlled Chinese media to support the government's policy of exterminating the group, which practises meditation and exercise based on the ancient form of qigong -- a Chinese healing art.

There are many other examples of Falun Gong practitioners described in news reports as "mentally ill," "anti-humanity, anti-science and anti-social;" Falun Gong as "an evil cult" that is "extending its demon claw"; and Falun Gong's founder Li Hongzhi as "trustworthy of our hatred."

The Chinese government banned the Falun Gong in 1999, calling it a religious cult. It has since been accused of harvesting organs for sale and transplant from Falun Gong practitioners who have been rounded up and imprisoned.

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission said many of the above comments broadcast between 1999 and 2001 were "clearly abusive . . . expressions of extreme ill will against Falun Gong and its founder, Li Hongzhi."

It went on to say: "The derision, hostility and abuse encouraged by such comments could expose the targeted group or individual to hatred or contempt and . . . could incite violence and threaten the physical security of Falun Gong practitioners."

THE COMMISSIONERS NOTED:

"Comments such as these in news programming are not consistent with the Canadian public's expectation that news programming will provide factual and credible information and informed commentary on pertinent social, economic and cultural issues."

Yet on the last real working day of 2006 -- Friday, Dec. 22 -- the CRTC agreed Rogers Communications Inc. could broadcast all nine Chinese channels digitally and uncensored into Canadian homes.

Commissioners concluded that the hate-filled examples were old. They said no concrete evidence was presented that they were typical of what is broadcast. They ignored the fact that Chinese broadcasters refused opponents' requests for tapes of more recent broadcasts, which they said contain similar material.

And they did more than just clear the way for Chinese government propaganda to be beamed into Canada. Commissioners gave Rogers a pass on taking responsibility for the content, even though that decision runs contrary to a 2004 ruling on Al-Jazeera.

In that ruling, the CRTC concluded that the so-called CNN of the Arab world had aired comments that might incite hatred against Jews and it was likely to do it again. Hate speech is illegal in Canada and runs contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

So the CRTC ruled that Canadian distributors would have to take responsibility for Al-Jazeera's content. Rather than just flipping a switch and letting the programs roll, distributors would have to monitor and edit programs before they aired in Canada

If offensive content was aired, distributors could be reprimanded and even have their broadcast licenses revoked.

Rogers, among others, declared the conditions too onerous.

This sheer inanity of the CRTC not only approving the Chinese channels but also concluding that Chinese inciting violence against Falun Gong members isn't as bad as Arabs invoking hatred against Jews has gone largely unnoticed in the media and, therefore, the public.

No doubt that's exactly what the CRTC hoped by releasing the controversial decision on Dec. 22.

The commissioners -- all Liberal appointees -- may reflect the previous government's appeasement policy regarding China. But their decision runs counter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper's criticism of China's human rights abuses and the outspoken criticism of Jason Kenney, who just last week was appointed minister of state for multiculturalism and Canadian values -- a junior minister in the heritage department to which the CRTC reports.

Cabinet can overturn the CRTC decision, as it did twice last year, stepping in to force further deregulation of local phone service.

But the question is, is Harper willing to do that now?

Here's what's in the balance. On one side are intangibles like Canadian values, equality rights, freedom from religious/ethnic persecution, freedom of association.

On the other is Canada's diplomatic and trade relationship with China.

There is the prospect that China could make it more difficult for Canadian companies -- among them the country's biggest, richest and most powerful -- to get access to its market.

The on-again, off-again meeting last fall with President Hu Jintao after the prime minister's comments about China's human rights' record provoked enough fear in Canada that Harper is dispatching Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, Industry Minister David Emerson and Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay to shore up trade relations.

Further provocation of China could also endanger the Tories' relationship with big business. Having heavily invested in China with still no real payoff, companies like Power Corp., Bombardier, SNC-Lavalin, BCE, the banks, insurance companies and others could abandon the Conservatives on the cusp of a national election and return to the comfortable embrace of the Liberals.

Still, the prime minister has vowed he won't sacrifice Canadian values for the "almighty dollar."

This is a chance to prove it.

dbramham@png.canwest.com


Wednesday, January 10, 2007

The Falun Gong Show and CRTC

An excellent piece by Kady O’Malley..well OK it's not as good as this one...but it just tells us where Rogers is at. If you oppose the approval of 9 Communist channels to broadcast hate incitement shows in Canada, ask your MP to reverse CRTC’s decision. The deadline is Feburary 5th.


OTTAWA - It's a battle the federal cabinet probably wants no part of. But following the CRTC's decision to allow nine Chinese-language television channels to be broadcast in Canada, Stephen Harper and his ministers could find themselves in the middle of hostilities between China and some of its harshest critics.

( ...)

With Kenney's new post, he gets a seat on the Cabinet Committee on Social Affairs - the natural jumping-off point for any proposal to consider overturning the CRTC ruling. Given his history, Kenney can count on intense lobbying from Falun Gong supporters. (more)

Sunday, January 07, 2007

Kilgour's Speech: Religious Freedom and Falun Gong in China

RELIGIOUS FREEDOM AND FALUN GONG IN CHINA

Address by

Hon. David Kilgour

Amnesty International Headquarters

Laurier Ave East

Ottawa

7 December 2006

Recently, I was attempting to raise legislator awareness about the organ snatching nightmare faced by many Falun Gong practitioners in China (The Matas-Kilgour report is available here in 17 languages) . We arrived at a national parliament in Europe, expecting to meet an all-party MP group, only to find that the MP entrusted to invite others had at the last moment decided not to do so. His stated reason was that his caucus is faith-based and Falun Gong is a different religion from his own.

In all of the 26 countries David Matas and I have now visited separately or together on this issue since our report came out, I have never heard a Falun Gong practitioner speak other than positively about other spiritual communities. Which religion, moreover, cannot identify with the Falun Gong core principles of “truth, compassion and forbearance”? The inner serenity and non-violence its practitioners have demonstrated in the face of beatings, imprisonments, torture and murder across China since July, 1999 are strikingly reminiscent of what early Christians faced with Roman despots.

If anyone thinks that persecution of religions has diminished in recent centuries, permit me to point out that the last century was undoubtedly the worst in recorded history for brutality directed at believers. One estimate of the number of human beings of all nationalities who died prematurely for their faiths between 1900 and 2000 is a staggering 169 million, including: 70 million Muslims, 35 million Christians, 11 million Hindus, nine million Jews, four million Buddhists, two million Sikhs and one million Baha’is.

Too many of these victims died in inter or intra-faith violence, but most by far perished at the hands of totalitarian regimes, which detest all religions mostly because believers’ deepest loyalties lie elsewhere. Stalin, Hitler, Mao and other dictators had murdered untold tens of millions of their fellow citizens. This attitude towards religion is one reason for the persecution Falun Gong practitioners have faced in China since mid-1999. The second was its immense popular appeal across China because of its deep roots in Daoism, Confucianism, Buddhism and other features of Chinese spiritualism, culture and physical exercise. By 1999, there were by the government’s own estimates more than 70 million Falun Gong practitioners across China-far more than the members of the Communist party with its European origin ideology. These factors explain why the regime developed a special hatred for Falun Gong.

Falun Gong is No Cult

I might add here that the Government of China’s Big Untruth, i.e., that Falun Gong is an “evil cult”, reminds one of the messages the government in Rwanda broadcast through its party media about the Tutsi community before the terrible events between April and June of 1994. There has been such a stream of propaganda against Falun Gong in the government-controlled media across China since mid-1999 that many Chinese nationals and even some outside China unfortunately appear to have accepted the Party line.

Permit me to mention that I spoke about the dangers of cults at a conference at the University of Alberta a few years ago, the text of which is available on my blog (david-kilgour.com). A better source on the subject is Professor David Ownby of the University of Montreal, who is cited in our report and did specific research on Falun Gong. He concluded:

  • Falun Gong practitioners in North America are well-educated and tend to live in nuclear families. Many work with computers or in finance; some are engineers.

  • Falun Gong Practitioners do not have financial obligations to their faith community; as well, they do not live in isolation and are law-abiding.

  • Falun Gong is not a cult

Ownby’s conclusion accords with that of many independent observers, including David Matas and myself. In the 70 or so countries where it exists, there is only one, China (and possibly Singapore), where its practitioners appear not to be considered good citizens and exemplary members of their respective civil societies.

Religious Liberty Indivisible

One researcher on the persecution of religions in China suggested several years ago that there were probably as many Christians attending services there each week--mostly in secret--as were doing so openly across Europe. In standing up for the principles of the United Nations Universal Human Rights Declaration for a young spiritual community like Falun Gong, the MP mentioned above would ultimately be defending freedom of religion generally in China. The constitution of China says its citizens “enjoy freedom of religious belief” (art. 36), although those outside the so-called “patriotic churches” are not permitted to practise their faith.

China’s government in fact considers all spiritual communities to be misguided, deviations and mistakes in accord with the dialectic materialism of Karl Marx. Enter, for example, “Chinese government persecution of Christians” on Google.ca and fully 835,000 entries come up, many of them deeply appalling. Replace “Christians” here with any of a host of other targeted groups and you get:

  • Muslims-772,000 entries
  • democrats-812,000
  • women-837,000
  • athletes-110,000
  • Falun Gong-481,000
  • Tibetans-approximately 400,000
  • Gays and lesbians-226,000
  • Uyghurs-989,000
  • Journalists-approx. 750,000
  • Lawyers-651,000
  • Investors-323,000
  • Entrepreneurs-293,000

In the current issue of an important publication, China Rights Forum, published by the NGO Human Rights in China (http://www.hrichina.org/), there is a list of the known persons in China by category, who will still be in prison during the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing. Consider the breakdown:

  • Democracy Movement-70 individuals
  • Ethnic minorities:
    • Inner Mongolia-one
    • Xinjiang-38
    • Tibet-33
  • Democratic Party of China-12
  • Internet journalists-40
  • Workers-16
  • Catholics-26
  • Protestants-39
  • Falun Gong-68

This list, no doubt, highly understates the number of persons in all categories, especially the Falun Gong, who are mostly in forced labour camps (which are not prisons for this list), making products for export, including Christmas decorations, in violation of WTO rules. The breakdown by category indicates the real nature of the regime in China.

Google “Chinese government corruption” and you get 1.7 million items. “Chinese government secretly executed” brings 714,000. (Presumably some of these relate to the three Christians killed secretly in prison in western China in late November: Xu Shuangfu, Li Maoxing and Wang Jun. Xu led a church with evidently more than 500,000 adherents nationwide. Their lawyers said they were convicted by confessions obtained by torture.) Another that caught my eye was “Government of China denies”, which has fully two million entries. The government specializes in denials, including such matters as whether there was a 2003 SARS epidemic in China, whether anyone died at Tiananmen Square in June, 1989, and whether it sells the organs of Falun Gong prisoners of conscience.

Chinese People Humiliated

The Chinese people, with all their history, culture, art and other accomplishments during more than 5000 years continue to be humiliated by the totalitarian and corrupt party in power since 1949. The population is among the most hard-working on earth, but is exploited by its own government in countless ways. If you doubt this, examine some of the many campaigns the Party has launched against its own nationals since 1950, including:

The terror campaigns of the 1950s, during which as many as three million citizens were executed,

The Anti-Rightist campaign of 1957 in which about 300,000 of the nation’s intellectuals were arrested, imprisoned and subjected to “re-education” for criticizing party policies,

The Great Leap Forward of 1959-61 in which a terrible famine caused by Mao’s forced collectivization of farming and industry caused the deaths of an estimated 30 million persons,

The Cultural Revolution of 1966-76, which reduced the country mostly to chaos, denied an entire generation formal education, and saw perhaps another two million killed for no reason justifiable in human terms.

The Tiananmen Square massacre of 1989.

The government of Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao is today showing little willingness to learn from past human rights disasters. Indeed a recent meeting of Amnesty International leaders from numerous countries evidently concluded unanimously that human rights have deteriorated significantly across China over the past two years. If this trend continues, which athlete, government, company or spectator of conscience would want anything to do with Olympic Games held in Beijing in 2008?

In applying for the coming Games, the government of China undertook to improve human rights; it continues to move briskly in the opposite direction. Can the government then be trusted to keep others of its Games undertakings even remotely in line with the Olympic spirit? If not, should the International Olympic Committee not move the event to one of the other cities which sought the privilege of hosting them?

Middle Kingdom Economy

This brings me finally to the economy of China, which we all know has grown at a phenomenal rate since the late 1970s. As the Australian Paul Monk put it in his 2005 book, Thunder From The Quiet Zone, starting with a tiny GDP of $US 106 billion in 1970, China’s economy by 2004 stood at $US 1.3 trillion, which is in the same range as what was produced that year by about 32 million Canadians. One must, moreover, keep in mind that even with such growth China’s economy in 2004 was, for example, less than 12 per cent of the gross size of the US economy. The per capita GDP of $US 1200 that year in China was about five per cent of Canada’s per person level.

My own view is that the particular model of capitalism Deng Xiaoping unleashed at the end of the 1970s is essentially heartless and without even remotely adequate social safety nets. Everything, including work conditions, the natural environment, and the consequences for people with jobs in other countries, is sacrificed in order to produce consumer goods for export at low prices. Most Chinese workers are exploited mercilessly by what is really a carnivore economy, which would make American robber barons in the 19th century green with envy. Perhaps nothing demonstrates the inhumanity of it all better than the practice of murdering Falun Gong prisoners of conscience to sell their vital organs often to foreigners. The sums paid by foreigners involved in “organ tourism” are enormous.

There is no rule of law in China as Canadians understand it; the courts are mostly theatre, where judges normally announce decisions made by local party committees. Not long ago, for example, the Beijing appellate court rejected the appeal by the New York Times researcher, Zhao Yan. His lawyer pointed out afterwards that his client was not allowed to call witnesses or present certain evidence. How can any responsible person invest other people’s money in such a legal jungle, where party apparatchiks behave like lions?

Only recently as well, the world learned that Gao Zhisheng, one of China’s best and most courageous lawyers was charged with “inciting subversion” after being held in prison without charge since mid-August. The news in recent days indicates that police have beaten up his wife severely and even continue to harass their two young children. It reminds us all of the sorts of things that go on in the regimes of Omar el-Bashir of Sudan, Burma’s Senior General Than Shwe, Kim Jung-il of North Korea and Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, which are not coincidentally all close allies of the government of Messrs Hu and Wen.

Conclusion

Human dignity today is indivisible around the world. All faith communities and other members of civil societies everywhere should be fully united on issues like the ones facing Falun Gong practitioners have faced daily for too long across China. If the peoples in open societies around the world don’t unite on such matters, some of the world’s remaining 40 or so dictatorships will only repeat the terrible ravages of the last century.

Here are some specific ways we can demonstrate Canadian concerns about basic freedoms in China:

Use every political, diplomatic and economic venue to raise and highlight religious freedom issues with the government Beijing. Let’s also avail ourselves of every opportunity to raise such issues with any official visitor from China;

Human rights dialogues should be held in public fora, not behind closed doors, because they are matters of widespread Canadian interest;

Canada-China relations should be based on fundamental human values, not commercial interests alone. A democratic and open society in China is in the long-term interest of peace, prosperity and security for the world;

Some additional funding from Canadians for supporting religious freedom in China, much in the same way pro-democracy movements elsewhere are supported;

Parliament should bar our companies from supplying suppression technologies to the government of China, such as surveillance devices and arms; and

Hold frequent conferences to address religious freedom issues in China.

Thank you

Thursday, January 04, 2007

Letter: Falun Gong letter disputed

Billings News: January 4, 2007 - I strongly disagree with Charles Liu’s views about Falun Gong undermining China’s rights record [Outpost, Dec. 28]. Let’s shine the light on Beijing for a moment.

The news of live organ harvesting targeting the Falun Gong only surfaced recently, but investigation reports highlight that it has been going on since 2000. Before that, the persecution of Falun Gong (in China) by the Chinese regime was already well documented at the United Nations with collected evidence amounting to genocide.

The world response toward stopping what the investigating team of Kilgour-Matas call ‘a new form of evil on the planet’ has been encouraging with a recent hearing held by the U.S. congressional subcommittee and support from Amnesty International New Zealand. So far, the Finnish, Taiwanese and Australian governments, as well as the European Parliament, have backed up the allegations.

For such an abhorrent practice to be allowed to take place in the 21st century is unacceptable. By all means, China should be held accountable for such crimes against humanity. In the run-up to the 2008 Olympics it would be in China’s best interest to live up to the promises they made to improve their rights record before the Games.

With the shooting of the Tibetans at the border, intensified crackdown on human rights lawyers along with tightening internet and press censorship, not to mention widespread corruption, one can only attest to the contrary. It is clear that this long list of violations, including organ harvesting, has put Beijing apologists on the spot leaving them with a bunch of nothing to say.

Marie Beaulieu
Victoria, B.C.

Something Smells About The Chinese Corpses On Display In Seattle

I couldn’t agree more with Ginsburg. Illicit organ harvesting has become a very lucrative market in China in the last 20 years. And with the recent news of organ snatching from Falun Gong practitioners, it’s not too late for people to realize that something fishy is going on.

Excerpt: "This Seattle exhibit is deeply flawed," Aaron Ginsburg, a pharmacist from Massachusetts, wrote in an e-mail to the P-I. "The bodies were not donated, and may well have belonged to political prisoners. China is not a nation of laws, and any assurances that the bodies were legally obtained is meaningless."...Dalian Medical University receives the bodies from the government....Premier has contracts with the university certifying that the bodies are not those of former prisoners or people from mental institutions. (Premier does not, however, show its contracts to the media.)…more