From @UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU:owner-china-nt@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU Wed Dec 15 20:36:45 1993 Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 18:27:56 -0500 Reply-To: yaxin wang Sender: China-Net From: yaxin wang Subject: CCF #9327, 12/15/93: "Human Rights" Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu To: Multiple recipients of list CHINA-NT ==+==+==+== C h i n e s e C o m m u n i t y F o r u m ==+==+==+=== Wednesday, December 15, 1993 (Issue No. 9327) +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= Chinese Community Forum (CCF) is a journal published on China-Net. CCF is dedicated to the discussion and debate on the issues related to the Chinese community. The opinions expressed here do not necessarily represent the views of the Editorial Board of CCF. Contributions to the discussions and suggestions of new topics are very much appreciated. +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= Table of Contents Author | # of Lines ============================================================================ 1. Editorial: Human Rights: Universal or Idiosyncratic?...................46 2. Some Thoughts on the Issue of Prison Labor............YANG Chang-Qing 64 3. Kristof and the Rise of China........................Glenn Calderwood 37 4. Human Rights - on Balance...............................Jim Hoagland 109 5. Human Rights Vs Crime Rate................................Anthony Lee 50 ============================================================================ ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== From The Editor +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ The theme of this issue of Chinese Community Forum is Human Rights. The concept of human rights is complicated because it can be interpreted differently by people from different societies with different culture backgrounds. We believe a better understanding of human rights will be helpful for us to make contribution to improve the quality of human life. In this issue of CCF, we carry five articles expressing the authors' views of human rights and related issues. We like to hear your comments. +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== 1. Editorial: Human Rights: Universal or Idiosyncratic?...................46 +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ The idea of human rights has become more salient but less harmonious in recent decades. Admitting its nature of controversy, one can raise a question: Are the human rights universal? It is argued on one hand that denying the universality of human rights would negate or diminish the nature of equal rights for human being regardless races and nationalities; on the other hand, it is contended that whether one could exempt any ideology of morality, of which human rights that ignoring the indigenous differences of a particular country would give rise to imposing the Western-centric model on the rest of the world. Because of the different views, the existence and the condition of political prisoners have been the central agenda of the US Government's human rights policy, while the general well being and improvement of economic conditions have been given the top priority by Chinese Government in human rights issues. Questions have been raised as to whether or not it is too narrow-minded to focus on the issues like political prisoners only, or one could put aside these issues when the development is the overwhelming issue of a nation. The concept phrased here as "university" and "idiosyncrasy" lay the corner stones for foreign policies made and pursued by countries in question. Of course, more are at stake than just the philosophical pondering at this ethical dilemma once the issue becomes intertwined with the intricacies of international politics. However, it is the capability of human beings to communicate with each other that gives hope that a basic common understanding could be reached so that the differences in viewpoints will turn into healthy competitions among the nations and cultures, rather than destructive cold or hot wars. It could be an encouraging sign for the advocates of universality of human rights that peoples and governments are finally coming together to talk with each other about human rights. It could also be a comfort to the advocates of idiosyncrasy of human rights that the communication is started on the basis of recognizing the differences in views of different parties. It is reported that China is going to publish a journal dedicated to human rights problems. This is certainly another significant change which indicates that China is continuously moving away from its past position of denying the existence of the human rights problem and denouncing the univer- sality of human rights. However, it still has long way to go to reach the common ground of human rights in a modern sense. It is therefore in agreement with the goal of CCF that we present this topic to you, our readers, in a form that more questions are raised than answered, and in hope that a dialogue could be initiated among ourselves by means of open-minded discussion. ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== 2. Some Thoughts on the Issue of Prison Labor............YANG Chang-Qing 64 +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ In the annual MFN debate (unfortunately), the export of prison labor product has consistently been an issue, yet not discussed fully. A lot of human rights activists in this country view the prison labor as part of systematic human rights abuse conducted by the Chinese Government. I can not sign on with this assessment. In my point of view, the issue of prison labor in China has been greatly exaggerated and politicalized. First of all, let me say this: We need to separate political prisoners from our discussion on prison labors. To the political prisoners, the problem is not whether they are forced to to hard labor, rather, they shall all be freed, without any condition. In the context of my following writing, the words prisoners or criminals shall be read strictly in their own definition, not to include any prisoners of consense. That prisoners are forced to do certain work is a common practice in almost all the countries, including the US. Tax payers shall not be obligated to feed a minority of trouble makers. Rather, those who violated the law shall be punished and educated through various means. Forcing them to do certain work will not only be a kind of punishment, but also a sort of education: to let them know that wealth can only be produced by work, to let them know that everyone shall be responsible for what he or she does and be responsible for the society. It's a way to teach them the meaning of social responsibility. It also provides them certain opportunity to learn certain skills which will enable them to become useful to the society, enable them to stand on their own once they come out the prison. I do not see anything wrong with it. Prison labor do produce wealth for a society, although it is not the purpose of the prisoner reform system. A society shall utilize the goods the same way the other goods are produced. A pencil is a pencil, no matter who made it. The question is in what extent a society can benefit from the prison labor economically? Some one suggested that the prison labor was the main driving engine of the Chinese economy. That is absurd. Even according to the most exaggerated account provided by Harry Wu, there are about 20 million prisoners in China, (which I have no way to believe and highly contradicts the US State Department's estimation) it is hardly believable that this will be the motor behind the specular economic boom in China. Remember the economy is about half the size of that of the US and we are talking about a country of more than 1.2 billion people. With mostly low skill labor and backward equipment, 20 million people have no way to drive the engine of a economy of that size. Let's put thing in perspective: We, as Chinese have every rights to do what we believe is right. However, the US law prohibits the import of foreign prison labor product. These internal policy differences put the two countries in a conflict. To solve this problem is purely a question of diplomacy, not human rights. Unfortunately, the US Congress and Government have a very interesting way in dealing with these kind of problems: We are not wrong in buying these, but you are wrong in selling these to us. They do not blame the US business people for violating the US law, but they blame the Chinese government for not following the law of the US. Is that funny? An analogy is the drug problem in this country: It's not our fault to consumes tons and tons of drugs every year. It is the problem of Columbian who sell kilos and kilos of drug to this country every year. You know what that is called? You bet! I understand that there are many American friends who sincerely care about the human rights situation in China. Unfortunately, picking on the issue of prison labor is aiming at the wrong target. Beijing can easily say that the American human rights care more about criminal rights than anything else. This issue has been badly utilized by a handful of American politicians and a few of Chinese radicals in this country. I do not think that it will gain the support of the majority of Chinese people. (Received Dec. 12, 1993) ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== 3. Kristof and the Rise of China........................Glenn Calderwood 37 +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ I read Mr Kristof's article in recent issue of CCF with interest. He is right of course to draw attention to the spectacular growth of the Chinese. Truly, the sleeping giant has roused from its slumber. It is also true that many are the businessmen on tours through China with an eye for a bargain and lucrative investment opportunities. This in itself cannot be criticized; it is the role of business interests to maximize the return on capital. Shareholders the world over would expect no less. But I do not think that it is the growth of the PRC as some kind of regional military power which will cause problems for China in its relations with the rest of the world. No, it is instead the fact that the motor behind the astonishing expansion of mainland China has been the use of forced prison labor. So many goods and services are provided by the laogai camps in every county, that no one buying a Chinese product or staying as a tourist in a Chinese hotel can know for certain that they are not the consumer of the produce of slave labor. This is an uncomfortable truth for the workers of Boeing in Seattle whose jobs may be on the line if the PRC does not give them some orders pretty quick, but President Clinton in questioning the Chinese leadership very bluntly and frankly quite undiplomatically has set a standard for the rest of the developed world to follow in dealing with the PRC. Most Favored Nation status in the US is up for renewal in a few months time. This may be granted to China; too many jobs in the US are hanging in the balance right now. But I would be very surprised to find that no strings were attached to this. Certainly here in the United Kingdom prestigious newspapers such as 'The Times' and 'The Sunday Times' have no kind words for the Beijing regime. Perhaps when Mr Kristof and his wife produce the final draft of their book on China they will give greater emphasis to this one great problem regarding the future of international relations with China. Without profound reforms of the Chinese system, it will be very difficult from a political standpoint to allow international investment in the People's Republic. (Received Nov. 30, 1993) ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== 4. Human Rights - on Balance...............................Jim Hoagland 109 +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ President Clinton's still emerging human rights policies stir exaggerated fears among conservatives that are matched by oversized hopes among liberals. Clinton's engagement on human rights abroad will be defined on a case-by-case basis that subordinates crusading for individual rights to a "What's in it for America?" pragmatism. That approach will be evident in Seattle this weekend, when Clinton meets Chinese President Jiang Zemin. The meeting is a public act of recognition for China's bloodstained leadership that George Bush might might have dreamed of but never dared after the Tiananmen massacre of June 1989. The world changes. Only Cold Warrior Richard Nixon could have gone to Beijing and survived the political flak two decades ago. Today only a centrist liberal like Clinton could do business with the butchers of Beijing and credibly argue that engagement is a central part of advancing human rights in China and economic recovery in America. In hosting Jiang for a bilateral meeting during the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation summit, Clinton will be testing the viability of the dualistic approach he feels is necessary in the post-Cold War world. Clinton's advisers feel he has established credibility with Congress and with Beijing by threatening to cut off China's most-favored- nation trading status next year if Beijing does not make substantial progress on human rights. They maintain that Clinton will be fine- tuning that message in the Seattle meeting. It is a sophisticated maneuver, handing over a large political carrot while keeping the threat of a heavy economic stick at hand. The risk is that the Chinese may miss the nuance unless Clinton is exceptionally forceful. And the balancing act on China is unlikely to satisfy either those who fear or those who hope that human rights will be a defining feature of the Clinton foreign policy. The immediate burden the engagement policy faces is the Chinese leadership's demonstrated determination to keep communist rule in place at any cost. The illusion that there are closet moderates who can be seduced into peacefully moving toward democracy is reminiscent of Oliver North's hunt for Iranian moderates. China's politburo will do only what is required to keep the illusion in place while maintaining totalitarian control. Paradoxically, the pragmatist in Clinton may settle for the illusion - if it leads to Chinese cooperation on stopping North Korea from developing a nuclear weapon and on other key international questions. Clinton told journalists Monday evening at the White House that he is also concerned about ensuring America's "long-term access to a market of 1.2 billion" consumers as his administration puts a strong emphasis on commercial relations with Asia, the world's only economically vibrant region. To liberals, this dualism is a retreat from Clinton's campaign rhetoric accusing Bush of coddling dictators. But abroad, that rhetoric continues to echo and reinforce fears that modern Democratic presidents are overly zealous on human rights. In his usual straightforward manner, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin explicitly voiced such fears during a meeting with journalists here on Monday. Rabin urged Americans not to push for human rights at the expense of undermining governments that could be helpful in combating the spread of Islamic fundamentalism. Reflecting on his recent meetings with the leaders of China, In- donesia and Kenya, Rabin said Washington should not "argue about human rights" with the leaders of those countries, "who block extremism" in their regions. He faulted "the assumption of the United States that carrying the banner of human rights" in most of the Third World "leads anywhere." Rabin cited what he saw as Jimmy Carter's failure to support the shah of Iran against Islamic fundamentalists as an example of an American president letting concern for human rights undermine useful allies. He seemed to offer Clinton an implicit warning against following following the Carter model. But I think Rabin and many others misread both Clinton and what happened in Iran, where Carter quickly stopped pushing the shah on human rights when the national revolt began. Carter, in fact, tried to bolster the shah long after the Iranian monarch had lost the will to rule. In fact, Clinton's Carter-era veterans like Secretary of State Warren Christopher and Clinton national security adviser Anthony Lake have absorbed the lessons of Iran. Their emphasis on pushing for broad and gradual democratic reform when the time is right (or, in the case of Haiti, when events force their hand) resembles Ronald Reagan's approach more than it does Jimmy Carter's across-the-board stress on individual rights. That is a comparison that Clinton is not likely to acknowledge publicly. But it underlies his decision to extend a hand of greeting to China's president this weekend. The test will be whether Clinton, while shaking President Jiang's hand, can squeeze it hard enough to produce results. (Source: The Washington Post, Nov. 18, 1993) ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== 5. Human Rights Vs Crime Rate................................Anthony Lee 50 +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ The question has been raised about the need to reduce human rights in the face of rising crime rates. The following article argues that it is not a problem of human rights which lead to high crime rates. So why do we need laws and law courts? Laws and law courts are necessary to ensure the smooth running of a society. We also need to jail people who commit crimes against others in the society but there must be a balance between the rights of the individual and the needs of the society. The role of a government is to ensure a peaceful and stable society by passing laws which look after the needs of the society and at the same time balances these needs against the rights of the individual. The question is how far can a government go in carrying out its duties? If a law is passed then how do we know that the particular law is there to ensure a stable and peaceful society as as opposed to the law being used to keep an unpopular government in place? Can we say such a law is acceptable? What if the law violates some fundamental principle of human rights? What if the government violates its own law out of convenience to ensure stable government, e.g., violent suppression of the Tiananmen Square student protest, the explusion of Han Dongfan from China? Can we regard such acts, as the acts of a government who wants a stable society or is it acts of desperation to keep power? Many point to the former Soviet Union as an example of what might happen if China is to become a democratic nation. They argue that only an iron fist can ensure a stable and peaceful society. I disagree, it is exactly because of the iron-fisted rule of the former Soviet government which led to the current instability in the republics. For too long have the people been suppressed in the name stability when its merely an excuse to keep the Communist in power. Many also point to the high crime rate in nations such as the United States, arguing that too much human rights and democracy can lead to high crime rate. But is this really the reality? Could the high crime rate in the United States be the result of a poor judicial system? Could it be the result of poor gun control? There are hundreds of factors and yet those arguing against human rights and democracy for China ignore all these other factors. Why? Over 800 years ago, the nobles of England forced the then King John to sign the Magna Carta. The nobles have recognized that a King or government can make mistakes and they often do and they want something which will protect their rights as individual vs the state. It is about time that the Chinese government recognize such needs of the individual. (Received Nov. 18, 1993. Source: usernet:soc.culture.china) +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=++ + Executive Editor: Yaxin Wang Executive Moderator: Yan Bai + +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + For subscription: mail "SUB CHINA-NT Your-First-Name Your-Last-Name" + + to LISTSERV@UGA (bitnet) or listserv@uga.cc.uga.edu (internet) + + For back issues of CCF: + + anonymous ftp to cnd.org[132.249.229.100]:pub/community/CCF + + For contribution and inquiry: mail to ccf-editor@ifcss.org + +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=++