Asia
Asia view
China and the Nobel peace prize
The empty chair
Dec 10th 2010, 19:48 by J.M. | LONDON
CHINESE leaders probably failed to anticipate the battering that China’s image abroad would suffer as a result of the awarding of the Nobel peace prize to an imprisoned Chinese dissident, Liu Xiaobo. They would have expected that their boycott of the award ceremony in Oslo on December 10th would invite comparisons in the West between China and the Soviet Union, which responded with similar fury to the award of the prize to Andrei Sakharov in 1975. It is unlikely they fully realised that their behaviour would be equated even more prominently with that of Nazi Germany.
The empty chair reserved for Mr Liu at Oslo’s town hall, and the absence of any of his family members to receive the award on his behalf, made this the first such ceremony since 1936 when Carl von Ossietzky, a jailed German pacifist, was a similar no-show. Adolf Hitler refused to let him go to the ceremony. Mr Sakharov was not allowed to pick up his prize either, but his wife, Elena Bonner, happened to be abroad at the time and was able to go in his place.
China is extremely prickly about being compared with Nazi Germany. This newspaper got an earful from Chinese officials in 2001 for publishing a leader arguing that China was not suited to host the Olympic Games because “the world has no cause to honour a government that governs in this way with a sporting event intended to promote human dignity”. The Economist reminded readers of the similar position it took on the Nazis’ hosting of the Olympic Games in 1936.
Chinese officials are less touchy about Soviet analogies. Indeed, they play them up. The state-controlled Chinese media have not been bashful about casting Mr Sakharov and Mr Liu in the same light: both tools of a Western conspiracy to undermine communism (this piece, in Chinese, is typical of the genre). Never mind that Western governments, anxious to secure Chinese help with everything from global economic rebalancing to curbing climate change, have little interest in annoying China by talking about Mr Liu. China’s propaganda machinery prefers to portray the West as duplicitous.
But the propagandists probably had not fully thought through the headlines that would be created by the sweeping crackdown on dissidents since the prize was announced in October. By putting Mr Liu’s wife and numerous others under house arrest, and stopping activists from leaving the country in order to prevent them from going to Oslo, the headlines were recalibrated to reflect a comparison with 1936, not 1975 (or 1983, when Lech Walesa's wife accepted the award on his behalf, or 1991, when Aung San Suu Kyi's son took home his mother's prize). China knows that memories of Nazi Germany evoke a more visceral repugnance in the West than do those of the Soviet Union. Comparisons with Germany early in the last century are also unwelcome for Chinese leaders given their efforts to convince the world that China’s rise will have none of the same consequences that Germany’s did.
The battering suffered by the West during the global economic crisis appears to have made Chinese leaders thicker skinned. But the state-controlled media’s handling of the first “Confucius Peace Prize”, which was awarded in Beijing this week, suggests that officials remain sensitive. The Chinese press played the event down. Officials said the government did not have a hand in it (as the party-affiliated Global Times reported, in Chinese). Perhaps they might have worried that Hitler too organised a home-grown version of the Nobel prize, the German National Prize for Art and Science, in response to von Ossietzky’s award.
About Asia view
On this blog our correspondents across Asia survey its many fast-changing parts, from Afghanistan to the Pacific islands, stopping at all points in between to take in politics, business, pan-Asian themes and local arcana.
Advertisement
Economist blogs
- Americas view
- Asia view
- Babbage
- Bagehot's notebook
- Banyan's notebook
- Baobab
- Blighty
- Buttonwood's notebook
- Charlemagne's notebook
- Daily chart
- Democracy in America
- Eastern approaches
- Free exchange
- Gulliver
- Johnson
- Lexington's notebook
- Multimedia
- Newsbook
- Prospero
- Schumpeter's notebook
- The World in 2011: Cassandra
- Which MBA?
Most commented
- Banyan: Great disorder under heaven
- China and the Nobel peace prize: The empty chair
- Save the date: Save the date
- Belarus's election: Lukashenka uncovered
- The future of English: English as she was spoke
- Hungarian politics: Hungry for power
- India and China: Pushing back
- India's languishing countryside: A village in a million
- Doctoral degrees: The disposable academic
- Germany and the euro: We don't want no transfer union
Over the past five days
Most recommended
- Save the date: Save the date
- Doctoral degrees: The disposable academic
- Globalisation: The redistribution of hope
- China and the Nobel peace prize: The empty chair
- Hungarian politics: Hungry for power
- The future of English: English as she was spoke
- Age and happiness: The U-bend of life
- Belarus's election: Lukashenka uncovered
- Chinese tourists: A new Grand Tour
- Science: The lonely 6%
Over the past seven days
Advertisement
Subscribe to The Economist's free e-mail newsletters and alerts.
Subscribe to The Economist's latest article postings on Twitter
See a selection of The Economist's articles, events, topical videos and debates on Facebook.
Advertisement
Readers' comments
The Economist welcomes your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful of other readers. Review our comments policy.
Sort:
May be the seat is too cold (Norway is a cold country!), that´s why empty. No one want to sit there.
Comparison to Nazi Germany does sound unfair, especially considering the fact that the West courts China on everything else. Would you borrow a trillion dollars from Nazi Germany?
That being said, there is no excuse for what China had done. I think they might have overplayed their hand in this one. True, China is surely rising but the world will not bend to their demands. Putting pressure on countries to boycott and threatening them with consequences seemed totally out of line. It is good to see countries like Philippines stick with their values rather than be bullied. I wonder how the ordinary Chinese citizens view the whole episode. They may not even have the facts to form an informed opinion.
Yeah, I like this game!! Maybe it is filled with staples (I hear Norwegians, much like the Swedes, adore staples). That's why it's empty. Your turn again.
I only know the Swedish produce cheap furnitures, may be it is a swedish furniture, too cheap, no one like to sit. :-)
Liu Xiaobo in his own words:
On his vision for China's future in 1988 (which he affirmed it again in 1997) -
"Three hundred years of colonialism. Hong Kong became like this after one hundred years of colonialism. China is so much larger, so obviously it will take three hundred years of colonialism. I am still doubtful whether three hundred years of colonialism will be enough to turn China into Hong Kong today."
On Bush's war on terror -
"Bush’s excellent accomplishment in anti-terror, is something Kerry absolutely can not negate"
On the Iraq war –
"Bush administration’s ‘preemptive strike” strategy is the right choice”
"No matter what, the anti-Saddam war is righteous! President Bush’s decision is a right one!”"
On Islam –
"Though we should not view Islam’s teaching on terrorism in the same vein as fascism and communism … but this is obvious: a culture and [religious] system that produced this threat, must be extremely intolerant and blood thirsty.”
Carrot rope for you my friends...
i am an ordinary Chinese. I am 28, i am now studying in LSE.
I read lots of writings of this year's nobel peace laureate, Liu Xiaobo in Chinese.
My impression is that he is highly critical of the Chinese government, and he speaks very highly of the US, which he considers to be a beautiful land of freedom.
I think that is quite OK for an individual to think and write like him. I simply do not see anything that he wrote or did contributed to PEACE in whatsoever way. I think to win a Nobel PEACE Price, you must have done something at least remotely related to the topic of PEACE.
In my personal opinion, I donot understand the decision of the price awarders.
Last year's Peace Award winner is also somewhat surprising to me. Although I am a personal fan of President Obama, I do not understand why he should be given the price on the ground that he "has strong willingness and determination to promote peace" ! Maybe the committee is so concerned with US presidents that they just want to preempt another US president from launching wars by burdening him with the title of a Nobel peace laureate?
Obama won Nobel peace price with a few speeches? Al Gore won Nobel peace price with his global warmming speeches? Jimmy Carter won Nobel peace price for few meetings with Egypt and Isreal? How many American preside4nts and Isreal preime ministers won Nobel Peace price? where is peace? how many people killed by American Presidents' decisionHow many innocent people killed by Isreal preime minister's decision? How many Nobel peace prices given to the persons who caused so much sufferings?
I know at least one Nobel peace price winner should be in jail. Do not get me wrong, I support human rights and free speech, but this Nobel peace price is a farce, they see4ms to give Nobel peace price to a lot of wrong people.
I do believe some people deserve the Nobel peaqce price, such as Mother Theresa deserved Nobel peace Price for her work in India. I also think the founder of Wikileaks deserves the Nobel peace price more than Liu Xioa Bao, Wikileaks published all these secrets, so less people would suffer less.
What a sad joke!
Kacey1, Obama's prize was certainly premature and undeserved. The idea was that he was bringing about a new way of superpower behavior, contrary to what his predecessor represented. Reality proved all this nonsense wrong.
On the other hand, Al Gore was rightly awarded for promoting awareness about a global problem that is endangering us all.
Jimmy Carter got Egypt and Israel to sign peace, and has devoted the rest of his life to solve different conflicts around the world. You could say he has been the most principled (if unsuccessful) president the US had since at least WWII.
The US opposed the Nobel to Martin Luther King. Now it's obvious it was more than deserved.
Walesa and Aung San Suu Kyi also didn't do anything "to promote peace" exactly, but, like Liu Xiaobo, they defended democracy, human rights and freedom against cruel dictatorships.
Nobel Peace Prizes can be controversial, but most times they hit the nail on the head, and History ends up agreeing with the Nobel committee. I don't think Liu Xiaobo's case will be different. And, in any case, he does not deserve to be in jail.
Face it, the whole point of this ceremony to make it possible to compare China and some cruel military government. 5years ago, Rabiye Qadir is still considered as wanted terrorist across the world because her quest to create independent Xin-Jiang and also because of its link with al-Qaeda. 2 dozen people loyal to her are still in Guantanamo. Now, today, She appeared on the ceremony for Nobel peace prize as a guest invited by Liu-Xiaobo. I trusted Liu before,because one of his comrade in Tian'anmen Square accuse Chinese serviceman raping girls in front of people,Liu is the only one stand up and remind everyone that's not even physically possible "We can't and shouldn't fight a lie with more lies" and ordered retreat to avoid more damage. Until then, he is admirable.
Now he's working with terrorists whose quest is not to change China for better but to destory China for good? It doesn't make any sense unless they are working for the same boss. I want to believe that he was used, after all,his statements are all made public by his EX-wife, and since he's in jail all his saying will be considered as China's "work". Any one seen the movie "ghost writer"? She might be a spy. Anyway it's just my thought.
Come on, Joshua Jin, not even Chinese politicians believe Kadeer had anything to do with Al Qaeda. She was imprisoned on ridiculous drug trafficking charges, when the real motives were clearly political. China just gets hysterical when it comes to challenges to its power, and reacts in the most absurdly brutal way. The moment a dictatorial regime starts branding people as "terrorists" you have to start smelling something fishy.
Mr. Liu Xiaobo represents the best that China has to offer. He is a true patriot. The people of China, once they get to learn about him, will be proud of their loyal son.
For all the prejudice and hypocrisy in the world this year's Nobel Peace Prize represents both the goodwill and optimism by the Nobel Committee towards the people of China. I salute you, the Committee members for your compassion towards the Chinese people, and for your optimism that the country of China will make positive contribution to the world peace in future.
And talking about the parallels between Carl von Ossietzky and Liu Xiaobo, this week the International League for Human Rights will award in Berlin its Carl von Ossietzky Medal to Israeli wistleblower Mordechai Vanunu, who uncovered to the whole world Israel's nuclear weapons program. Vanunu, just like Liu Xiaobo, will be unable to attend his awarding ceremony because his government refuses to allow him to travel to Germany to receive it.
Ironic, isn't it?
The similarity between Liu Xiaobo and Obama is that they talk about change much. How much change and good change Obama realized is for the Americans to debate, however, in Liu's case I'd say as a Chinese that he's quite the whiner, the fanatic fan of the western ideology and nothing more.
Nobel Peace Prize has become a propaganda, a party for some people in the West to point at China and say "Don't worry, we are still the good guys!"
Another horribly written article from Economist that bashes the Chinese. Liu does not promote peace, but spreads propaganda. I speculate that Americans are behind this, promoting their false sense of democracy with Sweden. The Chinese have five thousand years of history, and does not need the west's opinion on how to govern its people.
Just kidding. I feel like something is missing in the usual Economist Chinese article comment section. :)
@ruletheworld
The general Chinese certainly have enough information to form their opinions. Especially many Chinese citizens are living in Western countries and can understand more than 2 languages. So they have access to information and especially have access to MORE information than Westerners, most of whom are not multilingual.
During the early 1990 - early 2000, the majority of the young Chinese still deemed Western value as ideal value for China. However, the turning point was in 2008, when Tibetan rioters killed many innocent ethnic Han Chinese, and Western media outlets were filled with lies and extremely biased reports attacking the Chinese Communist Party. After that, most of the young Chinese including those who formerly appreciated Western value felt very disappointed towards the West. Now, the majority of the young Chinese deem the West as hostile countries which tried to disrupt China and cumber China's social development. This Nobel Peace Prize gives the Chinese Communist Party more ammunition to attack the EVIL West.
If the West wants to deem China as an enemy, then China will REALLY become an enemy of the West. And we will do our best to play our role as an enemy of the West. That is the opinion of the general Chinese.
For those pro-Chinese posters who argue that JULIAN ASSANGE will get the Nobel Peace Prize, sooner or later wikileaks is going to get leaks from the Chinese government. When that happens you guys will be the first to call for his white ass to hang from the flag pole at Tiananmen square.
I do appreciate if people in the West and doing things to help Chinese.
And I don't say that I like the politicians in China, but...
Let's look at it closely. By awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to a Chinese, they make people in the West like China (in general) less.
How is this happening?
dear economist, would u really know what happened between liu and chinese govement? what really do of liu who wants allegitately china converted into an american type free or democracy. too many fiasco occured such as in afanganst, Irag and so on. If we back to 800 or 1000years ago there is no americans but we, chinese, already have there own cultry, civilizations almost 4000years. why we need lecture of how to rule country from american, england and so on whos one aim is how to rob, steal from us. the history has already proved. why your sorts of people always compulsive with the democracy to what you so-called without it. The country of china likewise your punks has dare to compare with Nazi will be punished by God of youself
It is a hideous lapse of judgement for the China's leaders to try everything possible to suppress and boycott the incident even to the extent of white fear.
It is a public relation disaster for China despite their recent effort in projecting a unique Chinese way of open and uprising country.