Back in early October, Norway decided to bestow Chinese citizen Liu Xiaobo with the Nobel Peace Prize.

Xiaobo is currently serving an eleven year prison sentence for speaking out against the Chinese government. It’s his fourth prison term in China and he was chosen for the Nobel prize in recognition ‘for his long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in China‘.

Admittedly I had no idea who Xiaobo was before the peace prize was awarded, but from the looks of it it appears to be your standard ‘Chinese citizen stands up to Chinese government and then gets jailed and disappears’ scenario.

You know, the kind of thing that gets the back up of anybody who gives a crap about human rights and personal freedoms.

China’ response to Xiaobo’s peace prize was universal censorship of any mention of the prize in China (including the internet and SMS),  public criticism of the nomination and award and a greater campaign to undermine the the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony itself.

To date China has successfully lobbied to convince 18 countries to boycott the awards ceremony, places Xiaobo’s wife, Liu Xia under house arrest without charge and threatened Norway claiming that it would be difficult ‘to maintain friendly relations between the two countries‘.

In a rare show of blunt diplomatic relations, it was refreshing to see Norway respond rationally stating

China will have to bear the responsibility of eventual negative consequences that the Peace Prize could have for bilateral relations.

Norway believes there are no reasons for the [Nobel] committee’s decision to have consequences for the relationship” between the two countries.


In contrast to Norway’s response, just last week China decided to take it’s pettiness one step further and detained Australian citizen Zhang Heci at Shanghai airport;

Zhang Heci was headed to Norway via China to attend an award ceremony in Oslo.

Zhang said police boarded his flight after it landed at Pudong airport and brought him to a holding area where he was searched, interrogated and not allowed to call his wife or the Australian consulate.

Authorities gave no reason for detaining him for 24 hours and denied his nine requests to call his wife in Australia, he said.

They also refused to allow him to use transit facilities to travel directly to Norway without going through immigration.

Zhang, a Melbourne-based writer who often comments on human rights and is a friend of Liu’s, said he visits China every year without any problem.


As if that wasn’t childish enough, the latest move from China to counter Xiaobo’s peace prize sees the creation of the Confucius Peace Prize.

After being candidly suggested in a government approved Chinese tabloid ‘The Global Times’, three weeks later the Confucius Award has officially been announced.

The purpose of the award?

To ‘interpret the viewpoints of peace of (the) Chinese (people)‘.

Seeing as the Chinese people themselves evidently don’t have any say in what their viewpoints are, one can only assume that favour for the Confucius award is based on pushing the Chinese government agenda.

Case in point, the first recipient of the award. After just floating the idea three weeks ago, a Confucius awards committee has been formed and has already named the first recipient; Lien Chan, former Taiwanese Vice-President and Honorary Chairman of the Kuomingtang political party (known as the KMT).

The KMT as I understand it have feverishly been working towards strengthening the ties between Taiwan and China with the eventual goal of singular unity between the two countries. Or in other words, the complete assimilation of Taiwan into China.

Of course nothing more would make the Chinese government more happy so naturally they’ve thrown their support behind one of the most well known faces of the KMT.

I first read about the Confucius Peace Prize over at Michael Turton’s ‘The View from Taiwan‘. Turton’s thoughts on the prize virtually mirror my own;

Note how the prize is envisioned — for fulfilling the Chinese definition of peace, opposing “China” to the international standard. Scary/hilarious.

The first choice, of Lien Chan, is sublimely parodic, the perfect culmination to a profoundly silly idea. The stinginess of the award, a mere $15,000, is the cherry on top of this dessert.

How different this idea is from the USSR’s Nobel parody, the Lenin (originally Stalin) Peace Prize, ‘awarded by a panel appointed by the Soviet government, to notable individuals whom the panel indicated had ‘strengthened peace among peoples‘ (Wiki).

The prize went to Communists and sympathizers, but even so, the USSR felt that a pretense of universality was necessary.


Universality (and while we’re at it, credibility), is something that an award simply created to counter Norwegians awarding one of China’s dissidents with a peace prize, is simply never going to achieve.

Why?

Because more often than not Chinese internal policy is utterly irrelevant to the world at large, and when it is relevant and reported on it’s largely viewed in distrust and disappointment. Case in point, the chain of events orchestrated by the Chinese government since Xiaobo’s prize was first announced.

Placing an award ceremony at the centre of this pro Chinese government agenda is certainly not going to change the world’s perception, nor lend any credibility, prestige or ‘global significance‘ to the award as the Chinese are hoping.

Least of all it’s going to have little to no effect on the Nobel Peace Prize and ultimately all that it stands for.


Tweet