Ian Boyne
China's strident and arrogant protests over the United States' granting the Dalai Lama its prestigious Congressional Gold Medal dramatises the dangers it poses to liberty as a Great Power with increasing economic and political clout.
China, which has maintained its antipathy to one of the world's two most loved and revered religious leaders since he fled that country for India in 1959, has constantly sought to demonise him, accusing him of wanting to split up China by having Tibet secede.
The tone of its protests over the world's only superpower's granting him access to the halls of power shows the dizzying influence of its own growing power in geopolitics and the depth of its hostility to the man of peace and compassion.
US violation
"We solemnly demand that the U.S. cancel the extremely wrong arrangements," said Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi in Beijing. "It seriously violates the norm of international relations and seriously wounded the feelings of the Chinese people and interfered in China's internal affairs."
President Bush, who has made more than his fair share of foreign policy blunders, this time took the ethical course and rebuffed the Chinese dictators by meeting with and publicly celebrating the Dalai Lama.
Concessions
Regrettably though - and this demonstrates the power of the Chinese diplomatically - the Bush administration made some concessions to the authoritarians in Beijing by not meeting the Dalai Lama in the Oval Office, or even releasing a photograph of the 30-minute meeting with the highly respected religious leader of Tibet's nearly six million Buddhists. The meeting with the Dalai Lama was not even listed on Bush's public schedule and no media access was allowed.
President Bush, however, made it clear that "I support religious freedom; he supports religious freedom and I want to honour this man." He told reporters at the White House before the October 17 ceremony that "I have consistently told the Chinese that religious freedom is in their country's interest. I have told them it is in their interest to meet with the Dalai Lama." But the Chinese have stiffened, not softened, their attitude towards the religious icon, as their wealth and power have increased and as they have solidified their Great Power status.
A thorn
The Dalai Lama remains a thorn in their side, a painful and embarrassing reminder that despite the fact that they have had the most impressive rate of growth over the last three decades; and despite the fact that between 1978 and 2005 the Chinese people have experienced a seven-fold increase in their standard of living, some basic civil liberties still elude them.
China's foreign trade has skyrocketed from $20 billion in 1979 to $1 trillion in 2005. The latest World Investment Report shows that China is the leader of the developing world in terms of inward foreign direct investment flows, pulling in $69 billion last year.
Nuclear arsenal
It is projected that during the course of this century China will become the world's largest economy - not just the most populous. But despite this impressive growth and the fact that it has the third largest nuclear arsenal in the world, China remains underdeveloped and backward in terms of civil liberties and its commitment to democratic values.
The moral presence and force of the Dalai Lama is a stinging indictment on China; relentlessly reminding the world of China's oppression of its own minorities and its aversion to political freedom. China's Foreign Minister stated plainly that, "China is strongly resentful and resolutely opposes this" award of the Congressional Gold Medal to the Dalai Lama. Chinese state media warned that the U.S. "must be held responsible for the consequences" of making this Congressional award and for the President's hosting this Public Enemy Number One of China.
A senior official with the Foreign Affairs Ministry delivered a scorching attack on the Dalai Lama and the United States a day after the Congressional Gold Medal was awarded. The full text was given in the state media.
Said the official, obviously drunken with Great Power status: "In disregard of China's strong opposition and repeated representation the U.S. Congress has held a ceremony on Capitol Hill on October 17 and awarded the Dalai Lama the so-called Congressional Gold Medal, providing the Dalai Lama with a forum to distort reality and carry out activities aimed at splitting China."
Though the Dalai Lama has repeatedly denied that he is calling for the independence of Tibet rather than "real autonomy", the Chinese propagandists insist on calling him a "splittist", distorting reality by diverting attention from their suppression of the religious and political rights of Tibetan Chinese.
Sounding a sombre note, the Chinese Foreign Ministry official said what the U.S. did by honouring the Nobel Prize winner has "gravely undermined China-U.S. relations". Said he contemptuously: "We cannot but wonder what those people are up to." He then said, "We urge the U.S. Congress and administration not to forget the larger interests of U.S. relations with China, take speedy and credible steps to undo the damage caused by the above-mentioned wrong move, stop interfering in China's internal affairs and refrain from making moves offensive to the Chinese people."
Obnoxious behaviour
If the Chinese don't have the number one position in terms of military and economic prowess and they are behaving so obnoxious already, what will be the consequences for the world if they do?
This kind of hubris, now being perfected by the Americans, might even be surpassed by the Chinese. At least the Americans have a tradition of philosophical, if not practical, commitment to democracy and liberty.
This is a very significant point. Hubris combined with economic and military power and an authoritarian ideology will be a most lethal combination.
If China, therefore, does not abandon its authoritarian course, world order and global peace will be endangered.
President Bush made an important point at the ceremony to honour the Dalai Lama: "This freedom does not belong to one nation. It belongs to the world." This poignant philosophical point that liberty is the heritage of mankind, not just a peculiarly American or Western value, is one whose signi-ficance cannot be overstressed.
Leftists and liberals who sharply criticise American foreign policy and the actions of the Bush administration must pause to acknowledge that however much the U.S. has diverged from its democratic rhetoric, at least there is a framework of democratic ideas to which the U.S. has always been ideologically committed, and on which we can judge its performance.
The U.S. carrying out dastardly acts, sponsoring oppression, grossly violating democratic principles is not the same as an authoritarian Great Power doing the same because it has no respect for democratic ideas.
In the case of one power, a critic can use its own professed principles to critique its actions. In the case of the other, there is no common ground, no ideological meeting point.
Fascinating essay
Robert Kagan, one of the most engaging neoconservative foreign policy scholars in America, has a most fascinating essay in the August/September issue of the scholarly journal Policy Review, which publishes some of the most challenging foreign policy essays. In the essay, 'End of Dreams, Return of History', Kagan shows that the triumph of liberal democracy was never assured and, indeed, is an historical aberration. The norm has been authoritarianism.
(Johns Hopkins Professor Michael Mandelbaum develops that idea marvellously in his book just published, Democracy's Good Name: The Rise and Risks of the World's Most Popular Form of Government).
Kagan notes that, "The rulers of China and Russia have a set of beliefs which guide them. They believe autocracy is better for their nations than democracy. They believe it offers order and stability and the possibility of prosperity. They believe that for their large, fractious nations, a strong government is essential to prevent chaos and collapse. They believe democracy is not the answer and that they are serving the best interests of their people by holding and wielding power the way they do."
Telling point
Then Kagan makes a most telling point: "If two of the world's largest powers share a common commitment to autocratic government, autocracy is not dead as an ideology. The autocratic tradition has a long and distinguished past and it is not obvious, as it once seemed, that it has no future."
This is a profound point.
Though the United States might flout international law and preach one thing and do another, at least at the ideological level it is committed to the canons of liberal democracy. If it is superseded by an autocratic China, the entire international community is threatened.
"Autocracies pursue foreign policies aimed at making the world safe, if not for autocracies at least for their own continued rule." It is not surprising, therefore, that while the international community is outraged at the behaviour of states like Zimbabwe, Myanmar, Sudan, the Congo, and Iran, China gives support to these autocratic regimes.
While some scholars say the more China modernises the more democratic it will become - and the more it becomes open to trade and investment from the West the more liberal its political regime will be - this outcome is not assured. China is becoming a model of a successful autocracy - showing that you can have rapid economic growth and still be politically illiberal. This must be encouraging to states such as Venezuela. There is now emerging what one British foreign policy think tank calls, in a well-known 2004 study, 'The Beijing Consensus', as an answer to the 'Washington Consensus'.
But as the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations paper issued in May this year, 'U.S.-China Relations: An Affirmative Action a Responsible Course' points out, the Chinese are still suppressing Tibetans and other minorities, including religious believers.
Political reforms
One is not denying that there have been political reforms in China, nor is one saying that what we have is still Mao's China. But one is saying that China's authoritarian ideology remains. Its vehement opposition to Bush's meeting with the Dalai Lama - as its equally vociferous opposition to the German President and the Australian's Prime Minister's meeting him - shows that its increasing economic power (its trade has grown70-fold since 1980 alone) represents a threat to liberty and peace.
Ian Boyne is a veteran journalist who may be reached at ianboyne1@yahoo.com.
