Monday 31 August 2020

Australian Journalist for CGTN Detained in China

The Australian government recently announced that journalist Cheng Lei, an Australian citizen who worked for the official Chinese overseas broadcaster CGTN, has been detained. Elias Visontay and Helen Davidson report for The Guardian:

The Australian government was notified on 14 August that Cheng Lei, an anchor for a business show on the China Global Television Network, had been detained in Beijing.

In a statement released on Monday night, Australia’s foreign minister, Marise Payne, acknowledged the detention and said a consular visit had been conducted via video link.

“Australian officials had an initial consular visit with Ms Cheng at a detention facility via video link on 27 August and will continue to provide assistance and support to her and her family,” Payne said.

[…] It is highly unusual for foreign journalists to be detained in China. [Source]

More on her her detention under “residential surveillance at a designated location” (RSDL) from Australia’s ABC News’ Bill Birtles:

Ms Cheng has not been charged but is being held under what is called “residential surveillance at a designated location”.

It is a form of detention in which investigators can imprison and question a suspect for up to six months while cutting them off from lawyers and the outside world — all before they have even been formally arrested.

‘We ask that you respect the process’

Ms Cheng’s supporters are now arranging legal representation for her. [Source]

The Chinese government has given no reason for Ms. Cheng’s detention. She has worked as an anchor and reporter for CGTN for eight years. Prior to that, she worked for CCTV in China and for CNBC Asia. On her Twitter bio, Ms. Cheng refers to herself as a “passionate orator of the #China story,” a phrase employed by Xi Jinping to describe the goal of state media operating overseas. CGTN has removed all references to her and her work from their website, according to the ABC report. From The New York Times’ Chris Buckley:

The Australian statement gave no details of any accusations against Ms. Cheng, and the Chinese government has not commented publicly on her case. But her detention could become another irritant in Australia’s relations with China, especially if she is charged with serious offenses.

Australia’s economy depends heavily on exports to China, with its vast appetite for iron ore and other resources; even so, the Australian government has become increasingly critical of Chinese foreign policy and political influence.

Richard McGregor, a senior fellow at the Lowy Institute in Sydney who studies Chinese politics and foreign policy, said it was unclear whether Ms. Cheng’s nationality was a factor in her detention.

It was “not clear it is about her being an Aussie,” Mr. McGregor said. “Though that will surely become part of how her case is handled, on our side as well.” [Source]

RSDL is a form of administrative detention which allows authorities to detain suspects for up to six months without formal charges and often under abusive conditions. It is frequently used against human rights activists as well as foreigners detained in China, including Canadians Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, both of whom were detained in December 2018 and have since been charged with espionage but not yet tried. In a recent blog post, legal scholar Jerome Cohen pointed out the government’s use of RSDL as a way to evade legal protections mandated by the Criminal Procedure Law:

Although Australian scholarship on comparative law and politics relating to China is impressive, no learned books, law review articles or op-eds can do as much to alert public opinion to criminal injustice in China as recent arrests of Australian citizens who were formerly PRC nationals. They highlight the regime’s resort to RSDL, which vitiates the ordinary protections prescribed in the PRC’s Criminal Procedure Law for up to six months by authorizing the incommunicado detention that has so often fostered torture and coerced confessions. Good luck to those who seek to organize legal assistance for Ms. Cheng Lei! [Source]

As the coronavirus swept China, Ms. Cheng posted regular updates to Facebook about her life under lockdown in Beijing, several of which were quite critical of the official response. From Victoria Craw of news.com.au:

On February 16, she wrote that both she and a friend who also worked in television had been “lobbying our bosses to let us go to Wuhan to report, and not succeeding” in reference to the epicentre of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Instead, they were helping doctors by sending medical supplies and raising money for them to have PPE.

“Similarly, many alumni groups are handling their own rescue missions. It is a damning vote of distrust for intermediaries,” she wrote.

She also said her children would be schooled online but “school grades seem a distant concern at the moment, if this episode teaches children anything, it should be the premium on health and honesty.” [Source]

A China-born Australian citizen, Cheng has lived in Beijing since 2001. Her detention comes amid deteriorating relations between the two countries. In July, the Australian government issued a travel warning to China, citing the risk of “arbitrary detention.” Writer Yang Hengjun, also a China-born Australian citizen, was detained while on a trip to China in January 2019 and, like Ms. Cheng, held under “residential surveillance at a designated location” before being formally charged with espionage.


© Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), get_post_time('Y'). | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: , , , , , ,

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh



source https://chinadigitaltimes.net/2020/08/australian-journalist-for-cgtn-detained-in-china/

Photo: Exploring the Nanjing Quarter, by Dickson Phua

Exploring the Nanjing Quarter, by Dickson Phua (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)


© Josh Rudolph for China Digital Times (CDT), get_post_time('Y'). | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags:

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh



source https://chinadigitaltimes.net/2020/08/photo-exploring-the-nanjing-quarter-by-dickson-phua/

Friday 28 August 2020

Baidu Satellite Gaps Highlight Xinjiang Detention Sites

A new report from Buzzfeed News identifies 268 new purpose-built detention sites across Xinjiang, detected by cross-referencing areas obscured on Baidu Maps’ satellite view with images from sources not subject to Chinese government control. From Megha Rajagopalan, Alison Killing, and Christo Buschek:

These forbidding facilities — including several built or significantly expanded within the last year — are part of the government’s unprecedented campaign of mass detention of more than a million people, which began in late 2016. That year Chen Quanguo, the region’s top official and Communist Party boss, whom the US recently sanctioned over human rights abuses, also put Muslim minorities — more than half the region’s population of about 25 million — under perpetual surveillance via facial recognition cameras, cellphone tracking, checkpoints, and heavy-handed human policing. They are also subject to many other abuses, ranging from sterilization to forced labor.

To detain thousands of people in short order, the government repurposed old schools and other buildings. Then, as the number of detainees swelled, in 2018 the government began building new facilities with far greater security measures and more permanent architectural features, such as heavy concrete walls and guard towers, the BuzzFeed News analysis shows. Prisons often take years to build, but some of these new compounds took less than six months, according to historical satellite data. The government has also added more factories within camp and prison compounds during that time, suggesting the expansion of forced labor within the region. Construction was still ongoing as of this month. [Source]

A separate post provided details of the team’s methodology, which Killing outlined on Twitter:

Other observers of the camps commented:

Satellite imagery has also been used to monitor what The University of Nottingham’s Rian Thum described this week as "the extraordinary scope of state efforts to replace Uyghur built environments and uproot geographically embedded expressions of Uyghur culture," from urban neighborhoods to remote shrines. From Made in China Journal:

[Since 2018], the Chinese state has destroyed and desecrated Uyghur historical and holy places at a scale unprecedented in the history of Eastern Turkistan (Altishahr, Xinjiang) as a Chinese-dominated region. Among the demolished places were mosques, and these have received the bulk of international media attention. But another kind of sacred site, less legible to outsiders, has arguably been a more significant crux of desecration. This is the mazar, a point on the landscape that holds particular numinous authenticity, a connection to and presence of the divine that surpasses the sacredness even of the mosque as a physical structure.

[…] Even when locked behind a wall of police roadblocks and roadside informants, mazars wield power. They enter people’s dreams and give them guidance. One can petition them from a distance or send personal prayers (du’a) in their direction, as I witnessed a man do after being turned away from Imam Je’firi Sadiq mazar in 2015. Simply knowing that the mazar is standing out there between the Uyghur-inhabited oases maintains a community tie to history and the land. I met one of the handful of lucky Uyghurs who managed to reach Ordam Padshah long after it had been closed, and she told me what happened when she mentioned her good fortune, standing outside a village mosque, weeks later. The men she was talking to began weeping and begged to collect some of the dust of the mazar from her jacket. To judge from publicly available satellite imagery, Ordam Padshah is now gone too (Google Earth 2020, 38.9144°, 76.6567°). [Source]

Baidu does not offer usefully high-resolution images of the location. Thum notes that "the most renowned Uyghur scholar of mazars, Rahile Dawut, has been disappeared since late 2017. Uyghurs are unable to even document the destruction, much less to resist it."

The Buzzfeed report’s analysis of satellite imagery is supported by interviews with former detainees. From Killing and Rajagopalan:

BuzzFeed News interviewed 28 former detainees from the camps in Xinjiang about their experiences. Most spoke through an interpreter. They are, in many ways, the lucky ones — they escaped the country to tell their tale. All of them said that when they were released, they were made to sign a written agreement not to disclose what happens inside. (None kept copies — most said they were afraid they would be searched at the border when they tried to leave China.) Many declined to use their names because, despite living abroad, they feared reprisals on their families. But they said they wanted to make the world aware of how they were treated.

The stories about what detention is like in Xinjiang are remarkably consistent — from the point of arrest, where people are swept away in police cars, to the days, weeks, and months of abuse, deprivation, and routine humiliation inside the camps, to the moment of release for the very few who get out. They also offer insight into the structure of life inside, from the surveillance tools installed — even in restrooms — to the hierarchy of prisoners, who said they were divided into color-coded uniforms based on their assumed threat to the state. BuzzFeed News could not corroborate all details of their accounts because it is not possible to independently visit camps and prisons in Xinjiang.

Their accounts also give clues into how China’s mass internment policy targeting its Muslim minorities in Xinjiang has evolved, partly in response to international pressure. Those who were detained earlier, particularly in 2017 and early 2018, were more likely to find themselves forced into repurposed government buildings like schoolhouses and retirement homes. Those who were detained later, from late 2018, were more likely to have seen factories being built, or even been forced to labor in them, for no pay but less oppressive detention. [Source]

At The Guardian last Sunday, Kate Wong and David Bogi described how Chinese authorities have sought to combat accounts like these:

Sonbol, an Egyptian photographer and editor, was one of at least 80 journalists taken to Xinjiang since 2015 on the “Silk Road Celebrity China Tour”. He left convinced that accounts of mistreatment inside the re-education centres were untrue. “I keep hearing people saying the education centres were where they torture people,” he said. But the enthusiasm of the dancers impressed him, “Look at their faces! You know these are very happy people.”

[…] But one journalist who had a very different reaction to an official tour was Albanian-Canadian freelance Olsi Jazexhi. In August 2019, he flew to Xinjiang for an eight-day tour with another 19 journalists from 16 countries.He had always vocally opposed the United States, and when he approached the Chinese embassy in Tirana, he only had one aim in mind. “I wanted to write a good piece on China,” he admitted, “I wanted to prove to the world that the Americans, like they lied about us in the Balkans, they are lying about the Chinese as well.”

[…] But the key moment for Jazexhi came during a visit to Wensu County Vocational Skills Training Centre, a re-education camp in Aksu prefecture. When the group arrived, they watched a series of song-and-dance routines. After around 15 minutes, Jazexhi asked if he could speak to some of the detainees. He was ushered into a classroom and was told he could conduct interviews under supervised conditions. He noticed that whenever he started speaking to the detainees in their own language, they responded in Mandarin Chinese. He realised that the inmates were afraid. [Source]

At The Spectator on Friday, Darren Byler described the background to the mass detentions and the human and technological apparatus that surrounds and feeds the camps themselves, noting that "less attention has been paid to the remaining 85 to 90 per cent of the population outside the detention system, whose lives have also been dramatically affected, particularly their daily use of technology."

The police who checked Sholpan’s phone did so with AI-enabled auto-recovery tools, built by companies such as the Chinese tech giant Meiya Pico. The information received from her and others was fed—sometimes manually, sometimes automatically—into a region-wide Integrated Joint Operations Platform, serviced by the China Electronics Technology Corporation, the parent company of Hikvision, the world’s largest camera manufacturer. As Human Rights Watch has shown, the platform, along with data collected through interrogations, was then used by the police to determine which Muslims were “untrustworthy” and therefore sent to re-education camps and prisons.

[…] Sholpan’s family, like hundreds of thousands of others whose men have been imprisoned, was assigned a Han “older brother” who came to the home on regular overnight visits. Luckily, Sholpan’s family were able to work out a deal with him. Many other of these Big Brothers slept in rooms with their hosts to demonstrate, in the state’s sinister vernacular, “ethnic harmony,” with the attendant risks of sexual and other forms of abuse. But in Sholpan’s home, the allocated monitor agreed to sleep in the guest room. Sometimes, when Sholpan’s husband was away, their enforced guest and Sholpan agreed to pretend that he had visited; Sholpan would repost old pictures of a previous visit on WeChat. In return, he wouldn’t have to pay the 100 yuan (£11) that he was mandated to give them towards food and housing.

[…] On the advice of a police contact, Sholpan and her husband started going to dance parties and drinking alcohol in order to show they were not religious. Once, on their way home from a party, the police pulled them over and breathalysed them. They asked why Sholpan’s husband had not been drinking. He said he didn’t want to drink and drive. When the police found that Sholpan had been drinking, they let them go. “We had to perform the way they wanted us to perform,” said Sholpan. “If they said drink, we drank.” [Source]

The intense securitization of Xinjiang appears to have shaped local authorities’ handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has been blunter and even less transparent than recent responses to outbreaks elsewhere. The disease began to spread in Urumqi, the regional capital, in mid-July. Xinhua reported that as of Tuesday, there were 168 active cases in Xinjiang of which 44 were asymptomatic, while 3,024 people remained under medical observation, and nearly 900 had been discharged from hospital or released from observation. Millions, though, have been placed under strictly enforced lockdown, even in areas with no known cases. Severe and indiscriminate measures have prompted online protests from Han residents. A frustrated young Urumqi resident complained to NPR that "the government has used an ax where a scalpel was needed. I just want government officials to refrain from lazy policymaking and combat the outbreak with scientific, reasonable measures."

The state-owned Global Times, reporting on local officials’ efforts to soothe public anger by relaxing some restrictions and publishing their phone numbers to solicit feedback, acknowledged that the Urumqi outbreak had been handled differently. It attributed this to the purportedly distinctive regional characteristic that "people, especially the youngsters, enjoy hanging out outdoors and like to gather together." Another Global Times article cited experts’ view that "compared with Beijing, which has the ability to take targeted measures in areas with different level of risks, many cities in Xinjiang are short on experience and social governance ability in terms of smoothly dealing with urgent situations, like a coronavirus outbreak."

The experts did not explain why officials on what Xi Jinping called the "front line against terrorism" would be unprepared to handle urgent situations, but did suggest that having "had the trauma of terrorism, some people in Xinjiang may be inclined to give priority to stability and take a one-size-fits-all approach in managing other issues." Human Rights Watch’s Yaqiu Wang told South China Morning Post this week that “Xinjiang authorities had responded to the Covid-19 outbreak with the same mentality and tools used for surveillance of residents in past crackdowns on Uygurs and other minorities in the region.”

In the Made in China article cited above, Rian Thum discusses other cases in which nationwide policies have been implemented differently in Xinjiang, including "modernization" of sleeping arrangements and reform of grave sites.


© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), get_post_time('Y'). | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh



source https://chinadigitaltimes.net/2020/08/baidu-satellite-gaps-highlight-xinjiang-detention-sites/

Photo: Rice fields of Yuanyang, by mzagerp

Rice fields of Yuanyang, by mzagerp (CC BY-ND 2.0)


© Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), get_post_time('Y'). | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags:

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh



source https://chinadigitaltimes.net/2020/08/photo-rice-fields-of-yuanyang-by-mzagerp/

Thursday 27 August 2020

Security Law Brings New Risks to Education in Hong Kong and Abroad

Hong Kong’s academic freedom and university autonomy have been steady targets for the CCP since at least the 2014 Umbrella Movement protests, when several prominent Hong Kong professors were jailed for participating. In recent years, documented pressure on outspoken and politically active scholars met quick resistance from professors and students, who form an integral part of the city’s once active pro-democracy movement. The July 1 implementation of the National Security Law (NSL) in Hong Kong has expedited Beijing’s long-running crackdown on the region’s freedom of expression and political autonomy, and public schools in the city have since been given new teaching guidelines as curriculum reviews are underway. Much as the city’s independent media outlets are already feeling the direct impact of the law and the chilling effect of its opacity, The Economist reports that its universities are as well:

That opacity “is a feature not a bug”, reckons [NYU law professor] Mr [Alvin] Cheung. The idea is to scare academics into self-censorship. “The message from the government is that academics have nothing to worry about if you are law-abiding,” says Eva Pils, a professor at King’s College London and a prominent activist for human rights in China. “But at the back of your mind you ask yourself if you are safe. You are never told where the red lines are. In fact there are no red lines.”

That is already having a stifling effect. One history professor told The Economist that his colleagues have decided to stop teaching classes on China. He himself is nervous even about addressing topics such as the American revolution, in case class discussions alight on the touchy subject of democracy.

The danger to professors takes several forms. The first is from being denounced, whether by colleagues or students themselves. A lecturer from Hong Kong University says he has always been aware that mainland students have been recruited to report back about who is saying what within his lecture theatre. But, he says, the practice seems to be spreading. One of his Cantonese-speaking local students recently took him aside to warn that he had been approached by the Hong Kong Liaison Office—the mainland’s representative office in the territory—to report on class discussions.

That situation may worsen with time, thinks Johnny Patterson of Hong Kong Watch. The Hong Kong government has recently pushed for a more “patriotic” approach within school classrooms. Books deemed critical of China (eg, by authors such as Joshua Wong, a pro-democracy legislator) have been removed from public libraries. Schools have been told to follow suit, and stamp out pro-democracy or anti-China sentiment. Liberal-studies classes, intended to promote independent thinking, are also in the firing line. “Once [pupils] are indoctrinated in schools, what will happen in a decade or so?” wonders Mr Patterson. “Will it lead to a culture of reporting wrong-think?”

Another danger is that what academics may research will be policed. […] [Source]

At the Hong Kong Free Press, Rachel Wong reported on concerns voiced locally and abroad last week over the censorship and revision of textbook content covering the modern history of local protest, politics, and the passing of the NSL:

The Progressive Teachers’ Alliance, Hong Kong Educators Alliance, Hongkongers Education Support and Education Breakthrough drafted an open letter to Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung, urging him to halt the alleged political censorship and removal of content in Liberal Studies textbooks. The groups also requested that the Education Bureau disclose details of the newly set-up “professional consultancy service,” which reviews the textbooks.

[…] The open letter accused the authorities of obliterating the content in order to hinder students from independent thinking and stifle free thought: “Topics about the separation of powers are removed in several textbooks. Content about the ideology of civil disobedience, as well as the limits the government imposes to freedom of assembly were largely erased. It reflected that the bureau’s claim of ‘enhancing the quality of textbook’ was merely an excuse for political censorship. They are turning the textbooks into the authorities’ mouthpiece.”

[…] Meanwhile in a statement released on Thursday, the UK-based NGO Hong Kong Watch slammed the removal of textbook content related to the Tiananmen Massacre. [Source]

At the South China Morning Post, Chan Ho-him reported further on the petitioners’ complaints about the new textbook vetting process and the Education Bureau’s opacity, and notes support for the process expressed by mainland media:

Liberal studies, a compulsory subject for senior secondary pupils, was introduced in 2009 to encourage critical thinking and raise awareness of contemporary issues. But it has come under fire in recent years from pro-establishment figures who have deemed some teaching materials biased and blamed it for “radicalising” young people.

The changes, first revealed by the publishers on Monday [8/17], included the removal of the phrase “separation of powers” as well as multiple political cartoons, while criticisms towards the Hong Kong and mainland Chinese governments had been toned down.

[…] Responding to accusations of censorship, education officials on Wednesday defended the changes as “sieving out the inaccurate parts from the rest” and helping students develop positive values, an argument that failed to convince many pupils and teachers. […] [Source]

While some in Hong Kong have dismissed fears over the NSL’s impact on academic freedom as “alarmist,” much evidence has accumulated this year to fuel concern. Earlier this month, a petition signed by nearly 4,000 academics, students, and residents called for the reversal of the recent firings of University of Hong Kong legal scholar Benny Tai and Baptist University lecturer Shiu Ka-chun, who were sacked in connection with their involvement in the 2014 protest movement after earlier being sentenced. Former Chinese University of Hong Kong professor and Occupy Central co-founder Chan Kin-man, who served 11 months of a 16-month sentence for his role, said on his release in March that he had “no regrets, because that’s the price one has to pay for democracy.”

Not only Hong Kong citizens are being affected by the turbulence in the city’s educational system. Earlier this month at the Sydney Morning Herald, Eryk Bagsworth reported on the resignation of the principal of an Australian international school catering to the children of Hong Kong-based legal, diplomatic, and business professionals. While the resigned administrator cited COVID-19 travel complications as the reason for his resignation, concerns over the NSL were amply noted in the Hong Kong-based international education community:

“I have loved my time at [the school] and was hoping to continue in the role for many years to come,” [Mark Hemphill] wrote in a letter to parents.

The school is also advertising for replacements for heads of science, maths and learning support, along with primary and kindergarten teachers. It did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

[…] “National security, privacy and other laws are increasingly impacting on the governance and operational actions of schools.”

[…] Teachers at international schools in Hong Kong, who spoke on the condition of anonymity due to concerns about their employment, said school administrations have been terrified of upsetting the Hong Kong government and Beijing.

“The terror is very real and so speech is well and truly censored,” said one. “Our international curriculum will come under attack in the next year.” [Source]

In the West, concerns have been steadily growing for years over the political and academic risks of universities’ increasing reliance on Chinese international student tuition and direct investment from Beijing. At The Wall Street Journal, Lucy Craymer reported earlier this month on new dangers now facing elite U.S. universities, academic faculty, and the scores of international students from Hong Kong and China gearing up to begin classes this month either online or in-person:

The issue has become particularly pressing because at least the first semester at many universities will be taught online, meaning some students from China and Hong Kong will connect with their U.S. classmates via video links. Some academics fear the classes could be recorded and ultimately end up in the hands of Chinese authorities.

[…] “We cannot self-censor,” said Rory Truex, an assistant professor who teaches Chinese politics at Princeton. “If we, as a Chinese teaching community, out of fear stop teaching things like Tiananmen or Xinjiang or whatever sensitive topic the Chinese government doesn’t want us talking about, if we cave, then we’ve lost.”

[…] Meg Rithmire, who teaches political science at Harvard Business School, plans similar measures [to Truex’ on offering students political warnings and blind grading at the class launch] on a compulsory first-year course for roughly 800 students seeking a master’s degree in business administration. One of the case studies discussed requires students to read diaries from Uighur Muslims held in camps in China’s Xinjiang region—where Beijing is accused of large-scale human-rights abuses—and also covers Hong Kong, Taiwan and the legitimacy of the Communist party.

[…] Avery Goldstein, a professor in the political science department at the University of Pennsylvania, said as soon as students enroll for his course online he plans to send out the syllabus and flag that it may contain sensitive information. A security breach of his online classes could now compromise students’ safety, he said—or his own, if he were to travel to China.

[…] “It’s a moving target,” said Dr. Ratigan [political science professor at Amherst College], who fears increased risks for students who are Chinese citizens or have close family in China. [Source]

See also ChinaFile’s “How to Teach China This Fall,” a compilation of leading experts’ advice in light of the pandemic and the new security legislation, and an interview with Professor Sheena Greitens by William Yang on Medium.


© Josh Rudolph for China Digital Times (CDT), get_post_time('Y'). | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: , , , ,

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh



source https://chinadigitaltimes.net/2020/08/security-law-brings-new-risks-to-education-in-hong-kong-and-abroad/

Monday 24 August 2020

Viral Content: Gratitude

 is a new CDT series introducing terms coined and used by Chinese during the 2019-2020 COVID-19 outbreak. These terms include both subversive critiques of government policies and nationalistic support of them. Similar terms are being compiled and translated at China Digital Space, CDT’s bilingual wiki, as we expand it beyond the Grass-Mud Horse Lexicon to include short biographies of people pushing for change in China, topical resource pages, and special projects.  

Gratitude

“Thanks for digging my grave, man!” (Source: CDS)

gǎn’ēn 感恩

At a video meeting of the Novel Coronavirus Epidemic Prevention and Control Command on the evening of March 6, newly stationed Hubei Provincial Party Standing Committee member and Wuhan Party Secretary Wang Zhonglin touted “gratitude education” for the people of Wuhan. At that time, the city had been under lockdown for 43 days and had seen 49,871 confirmed cases and 2,349 deaths.

We must undertake gratitude education throughout the city, so that the populace is grateful to the General Secretary and to the Communist Party, listens to the Party, follows the Party, and forms strong positive energy… The people of Wuhan are heroic people. They are also people who know how to be grateful. [Chinese]

Many in Wuhan were infuriated to hear that they were supposed to be “grateful” for the government’s gross mismanagement of the outbreak, from suppressing warnings from doctors who identified the first cases to heavy-handed lockdowns, like the one in Hubei that effectively quarantined over 50 million people:

@G***周: What can I say? I’m grateful I haven’t been killed, I guess

@小***2: Thank you, Master, for your extraordinary kindness

@m***g: Grateful, I’m not so sure, but I do wish the best for eight generations of your ancestors

@卧***w: even the destruction is a blessing [Chinese]

The backlash forced Wuhan’s official newspaper to withdraw coverage of Wang’s remarks.


© Josh Rudolph for China Digital Times (CDT), get_post_time('Y'). | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: , , , ,

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh



source https://chinadigitaltimes.net/2020/08/viral-content-gratitude/

Photo: It’s Just a Matter of Legs, by Gauthier DELECROIX – 郭天

It’s Just a Matter of Legs, by Gauthier DELECROIX – 郭天 (CC BY 2.0)


© Josh Rudolph for China Digital Times (CDT), get_post_time('Y'). | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags:

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh



source https://chinadigitaltimes.net/2020/08/photo-its-just-a-matter-of-legs-by-gauthier-delecroix-%e9%83%ad%e5%a4%a9/

Sunday 23 August 2020

Loyalty to Xi Lies at Core of Public Security Purge

The New York Times’ Chris Buckley reports on a new campaign against corruption and disloyalty in China’s public security machinery:

Officials in China’s law-and-order apparatus have been ordered to “drive the blade in” and “scrape poison off the bone,” setting aside personal loyalties to expose wayward colleagues. The model for this “education and rectification” program, leaders have told them, should be Mao Zedong’s drive of the 1940s, which cemented his dominance over the party from a base in the city of Yan’an.

[…] Such mobilization sessions have proliferated across China — in courts, police headquarters, prison administrations and the secretive Ministry of State Security, which controls the country’s main civilian surveillance and spy forces.

[…] “The Yan’an rectification was about obeying Mao in everything, and that’s the biggest signal from learning from Yan’an this time,” Deng Yuwen, a former Chinese editor for a Communist Party newspaper, said in an interview from the United States, where he now lives. “The core goal of cleaning up the political and legal system is also to obey Xi in everything.”

[…] The campaign is scheduled to last until early 2022, the cusp of a Communist Party congress that will install a new cohort of central officials and, most likely, extend Mr. Xi’s time in power. Publicity about the campaign has described local officials studying Mr. Xi’s writings and speeches in indoctrination classes deep into the night. [Source]

There has been pervasive promotion of Xi’s signature ideology since its enshrinement in the Party and national constitutions, driven through channels such as research funding, mandatory study apps, and higher education. Recent examples include the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ establishment last month of a "Center for Research of Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy", and an official guidance document on boosting China’s science fiction cinema and visual effects industry through measures prominently including "study and implement[ation of] Xi Jinping Thought."

The Wall Street Journal’s Chun Han Wong also reported on the ongoing campaign:

Within the first week after the call to action, Communist Party enforcers had launched investigations into at least 21 police and judicial officials, according to a media tally cited by the party’s top law-enforcement commission. Dozens more have since been taken down, including the police chief of Shanghai, the most senior target thus far, and cadres who have won awards for good performance.

The rash of investigations marks the first time that Mr. Xi has unleashed a sweeping and systematic clean-up of the country’s powerful domestic-security apparatus. His push to forge police, prosecutors and judges who are “absolutely loyal, absolutely pure and absolutely reliable”—as officials running the campaign have demanded—points to thorny concerns that Mr. Xi faces at home even as he seeks to slow a downward spiral in relations with the U.S.

[…] Firmer control over China’s security forces also gives Mr. Xi more leverage as he positions himself to secure a third term as Communist Party leader in 2022, said Wu Qiang, a Chinese politics researcher and former lecturer at Beijing’s Tsinghua University.

“Xi is especially reliant on this coercive state apparatus, yet also distrustful of it,” Mr. Wu said. [Source]

The University of Vienna’s Ling Li commented on the crackdown at The China Story:

I cannot remember ever having heard of a rectification campaign that was preceded by a pilot program. Usually pilot programs are used for organizational reshuffles, e.g. the setup of the Supervision Commissions or the “quota judge” (员额制) reforms in courts and procuratorates. Rather noteworthy is that the important inaugural conference for the new rectification campaign was not chaired by Guo Shengkun, head of Central Political-Legal Committee, but by its Secretary 秘书长 Chen Yixin (known as Xi’s man from Zhejiang). Guo did not even seem to be present at the conference. [Chris Buckley’s NYT report also highlighted Chen’s apparently rising star as a trusted enforcer.]

Fourth, according to Chen Yixin’s speech at the inaugural conference, the upcoming rectification campaign will follow a similar format to the one developed between 2013 and 2017, i.e. a combination of ideological indoctrination, mandatory self-reporting, and solicitation of reporting from others on wrong-deeds, which include both crimes and political violations. Mandatory self-reporting was an effective investigative tool at the time, which deprived the targets of their previous privileges against self-incrimination and led to punishing inaccurate reporting when offenses are detected through other leads. It will be deployed in this campaign too.

[…] In Chen Yixin’s speech at the inaugural conference, he made clear that the current political-legal rectification campaign would emulate the Yan’an rectification campaign (1942 to 1945). The latter is known in Party history for its indispensable role in the formulation of Mao Zedong Thoughts, which was subsequently elevated to become the guiding ideology of the Party. Recall that only a few months into the Yan’an rectification campaign, the office of the Party Chairman was created, which Mao was the first and last person to hold till his death. Does the leader of the current rectification campaign strive to achieve the same? [Source]

Also at The China Story, Adam Ni recalled a famous discussion at Yan’an, on the historical cycle of dynastic rise and fall, in his observations on Xi’s focus on constant self-policing as key to the regime’s survival:

In January 2018, Xi addressed the topic of dynastic cycle and political power at some length in a speech on party-building. After discussing select historical episodes, he concluded that the common denominator that led to the fall of past Chinese regimes is internal erosion, especially from corruption and division. For Xi, the primary means of keeping the Party from succumbing to the vicious cycle of the birth and decay of political power is “self revolution” (自我革命), that is, renewing the life-blood of the Party through self-imposed, and sometimes painful, changes that strengthen its organisational and ideological cohesion.

[… Xi] has repeatedly argued that constant vigilance and adaptation is the only way to keep the Party from being swept away into history’s dustbin. In a warning to party cadres, Xi said in July 2019:

Our party is the world’s largest party. There is no external force that can defeat us; only we can defeat ourselves.

The imperatives of regime security have prompted the CCP under Xi to declare, in the strongest language, the supremacy of the Party as the most fundamental and indisputable feature of China’s political system, an inevitability born out of history. Xi’s emphasis on the need for party supremacy across the full spectrum of political, economic and social activities highlights a heightened level of vigilance and insecurity. [Source]

Ni and Yun Jiang discussed the new rectification campaign further in their China Neican newsletter on Sunday. They described invocations of the Yan’an precedent as “quite chilling,” adding that “Xi is not Mao; today’s China is far moved from the China during the high Maoism. But these bloodstained lessons of yore must inform our thinking on the trajectory of the People’s Republic as it travels down the road of Xi’s vaunted ‘new era’.”

Last September, China Media Project’s David Bandurski discussed the related theme of douzheng (斗争), or "struggle," after Xi used it 56 times in an address to the Central Party School. Though the speech was an extreme example, Bandurski wrote, "this recent litany of ‘struggles’ is not some Xi era outlier […]. In fact, Xi Jinping’s entire tenure thus far has been attended by a rather dramatic comeback of the notion of ‘struggle’":

Xi’s constant “struggling” in the September 3 speech means we should entertain more seriously the possibility that Xi is facing his own real struggles within the Party as he grapples with this substantial list of challenges. His choice of language might be intended to send a tough message to those within the Party who resist his leadership, or attempt to work against his objectives. So this talk of “struggle” could point to fierce internal struggles and squabbles within the Chinese Communist Party. Certainly, if we look back on the past half century, we can see that talk of “struggle” at the official level has often served as a warning to those who might act at cross purposes to those in power, or who might mount criticism or opposition.

[…] By the 19th National Congress in November 2017, “great struggle” had already become solidified into a new numerical propaganda phrase pushed by Xi Jinping. The so-called “Four Greats” (四个伟大) were about carrying out a 1) “great struggle” (伟大斗争) in order to build 2) “great projects” (伟大工程), promote 3) “great achievements” (伟大事业) and realize the 4) “great dream” (伟大梦想) — the last a reference to Xi’s so-called “Chinese dream” of the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese people.”

But the “Four Greats,” led by the notion of “struggle,” were also deeply enmeshed with the governance of the Party itself, the idea being that a “great rejuvenation” could only be achieved if the Party could remain united around the firm core of General Secretary Xi. As Wang Qishan, the powerful and feared outgoing anti-corruption chief (and soon to be vice-chairman) wrote in an article in the People’s Daily on November 7, 2017: “Comprehensive and strict governance of the Party provides a staunch guarantee for historic change. If our Party is to carry out a great struggle, build great projects, promote great achievements and realize the great dream, it must unswervingly adhere to comprehensive and strict governance of the Party.” [Source]

The Central Party School is itself the site of political rectification following the firing of former professor Cai Xia. Cai, now in the United States, called for Xi’s replacement in a strongly worded online speech translated by CDT earlier this year. The official notice of her dismissal also cited her authorship of a critical post on Hong Kong’s then-prospective National Security Law, and her signing of a petition for free speech in honor of whistleblowing doctor Li Wenliang. In interviews published since her firing, Cai has described her criticism of Xi as an act of patriotism, and estimated that 70% of the Party’s members sympathize to some degree, "and among middle- and high-level officials the proportion may be even higher." Foreign Policy’s James Palmer commented in his China Brief newsletter this week that "even if resentment toward Xi’s leadership is growing, nobody in the party has the ability to act. Short of a full-blown coup or a health crisis for Xi, the entire system is locked in to ideological paranoia, yes-man thinking, and an increasing personality cult."

South China Morning Post’s Josephine Ma reported this week on efforts to deter any others at the School from speaking out:

Management of the Communist Party’s top academy has been told to take action to ensure staff – and former staff – remain loyal and to step up scrutiny of employees’ overseas travel, after the party expelled an outspoken retired professor.

He Yiting, executive vice-president of the elite Central Party School, told 60 department heads and senior officials on Monday to carry out “meticulous work” to keep retirees loyal in particular, according to a statement on the school website on Thursday.

[…] He also ordered them to make sure there was no dissent from any teaching staff or management.

“We have to ensure there is absolutely no diversion of opinions that violates the party’s theories and direction, and absolutely no public statements that are different from the decisions of the party leadership,” he said. [Source]

In an interview with CNN on Saturday, Cai commented on the suppression of opposition to Xi from critics including outspoken property tycoon Ren Zhiqiang, whom Cai defended after his expulsion from the Party last month.

[… I]t was from the inside that Cai watched the Communist Party, which is the sole governing party within mainland China, taking a harder stance on internal debates and dissent. Under former President Hu Jintao, Xi’s predecessor, dissent was still tolerated — although the space was already shrinking, Cai said. Since Xi came to power, however, intra-party democracy has become nothing but an empty name, she added.

"What he emphasized was the concentration of power and the absolute conformity and loyalty to the Party’s central leadership," she said. "He does not allow dissenting voices from within the Party, punishing those who air a different opinion with Party discipline and corruption charges."

[…] Speaking to CNN, Cai said Xi’s "reign of terror" did not come from a position of strength — instead, it exposed his deep sense of insecurity. "He’s the one who’s the most scared. That’s why he launched round after round of purges inside the Party," she said. "The person holding supreme power always feels that others are plotting a power grab."

In the current political climate, few dare to speak up publicly, Cai said. "When reporting information to their superiors, officials often conceal the truth and only report what they would like to hear. The information conveyed upwards is false, and there is no more scientific, democratic, open and transparent decision making," she said. "Under such circumstances, major problems will definitely arise in policy making." [Source]

Another prominent critic of Xi is former Tsinghua University law professor Xu Zhangrun, who was fired last month after a brief detention. Xu has sinced declared his intention to challenge the "wholly nonexistent" solicitation of prostitutes used to justify his detention and, in part, his dismissal. Xu was previously suspended from teaching duties at the university after a series of sharp written attacks on Xi’s leadership.

Xu has now received an appointment as Associate in Research at Harvard University’s Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies. As Geremie Barmé notes at China Heritage, this would "in normal circumstances […] afford Xu Zhangrun access to library collections at the university and relevant participation in the intellectual life of the institution," but Xu is currently "becalmed in Beijing, under official surveillance, unemployed and barred from leaving China." Barmé translated Xu’s letter of thanks to Harvard, in which he reiterated his critique of China’s current leaders

You hold the power of life and death over others; your will and whims decided who will flourish and who will come undone. That’s why, by all rights, you have no good reason to be so fearful of the fresh flowers placed on new graves, or the sorrowful tears of widows.

The very skies and earth, why, the air itself — why, you claim dominion over them all! Your power courses through the land with impunity and in your miscreant behaviour you evince no heartfelt trepidation, even when confronted by punishing calamities: be it the surging floodwaters or the plague that has scarred our land. [Note: Here the writer is referring to the calamities of 2020.]

This reflects a truth that has been unchanged from the days when you first came into being: you are contemptuous of everything civilised and decent; you are determined to befoul whatsoever is beautiful in humanity; you cannot tolerate the fact that the people just want a peaceful and happy existence. Even less do you have any real notion of the pleasures and delights of normal existence, for you worship at the altar of crude violence. In your pursuit of your evil calculations you cleave to the ingrained habits of fraudulence and treachery. Why? Simple: because really you are indeed afraid, and you are scared of everything. Why, you are even unsettled by yourselves! That’s because you know all too well that the only thing that can be detected in your empty hearts is the obsidian gloom of the jail house. [Source]


© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), get_post_time('Y'). | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh



source https://chinadigitaltimes.net/2020/08/loyalty-to-xi-lies-at-core-of-public-security-purge/