 |
Panel 6: How does China deal with foreign and peripheral news media? Introduction: Voice of Tibet's experiences of Chinese censorship VOT is the only station outside China with daily programs about Tibet in Mandarin. I would like to tell you my experiences of nearly 13 years of broadcasting into Tibet and China, but first I want to comment on the events in Tibet since 10 March. The demonstrations in Tibet - and the sentencing of Adak Lopoe To me it was a big surprise that after a few days of protests in Lhasa the police and security forces seemingly vanished on the 14th afternoon. The next morning the Chinese authorities spread the footage from the previous day's riots in Lhasa worldwide, using the same footage as top story in their broad domestic news coverage. In a normal situation portraying the authorities' "vulnerability and weakness" this way would not have been an option. With the riot footage followed the message that the Tibetans are criminals, looters and even terrorists, and that the Dalai Lama is the mastermind behind it all. To me it seems like the Chinese authorities took the opportunity from the 14 March riots in Lhasa to portray the Tibetans in such a way, as the 9/11 events were used to label the Uyghurs in East Turkestan (Xingjiang) as terrorists. As a contrast the 10 years prison sentence given to Adak Lopoe just a few months earlier speaks for itself. During the Lithang Horse Festival in August 2007, where a Tibetan named Rongye Adak was arrested for going on stage and stating that "Tibetans lacked basic human rights and wanted the Dalai Lama to return to Tibet", a demonstration took place to demand the release of Rongye Adak.. Adak Lopoe informed international media about the protest and received a 10 years prison sentence for "colluding with foreign separatist force to split the country", while Rongye Adak got eight years initial "crime". My question following the contrasts of these two completely different ways of handling by the PRC authorities is simply: "Why?" Legitimizing "strike hard" and re-education in Tibet Knowing that demonstrations are not allowed to report on in China in general, the fact that the policies can change like this when a greater goal can be achieved, namely to portray the Tibetans as terrorists masterminded by the Dalai Lama, is alarming. Later on this strategy has been followed up with stories from official media and representatives in China that "Tibetans are planning suicide bomb-attacks during the Beijing Olympics, targeting athletes and sports officials." The ongoing "strike hard" and "re-educations" campaigns in Tibet, staged after international media and tourist were sent out of Tibet, to mee seems like a way of legitimizing the intensified "cultural genocide" and "assimilation policies" which has been threatening Tibetan culture and identity for centuries. In this perspective it is important to credit the Tibetans for not targeting the Chinese people with their protests and demonstrations, instead directing it to the violators, namely the Chinese political leadership. Quoting the Labrang monks who "broke free" to reach the international press on a "guided tour" to Labrang on 9 April, they shouted: "We want human rights" and "we have no rights" and many shouted "we are not against the Beijing Olympics, we are FOR the Beijing Olympics." Of course these statements will never reach the Chinese public, at least not through the Chinese domestic media. Beijing's Olympic pledges In their application for the 2008 Olympics and when Beijing was awarded the games, among the host country "guarantees" were the following: Because of the Olympics "the cause of democracy and rule of law will continually advance." In February 2001, Beijing's Deputy Mayor Liu Jingmin, a top Olympic official, said that "By applying for the Olympics, we want to promote not just the city's development, but the development of society, including democracy and human rights." Liu added that a victorious bid would "help us establish a more just and harmonious society, a more democratic society, and help integrate China into the world." Wang Wei, Secretary General of the Beijing bid committee, pledged that the government "will give the media complete freedom to report when they come to China." From my perspective these quotes can stand as good examples of the standards set by the Chinese authorities themselves. Then a final quote from the Olympic hosts, assigned by the PRC authorities: "In the preparation for the Games, we will be open in every aspect to the rest of the country and the whole world. We will draw on the successful experience of others and follow the international standards and criteria." From my perspective these quotes can stand as good examples of the standards set by the Chinese authorities themselves. PRC's international obligations Another very important aspect to outline is the fact that the Chinese authorities have committed themselves to secure a broad number of basic human rights for their citizens. It is not Western democracies or human rights campaigners exporting their standards upon China, the criticism is based on the huge gap between what the Chinese authorities have guaranteed for compared to how these promises are exercised in practice. Referring to the Peoples Republic of China's domestic and international obligations related to freedom of speech and information, the following is a few out of numerous resolutions and agreements signed up on by the Chinese authorities internationally and domestically. In its first decision on the subject, in 1946, the UN General Assembly (Resolution 59(1)) declared freedom of information to be a fundamental human right: "Freedom of information is a fundamental human right and is the touchstone of all the freedoms to which the United Nations is consecrated". Article 19 in the Human Rights Declaration is another example of China's international obligations. As you all know China is a permanent member of the Security Council with the right to veto. Still China threatens other countries insisting human rights are an "internal affair", a position they are successfully exporting to other totalitarian and repressive regimes. PRC DOMESTIC OBLIGATIONS: PRC Constitution Article 35 in the Chinese Constitution reads: "Freedom of speech, press, assembly Citizens of the People's Republic of China enjoy freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession and of demonstration." I have not much to add to this, except questioning why these rights are not respected. Experiences of 12 years of broadcasting into Tibet and China For 12 years VOT has broadcasted into Tibet and China, and for as many years our transmissions have been targeted by systematic jamming violations from the PRC. Jamming means "the intentional transmission of radio signals in order to interfere with the reception of the signals from another station." Twice every year all stations register internationally its short wave radio frequencies to secure the exclusive right to use these frequencies at the registered times. For years we have protested these violations and been seeking support in highlighting and addressing the issue toward the Chinese authorities. The International Telecommunications Union (ITU) is a global institution under the UN umbrella. The ITU is responsible for regulating and overseeing that international broadcasting laws, rules, and regulations are followed. Its Radio divisions' responsibility is to: "Coordinate efforts to eliminate harmful interference between radio stations of different countries." The ITU conducted a thorough survey toward the former Soviet Union's jamming of Western broadcasts, involving 8 countries in the investigation process. But to us they tell us they are aware of the problem, and that we have their moral support, but they can do nothing. "It is a waste of time coming to us." VOT started broadcasting on short wave to Tibet in May 1996, renting airtime from FEBA Radio's transmitter at the Seychelles. After a few months the Chinese authorities threatened FEBA to cancel our contract, otherwise China would start jamming all FEBA Radio's transmissions too. After a few months we found a new options and could continue. In the late 1990s the Chinese authorities understood the popularity and impact of foreign SW radio broadcasts into Tibet. Their response was starting what they call the XiXing project in 2000. Since then hundreds of millions of USD have been invested in the project, both in improving their own ability to broadcast their own programs, AND to jam/block access to foreign broadcasts. There are two ways of blocking access to SW radio broadcasts, and VOT transmissions are targeted by both: Jamming by conventional long distance transmissions, beamed on top of VOT's registered frequencies, using high power transmitters outside the cities of Xian, Beijing, Kashi and Nanning. Most of the time two jamming transmissions, from two different locations, target each and every VOT transmission. The other method is called local or "ground-wave" jamming. These local jamming installations are installed in or outside more than 100 cities and townships in Tibetan areas, small transmitters with antennas usually located on hilltops overlooking the town or valley. These local jammers are very effective, but with limited reach of about 20 km in radius, depending on the topography in the area. The PRC jamming transmissions does not stop at the border - the signals, containing a mix of dragon dance music, drums and noise, badly affects listening also in India, Nepal and all the way here to Paris and EUROPE as well! The French company Thales (Thomson) has sold and installed a lot of the equipment to stations in China used for jamming foreign broadcasts. So has US based Continental. During the last couple of years it is known that Chinese manufacturers have copied a lot of the foreign produced equipment enabling them to produce and install more by themselves. China has also exported equipment used for jamming to other countries, including Zimbabwe. In politically sensitive areas Tibetans have told us the Chinese came and offered brand new "state of the art" radio sets in exchange for their old ones. When they came home trying to tune to foreign transmissions, the main bands were cut off enabling them mainly to tune to a limited number of domestic transmissions. PRC Embassy in Oslo has stated to us that "its is our right to block access to your transmissions - you are hostile to China and you are the Dalai Lama's radio station and your objective is to split Tibet from China. PRC jamming takes place continuously while CCTV and Chinese stations are beamed throughout the world: Former President Jiang Zemin stated in 2002 when inspecting the XiXing project: "Unremitting efforts should be made in the radio and television broadcasting coverage in the western region and achievements should be consolidated, so that the voice of the Party and the State can be transmitted further to millions of households and the voice of China can be transmitted to all over the world." In Tibet it is illegal to listen to foreign broadcasts like VOT There are recent examples of people being detained for listening and informing of schedule or teaching others how and where to tune to foreign broadcasts like ours. VOT Satellite transmissions VOT also transmit its programs through Satellite, targeting private Satellite dish owners in China, including Tibetan areas outside the Tibetan Autonomous Regions. Right now we have a round-the-clock service working, although not through the best Satellite option. Those options were lost twice in 2006, when the State Administrations of Film, Radio and Television threatened the uplink stations and Satellite company owners with severe consequences if they did not cut down the VOT service immediately. So severe was the harassment and threats that one of the companies kept 2.000 USD of the prepaid costs - "for all the harassment and threats having come our way due to VOT", they said. VOT web-site blocked throughout China and Tibet Those educated and young people are able to access foreign web-sites through software and proxy-server. All information on the internet considered sensitive is "filtered" by Chinese authorities in an attempt to deny the people access to unbiased news and information. When blocking or filtering foreign web-sites considered sensitive, most often an entire section of that server is cut off from access in China. Quite recently the Swedish Tibet Committee experienced pressure from Swedish companies to find another server, as their company profiles were inaccessible in China due to the filtering of the www.tibet.se. Seemingly nobody protested toward the Chinese authorities... So what can be done Documenting the jamming violations is not the problem. Recordings in the form of sound clips recorded inside China from all our transmissions are instantly available on Internet every day. Still it has been a struggle to get the issue of Chinese jamming violations on the agenda, raising support internationally for protesting these violations. Governments globally have in many respects established a separate standard for China compared to all other countries. "What did you expect, this is China", I am often met with. The press is holding the key, informing the public and portraying the realities and consequences of Chinas human rights violations for millions of people and expose our elected representatives' and Government's double standards toward China. The Beijing Olympics is a historic opportunity also to reach out to the Chinese people, exposing how the Communist Party for centuries has manipulated the realities by misusing their information and media monopoly. The Olympics can also be a good opportunity to address the issue of jamming violations towards the People Republic of China's authorities. The Foundation Voice of Tibet St. Olavsgt. 24, 0166 Oslo - Norway URL: www.vot.org (Tibetan service) URL: www.vot.org/index_simp.html (Mandarin service) E-mail: voti@online.no Tel: +47 22111209 / +47 99378097 |
