Since reform and opening-up,
Part of the plot to contain China
For the second time, the Nobel Peace Prize goes to person identified as non-peaceful in
Liu Xiaobo, the 2010 awardee, is behind bars serving an 11-year term for "openly slandering and inciting others to overthrow our country's State power," according to the verdict at his trial.
The Nobel Committee said it was determined to honor "the foremost symbol" of the "struggle for human rights" in
Some may have expectations that such a prize will effect changes inside
A man judged a "criminal who violated Chinese law" by a Chinese court of law, is hailed in the West as a "worthy winner" and "prominent human rights defender".
Peace, in Bejing's lexicon, stands for a good rapport among nations, at the heart of which lies mutual respect and non-interference in each other's domestic affairs. This year's Nobel Peace Prize, like the 1989 award to the Dalai Lama, angered the Chinese government because it is the West that is once again trying to interfere in domestic issues.
And, perhaps to some people's disbelief, this Nobel Peace Prize, as was true 21 years back, angered not just the government.
Most Chinese would prefer to handle their own affairs without outside interference. As ordinary citizens find more channels with which to be heard and the government grows more responsive to public concerns, there is greater confidence that domestic affairs can be sorted out without any interference from the West.
Not that the average Chinese does not covet better guarantees and protection for their rights and interests. They want their government to be clean and efficient. They are angry at corruption and injustice. They complain and protest. They stand up against abuse.
Liu's award is a provocation to
Nor will all Chinese embrace such gestures with appreciation and gratitude. Whether or not it has to do with out collective memories of Western abuse, this nation will not allow its own home affairs to be dictated by the West. Few would like to see their government upbraided by a condescending Western party.
Like it or not, the Nobel Peace Prize broadens the suspicion that there is a Western plot to contain a rising
2010 Nobel Peace Prize disgrace
(Global Times, October 9,2010)
Yesterday the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Liu Xiaobo, an incarcerated Chinese Criminal.
The Nobel Committee once again displayed its arrogance and prejudice against a country that was made the most remarkable economic and social progress in the past three decades.
The Nobel Prize has been generally perceived as prestigious award in
Last century the prize was awarded several times to pro-West advocates in the former Soviet Union, including Mikhail Gorbachev, whose efforts directly led to the disintegration of the
The committee continues to deny
In 1989, the Dalai Lama, a separatist, won the prize. Liu Xiaobo, the new winner wants to copy Western political systems in
There are many different perspectives to view these two people, but neither of the two is among those who made constructive contributions to
Other Chinese dissidents, such as Rebiya Kadeer and Hu Jia, were reportedly on the shortlist for the peace prize this year, which naturally generates animosity among many Chinese against the award.
They have reason to question whether the Nobel Peace Prize has been degraded to a political tool that serves an anti-China purpose. It seems that instead of peace and unity in
Liu Xiaobo was sentenced to 11 years in jail by the Chinese government last year. Several countries tried to interfere into
The controversy in the West over Liu Xiaobo's sentence is not based on legal concerns. They are trying to impose Western values on
Obviously, the Nobel Peace Prize this year is meant to irritate
The award however makes it clearer that it is difficult for
The Nobel committee made an unwise choice, but it and the political force it represents cannot dictate
World should be wary of Cold War policies
(Global Times, October 12,2010)
The world seems to be locked in an age of agitation. While globalization is bringing countries, big and small, closer, they are also alienated from each other due to distrust.
This mood is clearly being displayed at the ongoing defense ministers meeting for ASEAN countries in
When countries are on alert against each other, diplomacy between countries can be charged and even provoked, and a confrontation may even seem imminent.
When the current situation is put into perspective, staying guarded against each other may be seen as progress from the violence and wars from last century. The cost of building and paying for militaries is soaring; meanwhile, mutual trust and friendship are difficult to build. Staying wary has become a pragmatic choice of many countries.
This mistrust might last for a long time. Though better than the times of violence and the Cold War, there is no guarantee the countries involved can be assured of victory. If one listens to the clamor of US politicians against
Is mutual trust a viable goal? The ups and downs of the Sino-US relationship may suggest no, but relationships among some European nations offer some hope.
Mutual trust is the key words of politicians of both china and the
War among major powers is unlikely to happen in the age of nuclear weapons, but no country is willing take any chances when it comes to national safety and sovereignty. Since the military spending of the
The question remains of how to prevent the world from slipping back into darker times. It is not easy. In an anarchical world ,the existing powers naturally tend to secure advantages by unfair means, limiting room for the new power to grow.
Rational judgment shows that moving toward mutual trust costs less than going back to the Cold War.