Congratulations to Liu Xiaobo (and a comment on WikiLeaks)

As most people who follow the news should be aware, this year's Nobel Peace Prize is being awarded to Chinese democracy activist Liu Xiaobo, who is currently being imprisoned by his government. China's hysterical reaction to the award simply helps prove to everyone with sense that they are still an oppressive authoritarian regime. They call Liu a criminal, when everyone knows his "crime" was only to openly call for a more open and democratic society. They put his wife and other relatives and friends under house arrest and prevent a long list of dissidents and relatives of dissidents from leaving the country in an effort to ensure that none of them can go to the award ceremony to accept the prize on Liu's behalf. This has only ensured that this will be the first time since Nazi Germany prevented 1935 recipient Carl von Ossietzky from traveling to accept the prize that the prize will not actually be given out at the ceremony. In other words, China has just ensured that they will be compared to the Nazis -- not entirely inappropriate in this case.

The most absurd thing though has been China's efforts to prevent other nations from attending the award ceremony. The majority of those invited (44 out of 65) have ignored China's threats and blandishments and official accepted invitations, but a number of countries have actually gone along (of course China, having no compunctions about telling outright lies in the interest of propaganda, claims that "the vast majority" of nations will not attend. Most of the 18 countries other than China that have said they are not attending are other authoritarian states, though there are one or two exceptions, such as the Philippines. Of course some countries had excuses which seemingly are unrelated to China, but one has to be dubious about them (if I were a Filipino, for instance, I would be strongly criticizing my government's kowtowing to China, no matter what lame excuse they offer).

It is also interesting to note that China seems genuinely incapable of believing that a prominent group like the Nobel committee could act independently of the government of the country where it is based (Norway). This is further evidence of their blinkered authoritarian mindset. Just because they make sure that any significant groups in China are under the control of the government, or at least unable to act publicly in a way blatantly contrary to its policies, they assume that the situation must be the same in all countries. Even if a group seems completely independent of the government, they assume the government must control it behind the scenes, because that's what they do with Chinese "non-governmental" organizations and such. Therefore, they persist in blaming the Norwegian government for the Nobel committee's selection, even though the government was not involved (though they no doubt agree with it, if they are sensible).

A few people may point to the irony that as Liu is being awarded the Nobel, many democratic governments are relentlessly pursuing Julian Assange and WikiLeaks for what many argue is an exercise of free speech. There is indeed a certain degree of irony here, but aside from the fact that bad behavior by some nations does not in the remotest degree excuse similar or worse behavior by others, there are certain differences between Liu and Assange. Many of the attacks on Assange do indeed strike me as illegitimate persecution (as for claiming he is the equivalent of people like Osama bin Laden, that is beyond ridiculous), and WikiLeaks has done much that is good (they won an award from Amnesty International for exposing extrajudicial killings in Kenya). The way governments have tried to block WikiLeaks and many companies have cut ties to it (often under government pressure) before it or Assange have been convicted of any crime also violates due process. I have seen little evidence that anyone has come to any physical harm because of WikiLeaks' release of classified US cables or other documents, and in many ways the US has been asking for something like this to happen by classifying huge numbers of documents as secret even when they don't need to be, and giving huge numbers of people top security clearance, as pointed out in this article and this one.

However, I have mixed feelings about the publication of communications which, if not private in the usual sense (if close to a million people are allowed to access them, they aren’t all that private), are nevertheless sensitive in certain ways, and could potentially cause harm, if only in the form of hurt feelings (not entirely insignificant when we are talking about foreign leaders). For one thing, foreign officials who are mentioned by name candidly speaking about their own or other governments are much less likely to speak honestly to US officials in the future. WikiLeaks, with the help of some of the mainstream media it works with, has made an effort to redact the names of many sources and agents, but some critics claim they haven't done a sufficient job and have exposed some people. It's true that they offered to cooperate with the US government in making redactions, but were refused. Nevertheless, it is better to err on the side of caution in a case like this, and it's not clear that WikiLeaks has done so. Then there's the excuse given for Assange's arrest, namely the sexual assault he is accused of in Sweden. I haven't heard enough of the supposed details to know what to make of this, but it seems the sex may have been consensual and there was no force involved, though he is accused of refusing to use a condom when asked to do so, which, while not as bad as what most people think of as sexual assault, is still not good (if it is true). In a nutshell, there is some room for argument about the morality of Assange's actions, while there is nothing remotely immoral about Liu's, not to mention the degree of repression in Liu's case, extending even to his family members and friends, is greater, at least at this point.

Finally, no matter how hypocritical Western governments may be sometimes, that is absolutely no excuse for China and similar regimes to behave even worse. For a country like China to point to abuses or human rights violations committed by Western democracies whenever its human rights record is criticized is like someone saying "See, you beat your dog, so it's okay for me to beat my children." In the end, China's treatment of people like Liu Xiaobo is indefensible, no matter how they try to change the subject. We can only hope that one day those in charge will realize that they can't control their people's minds completely. Perhaps the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobo will help bring that day closer.