In a recent speech in Thailand, just before heading off to the Olympics in Beijing, U.S. President Bush tweaked China over its human rights record, including the detention of political dissidents, human rights and religious activists and other human rights abuses by Beijing.

In response, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman tweaked right back at Mr. Bush:

“We firmly oppose any words or acts that interfere in other countries’ internal affairs, using human rights and religion and other issues.”

Really?

In 2007, my Independence Institute collegue Dave Kopel and I wrote about Costa Rica dropping diplomatic relations with Taiwan in order to enter into a stronger economic and diplomatic relations with China:

In June, Costa Rica ended nearly sixty years of diplomatic relations with Taiwan in order to establish diplomatic relations with China. Not only a victory in Beijing’s efforts to smother Taiwan’s independence, the Costa Rican switch is further evidence of China’s growing influence in Latin America—a growing threat to democracy and to U.S. interests.

Announcing the diplomatic switch, Costa Rican president Oscar Arias cited a desire to strengthen commercial ties and “attract investment” from China. Arias then thanked Taiwan for its “solidarity and co-operation” over the last sixty years, noting that Taiwan has been “very generous.”

But the next day, Arias denounced Taiwan for being “stingy.” Sounding as though he had taken emergency talking points from Beijing, Arias grumbled, “Considering the few friends they have, they don’t treat them very well.” Arias continued, “Without a doubt, we will get more help from China.”

So if Beijing actually believes that no country should interfere in the internal affairs of another, why would Costa Rica have to end its relationship with Taiwan in order to “get more help from China?”

As Kopel and I continue:

China insists that the price of trade relations is the severance of diplomatic relations with independent Taiwan. A 2005 Heritage Foundation report warned that “China has launched a major diplomatic offensive in Central America and the Caribbean to stamp out Taiwan’s diplomatic legitimacy in the region and supplant Taiwan’s influence among these young democracies with its own.” The report observed that China has been “translating its economic success -and its search for resources to fuel its economic growth—into greater influence in Latin America and the Caribbean.”

So perhaps the U.S. should go ahead and call Beijing on its bluster about not interfering in other countries’ affairs by re-entering into formal diplomatic relations with Taiwan, and maybe even throw in a trade deal with Taiwan. Then when Beijing throws its predictable temper tantrum, the U.S. can gently remind the regime that other countries (China) should not interfere in the internal affairs of other nations (in this case, foreign policy decisions by the U.S.).

The Communist party of China has beautified Beijing for the Olympics. The Organising Committee for the games has ordered one million cars from the road and told factories to shut down, so foreigners will believe that one of the most polluted cities on earth can hold ‘the green Olympics’.

The president of the Olympic Committee gabbled his appreciation. Jacques Rogge, a sports’ bureaucrat who appears to have learnt nothing from the 20th century, lauded China’s ‘extraordinary’ efforts. The statistics proved the authorities had done everything that ‘was humanely possible’, and the statistics never lie.

Greenpeace, so harsh on democratic countries, was as excessive in its praise. After registering a few reservations, it declared the dictatorship’s work was ‘tremendous’ and ‘positively unique’. Beijing was providing ‘important lessons to other Chinese cities’.

The eyebrows of Jonathan Fenby, who has just published The Penguin History of Modern China, shot up at that. When the games are over, the factories will reopen, he said. The Olympics will have secured a few long-term benefits – more homes and workplaces will burn gas rather than coal – but when set against China’s vast pollution problem these gains will be tiny.

Cohen then reminds us why it is such useful idiots are so easy to come by (and always have been for communist regimes):

The gullible admire dictatorships because they think the great leader and his politburo can cut through objections and force the recalcitrant to obey orders, and we have had no shortage of fantasies about the better China that would come if only the party embraced greenery.

In The River Runs Black, a book every environmentalist needs to read, Elizabeth C Economy points out that the fantasies can never be realised. Even if the centre wanted to change policy, its writ does not run in the provinces. Local officials are in the pocket of or related to factory owners and ignore inconvenient decrees. If the courts, the press or doctors in local hospitals complain, they silence them. Change is impossible without democratic reform – which is as far away as ever.

The Chinese desperately want the $40 billion games to be lauded as a success — a showcase for athletes reaching superlative heights against the backdrop of a perfect city.

Unfortunately, the early reports paint a far from perfect picture.

Instead of human rights improvements, the situation has worsened. Even as Beijing publicized the establishment of “protest zones,” dissidents were detained or jailed. So-called troublemakers have been denied entry to the country. In Beijing, taxi cabs are wired for eavesdropping. And Tibet, which has long clashed with Chinese authorities, remains closed to the outside world.

Furthermore, journalists in Beijing to cover the games have reported their Internet access is being filtered, with some websites being blocked.

Inexplicably, the IOC appears impotent in applying pressure on the Chinese to keep their promises. That is, if the IOC is even trying.

In the face of growing concern by athletes over air quality, the IOC’s chief medical commissioner said Tuesday that the Beijing air looks like pea soup because of its “humidity.” What?

The U.S. Olympic Committee seems to be taking its cues from the IOC. When four members of the U.S. cycling team got off a plane in China wearing air masks distributed by the USOC, their actions were questioned by USOC officials. USOC CEO Jim Scherr reportedly said the cyclists were “overly cautious.” The cyclists ended up making a public apology to the Chinese.

The events leave us wondering why the great effort to soothe the Chinese ego?

Nice! The folks at the Post don’t seem quite as timid as the New York Times editorial board, who have acted genuinely surprised that a communist regime is granted the Olympics, and then continues to act like a communist regime.

But the most interesting performance of this games may have already taken place a couple of days ago, starting in Thailand of all places. That’s when President George W. Bush actually sounded presidential for a change and made an unambiguous statement about human rights and China:

“We speak out for a free press, freedom of assembly, and labor rights not to antagonize China’s leaders, but because trusting its people with greater freedom is the only way for China to develop its full potential….We press for openness and justice, not to impose our beliefs but to allow the Chinese people to express theirs….

“The United States believes the people of China deserve the fundamental liberty that is the natural right of all human beings.”

A Chinese spokesman responded with a courteous screw-you: “We firmly oppose any words or acts that interfere in other countries internal affairs, using human rights and religion and other issues.” At the opening of the new U.S. embassy in China, Bush reiterated his theme of freedom and engagement: “We strongly believe societies which allow the free expression of ideas tend to be the most prosperous and the most peaceful.”

If you care about civil liberties, foreign policy, government spending, expansions in executive power, Social Security reform, traditional African dancing, or you name it, Bush’s presidency has been the sort of ongoing disaster-cum-embarrassment that the baseball team he used to own, the Texas Rangers, faces on an annual basis. And there is plenty to criticize in terms of Bush’s current appearance in China. Not his going to the opening ceremonies of the Games in the first place, but his failure to meet openly with Chinese dissidents or directly address a nation-wide audience in China.

Despite the high-flying rhetoric of athletic competition, the modern Olympics, restarted in 1896, were conceived of as a political act—a way for the French to avenge on the playing field their battlefield defeat in the Franco-Prussian War (it’s one reason why participants compete as part of national teams rather than as individuals). True to this origin, the Olympics have always provided a stage for world politics, both official and unofficial, well-intentioned and murderous. Hence the grotesque displays of Nazism in 1936, the student protests in ‘68, the terrorist atrocities of ‘72, Eric Rudolph’s bombings in ‘96, and various boycotts, such as President Jimmy Carter’s withdrawal of the United States team from the 1980 Summer Olympics in Moscow to protest the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

Carter’s boycott, done in the name of human rights, accomplished absolutely nothing. I’m willing to say that Bush is a worse president than Carter (who at least deregulated airline ticket pricing and interstate trucking, and invited Willie Nelson to the White House), but it’s Bush who has gotten it right when it comes to superpower-charged Olympics.

To have Bush out there, saying what he’s saying where he’s saying it—and pursuing a larger policy of engagement via trade and other forms of exchange—is absolutely the best way to pull China into something approaching Western-style democracy, complete with robust individual rights and the sort of economy that will ultimately force governments to loosen up. Milton Friedman famously said that as people get richer, they demand the ability to live however they want—that economic freedom, which increases prosperity, helps create the conditions for political freedom. It seems clear that the Chinese government, like all governments, doesn’t want to yield power if it can avoid doing so. It’s also clear that the more a country trades with the world—for goods, services, and even cultural identities—the less its government can control its people. Here’s hoping that the Beijing Olympics, regardless of the predictable and bizarre repressions going on right now to ensure a “stain-free” event, push that process along.

From the International Herald Tribune (July 30)

The Chinese government confirmed Wednesday what journalists arriving at the lavishly outfitted media center here had suspected: Contrary to previous assurances by Olympic and government officials, the Internet would be censored during the upcoming games.

Since the Olympic Village press center opened Friday, reporters have been unable to access scores of Web pages – politically sensitive ones that discuss Tibetan succession, Taiwanese independence, the violent crackdown of the protests in Tiananmen Square and the sites of Amnesty International, Radio Free Asia and several Hong Kong newspapers known for their freewheeling political discourse.

On Wednesday – two weeks after its most recent proclamation of an uncensored Internet during the Summer Games – the International Olympic Committee quietly agreed to some of the limitations, according to Kevan Gosper, chairman of the IOC press commission, Reuters reported.

Sounds like the communist regime in Beijing is acting like…well, a communist regime.

The Tribune continues:

The Chinese government and the IOC had repeatedly suggested up until two weeks ago that the 20,000 journalists covering the games would have full Internet access. Jacques Rogge, the International Olympic committee president, declared that the foreign media would be able to report and publish its work freely in China and that the Internet would be uncensored.

Wow, Jacques Rogge and the other bumbling bueracrats at the IOC really are just a bunch of toadies for the regime.

Thanks to Julie at the Independence Institute for the tip.

The piece is in english, but a french translation would be very cool…any takers?

Please watch it, and then pass it along.

The prosecutor of the world’s first permanent war crimes tribunal will seek an arrest warrant Monday charging Sudan’s president with crimes against humanity and genocide in Darfur, a move U.N. diplomats warned could bring a backlash from Sudan’s government.

U.N. officials and diplomats said the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court would seek an indictment charging Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir with orchestrating violence in Darfur that has left hundreds of thousands of people dead.

Woops, bad timing for al-Bashir and the rest of the thuggish regime in Khartoum. For years, Beijing has been the chief financial and political enabler of the mass-murder in Darfur, but with China’s role in the genocide increasingly being tied to the 2008 Olympics in Beijing, and with the games only weeks away, Beijing may have to throw its partner in genocide under the bus, at least publicly. The AP piece continues:

China’s U.N. Ambassador Wang Guangya, whose nation is an ally of Sudan, expressed concern that bringing charges against al-Bashir could jeopardize peace talks and put peacekeepers and humanitarian aid workers in Darfur at greater risk.

“It’s one of the implications we have to consider,” he said.

Wow, talk about a luke-warm reaction.  Of course, the Chinese ambassador failed to mention that the need for peacekeepers and humanitarian aid workers is due to Khartoum’s mass-slaughter in Darfur in the first place…a mass-slaughter that Beijing has enabled over the years.  Nor does the ambassador actually defend al-Bashir.  Kind of sounds like the regime in Khartoum  will have to do without overt support from its fellow thugs in Beijing…at least until after the Olympics.

For background and information about China’s outrageous economic and political complicity in the genocide in Darfur, check out Regime Watch’s Darfur archive here.

The first post on regime watch was about my article “Misery: China’s Main Export,” which describes Communist China’s moral illegitimacy to host the 2008 Olympics, and which was first published in the excellent weekly Colorado newspaper, Johnstown Breeze. Here it is, re-printed in its entirety. And again, thanks to everyone who found their way to this blog…hope you come back from time to time.

In 2005, Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo introduced a resolution into the House of Representatives calling on the U.S. Olympic Committee to change the venue of the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing, citing among other things, the “egregious violations of human rights” by China.

And indeed, while Communist China is well qualified to host an international gathering of thugs and tyrants, the regime’s moral legitimacy as host of the Olympics is another matter entirely.

In May 2007, The Hill—a Washington, D.C. newspaper that covers Congress—reported on “a quiet lobbying campaign” in Washington by China in an attempt to “deflect threats that the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing will be boycotted because of what critics say is a Chinese failure to help end genocidal violence in Darfur.”

Actually, far from simply failing to help end the slaughter, China’s outright complicity in the genocide being perpetrated by the National Islamic Front regime in Khartoum against non-Arab tribes-people in the Darfur region of Sudan is well established

A March 2007 report from the Washington D.C.-based Heritage Foundation notes that China’s huge investment in Sudan oil in turn helps fund the genocide in Darfur, “Khartoum has doubled its defense budget in recent years, spending 60 percent to 80 percent of its estimated $500 million in annual oil revenue—half from China—on weapons. Some of these weapons find their way to the conflict in Darfur.”

Beijing has also helped subvert international arm embargoes against Khartoum. As the Heritage report continues, “Moreover, with Chinese assistance, the Sudanese government recently built three weapons factories.”

So with China’s help, the Janjaweed militias carrying out the genocide in Darfur are not only well-armed, but have also received military transportation and helicopter gunship support from Khartoum, making the slaughter all the more efficient.

In 2006, China not only abstained from a United Nations Security Council Resolution authorizing the deployment of troops and civilian police into Darfur to provide security against the genocide, but also used its veto power to force language into the resolution requiring the consent of the same Khartoum regime whose mass-murder in Darfur created the need for an international security force in the first place.

But the lobbying campaign didn’t work out as Beijing may have hoped. In May 2007, Congressman Tom Lantos (D-Ca.) released a letter to the Chinese President signed by over 100 members of Congress, including Colorado’s Tancredo stating, among other things, “…unless China does its part to ensure that the government of Sudan accepts the best and most reasonable path to peace, history will judge your government as having bank-rolled a genocide.”

The letter continues, “If China fails to do its part, it risks being forever known as the host of the ‘Genocide Olympics.’ ”

Besides enabling genocide in Darfur, China is also well into its fiftieth year of a military occupation of Tibet. Many thousands of Tibetans—including Tibet’s spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama—are forced to live in exile around the world

Last year, Beijing showed its hyper-sensitivity to having its thuggish occupation of Tibet tied to the Olympics by detaining and then deporting Colorado resident Kirsten Westby and four other Americans for peacefully displaying a banner saying “One World, One Dream, Free Tibet 2008” on the Tibetan side of Mount Everest.

The slogan was a clever play on Beijing’s own cynical slogan for the 2008 Olympics, “One World, One Dream.”

In addition, Beijing is again threatening violence against the peaceful and democratic island nation of Taiwan, over which China claims sovereignty—even though it is plainly obvious that Taiwan function as an independent state—and that only Beijing may represent Taiwan’s 23 million citizens in international organizations.

In 2005, Beijing enacted an “Anti-Secession Law” which codified China’s already long-standing threats against Taiwan. Article eight of the law mandates the use of “Non-peaceful” means against Taiwan if, among other things, “a major event occurs which would lead to Taiwan’s separation from China.”

After more than a decade of being turned down for United Nations membership under its traditional name “Republic of China,” Taiwan is planning a national referendum this year over whether to formally apply for UN membership under the name “Taiwan.”

Beijing recently stated that Taiwan’s referendum represents the kind of “major event” that would allow the regime to invoke article eight against Taiwan.

So Communist China is desperately trying to put on a friendly face for the Olympics while at the same time threatening one of Asia’s most dynamic representative democracies.

The eyes of the world will be on Beijing for the summer games, making the 2008 Olympics a unique opportunity to shine an international spotlight on the misery China exports around the globe.