Monday 22 November 2010

Does Peace mean Peace?

Each year, there are five Nobel Prizes are given, one of them is Nobel Peace Prize. According to Nobel’s will, the Peace Prize should be awarded to the person who “…shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses”. This year, a divergence about Nobel Peace laureate is growing stronger and more complex, according to the article “Nobel Winner’s Absence May Delay Awarding of Prize” by Andrew Jacobs and Alan Cowell, published in New York Times.

The writer reports that “the Chinese government has come up with a less magnanimous approach to the Norwegian Nobel Committee’s decision to give the peace prize to the dissident Liu Xiaobo, 54, who is serving an 11-year sentence for subversion”. The Chinese government oppose the decision of Nobel Committee. Mr. Lui’s wife has been isolated since news of the award broken last month. Moreover, there was no immediate reaction from another family members of Mr. Lui. The news is the Nobel ceremony may delay because the winner and his family members can not attend, but Geir Lundestad, the secretary of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, said “The ceremony will definitely take place”. A commentary said that “Awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobo once again reflects the strong attempts of Western countries to intervene in the political process in China,” and “It is a well-planned event, premeditated and long organized by Western countries, and is part of a series of actions by the U.S. and its allies and companies to undermine China.” On another hand, Chinese people had accepted the government’s contention that Mr. Liu was seeking to push China into chaos through writings that called for free elections and an end to single-party rule, according to Andrew J. Nathan, a political scientist at Columbia University who has been studying China for four decades and he also said “The Chinese people I speak to have quite readily absorbed the government’s point of view that this guy is a criminal nurtured by the West”. There are some countries support China such as Russia, Iraq, Cuba and Kazakhstan, but 36 other countries support the West.

After read this article, I consider that “Is it a peace prize?” There are many intentions behind the prize with a strong “smell” of political. Is the winner worth to take the prize? Or he is just “a tool” of some powers. Nowadays, the power of the global has been changing, it is not for the West only but it is coming to balance between the West and Asia. It means the nations in Asia especially China which is growing rapidly in economic and political. What happen if the authorities from both sides do not have “the same voice” at the ending time? Do we need to care about this issue? Do you have any opinions about this issue? I would like to know your response for this article. Thanks.
__________
References

References
Jacobs.A and Cowell.A. (2010, November 18).Nobel Winner's Absence May Delay Awarding of Prize. The New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/19/world/asia/19nobel.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=nobel%20winner

18 comments:

  1. I think this sort of thing matters a lot simply because human rights matter, including the rights of Chinese citizens. I have to admit, that I think China's response to the award is weird, although Ai's idea that it smells of politics sounds right - perhaps Chinese domestic politics is behind it more than any international concern as the Chinese government seeks to maintain control of their own citizens by enforcing censorship to maintain ignorance in order to keep their citizens believing what they want, which is perhaps becoming increasingly difficult in 2010.

    Do you see any parallels with 1984?

    ReplyDelete
  2. And Ai,
    Thanks for teaching us something new about blogging here - I didn't know we could also use HTML tags in the title field.
    The way your title contrasts peace with peace is exactly right for your topic.

    Now, I'm looking for an excuse to try it out myself.

    Were you just trying it out, or did you already know it would work?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Peter,
    Actually What I had done in using HTML tags in the title is "what I had followed your instruction in blog". I do not know that this is a new thing for you because this is also my very first time to use italic in blog writing.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ai,
    I thought they only worked in comments.
    But after this happy accident, I've tried it out and found that they also work in titles, which is useful to know.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Ai, thank you for sharing such an interesting news. It's not easy to decide if the decision to give the Peace Novel Prize to Liu is fear or not.

    On one hand is evident that chinese's government doesn't respect human rights and the freedom of speech can be payed with a punish of 11 years in jail. It is totally unjust since my point of view. Even so our ideas are bad, the government should let us speech them as long as our behavior is peaceful and we don't incite to violence. On the other hand it sounds very opportunistic gives the prize to a person that fights against the ideas of chinese's government, with which most of western countries disagree nowadays.

    The respond of the chinese's government is out of place. They should allow his wife and family to get the prize; and because they strongly disagree with Norwegian's decision to award the prize to Liu, they could make an international press release showing their supported disagreement. The actual chinese behavior just shows the world the weak point in politics in the asian country. Like Peter said in the comment above, "censorship to maintain ignorance in order to keep their citizens believing what they want" (November 22, 2010 8:29 PM).

    ReplyDelete
  6. I must apologize to the westerner and whoever, that feel oppose to my comment.

    In the past, 100 years ago, western countries colonized Asian by armament. Nowadays, the west attempt to control Asian by the word "Human right" and "Democracy". (I'm not Communist, I also support them)

    Both of them might bring peace, but my question is that Do you think we are ready for them? In Thailand, for example, we have fought for democracy. But when we got it, we destroy the system by corruption. Today, the democracy in Thailand is seem to be a battle between 2 politic parties, which always refer to Human right. If someone didn't agree with government, the could wear colour shirt and demonstrate everywhere.

    I do not read into the detail of this news and do not know why Liu Xiaobo was detained. (let's me guess. He criticize Chinese government and try to published democratic idea.) However, I believe that Chinese government have done the right thing and they can handle the country. The evident is all of Chinese people have a job. Moreover, the country economic have become stronger and stronger. for the reason, Uncle SAM really want to intervene them. In my opinion, Communism may be suitable for China.

    ReplyDelete
  7. It is interesting ideas. It reminds me to the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991 which awarded to Aung San Suu Kyi. It sounds good for the word "Human right" and gives support to person who dedicate himself/herself to build up peace and never give up. By contrast, it looks like a tool of Uncle SAM. Sometimes I think they gave prize to Aung San Suu Kyi, because they want to participate and spread power in Burma. They pretend to be a good world policeman but actually The US want something or natural resource from Burma. In case of Liu Xiaobo, he does a good job but it seems the same as Aung San Suu Kyi. The US want to do something with China so China starts to become more powerful in economic world and dangerous competitor with the US.

    ReplyDelete
  8. For level 5, economics, including the effects of international trade on developed and developing nations is coming soon. We might like to revisit this thought provoking post by Ai then.

    But in the meantime, please keep arguing; it's a good thing.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I would like to ask Pop and Nk: is really US behind the decision to give the prize to Liu? I mean, the Novel Peace Prize in decided by The Norwegian Novel Committee, whose members are 5 norwegian citizens.

    You are totally right with the idea that US want to do something since China has become stronger and stronger. United State's government has always feel terror with the word communism . I like the idea of communism, but seems like it has became an utopian form of government since it did't really work in our world historical examples: Cuba, URRS... The thing is, nowadays China has a philosophy of free market and capitalism, same as most of western countries. This economic principles are exactly the opposite than communism proposes. Why should the government keep this politic system if the communist principles are not followed? Do you think that maybe it is because they want to keep having the power?

    I don't know if a democratic system would help the country and keep the economic's successful evolution which is making of China the first power economy of the world. Or do you think that maybe it is better keeps the communist regimen, even if the human rights are violated?

    ReplyDelete
  10. This issue is controversial. Normally, I always skip political topic, but this time I realize that I make a big mistake.

    I don't know much about the Novel Peace Prize. Thank you for enlightening me that the Novel Peace Prize is decided by The Norwegian Novel Committee. So, I started looking for more detail and i found that the members of the organization are:

    1) Thorbjørn Jagland: the Prime Minister of Norway from 1996 to 1997, and later as Minister of Foreign Affairs from 2000 to 2001.
    2) Kaci Kullmann Five
    3) Ã…got Valle
    4) Inger-Marie Ytterhorn
    5) Sissel Rønbeck

    They are politician. According to Background Note: Norway*, under subtopic "U.S.-NORWAY RELATIONS", the article stated that "The United States and Norway enjoy a long tradition of friendly association." and "The two countries enjoy an active cultural exchange, both officially and privately." So, my presumption is that US partly involve with the process.

    I also agree with David that communism has bad history as you examples. In China, the system still work quite well as the evidence is Chinese economic has became stronger and stronger.

    Free market and capitalism are oppose to communism proposes. I has less knowledge in this realm. In my point of view, I classify free market and colonialism as economical term and I put "the communism" in the political context. And the policy in term of free trade, in my vision, is the the evolution of new communism system.

    *http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3421.htm#relations

    ReplyDelete
  11. This issue is controversial. Normally, I always skip political topic, but* this time I realize that I make a big mistake.

    Changing to and

    I make a mistake about involving with this topic.

    ReplyDelete
  12. David (November 23, 2010 11:06 AM )

    I agree with your points.The Norwegian Novel Committee compose of 5 norwegian citizens. But I do not chage my mind 100%. According to Financial Management of the Nobel Foundation, they divide type of asset in 3 parts such as share investments, interest-bearing investments and alternative investments and in the first view, I look at the highest market value of invested capital. The highest value is 24% (Dec. 31, 2009) by the United States investment. It means the US is the important supporting. That why I do not beleive 100%.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I totally agree with China's government decision and also, I think China is proper to be "commnunism". If they permit Liu's family to go for Nobel's prize, a number of chinese who is ready to oppose their government will appear and gather until unable control. As you know, there are a lot of people in China, and their economy is rapidly growing. Many people in China have to be competitive in job market in their country and arond the world, but a number of them has no job. They can survive, have somthing for food and home for sleep because of their government. To control a lot of people somtimes need to use severe law and rules. If they want tidy and peaceful society in their country, they will be "communism". At least, I appreciate China and Chinese government, for they know to adapt themselves to be in global rules in some case. They learn to improve their system from Soviet which was pure communism and did not want to adapt themselves until they were out of control. Surely, many people around the world don't like communism system in which human right doesn't appear.

    ReplyDelete
  14. In addition, neither communism nor democratism is purpose of living. Personally, we are always among democratic and communist system everyday. If we thought command or order is communist system because they control everything by using rule and command, wherever or whatever would be interfered by communism. Thus, why we can be?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Pop, I agree with you. I don't like to discuss about politics. It use to be the kind of discussion which doesn't go anywhere. It's very difficult to convince someone to change his main about politics principles. But I like the discussion, because we are learning sharing our knowledge in this field.

    After read your and Nk's comment I realize that US provably has influence in the decision of the Novel Prize. I don't know in which measure, since the committee is still formed by norwegian politicians.

    Pop, in your comment (November 24, 2010 12:37 AM) you tell us ". . . I put "the communism" in the political context. And the policy in term of free trade, in my vision, is the evolution of new communism system." It is difficult separates politic of economy in the definition of communism. The communism theory is based in many principles: classless society, collective ownership of the means of production, end of private property... As you can realize, all of them have a big relation with economy. In your vision, China is building a new communist system since they changed their economic system. I agree in that China has changed his economic system, but because these changes contradict the communist principles I can not call it an evolution. I would say that China has become as capitalist as ever.

    A, China has a difficult paper in the world nowadays. Financially China became an important part of the global economy; however, politicly the contrast is evident compared with the rest of the big economic powers in the world. Decide what is better for the chinese citizens and the country is very difficult. In your comment (November 24, 2010 8:59 AM), you tell us the advantages of the politic system in China, which I agree in part. Let me point some disadvantages too.

    One thing that the chinese government still control 100% is the media. In this way the government can keep the citizens believing what the government want. The censure is evident in any field; for example, facebook is not allowed. The people must be very careful about to say what they think. 106,000 officials were found guilty of corruption in 2009, how we can read in the article "Corruption up among China government officials" from BBC News in http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8448059.stm. This is the result of an authoritarian politic system for many years.

    Sorry but I have not more time to support my ideas since I don't want to be late in Peter's class again ^_^

    ReplyDelete
  16. Thank you all for your response, discussion and giving more informations for this topic. Through your opinion, I understand more the political situation over the world.

    I agree with David that we learn from each other through discussion although we dislike the topic.

    Politics is a sensitive topic in the communist countries. The citizen of these countries have to be very careful in their political discussion. Thailand is a democratics country so that I feel more open to discuss about this topic.

    ReplyDelete
  17. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Oh, my Bhuddha! I typed a lot of opinions, but something missed while I was sending. all my comments were lost.

    David
    There are a lot of disadvantages in China about communism system. For example, Cheniese can't belong to bequest from their parents, such as home and area. Although they are millionares, they can't buy a lot of houses then give them their son or daughter. When parents are died, the government will retake their home and area then give them a new family. Surely, nobody likes this act.

    However, the family who gets home and area from the government will be happy and appreciate that act certainly.

    About Facebook, as much as I know, the government ever gave people freedom to join social network, but someone provoked and criticised the role of government in a bad way. Moreover, those guys tried to gather people who agree and accept their opinion to oppose the government. Thus, the government needed to destroy and stop action before it might not be controled further. It's a disadvantage of communism system, but we can also percieve that action in democratic country especially Thailand.

    Moreover, I don't think China control 100% of media because they always produce TV show, plays, movie and so on. I think and believe all contries around the world control media surely, but it's depend on the percentage that they hold. Media is modern communication and be able to approach people easily, so it's impossible that every government will give full freedom to whoever in each country.

    Therefore, pure commonism or democratic cannot be longer without adaptation to global action. China tried to bring a good thing from democratic system then they adapt and change it until it's suitable for their country though core system is communism.

    Certainly, it's not nice to find any corruption in any country. Personnaly, if China is democratic country, corruption will be severe more than it is at the moment.

    Why do I think that? They are a big country and have a lot of people, and also their economy is growing up continuously and rapidly. Lots of budget will be divided then distributed into every state and province for development. It would be easy to corrupt or recieve bribery from everyone who deals every project with the government's organization if they were democratic country.

    In democratic system, every inquiry or investigation about bribery and corruption will be progressed slowly, and sometimes be stopped process without any reason, and also it's hard to judge a one who is suspected in corruption case. They need to collect evidence enough to accuse that one. In Thailand, some case has been spent time almost 20 years then government's officer cannot judge and punish anyone though we surely know that one corrupted.

    On the other hand, as much as I know, Chinese government judge and punish everyone who is suspected and accused and also they have more confident that one has mistake surely. It's quite hard to find corruption in China.

    Personally, I don't like communism system, but I appreciate Chinese government that they learn to pick good point of democratic system then adapt themselves to suitable for global.

    ReplyDelete

Before you click the blue "Publish" button for your first comment on a post, check ✔ the "Notify me" box. You want to know when your classmates contribute to a discussion you have joined.

A thoughtful response should normally mean writing for five to ten minutes. After you state your main idea, some details, explanation, examples or other follow up will help your readers.

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.