By Grace Lee October 2010
Beijing – Although some of the country’s intellectuals hailed it, the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize awarded to imprisoned dissident Liu Xiaobo is considered a conspiracy by Western countries to impose their values on China by many young, well-educated Chinese.
“It’s a joke, a bigger joke than the one given to Obama,” said Rao Jin, founder of the Web forum Anti-CNN.com, referring to the Nobel Peace Prize given to U.S. President Barack Obama in 2009, at a time his nation was at war in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Rao, known for defending China’s stances on issues like Tibet and the Xinjiang region against Western media criticism, added that Western countries had the same motive for awarding the prize to Liu as for the one to Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader, in 1989.
Du Star, a graduate student majoring in international relationship and diplomacy at Beijing Foreign Studies University, said Western countries were making trouble for China. “Our country still faces a severe international environment. China’s rise will certainly harm some countries’ interests. Therefore, how to slow down China’s development and make China entail more responsibilities is what those countries are pursuing.”
To Guo Hui, a law school student at Peking University, the Peace Prize is the feedback from Western society on past political events in China, including the pro-Democracy protests in Tiananmen Square in 1989.
“They still feel indignant about the 1989 protests,” Guo said. “Of course the sympathy for democracy activists is a factor. But more importantly, they are trying to westernize China through indoctrinating Chinese public with their values.”
Guo added, “Fundamentally it is not the Nobel Committee alone that made the decision. Western governments were behind the scene!”
The Nobel Peace Prize is given annually to the person who “shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses,” according to the will of Alfred Nobel, founder of the prize.
The first Chinese to receive the prize was the Dalai Lama, who was the laureate in 1989 after mainland’s bloody crackdown on the Tiananmen Square protests. Last year, the prize went to Obama, which sparked a big controversy.
The Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded this year’s Peace Prize to Liu for his “long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in China.” Liu is serving an 11-year prison term on subversion charges for co-authoring Charter 08, a manifesto signed by over 350 Chinese intellectuals and human rights activists to promote political reform and democratization in China. The announcement of the Peace Prize caused international calls for Liu’s release.
Speaking of Liu’s way of political reform, Du expressed suspicion. “The Chinese society just hasn’t reached the level to adopt the kind of democracy promoted by Liu Xiaobo,” said Du. “I think his ideas are not practical. For today’s China, concentration of powers is still a better choice, and it is good for economic development.”
Rao said China’s reform during the past thirty years is a dual process of economic reform and political reform. “It is undeniable that political reform in China lags behind its economic growth, but that doesn’t mean we didn’t conduct political reform. Anyone who has a thorough understanding of China’s basic social model before reform will know that the 30-year reform is by no means merely an economic reform separated from political development,” he said.
“The prize may provoke some serious thinking about the issue by Chinese leaders, but it may not be that significant. After all, not many Chinese really know Liu,” Rao added.
When asked why most of the China’s future elite denounced the prize as a conspiracy, Qiao Mu, a journalism professor at Beijing Foreign Studies University, attributed it to “political-oriented, one-side-informed education and economy-growth-driven nationalism.”
Professor Qiao also spoke about the influence of Liu’s winning the prize. “It is a new hit, but life will go on as it is. It might change the headline of the press, but it can hardly change China and the world, particularly in the time when China has the richest and most powerful government in the world,” he said.
Grace's Blog 