Building on the posts about Dui Hua and China's upcoming Olympics, here is a link to Mr. Kamm's organization, Dui Hua, and its role in Chinese policy governing executions and political prisoners and the effect of the Olympics on all of this. The article appeared in Time magazine on June 11, 2007:
An Olympic Reprieve for China's Convicts
A previous post by Aaron Hui from early september (Sudan, China, and the 2008 Olympics) investigated the connection between China, the Olympics, and the genocide in Darfur. This article draws another connection, but this time between China, the Olympics, and human rights within China. Obviously, the Olympics is playing a big role in China's foreign relations.
Read the article, and say what you think!
Some questions to get the brain juices flowing:
1) Do you think that once the Olympics are over and the spotlight is off China, the execution numbers will rise again?
2) Mr. Kamm mentioned that his organization is using the Olympics, not morality, to convince the Chinese government to release prisoners and execute fewer people, but what can they use once the Olympics are over? In the meantime, using the Olympics as insentive is saving lives, but will all their work be for nothing once the Olympics are over (see question 1)?
3) Why is it that governments tend not to listen to reasons based on morality and common humanity, and instead respond to reasons based on economics, the Olympics, and foreign relations? Is this inevitable or a fault of the fundamental idea of government? Is it a fault at all - is it a good thing?
3 comments:
In response to the third question, I think that morality is a much more relative concept that is different for different people and different cultures. Though there are some universally held morals, when attempting to tell many officials of another culture that what they are doing is immoral according to your beliefs, people are less willing to see another's side of the argument. This is why business can be more effective in getting people to comply; it is much more concrete and undeniable that business will succeed or slow down if these conditions are or are not met.
Jordan raises some interesting questions. In response to the first question, whether execution numbers will rise again once the olympics are over, it is really hard to predict. From an optimistic perspective, the Chinese government might become aware of the overall benefits of improving human rights. It may just take a push from other countries through Olympics pressure to get China started on a path toward better treatment.
In response to question two, I don't think there is anything that can be used for pressuring the Chinese government once the Olympics are over. Like Mr. Kamm said, economic pressure is hard to use effectively because China trades with so many different countries. I think people are hoping that changes made through pressure on the Olympics will cause a lasting trend in China. Again, this may just be ignorant optimism. If nothing else, at least some people will benefit for a short period of time between now and the Olympic games. It's better than nothing, right?
Hey guys, in response to your comments and questions... this may sound a little pessismistic, but because China is so powerful, i doubt they will change their ways after the Olympics. If we are going to try to put economic pressure on China, it had better be with a lot more larger trade partners, otherwise, China could do without the US like Michael said. I really think human rights activists should fully take advantage of the Olympics, exposing more and more problems and truths to the public, as China will cover up or clean up their mess for the Olympics. As more and more people know, they may continue to work towards human rights even after the Olympics. However, because China is so far away, do you guys think that working for human rights may be the same situation like the Darfur genocide?
Post a Comment