Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

ForeignPolicy

How San Francisco Became Beijing for a Day

By Josh Schrei, AlterNet. Posted April 10, 2008.


Police roamed the streets, first amendment rights were ignored. Were San Francisco officials taking notes from the People's Republic of China?
Advertisement

Democracy took a dive in San Francisco yesterday.

Earlier this week, the International Olympic Committee was considering scrapping the entire Olympic torch run due to the controversy and protests surrounding it. Apparently, PR-value and face-saving prevailed over common sense, and rather than cancel the contentious run, the IOC, the City of San Francisco, and the Chinese government collaborated to make the run happen in the only way possible -- they transformed the City into Beijing for a day.

At first I watched with mild amusement as police officers, secret service, and Chinese officials went to comical lengths to disguise the torch route and prevent protesters from approaching. Like something out of a Dr. Seuss book, the torch was hurriedly moved from one mode of transportation to the next, from boat to van to ... Duck Truck? However, my amusement soon gave way to anger, as the charade developed into an ugly display of first amendment violations and thuggish police tactics, and everything the City of San Francisco stands for was trampled on. People's Armed Police -- the same force implicated in the shootings of unarmed Tibetans on the Tibet-Nepal border -- roamed freely through the streets. Tibetans with flags were forced to vacate public gathering spaces while Chinese nationals were allowed to remain. A phalanx of riot cops -- five deep -- guarded the torch at every step, shoving protesters out of the way.

For a city like San Francisco, with a colorful history of free speech and protest, this was a disgrace.

But far more disturbing is the apparent message that the IOC has taken from the controversy around the torch run. The approach that any rational democratic nation or institution would have taken this week would be to deeply consider whether running a torch through a city in an ultimately meaningless -- sorry Mr. Rogge -- PR exercise is worth putting people's lives in danger, spending millions of taxpayer dollars, and fanning an already contentious global situation. Any rational institution would have decided that it isn't worth it, that plans should be altered, and the controversial issue directly addressed.

Apparently the lesson that the IOC took from all the controversy is the exact opposite: that controversy can be obfuscated with propaganda and staged stunts, and that a massive military presence can prevent detractors and give the illusion of 'calm.'

How very PRC.

The entire charade yesterday was a perfect microcosm for the situation in Tibet. The illusion of normalcy is conveyed through elaborate PR machinations and military lockdown. The truth of the situation is secondary to the image that is portrayed to the outside world.

This charade isn't news to Tibetans; it has been status quo in Tibet for years. What's news is that the IOC and City of San Francisco have apparently been taking notes, and, in the words of Tibetan activist Tenzin Dorjee: 'We're not changing China, China's changing us.'

That is frightening indeed.

The IOC has indicated that the rest of the international torch run will go through as planned. They are meeting in Beijing today to discuss whether to continue with plans to run the torch through TIbet. I'm not sure if the 'apolitical' IOC fully grasps that they are on the verge of creating an international political crisis. People around the world have shown little tolerance for China's torch run in free nations; the international community will not easily stomach the sight of the torch being paraded through downtown Lhasa accompanied by tanks and PLA army squads. The Governor of the Tibet said yesterday that anyone attempting to disrupt the torch would be dealt with "harshly and with no leniency." Activists groups have indicated that they will hold the IOC responsible for any Tibetan detentions or deaths that occur.

The IOC still has time to rescue itself from this firestorm and prevent an international incident. The way is clear. No Torch through Tibet.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: olympic torch run, international olympic com, san francisco, tibet, china



Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Let the Europeans do this
Posted by: g50 on Apr 10, 2008 2:18 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
China is an important nation which does not deserve to be scapegoated. Yes, there should be a policy to encourage China's government to enact more humane policies. However, China's path to broader and deeper respect to human rights is a path through markets and international cooperation - a bunch of richie politically active yahoos abroad aren't going to do anything - except for reinforce the perception among the Chinese that they are being unfairly targeted.

As for police measures, I think people can determine what they think is the truth without - it is arrogant to say, "oh, they are suppressing the truth which they can only get from enlightened protesters who apparently had time off from work to shout slogans at the Olympic committee people!" The police were protecting the people who are doing the torch procession from violence. I am quite confident that the anti-Chinese viewpoint is not censored in the United States. Quite the opposite.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Show must go on!
Posted by: Cathyc on Apr 10, 2008 2:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is all about Big Business, and sport is just another means to that Very Profitable end.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Clueless
Posted by: martijoyce on Apr 10, 2008 3:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This writer doesn't know what he's talking about. There was some violence. The Chinese embassy actually bussed in Chinese from all over the Bay Area. To continue would most likely have resulted in a lot more violence. The Mayor acted accordingly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Beijing bucks and a corporate agenda in San Francisco? Say it isn't so...
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Apr 10, 2008 4:17 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, the city that stuck big corporate labels on all their sports stadiums (3Com Park? Monster Cable Stadium? AT&T Domestic Spying BallPark?) bowed down before China's wishes.

All around the Bay Area there used to be active small manufacturing - sewing work and the like. The pay wasn't great, but it did employ a lot of people in jobs that had benefits.

What did the owners of all those companies do? Packed up their factories and moved them off to China to be operated in state-run sweatshops, thereby reducing their labor costs by 95% - glory be. There are a lot of quite cozy relationships between some of those importers and the Chinese Party apparatchiks, who have smoothly dropped their communist ideology for the new glories of capitalism, while their position of authoritarian power remains unchanged.

The corporate interests who rely on cheap Chinese labor also rely on an authoritarian Chinese state to keep those labor costs low (and let's also recall that ~1/3 of China's pollution is due to their export factories). And, surprise surprise, major corporate interests have major sway over San Francisco politicians, who are thus relatively eager to maintain a semblance of polite cooperation with China, as any well-mannered slave-owning Southern aristocrat would understand.

However, the Olympics are not really the best venue for protest - they're supposedly dedicated to "human endeavor & achievement" as well as a symbol of "peaceful international competition" - but let's face it, the Olympics is as much of a sham as corporate sports in the U.S. has become. Advertising deals now take precedence over all else (and Burson-Marsteller, of Mark Penn, Big Tobacco, and similar fame, is leading the pack there). Athletes pull down million-dollar contracts for pimping consumer products. Winning isn't about a gold medal, it's about a golden contract - and anything goes, leading to non-stop drug testing and monitoring of athletes - the whole thing has become a farce.

Of course the police are doing their best to do what the politicians want them to do. Orders from on high, right? The situation in Seattle in 1999 was no different.

I think this all does explain why China is so paranoid about Tibet, however. There are many other regions and people in China that are sick of the corrupt and authoritarian regime that still rules China, and would like to see it replaced by democracy. Neither the U.S. nor the Chinese elites would benefit by that - U.S. corporations would lose their cheap labor pool, and the children of the Communist Party bosses would lose their privilege and power. Thus, if Tibet wins a degree of autonomy from Beijing, many others will want the same.

To see footage on the ground in Tibet, see This Report. That's taking place outside Tibet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Tibet, China, and the National Endowment for Democracy
Posted by: chlamor on Apr 10, 2008 5:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The International Campaign for Tibet (ICT) was founded in 1988 and is a non-profit membership organization with offices in Washington, DC, Amsterdam, Berlin and Brussels. Their website notes that they “fundamentally believe that there must be a political solution based on direct dialogue between the Dalai Lama and his representatives and the People’s Republic of China.” ICT received their first NED grant (of the 1990s) in 1994 to:

“…enhance Chinese knowledge of Tibet by contributing articles about Tibet to newspapers and magazines within China and abroad; translating books about Tibet into Chinese; and facilitating a series of discussion meetings among key Chinese and Tibetan figures, focusing on bringing Chinese journalists and pro-democracy leaders together with Tibetan leaders in exile.”

Since then, the ICT has received regular support from the NED, obtaining subsequent grants in 1997, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003 (all for media work except the 1997 grant). Like many groups that obtain NED aid, ICT are not afraid to boast of their ‘democratic’ connections, and in 2005 they even awarded one of their annual Light of Truth awards to the president of the NED, Carl Gershman. Furthermore, the year before (in 2004) ICT gave the same award to both Vaclav Havel (who had received the NED’s Democracy Award in 1991, and serves on the advisory board of the Project on Justice in Times of Transition), and also to one of the earliest ‘democracy promoting’ organizations, the Friedrich Naumann Foundation. (For a summary of the key ‘democratic’ connections of the Project on Justice in Times of Transition and all the other groups mentioned in this article see, Barker (2007) Hijacking Human Rights: A Critical Examination of Human Rights Watch’s Americas Branch and their Links to the ‘Democracy’ Establishment. Due to this article’s heavy reliance on internet sources most links have been omitted from the paper, however, a fully referenced paper can be obtained from the author upon request.)

Some of ICT’s directors are also integral members of the ‘democracy promoting’ establishment, and include Bette Bao Lord (who is the chair of Freedom House, and a director of Freedom Forum), Gare A. Smith (who has previously served as principal deputy assistant secretary in the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor), Julia Taft (who is a former director of the NED, the former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State and Special Coordinator for Tibetan Issues, has worked for USAID, and has also served as the President and CEO of InterAction), and finally, Mark Handelman (who is also a director of the National Coalition for Haitian Rights, an organization whose work is ideologically linked to the NED’s longstanding interventions in Haiti). The ICT’s board of advisors also presents two individuals who are closely linked to the NED, Harry Wu, and Qiang Xiao (who is the former executive director of the NED-funded Human Rights in China). Like their board of directors, ICT’s international council of advisors includes many ‘democratic’ notables like Vaclav Havel, Fang Lizhi (who in 1995 – at least – was a board member of Human Rights in China), Jose Ramos-Horta (who serves on the international advisory board for the Democracy Coalition Project), Kerry Kennedy (who is a director of the NED-funded China Information Center), Vytautas Landsbergis (who is an international patron of the British-based neoconservative Henry Jackson Society – see Clark, 2005), and until her recent death, the “mid-wife of the neocons” Jeane J. Kirkpatrick (who was also linked to ‘democratic’ groups like Freedom House and the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies).

Link

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Terrorist
Posted by: HeKnew on Apr 10, 2008 5:55 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
China is what America will be like after the GOP tears up the Constitution


Direct Democracy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What goes around comes around
Posted by: carbon-based on Apr 10, 2008 6:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't see how it's someones right to destroy property, and act in a potentially threatening manner. I'm no fan of SF but they got what they deserve..police crackdown..At least they showed they have some degree of common sense and can act to curb threatening protest.

I'm waiting for China to protest America and demand we give back stolen land to the american natives!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What goes around comes around Posted by: martijoyce
» RE: What goes around comes around Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: What goes around comes around Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: What goes around comes around Posted by: ALANHESTER
» RE: What goes around comes around Posted by: carbon-based
Has this writer lived in Beijing?
Posted by: Dyolfknip on Apr 10, 2008 8:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ok, I know that on this site saying anything even remotely pro Chinese is probably a death knell but I feel that things are not so black and white when it comes to China.

I can ride my skateboard in Beijing and not get arrested, I can (if I want to) drink alcohol in public, I can (if I wish) make food at a roadside stall and sell it without interference and I can choose weather or not to buy what is possibly contaminated food, I can ride a bike and forget my helmet not having to worry about being fined, I can jaywalk, I can bargain for goods, I can buy imitation designer clothes and not have to pay the exaggerated price (not that I do, but I could), I do not need to be worried about being robbed, I am free to do something stupid and suffer the consequences. Our freedoms in North America are tempered by control of almost every facet of our daily lives.... just think for a moment how often it occurs to you that you may get fined for something you just did...

Beijing is one of the freest cities I have ever lived in, putting aside that people in China are not allowed the inconsequential right of protesting their government . What do I mean by inconsequential? let me elaborate: Consider for a moment what has happened any time over the last two decades in Canada or the USA when people have grouped en-masse to protest the government... Seattle? Quebec city? ring any bells? Sure we have those rights but only on paper and those who use those rights are oft times demonized and marginalized because of exercising those "freedoms". The Chinese government is brutal to be sure but no more so than our "glorious democracies" and our Foreign policies. We are all members of a world community and to call down China for human rights violations is "the pot calling the kettle black." We merely excercize our oppression on a foreign rather than domestic stage.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Thank you.... Posted by: Dyolfknip
» RE: Thank you.... Posted by: ankhet
» Beijing Posted by: meetmeineleusis
When you look at the world
Posted by: drfun on Apr 10, 2008 10:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
through 21 century eyes, it looks rather clear, but this author does not remember history very well.
A Tibetan princess was married to a Ming Emperor over 500 years ago. These types of "marriages" were a means of expanding ones empire, even practiced in medieval Europe.
As for the brute force takeover by the PLA in the 1950's of Tibet, I can't condone it.
How can the U.S. say the same of its overthrow of the kingdom of Hawaii, the Mexican War where the entire south-west U.S. was confiscated not to mention expansion of pre-negotiated founding colonies?
So before you begin casting stones beware of the glass house you live in.
The protesters have a right to demonstrate peacefully, not become a mob and forcefully dictate terms. Their message would have had more impact if they had respected the right of the torch parade to continue unobstructed.
The Bu$h administration has done more damage to the Constitution and your privacy, which should be as meaningful to a citizen than what happens within a sovereign country's borders.
The 1964 Olympics in L.A. happened while the U.S. was in Vietnam, and you didn't hear China demonstrating the atrocities the U.S. committed there.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: When you look at the world Posted by: ALANHESTER
A Somewhat Disappointing Perspective, Coming from Alternet
Posted by: critical.commentary on Apr 11, 2008 2:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have always prized Alternet for its independent, critical and alternative views, but am slightly disappointed that it too has fallen victim to the China-bashing mob-mentality of the western world. For a different perspective on the fraught journey of the Olympic flame, I urge critical thinkers to read the following story http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/4963/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nothing more than Protester Chic
Posted by: ankhet on Apr 11, 2008 2:32 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ah Tibet! Shangri-La! So far away, so romantic and dreamy in the clouds, and all those monks in their pretty saffron outfits spinning their pretty prayer wheels, and the cute little dogs...Can you even find it on a map?

It's a safe bet, isn't it? It's safe to march around with placards arguing for Tibetan liberation. Has anyone examined why this issue is arising now, just before the Olympics?

Not like Gaza at all, is it? We can watch that catastrophe unfold from our comfy chairs and not bat an eyelash.

Ommmmm....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Does AlterNet actually have editors and fact checkers?
Posted by: anthonysfo on Apr 11, 2008 6:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have been a subscriber to AlterNet for years now. However, after this fanciful piece I will have to reconsider whether I can trust anything claimed by a media outlet supposedly charged with monitoring accuracy and fairness in the media.

True, part of SF was transformed into Beijing for a day: the orchestration of nationalistic propaganda at Opening Ceremonies was so egregious as to be comical. However:

* the Torch was never on a boat or on a Duck Truck (Duck Buses were for media -- clearly Alternet did not gain access to one of those Duck Buses!!!!)
* "first amendment violations." Name one. Protesters blocked the pathway of a commercial tour bus on the Embarcadero. Police did not move in for over an hour. People were allowed to move freely up and down the Embarcadero. Large groups of protesters -- representing both sides -- were allowed to take over the Embarcadero in front of the Ferry Building. People were allowed to say and chant and yell and scream anything they wanted. Police did step in a couple of times when the pushing between pro and anti Chinese protesters got testy.
*"thuggish police tactics." name one incident. the police used force along the Torch route when protesters would not step back as ordered. Everyone of us knew going in that the City had made it totally clear that any perceived threat to the Torchbearers would be rebuffed. I watched all the news accounts. I saw some force that may have gone a bit far, but the police were hardly "thuggish."
* "People's Armed Police -- the same force implicated in the shootings of unarmed Tibetans on the Tibet-Nepal border -- roamed freely through the streets." There were PAP in San Francisco? I assume the writer means the so-called "flame attendants." I nor any of my friends never saw any of them roaming freely. Now there were Beijing Olympic officials and Chinese media in the same windbreakers moving freely around -- but isn't that what a free society is supposed to allow?
Also, did anyone else notice that the number of "flame attendants" in SF was far fewer than anywhere else. Looks like SF told Beijing that they COULDN'T let the PAP roam the streets -- even when surrounded by hundreds of US law enforcement officers.
"A phalanx of riot cops -- five deep -- guarded the torch at every step, shoving protesters out of the way. Huh? let's see. there was a row of riot police. then there was a row of motorcycle cops. then there was a bunch of (not in very good shape) police officers on bicycles (it is SF after all!), and a row of police with batons (and very unattractive, knobbly knees) running beside the torch bearers. HARDLY 5 deep of riot specialists.

In short, based on what I saw, SF went to tremendous lengths to let the protesters have their day in the sun. They just made sure that the people carrying the torch were safe and the City did not end up with blood in its own streets.

If SF HAD been Beijing, the original route would have been used. All media access would have been limited. Opposition protesters would have been removed and/or crushed. No contrary views would have been let out into the media. And people would have been disappearing left and right. Some never to be seen again.

In short, AlterNet: check your facts. do some editing. and hold your reporters to some very, very basic standards of responsibility and truthfulness in reporting. We all deserve so much better than what is on display in this rant of an "article".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Balderdash...You've Never Been to Beijing
Posted by: dayahka on Apr 11, 2008 8:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Policemen everywhere, my foot. Civil right down the drain, nonsense. Where on earth did you ever come up with this load of bull--and misinformation? Have you ever been to China? Lived in China? Been to Beijing? Any Chinese city is far, far safer to be in than any city in the US. A country with no gun laws, no hindrances against dangerous dogs, no respect for human life like the US can't compare even marginally with China.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When will Alternet do a fact-check on Tibet?
Posted by: strahlungsamt on Apr 12, 2008 1:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It never ceases to amaze me how supposedly intelligent people are too smart to believe the Pope or Christianity will lap up every word the Dalai Lama utters as absolute truth.

Tibet has been for centuries a slave kingdom. The Dalai Lamas were the World's biggest property holders before

the Chinese booted them out. The rest of the population were slaves and could have their eyes gouged out for not producing enough for their religious masters. Think "The Last Emperor"; that's how the Lamas lived. They were slave masters plain and simple who controlled the entire populaton.

Around 1904, the British "discovered" Tibet. They were fascinated with this "magical" kingdom and started writing fantastic tales about it. Then, in 1933, James Hilton wrote "Lost Horizon" about eternal live at Shangri La and the legend was born.

At the same time, the Nazis were searching for any kind of fake evidence that the "Aryan" people came from a noble caste and Tibet suited their purposes perfectly. Hitler's agent, Heinrich Harrer (played by Brad Pitt int the movie) was the one who taught the Dalai Lama to speak English and educated him in Western ways. Hitler was so impressed by the Tibetans that he took the Swastika as his national emblem. No, that was no coincidence. (The Indiana Jones movies were - very loosely - inspired by this)

Then, the Cold War came along and the Americans were looking for a nice place to launch missiles against the Red Chinese threat. The Himalayas were the perfect spot but unfortunately the Chinese got there first.
And the first thing the Communists did in China was to end the serf system and make all citizens equal. So, no more master/slave relationships anymore.

So now, the poor Dalai Lama is kicked out of his 1000 room palace in Lhasa, had all his slaves confiscated, and has been holed up in a dingy palace in Hawaii with beautiful women for company and nothing to do except write books on compassion and travel the world in comfort.

Yes. I really think this is a guy Alternet should be supporting!


The Shadow of the Dalai Lama. Full book online.
Penn and Teller explain why the Dalai Lama sucks ass
Youtube -Tibet: The Truth (oppression, monks, nuns... you're wrong)

Disclaimer: I am NOT making a case for the Chinese Government who are major Human Rights abusers. Nor am I part of a church or political movement. I am just trying to wake people up to the reality of this evil man and to stop giving him publicity he doesn't deserve.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Boycotting is a two way street
Posted by: Motion on Apr 20, 2008 1:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are many in the West who advocate boycotting Chinese goods to make China submit to Western demands. Well, boycotting is a two way street isn’t it. I hope the Chinese people boycott the hell out of the Western junk that’s imported into China. (Grassroots movements are now springing up all over China to do precisely that.) Westerners are after all the greatest perpetrators of genocide in the world past and present. Let the Westerners get a taste of their own medicine and choke on their own arrogance and hypocrisy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]