Radio Free Asia-A Conduit For China’s Disinformation On Tibet

RFA Tibetan Service Director Kalden Lodoe

Image: print-screen

A question. Why is Mr Kalden Lodoe, Tibetan Director of Radio Free Asia (Tibetan Service) approving from his colleagues output such as this?

“And in March 2008, a riot in Lhasa followed the suppression by Chinese police of four days of peaceful Tibetan protests and led to the destruction of Han Chinese shops in the city and deadly attacks on Han Chinese residents. The riot then sparked a wave of mostly peaceful protests against Chinese rule that spread across Tibet and into Tibetan-populated regions of western Chinese provinces.” (emphasis added) Source: RFA-Tibetan Pilgrim Sees Restrictions, Heavy Police Presence in Lhasa 2018-08-31

You would be forgiven on reading the quote above to wonder if it had been written by an official within China’s Ministry Of Foreign Affairs, or its propaganda channel, Xinhua news. Why do we say this?

The syntax used has a striking similarity with terminology used by official Chinese sources. The description as ‘a riot’ of the Tibetan response to a brutal oppression in Lhasa during 2008 is precisely the narrative used by China’s regime at that time. Seeking to denigrate and misrepresent Tibetans as rioters, engaged in criminal behavior, while conveninently ignoring the legitimate protests against China’s illegal and vicious rule. The reference to ‘deadly attacks on Han Chinese residents‘ is also borrowed from China’s disinformation on those demonstrations.

The closing sentence concludes by endorsing the fact-free claims of China’s regime regarding Tibetan territory by repeating their propaganda: ‘…that spread across Tibet and into Tibetan-populated regions of western Chinese provinces.’ The so-called western Chinese provinces referred to in reality are the traditional Tibetan regions of Amdo and Kham.

So if Chinese propagandists did not write such baseless drivel who did? Well the people responsible are employed by Radio Free Asia (Tibetan Service) in Washington DC. A body influenced and controlled by the State Department, via the US Agency For Global Media. There is also, so some have discussed, a pro-China sway within the organization, ultimately though the English version of such reports  is down to a Richard Finney.  An individual who consistently features such misleading and toxic propaganda into reports on Tibet, betcha his State Department controllers must be very pleased with his contributions. After all they have for decades appeased China’s bogus claim over Tibet!

Why World ‘Leaders’ Are Culpable Of Crimes Against Tibet

Turning A Blind Eye

Image: voxcdn

No genocide exists in a vacuum and while responsibility can often be justly placed upon an originating tyranny, be it China’s regime, the Khymer Rouge, or dictators such as Stalin and Hitler the atrocities and oppression which spring from such fascistic authority are often enabled and tolerated by the political and economic interests of other states. Some go further of course and encourage and fund state-terrorism, we need only to assess the history between the CIA and Pol Pot to realize that ethics can be relegated below geo-strategic requirements. Sure the Western Allies went to war against the Nazis, but there was much appeasement, indifference and indeed financial, as well as academic cooperation with Hitler’s Germany that took place. Would the horrors that came to define Germany during that period have been prevented or significantly reduced had the world presented, from the rise of Hitler, a unified and determined stance against fascism?

Of course it was not in the political and more importantly commercial interest of countries to destablize relations with Germany in the years prior to the Second World War. Yet they were aware of the accounts of labor-camps, forced-sterilization laws and growing persecution of Gypsies and Jews, but took vitually no action. Such economically driven apathy sent a clear signal to the Nazis that the wider world cared so little of such reports as to be interpreted as an acceptance of their vicious campaign of suppression.

A similar theatre of callousness is emboldening the Chinese regime while Tibetans, Uyghurs, Mongolians, and Manchurians are suffering a genocidal assault against their cultural and national identity. Concentration camps are housing up to a million Uyghurs, existing in a dark misery, abused and indoctrinated with the approved ideology of China’s totalitarian authority. Human rights violations mostly ignored, the eradication of Tibetan and Uyghur culture barely mentioned, apart from the occasional platitude from a United Nations official or carefully worded report. Global media too facilitates the odious excesses of dictator Xi Jinpeng, its reportage, with far too few notable and sadly isolated examples, preoccupied with a narrative that in-the-main avoids or treads very softly on the nature and extent of tyranny that characterizes China’s policies towards Tibet and East Turkestan.

What’s behind such engineered disinterest? The political and financial concerns of states which have long elevated trade interests with China above unease on human rights and the brutal denial of freedom being witnessed against Tibetans and Uyghurs. What’s been a global scramble to profit from the opportunities of a Chinese market has resulted in a dilution of foreign policy anxieties on China and almost extinction of ethical structuring of such protocols. When governments issue bland and acutely worded cautions on human rights related issues on China their target audience is not the vile and corrupted terrorists of the Chinese regime, but a domestic one. Better show folks at least some pretence of valuing the principles we  make so much noise about as exemplifying our national values on liberty, justice and rights. These of course are being trampled into the dust by China’s paramilitary as they inflict measures of control and abuse that Himmler’s SS would have recognized!

Yet it is largely silence that dominates the global response, as business, media corporations and politicians grovel to Beijing, signalling to China that in real terms they are unconcerned by the harrowing atrocities and war of genocide against Tibetan and Uyghur culture. Like their Twentieth Century counterparts their greed-driven indifference makes them complict enablers of the harrowing crimes being perpetrated against the people of occupied Tibet, East Turkestan and China itself.

Marriot Hotels Fire Employee For Liking A Tweet From A Pro-Tibetan Independence Organization

Image:archivenet

So get this…Marriot hotels is reportedly firing one of its employees for…..liking a tweet posted in support of Tibet by a (cough) group promoting Tibetan independence. REPORT HERE

Let’s all let that sink in shall we?  In that story we can see with brilliant clarity the current relationship between corporations and China, ever desperate to appease and placate the Chinese regime in the hope of securing more blood-stained profits. What’s that about the right to freedom-of-speech you say? Sure, once upon a time way back when the internet had no commercials and was viewed on a glowing green monitor! Today censorship and state intrusion is ever encroaching, while companies such as Marriot demonstrate a callous indifference on issues of human rights or employees freedom of expression. Welcome to 2018!

Donald Trump Praises Dictator Xi Jinping As “Highly Respected”

Image: anzeiger

During a speech given 11/10/2017 before his departure from China President Trump described Xi Jinping as being “…a highly respected and powerful representative of his people.”. (Source: https://globalnews.ca/news/3853907/donald-trump-praise-xi-jinping-chinese-leader/)

By whom? was our first reaction. The USA? Seems to us a little clarification is required on this, after all if the Chinese leader is indeed ‘respected’ then what precisely is being accorded such approbation? It’s unlikely Donald Trump was referring to a personal quality of China’s President, we can though be sure his comment was in praise of Xi’s political leadership.

Let’s take a moment here to reflect on that. The President of the United States, an albeit dysfunctional nation yet built upon principles of individual liberty and democracy, is openly admiring a totalitarian dictator, unelected by the people of China. A man who presides over the world’s most repressive regime. Under which censorship, torture, forced-labor camps and executions ensure that Xi Jinping and his Communist Chinese Party maintain total control.

Image: zeenews

Unless of course Trump’s remark was cosmetic posturing, a diplomatic nicety, which both parties inwardly recognize as such. However, in singling out Xi Jinping for such a compliment the President is saying that he cares little for China’s harrowing record on human rights or the brutal oppression of Tibetans. Indeed his comment, if taken to its logical conclusion, is essentially approving such violations, since Xi Jinping, his political ideology and political regime is responsible for the long and dark list of atrocities which blights China and occupied lands such as Tibet and East Turkestan.

We reckon some clarity is in order on this matter and we’ll be contacting the Whitehouse and State Department to get a response. You can help too. Why not ask your Senator to raise the following question:

‘Does the President consider the leadership of Xi Jinping to be a dictatorship and if so would he explain his description of the Chinese leader as “highly respected”

Send it online via https://www.senate.gov/senators/contact/

Readers from other countries of our site could present a similar question to their representative

China’s Regime Extending Its Corrosive Grip Over Interpol

China’s Public Security Are State Endorsed Terrorists

Image: archivenet

Meng Hongwei is a loyal member of China’s Communist Party, since November 2016 he has has also been the President of Interpol, the global policing partnership. An election greeted with considerable alarm among human rights groups, which were justly concerned his appointment would lead to abuse of the organization’s powers to issue international arrest warrants. Particular targets would of course be those voices of dissent against the Chinese regime. Which while terrorizing Tibetans, torturing Uighurs and vicously oppressing its own people is cynically branding protesters against its tyranny as terrorists.

Meng Hongwei Authorizes Torture & Oppression of Dissidents Of Chinese Regime While Heading Interpol

Image: chinanews

It’s an irony off of the scale for sure. Meanwhile the world’s most repressive state, which maintains its power through forced labor camps, torture, executions and censorship has its Deputy Minister Of Public Security (the very department that inflicts such violations) leading Interpol!

Meng Hongwei’s paramilitary police guilty of abuses against Uighurs in East Turkistan

Image: archivenet

This week Beijing is hosting Interpol’s annual assembly and Meng Hongwei will be ensuring that ‘terrorism’ is given prominence on the agenda. No doubt his keynote speech will receive warm applause from international police representatives. It will also please the Chinese regime which is slyly seeking to legitimize (and manipulate global political opinion) its oppressive actions in East Turkistan as a just response to what it claims are terrorists. They would expect nothing less of their ideological colleague, who during a briefing of a Chinese police unit being dispatched to Syria during 2014 advised them to place:

“Politics first, party organization first and ideological thinking first.” (Source: New York Times November 10, 2016)

China draping its flag and influence all over Interpol

Image: interpolhq

How such thinking complies with and respects the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which Interpol is supposed to uphold as a core value, is difficult to understand. If anything it suggests that Meng Hongwei has a clear conflict of interest. While his position as a Chinese Minister presiding over a department which systematically inflicts a range of abuses makes a mockery of any claim that Interpol is commited to human rights principles.

Cambridge University Press Censors Publications To Appease Chinese Regime

Image:archivenet

Cambridge University has a tradition of accommodating the Chinese regime, we need only to recall a willingness of Trinity College to host in 2013 prominent members of China’s Ministry of Public Security. On the condition from conference organizers that no mention of human rights or issues such as Tibet were permitted!

Now the University is embroiled in another China-linked controversy, as Cambridge University Press (CUP) has conformed to a demand from the Chinese authorities to block online access to journals and other data. Unsurprisingly the subject areas targeted for such censorship include Tiananmen, the so-called Cultural Revolution, Tibet, East Turkistan, Hong Kong, and Taiwan.

In response to the international concern and outrage which has followed CUP has issued a statement which contains the following:

“The issue of censorship in China…is not short term issue and therefore requires a longer term approach.….we will continue to take every opportunity to influence this agenda”. Emphasis added. (tweeted by @CambridgeUP 8/8/2017)

Such a response has a worrying similarity to comments drafted by the British equivalent of the State Department, which also masks its appeasement of China with arguments of ‘constructive engagement’ and being a ‘force of moderation’. In truth however such change never materializes, the human rights atrocities continue, forced labor camps flourish, women forcibly sterilized, while Tibetans are brutally denied their cultural and national freedom.

Cambridge University Press is hiding behind the same self-serving justification, yet in doing so it is in contradiction to the values of human rights and freedom of thought it claims to champion.

“Freedom of thought and expression underpin what we as publishers believe in..” (tweeted by @CambridgeUP 8/8/2017)

Really? From where most reasonable and intelligent folks are standing CPU looks to be in an indefensible position. Being actively complicit in censorship on the inane suggestion that at some undetermined future point its engagement with China’s regime can realize ‘progress’. Meanwhile blood-stained cash from China continues to fund the world of academia and Cambridge University no doubt benefits from its more than cordial relations with the Chinese authorities and numerous companies and institutions!