Log in

View Full Version : It takes an angry village to revolt in rural China



meganmonkey
10-11-2007, 03:25 PM
It takes an angry village to revolt in rural China

Residents occupy seat of local government, fed up with officials selling off communal farmland

XIANTANG VILLAGE, China–After years of simmering suspicion and mounting anger, the citizens of this sleepy south China village of 3,500 decided they weren't going to take it anymore.

They were disturbed by what they saw: local politicians seemed to keep getting richer and everyone else kept falling behind while communally owned farmland kept disappearing beneath commercial developments.

Local citizens wanted to know how these land deals were done and where the proceeds were going.

They had a right to know.

Under law, farmland – unlike urban land – is owned by the community as a whole and regarded as the bedrock of a Chinese peasant's means to make a living.

So on July 2, hundreds of concerned citizens laid siege to Xiantang Village Hall demanding to examine the books.

Today – 101 days later – the citizens are still here.

It may be unprecedented in modern China. Citizens not only accused their leaders of corruption, but drove them from office and continue to occupy the central administration building – a modern five-storey structure now festooned with fiery red banners.

It is an astonishing sight in an authoritarian state.

"SUPPORT GENERAL SECRETARY HU JINTAO'S SPIRIT OF ANTI-CORRUPTION," a 20-metre long banner shouts, invoking the Chinese president's name. "BUILD A HARMONIOUS SOCIETY TOGETHER. FIGHT TO THE END THE CORRUPT OFFICIALS WHO VIOLATE THE PEOPLE'S BENEFITS."

Inside the building a number of citizens have set up basic housekeeping, bringing with them bedding, small stoves and cooking utensils. Others occupy the building only during the day.

One recent afternoon there were about 200 people inside the hall.

A few are in their early 20s. But many are middle-aged and greying, and some are even in their late 80s.

All want a thorough examination of the village committee's dealings and, if wrongdoing is found, they want prosecutions.

In the large and comfortable council chambers, citizens have erected a painting of former leader Mao Zedong.

"Mao granted us this land," citizen Lai Shunyou explains solemnly, seated in one of the upholstered chairs. "And they (the former village committee) sold this land to developers behind our back!"

Lai Jiawen, in his mid-40s, speaks with urgency. "If we don't stand up to them now, there won't be a single piece of land left. We make a living from that land. But now – we have almost nothing."

Nearby, a few of the elderly take seats and lean in, listening intently.

"These old people cry almost every day," says a woman, Li Jianrong.

Corruption involving local government officials and land deals is widespread in China.

The powerful central government has said so openly.

Last month a senior official in the Ministry of Land and Resources announced a nationwide campaign to rein in such corruption.

Gan Zangchun criticized local governments that have "arbitrarily expanded development areas in violation of the master plan," saying the central government is prepared to act. Given that commitment, citizens here can't understand why no government, at any level, has come to their aid.

Even the police have stood back.

As recently as Sept. 21, citizens say, two men associated with the former village committee arrived at council offices and began loading boxes into a minivan preparing to carry them away.

Locals demanded to know what was inside the boxes. When the men said they were "mooncakes" – a traditional Chinese pastry enjoyed during the mid-autumn festival – close to 1,000 citizens blocked the vehicle. They then ripped open the boxes and discovered years of village accounting ledgers inside.

Until then, the villagers had been unable to locate the accounting books.

The records revealed details concerning land trades and factory rents and management fees about which the villagers had known nothing.

"There were millions in revenues – which was news to the villagers," said a short but detailed summary entitled "A Desperate Plea from Xiantang Villagers" compiled by citizens and provided to the Toronto Star.

Citizens called police to report an attempted theft of the accounting books but police said the incident was beyond their jurisdiction.

"The people here were outraged," says Lai Shunyou.

Over the past 100 days, the citizens have sent delegations to ever higher levels of government, appealing for an investigation. They have gone to Longjiang Town, to Shunde District, to Foshan City, to the province of Guangdong and even to the central government's national petitioning office, which hears appeals from citizens in the distant provinces who believe they have been ill-treated by local governments.

None of these offices have offered satisfaction.

A so-called investigation by a team from the town was dismissed by locals as a whitewash.

They point out that no villagers were allowed to participate.

Citizens also complain that news about the events in Xiantang is being blocked.

"No one can hear of the villagers' suffering. Reporters are forbidden to report on it," the citizen's letter says.

None of mainland China's newspapers, which are all state-owned or state-controlled, have reported on the villagers' protest.

Only a single paper in Hong Kong, The Sun, filed a short story in late September.

Meanwhile, without government assistance and without media coverage, citizens say they have now become targets of intimidation and revenge attacks believed to originate from the family and supporters of the politicians driven from power.

They say recent "terrorist incidents" have included a villager being burned out of his home; the assault of a woman in her 60s in front of others at the Village Hall; the pouring of red oil at the front doors of grocery stores and barber shops of those participating in the occupation; and the locking of a citizen's front door with a towel soaked in gasoline.

Villagers believe their lives and safety are under threat.

Still, they continue to guard the village accounts, hopeful that "wise, higher officials" will grant them justice and finally order a thorough investigation.

Meanwhile, an official reached at Longjiang Town this week said he couldn't comment on events at Xiantang Village and referred calls to Shunde's press office. Repeated calls there went unanswered.

And officials at Guangdong province press office declined to respond to questions faxed to them at their request.


http://www.thestar.com/News/article/265581

Kid of the Black Hole
10-11-2007, 03:33 PM
Well this is as good a place as any to follow up:

by Lindsey Hilsum

New Statesman (October 04 2007)


As Burmese pro-democracy activists are rounded up, the west looks to
China to intervene. We are failing to see the seismic changes that
authoritarian capitalism is bringing the world.

In Beijing you might never have known about the saffron revolution that
started with a bang and ended with a whimper in Burma. No pictures of
chanting monks on state-controlled television, no anguished politicians
saying "something must be done". Yet the consensus in Washington and
European capitals was that only China could resolve the crisis.

Over the past year, there have been similar cries about Darfur and
North
Korea. Suddenly China has become what the former US secretary of state
Madeleine Albright once called her own country - "the essential
nation".
It is not just China's new diplomatic reach, born of economic muscle,
that is drawing international attention, but also its system of
"authoritarian capitalism", which is increasingly seen as a
counterweight to liberal democracy.

Like football coaches urging on their team, western diplomats call on
the People's Republic to become a "responsible stakeholder in the
international system". But the Chinese are aiming at a different goal.
George Bush and Gordon Brown are pressing for democracy in Burma - the
Chinese, by contrast, care about stability. They had no desire to see
brutality by the troops on the streets, but the last thing they wanted
was a revolutionary overthrow in a neighbouring country. "What really
concerns China in the issue of Myanmar is that a failed state of any
political persuasion may lead to the disintegration of the country and
a
revival of civil war, which will have serious repercussions in the
region", writes Xiaolin Guo, an anthropologist based at Uppsala
University in Sweden.

An estimated 2.5 million people of Chinese descent live in Burma;
several ethnic groups straddle the 2,000-kilometre border dividing the
two countries. Believing the junta's inflexibility to be inherently
unstable, the Chinese government has tried to persuade the generals to
come to some accommodation with the political opposition and rebellious
ethnic fighters. Chinese officials have met opposition leaders in
Kunming, on the Chinese side of the border, and in June they
facilitated
a meeting between US and Burmese government representatives. The
current
upheaval may have stymied that initiative, but according to the Burma
specialist Larry Jagan, Beijing had hoped the contacts could herald a
process similar to the six-party talks that have brought North Korean
and US negotiators together.

Western leaders dream of a Burma reinvented in their image - with a
little lustre from association with the revered opposition leader Aung
San Suu Kyi rubbing off on them. But China is still ruled by the
Communist Party that shot and mowed down protesters in Tiananmen Square
in 1989, and which suppresses Buddhist monks in Tibet.

Authoritarian capitalism, not liberal democracy, has made China
successful. The Beijing government's ideal would be for the Burmese
generals to allow limited political participation, so that stability
could be assured and China's supply of timber, gemstones, oil and
natural gas guaranteed.

China may have bankrolled and armed Burma's generals and plundered its
neighbour's natural resources, but it still hides behind the rubric
that
it never interferes in other countries' "internal affairs". In the
early
1980s, as China began to open up, its then leader, Deng Xiaoping, said
his country should "adopt a low profile and never take the lead". He
predicted that it would take China between thirty and fifty years to
come near the economic level of the west. "We do not mean to catch up
with, still less do we say to surpass, but only to approach the level
of
developed countries", he said.

But the rocket fuel of globalisation has propelled China's economy
faster than anyone could have imagined. Just 25 years after Deng
outlined his modest goals, China has the world's fourth-largest
economy,
smaller only than those of the US, Japan and Germany and poised to
overtake the last. Many of its 1.3 billion people still live in
poverty,
but its $1.4 trillion in reserves, much of it held in US treasury
bonds,
give it unprecedented influence over the global financial system. China
is already changing the way the world works, by influence and example.

Western leaders continue to assert that capitalism inevitably brings
democracy in its wake. "As China reforms its economy, its leaders are
finding that once the door to freedom is opened even a crack, it cannot
be closed", said Bush in 2005. "As the people of China grow in
prosperity, their demands for political freedom will grow as well". The
US president cited South Korea and Taiwan as examples. "The economic
wealth that South Korea created at home helped nurture a thriving
middle
class that eventually demanded free elections and a democratic
government that would be accountable to the people", he said.

But, as the scholars Azar Gat and James Mann have pointed out, China -
unlike smaller east Asian countries - is not under the US military
umbrella. It is forging its own path and it is not the one that Bush
predicted. As the Communist Party of China prepares for its 17th
Congress this month, scores of popular websites have been closed.
Meetings of Aids activists have been banned and environmental
campaigners have been jailed. Human rights campaigners say that far
from
more freedom being allowed in the run-up to the 2008 Beijing Olympic
Games, the space for dissent is narrowing.

Premier Wen Jiabao talks vaguely about democracy as some distant ideal,
but in an article for the People's Daily, published in February, he
said: "We must adhere to the party's basic guidelines of the primary
stage of socialism for 100 years".

Meanwhile, as a result of the "reform and opening up" policy, the
economy powers ahead at ten per cent annual growth. The Chinese middle
class is getting more prosperous but showing few signs of clamouring
for
democracy. Young people have pop stars, not politicians, as cult
heroes,
and seem more interested in voting for candidates in reality-TV shows
than elections. Last month, fans of Li Yuchun, winner of the second
series of Super Girl, China's first Pop Idol contest, waited at a
Beijing recording studio for seven hours to watch her perform for MTV.
Asked about politics, 26-year-old Li Bohui, an office worker, shrugged.
"I don't care", she said. "It doesn't have any impact on my life - all
that seems so far away. I'm more interested in Li Yuchun because when I
see her face I forget my frustrations and troubles."


Disney and death

It was Lee Kuan Yew, the former leader of Singapore, who predicted that
the system he championed would work in China. He turned Singapore into
an immensely rich, alarmingly clean, politically repressive city-state,
described by the science-fiction writer William Gibson as "Disneyland
with the death penalty".

"If in twenty years they bring China's progress, not just in the
coastal
areas, but also the interior, to conditions like those of Korea of the
1980s, the Chinese people will buy that", Lee said in 2004. "The
people's ambition at present is not to achieve political rights or
representative government. They just want to arrive as a developed
nation." It may not last. The Chinese government worries about rising
discontent among those who have been left behind - peasants whose land
has been confiscated, those who become ill because of polluted water,
the victims of unscrupulous officials.

But China is no longer alone. Russia's retreat from democracy at a time
when high oil prices are boosting the economy suggests that an
alternative axis is coming into being. China and Russia parted
ideological course in 1960, but today, once again, they share a vision.

The Russian economist Sergei Karaganov, dean of the School of
International Economics and Foreign Affairs of the State University in
Moscow, describes this as a "new era of confrontation", with China and
Russia on one side and the US and EU on the other. "In an environment
characterised by acute competition, the fight for the lofty values of
democracy will almost inevitably acquire the character of geopolitical
confrontation", he says. "This will impede the probable process of
liberalisation in the countries of the new 'authoritarian' capitalism -
in particular, in Russia".

Russia's GDP has risen from $200 billion in 1999 to more than $1
trillion in 2006. Incomes have quadrupled. According to the US think
tank Freedom House, "The country has come to resemble the autocratic
regimes of central Asia more than the consolidated democracies of
eastern Europe that have recently joined the European Union".

President Vladimir Putin is nonetheless popular, because he has
restored
a sense of national pride lost in the chaotic years that followed the
fall of communism. Many Russians - like many Chinese - feel humiliated
by decades of global western dominance. The new "sovereign democracy",
as Russian political scientists call it, has been sold successfully as
a
way of restoring Russia to its rightful place in the world.

The confidence of the Chinese and Russian governments is bolstered by
global economic integration. The European Union and the United States
need Russia's energy supplies and China's manufactured goods.

The debacle in Iraq, and the wider failure of the American project to
bring democracy to the Middle East, have undermined America's
ideological supremacy. By overreaching itself with a doomed military
adventure, the US government has tumbled from its moral pedestal. As
Ukraine goes through its third turbulent election in three years, the
shine has also come off the various "colour revolutions" trumpeted by
western neoconservatives and progressives alike, while making aid to
Africa dependent on "good governance" has done little to boost
development.

America's image has collapsed across the world, so China is moving to
fill the gap. These days, to many people globally, the Americans seem
like the ideologues, with their shrill demands for democracy, while the
Chinese are quietly winning friends and influencing people with aid
projects, low-interest loans, Confucius Institutes and the aura of
success.


Cleverer diplomacy

The Chinese are less confrontational than the Russians, aware that
their
ability to extend their reach will be enhanced by better global public
relations. It is almost unheard of for a Chinese official to meet
representatives of a hostile, foreign non-governmental organisation,
but
last month Liu Guijin, China's newly appointed special envoy on Darfur,
held talks with the Save Darfur Coalition in Washington.

"We removed some differences between us", he said on his return to
Beijing. Western diplomats, who have struggled with Chinese
intransigence for five years, are delighted that members of the
People's
Liberation Army will join the new UN/African Union peacekeeping force
in
Darfur.

The revised policy has cost the Chinese nothing. Their oil interests in
Sudan are untouched, and the war has moved to a new stage, as evidenced
by the attack on African Union peacekeepers by a band of Darfur rebels
at the end of September. Liu Guijin criticises China's friends in
Khartoum for failing to develop Darfur, pushing the line that the
conflict is a result of desertification and poverty, thus neatly
avoiding the issue of attacks on civilians committed by the Sudanese
government and its militias, using Chinese weapons. The diplomacy is
more subtle, the analysis more nuanced, but the principles of China's
policy to support the government of Sudan have not been compromised.

As the monks in Rangoon pushed past the barrier to pray with Aung San
Suu Kyi, police in Beijing were demolishing the city's petitioners'
village. China's dispossessed - those who have lost land to rapacious
developers or been persecuted for exposing corrupt officials -
congregate in the capital to petition the authorities for justice.
Before the 17th Party Congress, the police are trying to get rid of as
many as possible.

On the other side of town, the gleaming new Olympic Stadium is nearly
finished, while the leaning towers of the postmodern, experimental new
China Central Television building grow higher daily. And in four years,
less than the time spent debating Heathrow's Terminal 5, China has
designed and completed the largest airport terminal in the world.

Authoritarian capitalism works. It gets things done.

As the Olympics approach, activist groups will pressure China on human
rights, and when the Chinese appear to respond, as they have done on
Darfur and could yet do on Burma, western governments will talk of how
China is changing. Democracy will follow capitalism, they will tell us,
as night follows day. But China's leaders are embarked on a different
course, and it may prove to be the biggest challenge to western
certainties since the fall of communism.

_____

Lindsey Hilsum is China Correspondent for Channel 4 News. She has
previously reported extensively from Africa, the Middle East, the
Balkans and Latin America.

Burma timeline

1948 Wins independence from Britain

1962 Ne Win-led coup overthrows elected government

1988 Martial law imposed. 8888 uprising - Rangoon students trigger
nationwide demos on 8 August

1992 Than Shwe becomes head of junta

2006 China makes joint investment in $1bn deal for dam on Thai/Burmese
border

2007 Buddhist monks lead largest protests since 1988 in Rangoon and
Mandalay

Research by Jonathan Beckman

http://www.newstatesman.com/200710040024

anaxarchos
10-11-2007, 04:01 PM
It takes an angry village to revolt in rural China

Residents occupy seat of local government, fed up with officials selling off communal farmland

XIANTANG VILLAGE, China–After years of simmering suspicion and mounting anger, the citizens of this sleepy south China village of 3,500 decided they weren't going to take it anymore.

They were disturbed by what they saw: local politicians seemed to keep getting richer and everyone else kept falling behind while communally owned farmland kept disappearing beneath commercial developments.

Local citizens wanted to know how these land deals were done and where the proceeds were going.

They had a right to know.

Under law, farmland – unlike urban land – is owned by the community as a whole and regarded as the bedrock of a Chinese peasant's means to make a living.

So on July 2, hundreds of concerned citizens laid siege to Xiantang Village Hall demanding to examine the books.

Today – 101 days later – the citizens are still here.

It may be unprecedented in modern China. Citizens not only accused their leaders of corruption, but drove them from office and continue to occupy the central administration building – a modern five-storey structure now festooned with fiery red banners.

It is an astonishing sight in an authoritarian state.



Actually, it used to be the "norm". Lookup "Fanshen".

.