Affichage des articles dont le libellé est human rights abuses. Afficher tous les articles
Affichage des articles dont le libellé est human rights abuses. Afficher tous les articles

vendredi 29 novembre 2019

China's Final Solution: TikTok parent company ByteDance is working with China's Communist Party to spread propaganda on East Turkestan

  • ByteDance, the company that owns the viral video app TikTok, is working closely with China's government to facilitate human-rights abuses against Uighur Muslims in China's western colony of East Turkestan.
  • The report, titled "Mapping more of China's tech giants: AI and surveillance," looked at the way major Chinese tech companies were involved in state-sanctioned surveillance and censorship using artificial intelligence packaged as popular apps and websites.
  • ByteDance is collaborating with public security bureaus across China, including in East Turkestan where it plays an active role in disseminating the party-state's propaganda on East Turkestan.
  • TikTok has been in the spotlight after it suspended the account of a US teenager Feroza Aziz after she posted a viral video on the app that was disguised as a makeup tutorial but criticized the Chinese government's treatment of Uighurs in East Turkestan.
By Rosie Perper

The Chinese company that owns the viral video app TikTok is working closely with China's government to facilitate human-rights abuses against Uighur Muslims in the western colony of East Turkestan, according to a new report by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute.
The report, titled "Mapping more of China's tech giants: AI and surveillance," looked at the way major Chinese tech companies were involved in state-sanctioned surveillance and censorship using artificial intelligence packaged as popular apps and websites.
ByteDance, the parent company of the viral-video sensation TikTok, was mentioned in the report alongside other major Chinese tech companies including Huawei, Tencent, and Alibaba, all of which -- ASPI wrote -- "are engaged in deeply unethical behavior in East Turkestan, where their work directly supports and enables mass human rights abuses."
China is running thousands detention centers and forced labor camps in East Turkestan. 
Interviews with people who were held in the facilities reveal beatings and food deprivation, as well as medical experimentation on prisoners.
In its research, ASPI singled out ByteDance and accused it of acting alongside the Communist Party to enforce the country's strict censorship laws.
"ByteDance collaborates with public security bureaus across China, including in East Turkestan where it plays an active role in disseminating the party-state's propaganda on East Turkestan," the report said.

ByteDance operates two versions of its viral video app — a China-based app called Douyin and the global app TikTok.
TikTok is one of the most downloaded phone apps in the world and has already entered more than 150 global markets.
Previous reports cited by ASPI indicated that "East Turkestan Internet Police" had a presence on Douyin in 2018 and created a "new public security and internet social governance model."
ASPI also cited recent reporting that said China's Ministry of Public Security's Press and Publicity Bureau signed an agreement with ByteDance that allowed ministry and police officials to have their own Douyin accounts to push ministry propaganda. 
The report also said ByteDance would "increase its offline cooperation with the police department," though it was unclear what that partnership would entail.
ASPI added that other tech giants, including Alibaba and Huawei, contributed cloud computing and surveillance technologies in East Turkestan.
In October, the US blacklisted 28 Chinese organizations and companies accused of facilitating human-rights abuses in East Turkestan.
And earlier this month, sources told Reuters that the US opened a national security investigation into ByteDance after its $1 billion acquisition of the US social-media app Musical.ly in 2017.
TikTok has been in the spotlight after suspending the account of a US teenager named Feroza Aziz who posted a viral video on the app that was disguised as a makeup tutorial but criticized the Chinese government's treatment of Uighurs in East Turkestan.
The company apologized in a statement published to its website on Wednesday, saying that it stood behind its initial decision to suspend Aziz's account but that its moderation process "will not be perfect."
East Turkestan has a population of about 10 million, many of whom are Uighur or other ethnic minorities. 
In May, US Assistant Secretary of Defense Randall Schriver said "at least a million but likely closer to 3 million citizens" were detained detention camps.
Satellite images reviewed by the Washington-based East Turkistan National Awakening Movement earlier this month identified at least 465 detention centers, labor camps, and suspected prisons in East Turkestan.
And a recent leak of classified Chinese government documents known as the "China Cables" laid out a manual for exactly how the detention centers were to operate, preventing escape by double locking all the doors and using a "points system" based on behavior that is linked "directly to rewards, punishments, and family visits".

mercredi 25 septembre 2019

US leads China condemnation over barbaric East Turkestan repression

International community pushes for access to China's far western colony
https://www.aljazeera.com
The UN says at least one million Uighurs have been detained in what China calls "recreational education centres". This one is in Dabancheng and was still under construction at the time the photo was taken on September 4, 2018.

The United States led more than 30 countries on Tuesday in condemning what it called China's "horrific campaign of repression" against Muslims in the western colony of East Turkestan at an event on the sidelines of the annual UN General Assembly.
In highlighting abuses against ethnic Uighurs and other Muslims in China, Deputy Secretary of State John Sullivan said the United Nations and its member states had "a singular responsibility to speak up when survivor after survivor recounts the horrors of state repression."
Sullivan said it was incumbent on UN-member states to ensure the world body was able to closely monitor human rights abuses by China and added that it must seek "immediate, unhindered, and unmonitored" access to East Turkestan for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
Sullivan said Tuesday's event was co-sponsored by Canada, Germany, the Netherlands and Britain, and was joined by more than 30 UN states, representatives of the European Union and more than 20 nongovernmental organisations, as well as Uighurs themselves.
"We invite others to join the international effort to demand and compel an immediate end to China’s horrific campaign of repression," he said. 
"History will judge the international community for how we respond to this attack on human rights and fundamental freedoms."

Negotiating access
Paola Pampaloni, deputy managing director for Asia of the European External Action Service, said the EU was "alarmed" by the situation and also urged "meaningful" access to East Turkestan.
"We are concerned about ... information about mistreatment and torture," she said. 
"China is always inviting us to the camps under their conditions, we are in negotiations right now for terms and conditions for free access."
On Monday, Donald Trump had called for an end to religious persecution at another event on the sidelines of the UN gathering. 
He repeated his comments in a speech on Tuesday.
Trump, who has been cautious about upsetting China on human rights issues while making a major trade deal with Beijing a major priority, said religious freedom was under growing threat around the world but fell short of specifically mentioning the situation in East Turkestan.
"Volume is coming up at a pace that we hope that the Beijing government recognises not only US but the global concern about this situation," David Stilwell, US Assistant Secretary, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs told reporters at a briefing.
"We will see how that plays out and how Beijing reacts and take it from there."
The UN says at least one million ethnic Uighurs and other Muslims have been detained in what China describes as "recreational training centres" to give people new skills.
Sullivan said the US had received "credible reports of deaths, forced labour, torture, and other cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment" in the camps.
He said that the Chinese government forced detainees to renounce their ethnic identities as well as their culture and religion.
Though US officials have ramped up criticism of China's measures in East Turkestan, it has refrained from responding with sanctions, amid on-again, off-again talks to resolve a bitter, costly trade war.
At the same time, it has criticised other countries, including some Muslim states, for not doing enough or for backing China's approach in East Turkestan.
Rishat Abbas, the brother of Uighur physician Gulshan Abbas, who was abducted from her home in Urumqi in September 2018, told Tuesday's event that "millions of Uighurs are becoming collateral damage to international trade policies, enabling China to continue to threaten our freedoms around the world, enable it to continue its police state.”
UN human rights chief Michelle Bachelet has repeatedly pushed China to grant the UN access to investigate reports of disappearances and arbitrary detentions, particularly of Muslims in East Turkestan.
China's envoy in Geneva said in June that he hoped Bachelet would visit China, including East Turkestan. 
Bachelet's office said in June that it was discussing "full access".

mardi 17 septembre 2019

Hong Kong Government Asked 8 Global PR Firms To Help Rebrand Its Image After Months Of Protests. Everyone Said No.

Hong Kong government reached out to PR firms to help with its image after months of protests.
By Rosalind Adams

Anti-government protesters shelter from tear gas during a demonstration last weekend.

HONG KONG — If you’re between the ages of 25 and 45 and live in a city like San Francisco, New York or Washington, DC, and an investor or a politician, or perhaps a high-income leisure traveller — the Hong Kong Government would like you to know that its “one country, two systems" rule is working just fine.
As protests in the city reached their 100th day this week following another weekend of violence, a 75-page document obtained by BuzzFeed News and first published by the Guardian reveals how the Hong Kong government sought help from international public relations agencies to rebuild its image with western audiences. 
Although the document does not specify how many firms were contacted, leaked remarks from Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam revealed the government reached out to eight global PR companies.
However, the government received no bids on its request.
In a press conference on Tuesday, Lam said she would still consider seeking help in the future. 
“The time will come for us to launch a major campaign to restore some of the damage done to Hong Kong’s reputation,” Lam said.
The request for a communication strategy described how the protests have “raised concerns about Hong Kong’s positioning as a global business and financial hub with a stable environment underpinned by the rule of law.”
The government said its objectives were to address both negative perceptions following months of protests as well as to underscore Hong Kong’s strengths and “bring out the success of ‘one country, two systems.’” 
It hoped to target key audiences in Asia-Pacific countries like Japan, South Korea and Singapore; the UK, France and Germany in Europe, as well as major US cities like New York and San Francisco.
"One country, two systems" refers to Hong Kong’s special relationship with China that allows the city to maintain its own legal system and trade relations. 
But it’s that which protesters say is also precisely at risk. 
A controversial extradition bill that would have allowed people to stand trial China — and which sparked the mass protests in June — is an erosion of that separate system, protesters say. 
While the extradition bill was the initial spark for the protests, they have now morphed into a wider pro-democracy movement.

A protester catches fire after throwing Molotov cocktail during a demonstration near Central Government Complex in Hong Kong on September 15.

In leaked remarks published by Reuters last week, Lam told a crowd that the government had reached out to eight global public relations firms to help improve its image — four immediately declined, two later turned away a request for meetings and only two were left.
“I dare not say the government carries out propaganda, but at least in terms of dissemination of factual information we are very, very weak,” Lam said in the remarks made to the group of businessmen in late August.
Hong Kong's Information Services Department, which distributed the document, did not respond to requests to provide the names of specific public relations firms the government had contacted.
Protesters, too, have been busy with their own public relations strategies, using crowdfunding to take out ads in newspapers across the world in August. 
Last week, protesters marched to the US Consulate to encourage politicians to pass the Hong Kong Freedom and Democracy Act which would allow the US to sanction some Chinese and Hong Kong officials if there’s evidence of human rights abuses.
And China state media has bought ads on Twitter and Facebook framing protesters as violent, and op-eds have regularly blamed foreign interference for the protests. 
Twitter later said it would no longer allow state media to place ads on its platform.
According to a timeline, the request for services was sent to possible contract providers on August 12 and a briefing was planned for a week later. 
The government hoped a public relations strategy would be in place by the end of the year, the document said.

mardi 14 mai 2019

Amnesty International Is Denied Lease at New York Tower Owned by China

The group, which has detailed human rights abuses in China, said its deal to move into Wall Street Plaza was canceled at the last minute.
By Matthew Haag and Michael Forsythe

Cosco Shipping, a giant conglomerate owned by the Chinese government, declined to lease space in a building it owns in Lower Manhattan to Amnesty International U.S.A.

When Amnesty International U.S.A. started looking for a new headquarters in New York City, the human rights group settled on office space in a modest skyscraper in Lower Manhattan known as Wall Street Plaza.
But just as the organization was about to sign a lease last week, the building’s owner said that its new parent company, a giant shipping conglomerate owned by the Chinese government, decided to veto the offer.
The company, Cosco Shipping, did not want the United States chapter of Amnesty International, which has produced scathing reports highlighting human rights abuses in China, as a tenant, according to the group.
Amnesty International U.S.A. said it was told the organization was “not the best tenant” for a building owned by a Chinese state-owned enterprise, in a turnabout that suggests the reach of the Communist Party during a time of intense economic dispute with the United States, and its ability to exert power in America.
“We were planning to sign the lease until we were told a week ago by our contact at Orient Overseas — who owns the building — that his bosses were declining,’’ said Robyn Shepherd, a spokeswoman at Amnesty International U.S.A.
“His response was along the lines that we weren’t the best tenant for a building owned by a Chinese S.O.E., and that we probably wouldn’t want to be a tenant there anyway, given the owners.”
Ms. Shepherd was referring to the Chinese state-owned enterprise, Cosco Shipping, which did not respond to messages seeking comment. 
A woman who answered the phone at Cosco’s offices in Shanghai said nobody was immediately available to comment.
Amnesty International U.S.A. had expected to relocate employees from its New York offices — among the agency’s largest in the United States — to Wall Street Plaza, a 33-story building on Pine Street that opened in 1973. 
Orient Overseas Associates, a subsidiary of a Hong Kong shipping company, Orient Overseas Container Line, had owned the Pine Street building for nearly 50 years.
But in 2017, Cosco Shipping acquired Orient Overseas in a $6.3 billion deal that made it one of the largest container shipping operators in the world and one of the largest shipping import companies in the United States. 
Cosco Shipping also took ownership of Orient’s real estate investments, including 88 Pine Street, its only property in the United States.
Ms. Shepherd said that the organization did not discover Cosco Shipping’s connections to Wall Street Plaza until its lease was denied.
Amnesty International, which is based in London, does not have a permanent presence in China and its researchers have been denied entry into the country. 
In one of its latest reports, Amnesty International highlighted discriminatory laws that threatened the health and safety of transgender people living there.
Amnesty International has also been outspoken about the Communist Party’s detention of ethnic Uighur Muslims in far western China concentration camps. 
Amnesty International researchers have been denied access to the network of camps in the East Turkestan colony.
Cosco Shipping, which now oversees the building’s owner, is one of the biggest and most important state-owned companies in China. 
As one of about 100 state-owned companies administered directly by the central government, its top officials are handpicked by the Communist Party.
Cosco’s chairman, Xu Lirong, is also a delegate to China’s legislature, the National People’s Congress, and in 2017 was a delegate to the 19th Communist Party Congress, the conclave held every five years that picks the ruling party’s top leaders.
In Hong Kong, which has been controlled by China since the end of the British colonial era there in 1997, Tung Chee-hwa, the chairman of Orient Overseas whose father founded the company, was selected to be the first chief executive under Communist rule.
Orient Overseas had conducted business for years in the United States before Cosco Shipping bought it. 
Orient operated the Long Beach Container Terminal for three decades at the Port of Long Beach in California, one of the world’s busiest.
The merger of Cosco Shipping and Orient Overseas prompted the Treasury Department to review the deal for national security concerns. 
While the federal government ultimately approved it, Cosco agreed to sell the Long Beach Container Terminal. 
The company announced last week it had reached a deal to sell it for nearly $1.8 billion.
Amnesty International’s headquarters in New York are in Chelsea and its national offices are in Washington. 
Ms. Shepherd said Amnesty International U.S.A. was exploring other lease options in New York.

mardi 15 janvier 2019

China Is a Dangerous Rival, and America Should Treat It Like One

Enough with the endless talks and handshakes. We need to untie the American economy from China.
By Derek Scissors and Daniel Blumenthal

The Trump administration has been clear about its view of China. 
A 2017 national security strategy document called China a “revisionist” power attempting to reorder international politics to suit its interests. 
It’s difficult to think otherwise given Beijing’s military buildup, its attempts to undermine American influence and power, its retaliations against American allies such as Canada, and its economic actions.
How to respond is more controversial. 
After years of unsuccessful talks and handshake deals with Beijing, the United States should change course and begin cutting its economic ties with China. 
Such a separation would stop intellectual property theft, cut off an important source of support to the People’s Liberation Army and hold companies that are involved in Chinese human rights abuses accountable.
This will be no easy task. 
Some industries will have problems finding new suppliers or buyers, and there are entrenched constituencies that support doing business with China. 
They argue that any pullback could threaten economic growth. 
But even if American exports to China fell by half, it would be the equivalent of less than one-half of 1 percent of gross domestic product. 
The cost of reducing Chinese imports is harder to assess, but there are multiple countries that can substitute for China-based production, none of them strategic rivals and trade predators.
The United States economy and its national security have been harmed by China’s rampant theft of intellectual property and the requirement that American companies that want to do business in the country hand over their technology. 
These actions threaten America’s comparative advantage in innovation and its military edge.
Even uncoerced foreign investment in technology can strengthen the Chinese military-industrial complex, especially since the Communist Party has moved, since Xi Jinping took office in 2012, to a defense industrial policy that translates in English to “civil-military fusion.” 
In practice, many Chinese and foreign “civilian” companies serve as de facto suppliers for the Chinese Army and its technological-industrial base. 
Residents and visitors are subject to constant visual surveillance, and a nascent “social credit program” in which disobedience to party dictates is reflected in credit scores, which could affect everything from home purchases to job opportunities. 
These forms of social control often use technology developed by Western companies.
The United States should make major adjustments to its economic relationship with China. Comprehensive tariffs, which harm American consumers and workers unnecessarily, are not the right reaction. 
But neither are admonishments to “just let the market work.”
Under Xi Jinping, China has moved to a defense industrial policy that translates in English to “civil-military fusion.”

The scale of China’s industrial-policy distortions, technology thievery and efforts to modernize its army are too significant for such superficial responses. 
The American government must intervene in the market when it comes to China, although that intervention should be limited to areas that are genuinely vital to national security, prosperity and democratic values.
For example, the United States government should impose sanctions on the Chinese beneficiaries of intellectual property theft and coercion, in cooperation with our allies. 
This was the legitimate target of the United States trade representative’s original inquiry in August 2017 under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, but the policy steps chosen — tariffs — focus on the trade deficit instead of loss of intellectual property.
Rather than across-the-board tariffs, Chinese companies receiving stolen or coerced intellectual property should not be allowed to do business with firms in America or, with our allies’ cooperation, in Europe and Japan. 
The United States should also intervene to halt foreign investment in any technology that assists the Chinese Army or contributes to internal repression and limit the access to global markets of any Chinese company that is tied to human rights abuses and army modernization.
Taking these actions would require an enormous amount of intelligence collection by American security agencies as well as crucial information from American companies. 
The latter is difficult to obtain: Out of fear of Chinese retribution, the foreign business community will cooperate only if there is a clear, bipartisan and long-term commitment by the American government.
While the United States must act unilaterally if necessary, the cooperation of allies such as Japan, Germany and Britain would make these steps more effective. 
Such countries have their own interests in China. 
Imposing sanctions in the name of national security on the European Union and China, as the Trump administration has threatened, would unwisely give them common cause.
Previous efforts to assert America’s influence against China, such as the discarded Trans-Pacific Partnership, did not push back effectively on Chinese economic aggression. 
Working with allies to directly address China’s malfeasance would.
All this means putting China at the top of American international economic priorities and keeping it there for years, without overstating or overreacting to trade disputes with our allies.
The administration has demonstrated some good instincts on China, but it must not be distracted by the next round of Beijing’s false economic promises. 
Protecting innovation from Chinese attack makes the United States stronger. 
Hindering the Chinese security apparatus makes external aggression and internal repression more costly for Beijing.
China is our only major trade partner that is also a strategic rival, and we should treat it differently from friendly countries with whom we have disputes. 
If Washington wants the global free market to work, it must intervene to blunt Beijing’s belligerence.

jeudi 20 décembre 2018

Free Tibet

Tibet Reciprocity Act Passes in the US Congress
By Richard Finney

The Potala Palace, former residence of Tibet's spiritual leader the Dalai Lama, is shown in a file photo.

In a strong show of bipartisan support, the U.S. Congress on Dec. 11 passed legislation demanding access to Tibet for American journalists and diplomats now routinely denied entry by Chinese authorities to the Beijing-ruled Himalayan region.
The Reciprocal Access to Tibet Act of 2018 will require the U.S. Secretary of State, within 90 days of the bill being signed into law, to identify Chinese officials responsible for excluding U.S. citizens from China’s Tibet Autonomous Region, and then ban them from entering the United States.
The bill had earlier passed in September in the U.S. House of Representatives, and then went to the Senate for approval.
The legislation is based on the diplomatic principle of reciprocity, in which “countries should provide equal rights to one another’s citizens,” the Washington D.C.-based International Campaign for Tibet (ICT) said in a Dec. 11 statement welcoming passage of the bill.
Travel by Americans in Tibet is now highly restricted, though “Chinese citizens, journalists from state-sponsored propaganda outlets and bureaucrats of the Chinese Communist Party travel freely throughout the US and lobby the American government on Tibetan issues,” ICT said.
A formerly independent nation, Tibet was taken over by and incorporated into China by force nearly 70 years ago, following which Tibet's spiritual leader the Dalai Lama and thousands of his followers fled into exile in India.
Chinese authorities now maintain a tight grip on the region, restricting Tibetans’ political activities and peaceful expression of ethnic and religious identities, and subjecting Tibetans to persecution, torture, imprisonment, and extrajudicial killings.
“China’s repression in Tibet includes keeping out those who can shine a light on its human rights abuses against the Tibetan people,” Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), one of the bill’s sponsors in the Senate, said in a statement.
“We should not accept a double standard where Chinese officials can freely visit the United States while at the same blocking our diplomats, journalists and Tibetan-Americans from visiting Tibet.”

“I look forward to President Trump signing this bill into law that will help restore some measure of reciprocity to America’s relationship with China,” Rubio said.

jeudi 11 octobre 2018

You buy a purse at Walmart. There’s a note inside from a Chinese prisoner. Now what?

Tracing a mysterious message across the world to understand how what we buy is made.
By Rossalyn A. Warren

When Christel Wallace found a piece of paper folded up at the bottom of her purse in March 2017, she threw it in the trash. 
She hadn’t yet used the maroon bag, made by Walmart and purchased from one of its Arizona stores months ago.
But after a few minutes, she got curious. 
She took the paper out of the wastebasket, unfolding the sheet to reveal a message scrawled in Mandarin Chinese.
Translated, it read: 
Inmates in China’s Yingshan Prison work 14 hours a day and are not allowed to rest at noon. 
We have to work overtime until midnight. People are beaten for not finishing their work. 
There’s no salt and oil in our meals. 
The boss pays 2,000 yuan every month for the prison to offer better food, but the food is all consumed by the prison guards. Sick inmates have to pay for their own pills. 
Prisons in China cannot be compared to prisons in the United States. 
Horse, cow, goat, pig, dog.
Christel’s daughter-in-law Laura Wallace posted a photo of the note to Facebook on April 23. 
The post first went viral locally, getting shared and liked several hundred times, mostly by fellow Arizonans. 
After a few days, local media outlets picked up the story; a week or so after that, dozens of mainstream publications like USA Today and HuffPost followed suit. 
One video report on the incident accumulated 2.9 million views.
Shares of the note provoked shock and outrage. 
Even those who were skeptical of the note’s provenance were incensed, pointing to a wider issue. “Who cares if it’s a marketing stunt?” read one comment on Facebook. 
“If it made five people rethink buying cheap crap, then it’s a success.”
At the time, a Walmart spokesperson told a reporter in Arizona it was unable to comment because it had “no way to verify the origin of the letter.”
You may remember this story or one like it. 
It follows a long line of SOS-style notes found by shoppers. 
They crop up a few times a year, and each story follows the same beats.
First, a shopper in the US or Europe finds a note in the pocket or on a tag of a product from a big retailer — Walmart, Saks, Zara
The note claims the product had been made using forced labor or under poor working conditions. 
The writer of the note also claims to be in a faraway country, usually China. 
The shopper takes a photo of the note and posts it to social media. 
It’s reported on by all sorts of publications from Reuters to Refinery29, where the articles reach millions of readers.
Then the hysteria cools, and the story falls into the viral news abyss. 
There’s no real attempt at verification. 
There’s no meaningful corporate gesture. 
There’s no grand reckoning with the system of global production from which this cry for help is said to have emerged.
As for Christel’s particular Walmart note, there are a number of possibilities regarding who wrote and hid it, and its contents are difficult to fact-check. 
A Chinese prison called Yingshan may exist, or it may not. 
Forced labor may be practiced there, or it may not. 
A prisoner in China may have written the note, or maybe a Chinese activist did, or maybe an American activist instead. 
The note may have been placed in the bag in a prison factory, or somewhere else along the supply chain in China, or perhaps in Arizona.
The only way to make sense of this puzzle — one with actual human stakes that can help explain how what we buy is made — is to try to trace the journey backward, from the moment a note goes viral to its potential place of origin. 
Which is how I find myself in rural China, outside of a local prison, 7,522 miles away from where Christel first opened her purse.
Guilin is a city in the Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region of southern China, and a tourist haven, renowned for the tooth-like karst peaks that rise from the banks of the Li River. 
Its limpid lakes and limestone caves draw tens of millions of visitors every year.
To reach Guilin, it takes me two international flights, two taxis, a one-hour bus ride through border control, and three hours on a high-speed train. 
I travel from London through Hong Kong on to Shenzhen and then Guilin via the Guangshen Railway. 
There, I meet Channing, a local reporter hired to help me find the prison.
We’re in Guilin because of the first and only concrete lead in the Walmart note: the name of the prison. 
The note writer says the prison is called Yingshan, and several weeks of research has led me to believe it’s located in China’s Guangxi region, home to many manufacturing factories because of the area’s cheap labor and low taxes.
The very few details I can find about Yingshan prison come from a 10-year-old report on prisons across China written by a human rights group
The report suggests the prison may be in the suburbs of east Guilin, and so the plan is to explore the neighborhood, talk to locals, and look for signs — barbed wire, security cameras, anything.

But before we embark on our prison scouting, we have something else on the agenda: a visit to the city’s only Walmart store. 
It feels important, given the note was found in a Walmart, albeit one on the other side of the globe. Perhaps a Chinese Walmart close to where the note supposedly originated can provide clues, or at least context.
The Guilin Walmart is a 10-minute drive from the center of the city, spread across two floors in a shopping mall, on a road lined with scooter repair shops. 
Walmart is the world’s biggest retailer; it owns 11,700 retail units in 27 countries around the world, including Brazil and South Africa, under various banner names. 
In China, Walmart owns 389 Walmart Supercenters, in addition to 21 Sam’s Clubs and 15 Hypermarkets.
A note on Walmart’s Chinese site reads: “Walmart China firmly believes in local sourcing. 
We have established partnerships with more than seven thousand suppliers in China. Over 95% of the merchandise in our stores in China is sourced locally.”
The Guilin Walmart sells athletic shorts made in Vietnam, girls’ T-shirts made in Bangladesh, and sports jackets made in Cambodia. 
But for the most part, the store’s clothing is made in China, some of it just a few hours away. 
There are England football shirts and women’s purses from Guangdong, World Cup Russia sandals from Fujian, Frozen and Mickey Mouse tees from Shanghai, and baseball jerseys and Peppa Pig sun hats from Jiangxi.
Countries the world over encourage citizens to “buy local,” so why would China be any different? Still, necessarily, what is local to one place — local practice, local perspective — is foreign to all others. 
To those in the country, “made in China” means items produced by their fellow Chinese that contribute to the robust economy. 
Elsewhere in the world, particularly in the US, the phrase draws ire, conjuring images of goods mass-produced in factories with questionable conditions by workers who have supplanted their own country’s workforce.
Walmart in the US has tried and tested the homemade idea. 
In 1985, founder Sam Walton voiced a commitment to “made in America” products, launching a program called “Bring It Home to the USA” to buy more US-made goods. 
Around that time, according to reporter Bob Ortega’s book In Sam We Trust, Walton estimated 6 percent of his company’s total sales came from imports; a Frontline report found that number may have been closer to 40 percent. 
Bill Clinton, then the governor of Walmart’s home state of Arkansas, described “Bring It Home to the USA” as an “act of patriotism.” 
The program failed.
It’s easy to understand why. 
The “made in America” ideal comes second to finding the cheapest sources of production — this was true in the ’80s, and it’s true now. 
A study released in 2016 found that three in four Americans say they would like to buy US-made goods but consider those items too costly or difficult to find. 
When asked if they’d buy an $85 pair of pants made in the US or a $50 pair made in a different country, 67 percent chose the latter.
Today, Walmart outsources the majority of its production around the world. 
According to a 2011 report in the Atlantic, Chinese suppliers are believed to account for around 70 percent of the company’s merchandise. 
A 2015 analysis from the Economic Institute, a progressive think tank, found that Walmart’s trade with China may have eliminated 400,000 jobs in the US between 2001 and 2013.
This is something Walmart says it’s trying to change. 
In its 2014 annual report, the company pledged to spend an additional $250 billion on US-made goods by 2023, saying it believes “we can drive cost savings by sourcing closer to the point of consumption.” 
Research from Boston Consulting Group projected this could create a million new US jobs.
At the initiative’s 2018 halfway point, though, it’s unclear how many jobs have been created or how much money has actually been spent. 
Additionally, in 2015, the Federal Trade Commission initiated a probe into Walmart’s mislabeling of foreign goods as “Made in the USA.” 
Walmart took action by removing inaccurate logos and making its disclosures more transparent, only to come under fire for deceptive “Made in the USA” labels yet again the very next year.

Forced labor is commonly practiced in the Chinese prison system, which the Chinese Communist Party first established countrywide in 1949, modeling it on Soviet gulags. 
The kind of crimes that land someone in the Chinese penal system range widely, from murder and bribery to saying anything remotely bad about the government
Freedom of speech isn’t a reality for Chinese citizens, who can face decades in prison for publishing articles about human rights online.
A tenet of the Chinese justice system is that labor inside prisons is good for the country. 
The government, as well as many of its citizens, believes it helps reform corrupted people — and China is far from the only country to use prison labor. 
The US legally benefits from labor in its prison system, and while not every US prison practices penal labor, hundreds of thousands of American inmates work jobs that include making furniture and fighting fires
In August of this year, prisoners from 17 states went on strike to protest being forced to work, characterizing the practice as “modern slavery.”
Peter E. Müller, a leading specialist at the Laogai Research Foundation, and his team extensively document the human rights abuses inside China’s prison system. 
This work includes identifying prisons and camps that employ forced labor, tracking the inmate population, and gathering personal testimony from those who have experienced forced labor. (In the Walmart note, the writer describes forced labor and beatings, as well as low pay for long hours and health care deducted from payment.) 
The amount depends on the financial situation of the prison; the average pay in American state prisons is 20 cents an hour
Müller says the monthly salary specified in the note (2,000 yuan, or $295) is “unusually high,” but speculates that it may be because the prison “makes good money because of high-quality workers.”

Human rights organizations, such as the Laogai Research Foundation and China Labor Watch, say the biggest problem in stopping the export of products made in prisons is that the supply lines are “almost untraceable.” 
Supply lines, in general, are very difficult to trace due to the enormous complexity of supplier networks, a lack of communication between actors, and a general dearth of data that can be shared in the first place. 
The result is a frustratingly opaque global system of production.
Li Qiang, the founder and executive director of China Labor Watch, explains that American companies that manufacture abroad place their orders directly with factories or sourcing companies, and that those factories and companies can transfer the orders to prisons without the company’s knowledge. 
In fact, some of these relationships are formalized to the point where prisons that use forced labor have a sister factory that coordinates the prison manufacturing.
It’s essentially a front, as sister factories will use a commercial name for outside trade, intentionally mislabeling products that are made in prisons.
 
Prisoners are never physically sent to the sister factories; the main bulk of the production happens on prison grounds. 
Once nearly complete, items are then sent to the sister factories, where they are prepared and labeled for international delivery. 
This system isn’t easy for companies to monitor. 
Suppliers conceal these practices from clients, and supplier checks are not frequent, especially for large corporations like Walmart, which use a large number of suppliers and subcontractors.
Qiang says the issue can feel intractable. 
“Even if shoppers in the US understand that the items are being made under poor working conditions, there is nothing they can really do,” he says. 
“Multinational corporations will not invest in improving their supply chain if there are few laws to protect workers whose rights are being violated, and no successful lawsuits against brands, companies, or their factories for violating them.”
On a Tuesday morning in late May, Channing and I sit at a table in our hotel lobby. 
We browse message boards on Baidu, one of the country’s most popular search engines and social networking sites, to see if the issue of prison labor is discussed on Chinese social media, or if it’s a subject the government censors.
In a matter of seconds, Channing is able to find discussion boards filled with suppliers looking to outsource labor to prisons. 
The conversations are quite ordinary — there is no coded language, and full addresses and contact numbers are included in postings. 
We also find dozens of posts from people offering the services of prisons they work with to mass-produce items for overseas companies, including “electronic accessories, bracelets, necklace bead processing, toy assembly, and shirt processing.”
One post in Chinese reads: “Because our processing personnel are from prison, it has the following advantages. The prison personnel are centralized and stable, and they are managed by the prison. There is no need to worry about the flow of people and the shortage of labor. The processing price is low: Since the processing location is in prison, there is no need for manufacturers to provide space and accommodation; and the prison works in the principle of serving the people, so the processing price is guaranteed to be absolutely lower than the market price. If your company needs it, please contact!”
In an effort to verify not only that Yingshan prison exists but also that it’s one of many Chinese factories that use forced labor and contract with manufacturers, Channing and I drive toward the suburbs in the eastern part of Guilin.

Channing asks our driver to drop us at a high school so we can remain undetected. 
Nearby, I’d marked a spot where I believed the prison to be according to the human rights report I’d found before arriving in China. 
But the prison isn’t there. 
In its place is a crossing, though there’s reason to believe the prison is closed — a dilapidated sign pointing left reads: Yingshan.
We walk down the road and find the area under heavy surveillance. 
Security cameras are hitched onto poles on every corner of the pathway. 
The farther we walk, the more literal the warnings that we shouldn’t be there. 
Three different signs hammered into a tree read: “DO NOT APPROACH.”
Yingshan prison, described in a note found in a Walmart handbag thousands of miles away in the US, does exist — and we are standing in front of it.
Though it had been difficult to find, it actually doesn’t seem so hidden after all. 
It is integrated into the neighborhood, just around the corner from a driving school, near leafy streets and apartment blocks.
The prison doesn’t look like an archetypal prison you’d see in the US. 
If it weren’t for the two security watchtowers, Yingshan could be mistaken for a modern residential building. 
Thick bushes cover dark blue metal fences lined with barbed wire. 
The high walls are painted cream with decorative white lines demarcating each of the building’s five floors. 
Each window has a neat white frame, with a metal air vent attached.
Several guards in uniform are standing in the parking lot of the building next door. 
We don’t approach them for fear of being detained. 
The Chinese government treats both domestic and foreign journalists hostilely
Reporters are often banned from entering the country, and they have also been detained for their work
Our safest bet for gathering information is to speak to people in the area who may have ties to the prison.
Walking down a second pathway that runs alongside Yingshan, the village of Sanjia comes into view. Sanjia is a small village that abuts the prison grounds. 
In the village, crumbling homes stand alongside gated, modern ones painted gold. 
Locals say this is because the land is being bought out, and that the village is grappling with redevelopment.
Each person we speak to has a personal connection to the prison. 
They know people imprisoned, have a family member working inside, or have worked inside themselves. 
They tell us that guards who work in Yingshan are housed with their families in an apartment complex next to the prison. 
We realize this is the building with the parking lot filled with uniformed guards.
Zhenzhu, who asked that her surname not be used for fear of retribution from the government, can see the prison from her front door. 
A jovial woman, she has lived in the village for 14 years, moving to the area right after she was married. 
As we talk, we hear pigs squealing. 
Zhenzhu explains that those are her pigs, 100 of them, next door in a slaughterhouse she runs with her husband.
When the building of the prison commenced in 2007, Zhenzhu was three months pregnant, and her husband was employed as a construction worker on the project. 
By the time their daughter turned 3, the building was complete. 
Zhenzhu has visited the prison before, to see an inmate; Yingshan allows visits from family members under heavy security. 
She says its walls are buried so deep into the ground that “even if the prisoners want to break out by digging an underground tunnel, they can’t dig through.”
Zhenzhu recounts much of what her husband told her about his experience at Yingshan. 
For years following the construction, he would visit for maintenance checks and additional building; trucks were always driving fabric in and out of the prison. 
The trucks, he told Zhenzhu, were from factories located in the Guangdong province. 
Guangdong is home to an estimated 60,000 factories, which produce around a third of the world’s shoes and much of its textiles, apparel, and toys.
Everyone we speak to, Zhenzhu included, says they’ve seen labor inside the prison or have been told about it directly by inmates. 
None were familiar with Walmart goods being produced there, but some could confirm that women’s fashion is manufactured inside.
To those in the village, prison labor is not just common knowledge; it’s also necessary. 
They consider the prisoners “bad guys” who have committed horrible crimes. 
In their eyes, the labor is a good thing: It helps rehabilitate inmates and gets them to understand the value of work. 
But that work can come at a great cost. 
According to local hearsay and furthered by a published account from a woman who was married to a Yingshan prison guard, inmates have been known to kill themselves because of the poor conditions and forced labor.
Zhenzhu leads us around the edge of the village, to get a side view of the prison. 
She points to the building we first passed and tells us that’s where the inmates eat and sleep. 
She then points to a building farther in the distance on the left that looks almost exactly the same. 
It’s also painted cream, but with slightly larger white window frames; a yard obscured behind the prison wall separates the structures. 
The second building, she tells us, is for “the work.”

The Walmart note followed a tradition of hidden messages found by shoppers. 
In 2014, shoppers found labels stitched into several items of clothing in Primark stores across the UK. 
The labels, written in English, read: “forced to work exhausting hours” and “degrading sweatshop conditions.”
As the notes spread across social media, the fast-fashion company conducted an investigation and found the labels were fake
The company said the items were all made by different suppliers, in different factories, on different continents. 
They stressed it was impossible that the same labels, especially those written in English, would appear on all the items and that they believed the labels were part of an activist stunt carried out in the UK.
Though no one claimed credit for the labels, activist groups had been waging campaigns to protest Primark’s labor practices in the time leading up to their discovery. 
War on Want led a 2013 campaign against the company after more than 1,100 people died as a result of the Rana Plaza collapse
Primark, along with J.C. Penney and Joe Fresh, was among the retailers whose products were made in the Bangladeshi complex.
Almost all the messages that have been found in stores have come under public scrutiny, as they’re often suspected of being written and planted by activists. 
The handwriting, the language, and even the paper used for notes have pointed to activist work. 
For example, several notes and labels, like the Primark ones, were written in English. 
Many inmates and factory workers in China, as well as Bangladesh, come from poor backgrounds and are unlikely to have had the chance to learn English in school.

There have been, however, at least two instances in which actual workers have claimed the notes. 
In 2011, a shopper bought a box of Halloween decorations at an Oregon Kmart. 
She found a note inside the box, from a prisoner in China explaining that he had made the item under forced labor conditions.
Two years later, Zhang — a man who asked newsrooms to only use his surname for fear of being arrested and imprisoned again — claimed to be the writer of the note. 
He said he planted 20 such notes during the two years he spent in prison, with hopes they would reach American stores. 
His handwriting and modest English language proficiency matched those of the note, but even then, it wasn’t feasible to fully corroborate his story. 
As the New York Times wrote, “it was impossible to know for sure whether there were perhaps other letter writers, one of whose messages might have reached Oregon.”
The second instance came in 2014, when a shopper in New York found a note in a Saks shopping bag she received when purchasing a pair of Hunter rain boots two years earlier. 
The note, written in English, claimed to have been written by a man in a Chinese prison; it also included his email address, photo, and name, which led to the finding of the author, Tohnain Emmanuel Njong
Originally from Cameroon, he said he’d been teaching English in China when he was arrested in May 2011 and wrongly jailed for fraud charges.
In both cases, the final step of verification would be to confirm with the prisons mentioned in the notes that Zhang and Njong served sentences at their facilities and that forced labor occurs there. 
But since Chinese prisons refuse to provide comment on such stories, there’s little way of definitively confirming the prisoners’ accounts.
In 2017, the validity of hidden notes came into question yet again. 
Shoppers in Istanbul found tags inside clothing items in a Zara store that read: “I made this item you are going to buy, but I didn’t get paid for it.”
It turned out Turkish workers, who produced the clothing for Zara in an Istanbul factory, planted the notes in protest. 
The factory where they had been employed closed down overnight, leaving them suddenly without jobs or a source of income. 
The workers wrote notes urging shoppers to pressure Zara into giving them the back pay they were owed. 
They then went to a Zara store in the center of Istanbul and hid the notes in the pockets of clothing being sold inside.
The Turkish workers didn’t come up with the idea of the notes on their own. 
The Clean Clothes Campaign and its alliance partner Labour Behind the Label (LBL), an organization that campaigns for garment workers’ rights, helped plan the action.
LBL and other campaign groups have organized “note droppings” like this in retail stores like Zara for many years. 
The notes describe how poor labor practices are behind the store’s items; LBL gathers information about these practices through its own reports and interviews.
“Dropping notes is an extension of leaving leaflets in stores,” says LBL’s director of policy Dominique Muller. 
“When we think we’re not getting movement from companies, we turn to confrontational tactics like this.”
LBL doesn’t worry that the notes they plant in stores could overshadow any potentially real notes found in stores. 
“These notes are just a drop in the ocean. They’re still new” — as an activism tool, that is — “and they will continue to have an impact.”
As of this June, the Turkish workers had only received partial payment.

Finding Yingshan brought some answers about the validity of the note. 
For one, the prison named in the Walmart note exists. 
We heard firsthand accounts from locals who said forced labor does occur inside the prison as the note described. 
What we were told about the work is that the hours are long, the work is done indoors, and the labor involves manufacturing fashion items, which might include bags like the purse Christel bought in Arizona.
After Walmart issued its statement about there being “no way to verify the origin of the letter,” the company launched an internal investigation. 
It was found that the factory that made the purse didn’t adhere to Walmart’s standards, which stress the need for “labor to be voluntary” and state that “slave, child, underage, forced, bonded, or indentured labor will not be tolerated.” 
As a result, the company cut ties with the supplier, a decision the company only disclosed after it was contacted for this story. 
Walmart declined to clarify whether the supplier in question had contracted with Yingshan prison.
In a statement to Vox, a Walmart spokesperson wrote: “Walmart has strict standards for our suppliers, and they must tell us where our products are being made. Through our investigation into this matter, we found the supplier’s factory sent purses to be made at other factories in the region that were not disclosed to us. The supplier failed to follow our standards, so we stopped doing business with them. We take allegations like this seriously, and we are committed to a responsible and transparent supply chain. There are consequences for our suppliers when our standards are not followed.”
One last question did remain unanswered. 
Was the note written by an actual prisoner, or by an activist with knowledge of the conditions that produced the bag? 
Müller of the Laogai Research Foundation believes the note is indeed real.
The description and details referenced in the note, he says, mirror much of what he’s heard in interviews with former prisoners. 
He says the language, the style of writing, and the use of the phrase “horse cow goat pig dog” — a common expression in China that compares the treatment of prisoners to that of animals — add to its authenticity. 
He believes the writer of the note certainly risked his life to send his message.
Even if the note is real, though, what’s come to light during the reporting of this story is that the Walmart note won’t end forced labor in China. 
The government is not going to release a public statement condemning human rights abuses inside its prisons because of stories like this one. 
It doesn’t see forced labor as a human rights abuse; Chinese citizens who don’t support the practices risk arrest if they speak out, and so most won’t.
The pitfall of pinning reform on awareness is expecting a bad thing to end if enough people know about it. 
Very rarely does mass attention on an issue result in a tangible shift in how things work. 
If merely sharing information were enough, the countless viral stories about forced labor recounted here would have already resulted in widespread reform.
Still, the incremental change the Walmart note led to — however impossibly small, however seemingly inconsequential — is a step. 
It has to be. 

mercredi 28 février 2018

Rotten Apple

Apple under fire for moving iCloud data to China: Apple's latest move has privacy advocates and human rights groups worried.
by Sherisse Pham


The U.S. company is moving iCloud accounts registered in mainland China to state-run Chinese servers on Wednesday along with the digital keys needed to unlock them.
"The changes being made to iCloud are the latest indication that China's repressive legal environment is making it difficult for Apple to uphold its commitments to user privacy and security," Amnesty International warned in a statement Tuesday.
The criticism highlights the tradeoffs major international companies are making in order to do business in China, which is a huge market and vital manufacturing base for Apple.
In the past, if Chinese authorities wanted to access Apple's user data, they had to go through an international legal process and comply with U.S. laws on user rights, according to Ronald Deibert, director of the University of Toronto's Citizen Lab, which studies the intersection of digital policy and human rights.
"They will no longer have to do so if iCloud and cryptographic keys are located in China's jurisdiction," he told CNNMoney.
The company taking over Apple's Chinese iCloud operations is Guizhou-Cloud Big Data (GCBD), which is owned by the government of Guizhou province. 
GCBD did not respond to requests for comment.
The change only affects iCloud accounts that are registered in mainland China.
Apple made the move to comply with China's latest regulations on cloud services. 
A controversial cybersecurity law, which went into effect last June, requires companies to keep all data in the country. 
Beijing has said the measures are necessary to help prevent crime and terrorism, and protect Chinese citizens' privacy.
The problem with Chinese cybersecurity laws, Deibert said, is that they also require companies operating in China "to turn over user data to state authorities on demand -- Apple now included."
Other big U.S. tech companies have had to take similar steps -- Amazon and Microsoft also struck partnerships with Chinese companies to operate their cloud services in the country.
"Our choice was to offer iCloud under the new laws or discontinue offering the service," an Apple spokesman told CNN. 
The company decided to keep iCloud in China, because cutting it off "would result in a bad user experience and less data security and privacy for our Chinese customers," he said.
Apple users typically use iCloud to store data such as music, photos and contacts.
That information can be extremely sensitive. 
Earlier this month, Reporters Without Borders urged China-based journalists to change the country associated with their iCloud accounts -- which is an option for non-Chinese citizens, according to Apple -- or to close them down entirely.
Human rights groups also highlighted the difficult ethical positions Apple could find itself in under the new iCloud arrangement in China.
The company has fought for privacy rights in the Unites States. 
It publicly opposed a judge's order to break into the iPhone of one of the terrorists who carried out the deadly attack in San Bernardino in December 2016, calling the directive "an overreach by the US government."
At the time, CEO Tim Cook pretentiously said complying with the order would have required Apple to build "a backdoor to the iPhone ... something we consider too dangerous to create."
Human Rights Watch questioned whether the company would take similar steps to try to protect users' iCloud information in China, where similar privacy rights don't exist.
"Will Apple challenge laws adopted by the Chinese government that give authorities vast access to that data, especially with respect to encrypted keys that authorities will likely demand?" asked Sophie Richardson, China director for Human Rights Watch.
Apple declined to answer that question directly,.
"Apple has not created nor were we requested to create any backdoors and Apple will continue to retain control over the encryption keys to iCloud data," the Apple spokesman said.
Rights groups and privacy advocates are not convinced.
"China is an authoritarian country with a long track record of problematic human rights abuses, and extensive censorship and surveillance practices," Deibert said.
Apple users in China should take "extra and possibly inconvenient precautions not to store sensitive data on Apple's iCloud," he advised.
Most of those users have already accepted the new status quo, according to Apple. 
So far, more than 99.9% of iCloud users in China have chosen to continue using the service, the Apple spokesman said.

vendredi 5 mai 2017

The Enemy Within: Chinese Fifth Column

On Campuses Far From China, Still Under Beijing’s Watchful Eye
By STEPHANIE SAUL

Students at the University of California, San Diego, where an organization of Chinese students is protesting the invitation of the Dalai Lama as a commencement speaker. 

SAN DIEGO — In the competition for marquee commencement speakers, the University of California, San Diego thought it had scored a coup this year — a Nobel Peace Prize winner, best-selling author and spiritual North Star to millions of people.
“We are honored to host His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama,” gushed Pradeep Khosla, the university’s chancellor, “and thankful that he will share messages of global compassion.”
Within hours of Mr. Khosla’s announcement, though, the university was blindsided by nasty remarks on Facebook and other social media sites: “Imagine how Americans would feel if someone invited Bin Laden,” said one.
At the center of the opposition was the U.C. San Diego chapter of the Chinese Students and Scholars Association, which threatened “tough measures to resolutely resist the school’s unreasonable behavior.” 
The Chinese government accuses the Dalai Lama of promoting Tibetan independence from China, and if the student group’s message sounded a bit like the Beijing party line, that may have been no coincidence: The group said it had consulted with the Chinese Consulate in Los Angeles on the matter.
China’s booming economy has increasingly allowed more of its young men and women to seek a college education in the West; 329,000 now study in the United States, more than five times the number recorded a decade ago. 
By far the largest contingent of foreign students, they can be an economic lifeline for colleges, since they usually pay full tuition, and they can provide a healthy dose of international diversity.
But Chinese students always bring to campus something else from home: the watchful eyes and heavy hand of the Chinese government, manifested through its ties to many of the 150-odd chapters of the Chinese Students and Scholars Associations.
The groups have worked in tandem with Beijing to promote a pro-Chinese agenda and tamp down anti-Chinese speech on Western campuses. 
At Columbia a decade ago, the club mobilized students to protest a presentation about human rights violations in China, urging them to “resolutely defend the honor and dignity of the Motherland.” 
At Duke, the group was accused of inciting a harassment campaign in 2008 against a Chinese student who tried to mediate between sides in a Tibet protest. 
More recently in Durham, England, the group acted at the behest of the Chinese government to censor comments at a forum on China-Hong Kong relations.
In many instances, members of the student group have been accused of spying.
The organization’s influence troubles scholars and human rights activists, who say it wields outsize sway over American campuses because of the sizable tuition paid by Chinese students abroad, a group recently exhorted by China’s government to increase their patriotism and devotion to the Communist Party.
“I basically don’t think that any student organizations that are controlled by their government — which clearly the C.S.S.A. is — should have a presence on foreign university campuses,” said Jeffrey Henderson, a professor of international development at the University of Bristol in England.
A Hong Kong expert, Dr. Henderson was invited to speak at a 2014 workshop at Durham University in England organized by the Chinese Students and Scholars and two other groups to discuss the Umbrella Movement — in which protesters had shut down streets in Hong Kong demonstrating against the Chinese government’s failure to hold democratic elections there.
Two days before the workshop, Dr. Henderson said, he received an email on behalf of the president of the Chinese Students and Scholars Association stating that the Chinese Embassy in London was “very concerned that nothing should go on in the workshop that disturbs the harmonious relationship between Hong Kong and China.”
Dr. Henderson arrived with plans to ignore the embassy guidance. 
Yet he found the seminar’s Q. and A. session tightly controlled, permitting only written questions that had been vetted.

Meetings in Motels
For the most part, the clubs function as run-of-the-mill campus groups, providing transportation for new arrivals, sponsoring Lunar New Year celebrations and organizing bilingual job fairs. 
Joining the Chinese Students and Scholars Association on some campuses is competitive. 
Students are required to apply for spots on club committees, and being accepted confers a certain measure of prestige; members often trumpet it on their LinkedIn pages.
Neither the Chinese embassies in Washington and London nor the consulate in Los Angeles responded to questions about their ties to the student organizations.
Leo Yao, departing president of the student association’s chapter at U.C. San Diego, said the group’s only regular interaction with the government was an annual meeting at the consulate, during which student safety and campus events are discussed.
“So it’s true that we have connections with the consulate, but it’s not the kind of relations that many people say we have,” said Mr. Yao, a probability and statistics major from Zhuhai, China. 
“They think we represent the Chinese government, that we do things the Chinese government tells us to do, things like that, but that’s not true.”
Chinese Students and Scholars Association groups started to spread in the 1980s as the number of Chinese students studying abroad began to grow. 
“I came to the U.S. and thought, ‘Wow, great, I’m in a free country, now I hope that everything is cool and happy,’” said Frank Tian Xie, who arrived in the late 1980s to study chemistry at Purdue University. 
“But I found out that the government extended their control to even Chinese students in America.”
Dr. Xie, now a professor at the University of South Carolina, Aiken, said the Chinese Consulate in Chicago tried to handpick officers of the organization and periodically sent a representative to meet with students in a motel room.
Li Fengzhi, a longtime employee of the Chinese Ministry of State Security who came to the United States in 2003 as a graduate student at the University of Denver, said that the Chinese government did not see the group so much as a spying operation, but rather as a propaganda and “information collection organization.” 
Mr. Li eventually defected and was debriefed by F.B.I. counterintelligence agents about the group’s activities.
The ties between the Chinese government and the student groups are not exactly secret. 
At some colleges, like the University of Connecticut and the University of North Texas, the groups’ websites mention that they are supported by or affiliated with Chinese consulates.
Michigan Technological University’s group acknowledges a relationship with the Chinese Embassy, then adds, “However, C.S.S.A. will not participate in any political revolutions, unless in special conditions.”
But their relationship can also be covert. 
In the 1990s, Canadian immigration officials accused a leader of the group’s chapter at Concordia University in Montreal of using funds from the Chinese government and supplying Chinese diplomats with information regarding pro-democracy Chinese students.
In 2005, authorities in Belgium said they had identified another Chinese spy — a member of the Chinese Students and Scholars Association at Leuven University — coordinating industrial espionage agents throughout Europe, according to an unclassified 2011 F.B.I. report.
Perry Link, a China expert and co-editor of the English version of “The Tiananmen Papers,” a compilation of secret Chinese documents relating to the Tiananmen Square protests, characterized the student organization as “a tool of the government’s foreign ministry” that, among other activities, keeps tabs on unpatriotic speech among Chinese students.
“The effect of that surveillance is less that certain people are caught and punished and more that virtually all Chinese students know they could be reported and, therefore, watch what they say in public fora,” said Dr. Link, now a professor at the University of California, Riverside.

Off-Limits Topics

At Columbia in 2007, a Canadian human rights lawyer, David Matas, arrived to find heavy security and a protest by the Chinese Students and Scholars Association against his presentation on China’s mistreatment of adherents of Falun Gong, a spiritual practice that combines portions of Buddhism, meditation and exercise and is banned by the government.
Later, a threatening email — apparently directed at Mr. Matas — was sent to the Columbia group’s website, stating, “Anyone who offends China will be executed no matter how far away they are,” Mr. Matas said recently.
Last month the Columbia chapter held its annual China Prospects Conference at the Low Memorial Library at Columbia, focusing on economic policy and sustainable development. 
Several dozen government, academic and business leaders spoke to an audience of mostly Chinese students, and the agenda avoided third-rail topics such as human rights, Taiwan and the Dalai Lama.
A conference program said it had “full support from the Embassy of the People’s Republic of China.”
Several colleges where the Chinese Students and Scholars Association openly acknowledges ties to the Chinese government, including Columbia, said such ties did not violate any college rules. 
But colleges have found themselves caught up in Chinese politics just the same.
After the University of Calgary conferred an honorary degree on the Dalai Lama in 2009, the Chinese government withdrew Calgary from its list of accredited international universities for a year. 
Enrollment from China dipped slightly, then grew again after accreditation was restored and is now a quarter of the university’s total international students.
At U.C. San Diego, about 3,500 undergraduates hail from China, or more than 10 percent of the student body. 
They pay more than twice what California students pay, providing critical revenue at a time when the University of California system is financially pressured.
Last year, Mr. Khosla, the chancellor, laid the groundwork for the Dalai Lama’s speech, meeting with him in Dharamsala, India, where the Dalai Lama has lived since fleeing Tibet after a 1959 uprising. Through his office, Mr. Khosla declined to be interviewed.

Chancellor Pradeep Khosla of the University of California, San Diego met with the Dalai Lama in Dharamsala, India, in October 2016.

Other than Mr. Yao, the exiting club president, members of the group declined requests for interviews. 
But some other Chinese students said they also were offended by the Dalai Lama’s invitation. 
At the Price Center, a campus student center and food court, several who were eating lunch one recent afternoon predicted protests on June 17, commencement day. 
One said his parents were going to miss his graduation because they refused to be present for the Dalai Lama’s speech.
Shiwei Terry Zhou, a junior from Wuhan, China, said the students felt targeted by the university’s decision. 
“We make good grades. We don’t make trouble. We pay a lot,” Mr. Zhou said. “What is the motivation?”
Despite the pressure, the university has not backed down. 
At a meeting with Mr. Khosla, members of the Chinese Students and Scholars Association asked that the university at least refrain from referring to the Dalai Lama as a “spiritual leader” and that he be prevented from discussing politics.
“Rebranding is very important so we won’t take this personally, maybe,” Mr. Yao said.
The university has not said if it will comply with those demands. 
In a statement, it said it has always “served as a forum for discussion and interaction on important public policy issues and respects the rights of individuals to agree or disagree as we consider issues of our complex world.”

jeudi 22 décembre 2016

UN Catches Up With Philippines' Rodrigo Duterte, Will China Come To Rescue?

By Panos Mourdoukoutas

The United Nations is catching up with Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte’s human rights record, asking the country’s judicial authorities to launch an investigation.
That’s bad news for Duterte and for financial markets, which have been crushed following his flip-flops on South China Sea disputes.
iShares Philippines is down 20.74 percent since last July; iShares for Vietnam, which which has also been involved in the dispute, have lost close to 15 percent of their value.
Obviously, investors are concerned about the rising economic and political risks of the country, and the prospects for the on-going economic integration of the region into the global economy — most notably China, which needs a market frontier for its manufacturing products.
Actually, the international institutions have been very fair with Philippines. 
For example, last July the nation won an international arbitration ruling, which found that China has no historic title over the waters of the South China Sea.
That was a big victory for both the US and Philippines, its close ally, which had filed the arbitration case.
But Rodrigo Duterte didn’t capitalize on the ruling by having China compensate his country for the damage already done. 
Instead, he decided to side with China on the dispute, and seek a “divorce” from the US!
Apparently, Duterte thought that his country is better off appeasing rather than confronting China.
Now, the UN has caught up with his human rights record. 
And he’s going to need China, an influential UN member, to come to his rescue.
Will Beijing do it?
It’s hard to say. 
So far there’s no official response from Beijing on the issue. 
In the meantime, investors in Philippines equities must keep a wary eye on Mr. Duterte’s next flip-flop. 
It may bring more losses.