我译：处在全球抗议中的奥运会危机

处在全球抗议中的奥运会危机

在西藏问题和西方对中国'侮辱'的问题上持强硬的立场预示了更大的危机

中国劳工论坛

北京奥运会已陷入危机。奥运圣火全球接力传递中的抗议活动恢复了国际社会对在西藏的中国政权和'侵犯人权' （一个蓄意的含糊其词的术语，该术语意味着国家镇压）的政策的批评。中国的反应是由国家控制的媒体带头的'捍卫中国的奥运会的'民族主义浪潮，好象这奥运会主要不是一个提供给如阿迪达斯，三星，可口可乐和麦当劳的大企业赞助商的赚钱机会，它们的在中国和世界各地的雇员看不到什么好处。

在伦敦，巴黎和旧金山发生街头抗议活动后，爆发的相互指责的竞赛激化了民族的紧张局势，该局势可能蔓延到更广泛的经济和政治冲突上去。对主办方来说，这是一个严重的失算，自1980年莫斯科奥运会以来，2008年奥运会已成为最政治化的竞赛。不过，那一年的抵制是由西方国家政府发起的，以卡特，撒切尔夫人作为急先锋并得到了他们的'朋友'邓小平（预示着中国市场化的开始）的热切支持。而今天的抗议活动从下面发起。由草根组织领导并获得非常少的国家层面上的支持和鼓励（正好相反）。事实是，到现在，抗议活动相当小，这证明了组织者在得到很少媒体和机构支持的情况下在逆境中运转着。

西方资本主义领导避免批评中国的名不副实的'共产'党（CCP），因为它们的经济是如此依赖于它的反工人和反民主的政策，而且还因为正如俗语所说的：人活在玻璃房里不应该扔石头！鉴于全世界都知道，在美国领导下的对伊拉克的占领导致大约50万人丧生，布什政府没有资格去对其他政权的行为指指点点。布什总统明显地不批评中国政权对西藏的镇压（据说自3月14日以来，有150个藏族人和20多个汉族人被杀害） ，或在作为一个整体的中国层面上，敦促北京，要和达赖喇嘛'对话' 和保持'克制' 。谈到西藏，根据中国社科院的徐由于（音译）的说法，听说有中共高层领导人这样说： "我们背后有布什的支持，所以不会有任何问题。" [瑞典Dagens Nyheter新闻， 2008年3月25日]，这是复制来的近几年的对台湾的模式，既北京和华盛顿之间密切的合作以便制约即将卸任的支持独立的总统陈水扁政府的模式。

来自底层的抗议活动

国际上，各国政府对待西藏问题比起对待中国政权和发生军事镇压的苏丹和缅甸的联系问题上的批评要更为平淡，但海外资本主义真正关注的焦点是中国在非洲和东南亚不断增长的经济和外交影响力。但是，因为西方国家经济上日益依赖于中国，即使这些问题也一直被低调处理。当世界报（ 2008年3月29日）问及法国外交部长库什内尔是否他的政府在西藏问题上的批评由于受到中国的经济力量的影响而“有限”的时候，这一现实被说穿了。 "事实上，这使得事情更加困难， "库什内尔作答。 "如果西藏想要而且有能力购买EPR [法语造]核反应堆，人权问题会立即被提升到和CAC40指数的经济问题的一个水平上。 "他说时谈到了巴黎股市的主要指数CAC40指数。据说法国总统萨尔科齐考虑对奥运开幕式的'抵制'，但，这明显是一个伎俩以便能恢复据民意调查已经下滑的支持率。作为国事访问，去年11月就是这个萨尔科齐带领30人的代表团，其中包括一半他的内阁成员访问北京，而其人权部长却留在巴黎！萨尔科齐带走了200亿欧元的中国政府合同。

然而，这志得意满并可获巨额利润的资本主义国家政府之间的生意安排，由于奥运会引发的民族主义情绪的高涨而变得令人心烦。在欧洲，最近在金融时报（英国， 2008年4月15日）上的一项民意调查显示了一个重大的态度转变，英国，法国，德国和意大利的人们现在把中国看作一个比美国对全球稳定的威胁更大的国家。在美国，中国被视为一个比北韩或伊朗更大的威胁。这也反映在美国总统竞选中，该选举始终是一个猛击中国的机会，虽然这通常在赢家一旦当选后会淡化。尤其是希拉里正在挣扎着继续竞选，在布什的计划参加奥运开幕式的问题上圆满结束她的竞选。作为白宫西藏特使的副国务卿多布里扬斯基和达赖喇嘛会晤将在下周举行，这会进一步加深危机。在流亡西藏领导的基地的印度，藏族示威者可能得到来自印度教原教旨主义人民党（BJP）的“支持”而有着莫名的快乐，这个人民党（BJP）强烈反对克什米尔和阿萨姆邦和印度其他地区的人民的自决权，但它假惺惺指责辛格政府"对中国的公然的绥靖政策" 。

对主办者来说，保卫奥运火炬（或被中国媒体称之为'圣火'）的遍布世界各地的庞大的安全警戒线宣告着这是一个灾祸。巴黎警方发言人告诉卫报[英国， 2008年4月8日]说，市的保安行动"有点像为布什总统进行的" 。这样的媒体形象，特别是负责守护圣火的由中国人民武装警察部队（PAP）“飞龙” 精选人员组成团队的高姿态并且有时表现为好斗的角色比藏族流亡政府和中国人权组织的游说和宣传更让人联想到在即将举办奥运会的中国和西藏的镇压和缺乏民主权利的问题。
在一个新的对中国和国际奥委会主办方的冲击中，足球运动员马拉多纳退出了布宜诺斯艾利斯的火炬接力，假定马拉多纳与卡斯特罗的古巴政府和委内瑞拉的总统乌戈查韦斯政府-这两个政权已经公开表示支持中国军事镇压西藏-联系紧密的话，该举动是突兀的。


强硬的形势

在写作本文时，形势越来越强硬。但是中国独裁政府拒绝取消涵盖六大洲的有史以来最长的火炬接力（ 130天），因为这会被看作在国际压力面前表现为软弱的迹象，退却可能会严重动摇一党专政的地位。各种抗议团体意识到来自国际上的越来越多的支持，当然由于资产阶级政客正忙于选举便使用虚伪的和民族主义的论调。他们采取这一狡猾的立场，是因为统治阶级，尤其是占主导地位的帝国主义国家，震惊于中国政权在有关奥运的问题上的顽固立场并认为这是中国政权在未来其他-更重要的-经济和地缘政治争端上会采取更强硬的立场的一个迹象。

国际奥林匹克委员会（IOC），突然发现自己处在作为抗议行动目标的八国集团，世贸组织和其他象征着公司的贪婪和强权政治的对象之列。如果在主要国家存在强大的工人阶级政党，他们将有可能呼吁工人团结起来与全球性的政治和宗教压迫和资本主义的剥削斗争。不幸的是，由于没有一个代表工人阶级或站在国际主义立场的重要组织，围绕着抗议的争论在各方面反而摆出民族主义的调子。示威普遍地被西方媒体称为"反中国的"或"亲中的"示威 ，把独裁政权和被压迫的人民群众混为一谈（经常代表美国和其他外国公司） 。许多中国人看来，这似乎是一项针对作为传统上被西方种族主义统治者看低的人民的他们的运动，基于这个原因，在此阶段，许多人在中共政权的支持下正纷纷站在民族主义路线上。

事实上为西藏自由运动代言的很多人都是西方人，而不是藏族人，这也有利于给共产党的宣传提供口实说抗议活动是由西方国家政府和中央情报局组织的，他们利用西藏问题对中国进行攻击。正如我们所看到的正好相反。连达赖喇嘛和他的资产阶级西藏流亡政府-他们拼命试图和中国政权谈判-也不支持抗议或呼吁抵制奥林匹克。达赖喇嘛最近确认甚至在对西藏的镇压继续着的情况下，他的政府的特使已经开始与北京政权进行"私人"会谈。国家主席胡锦涛要求达赖喇嘛表现出"具体行动" 以便能够举行认真的会谈。北京希望西藏精神领袖自己能无条件地和抗议保持距离并敦促他的追随者与当局合作。在今后一段时间里，这中可能性并没有被排除，但会导致他和西藏流亡运动更深的分裂并进一步削弱其领导力，他的和解路线就遭到了严厉批评。
奥运是'非政治性'的吗？

各处的资本主义机关声称政治不应该带进体育，这是纯粹的伪善！1971年毛泽东治下，中国向西方打开大门就是以允许美国的国家乒乓球队在中国打球的决定开始的。今天，特别地看西藏一隅，中国政权正在利用奥运会问题作为一个具有高度政治性的话题。它进行了大规模的宣传活动，把据称是反中国倾向的针对奥林匹克的抗议制造成中国受到攻击而且必须保卫自己的样子。由于受到西方和日本帝国主义在过去犯下的罪行之苦，中国的民族主义已深深扎根。但细看该政权的政策，暴露了其目前立场的虚伪性。中共废除了该国曾经的广泛的福利制度（免费医疗，廉价公共住房，免费上学）以及资助这一切改革的官僚计划经济，都是为了拥抱资本主义经济和大量的外国资本。 50000家美国公司在中国境内经营并以减税，补贴土地和廉价劳动力的形式从中共政权那里得到大量的施舍。中国工人和农民到底有什么理由应该'保卫' 这个东西，或目前的政权推行的其他的资本主义政策呢？

中共政权与外国资本的战略联盟在北京奥运会中体现出来了。奥运是公司赞助的盛事，主要的作用是为其赞助商和新闻媒体及建筑商获得巨额利润。它提供给在艰难的经济中生存下来的工人除了暂时性的娱乐外几乎什么都没有！被中国政权改造成为中国'荣誉'一个象征的火炬接力已经似乎作为纳粹胜利的象征的1936年柏林奥运会开始了其进程。它和国际主义或和谐关系没有任何关系。3月通过西藏（包括计划攀登珠穆朗玛峰）、新疆和台湾的路线的中国政权的决定都不能被形容为'非政治性的'。这种过分的宣传噱头是要显示自己的力量并使民众从真正的问题：失业，低工资，致命的污染和急剧上升的食品价格上转移注意力的各处统治精英的特点。

从某种意义上说，世界人口的一半将'抵制'今年的奥运会，因为他们太穷而没有电视或不能停止劳作。专门兴建的北京国家体育场-'鸟巢' -能容纳最多9万1千名观众，或中国的人口的0.00007％。尽管事实上，他们的城市是中国一个富有的城市，大多数北京市民买不起体育场门票，在这些地方最好的座位将被富裕的外国人和中国的精英占用。运动场耗资35亿元（ 3.5亿欧元）兴建。同时在中国， 2.6亿人，其中有许多是藏族和其他少数民族的人口，都无法获得安全的饮用水。由于在中国北方的荒漠化和地下含水层损耗，北京市本身正面临严峻的缺水问题。 为比赛期间三个星期里呆在该城市的外国记者、运动员和游客“解决”这个问题，北京全市已获准流干邻近省河北的用水储备，这正促使工业主和农民进行抗议。

2008年奥运会是为了庆祝这个'新中国'，其乃这个资本主义全球化进程中的一个关键玩家，而其贫富差距现在比俄罗斯或印度更为极端。中国有106个美元计的亿万富翁，只比美国少。然而， 3亿人仍然生活在不到世界银行定义为绝对贫困的每一天一美元（ 7元）的水平下。对于绝大多数仍旧贫困的中国人来说，如今所需要的是斗争和组织起来-而不是那浪费性的民族主义者和公司的盛会！


民族主义的冲突


所描绘的一切批评它的政策都是'攻击'中国和“企图分裂“中国，暂时，中共已成功地动员公众的支持，尤其是来自城市的中产阶层与生活在国外的华人社区阶层的支持。中文传媒三十年来没有使用过这样的反西方言论，他们几十年来一直试图效仿和垂涎西方的一切事物。即使是政权的批评者和中国左派部分也在一定程度上受到这种民族主义浪潮的席卷。中共是抄袭了布什和美国共和党的宣传方式，布什和美国共和党虚假地把反对伊拉克和阿富汗的战争都描绘成为'反美'和'支持恐怖'的 。结果-出轨-可以在类似的意义上导致对欺骗其人民的政府的大规模的失望和愤怒。但这一政策也带来了巨大的民族主义升级的和由政客机会主义地掀起的以反中国民族主义的形式出现的全球性反弹的风险。

资产阶级媒体在国际上再次鼓吹"西方价值观" 以反对亚洲的"专制资本主义" ，好象前者没有剥削和依赖后者。在最近几个星期，国外的警察部队已经逮捕了几乎和中国安全部队逮捕的西藏抗议者同样多的人（不过当然他们接下来得到的处理会不一样）。在伦敦，据报道，警方甚至拘捕身穿'自由西藏' T恤衫的青年-如此多的言论自由！

右翼评论家暗示民主权利是犹太教和基督教的资本主义社会所固有的。这完全是无稽之谈！在历史上，欧洲资本主义国家对亚洲大多数地区的统治使用类似于现在中国政权使用的方法，英国统治下的香港也没有自由选举，举例来说，1904年至第二次世界大战时期，英国军队侵略和占领下的西藏也是如此。大部分的欧洲当年并未享受普选直到1917年在俄罗斯发生布尔什维克革命后，该革命迫使各处的资本家在害怕反抗下开始意义深远的改革。历史已经表明，最终保证人的基本民主权利的是强大的有组织地开展的工人运动。现在在西方国家，尤其是自'反恐战争'开始以来，这些权利正日益受到攻击，这些权利只能通过持续的工作阶级斗争并最终推翻资本主义而代之以民主的社会主义社会才能维持。
如果不采取措施来消解奥林匹克的危机，这可能标志着一个新的竞争性资本主义阵营之间的'冷战'。4月9日旧金山大游行中见证的被政权认可的'亲中国'的阵营，各类右翼民族主义者，法西斯份子，国民党支持者和黑手党份子-没有中国工人阶级的朋友-正在抓住这个机会扩大其影响力。一位89民运事件的资深人士在T恤衫上写着“莫忘天安门事件”在旧金山游行而遭到了身体上的攻击并被亲中国政权者称为'汉奸'。在澳大利亚，因为本地中国国旗供应已告罄，动员'保卫'4月24日奥运圣火的华人组织不得不额外订购以准备库存。同时，藏族民族运动鼓吹独立并反对达赖喇嘛的'更大的自治权'诉求的主张，这因为镇压而更显优势。官方2008年奥运会的口号-'同一个世界，同一个梦想-成为一个笑话！

从反日示威中得到教训

正如2005年发生的反日的街头抗议活动表明的，当它开始威胁到中国的出口市场和外来投资时，中国政权可以消解抗议，并封锁民族主义互联网大合唱。在今天的不稳定环境下，其对中国的经济的威胁将更为严重。没有大的经济体如中国那样更加依赖于全球市场。另一个-甚至更大-威胁到中国政权的是由承受超级剥削的工人阶级形成的，这些工人阶级将抓住机会为增加工资和反对外国资本家而获得其他方面的改善而罢工，这些外国资本家拥有中国工业的四分之一（虽然这些公司和中国'的'民族资本联系甚深） 。在2005年4月至5月，大连市40000名工人，深圳12000名工人罢工以反对他们的日本老板。他们要求建立自由工会组织，虽然他们没有赢得这个关键的诉求，但罢工赢得了可观的经济让步。

紧接着法国政客（具有讽刺意味的，包括那和社会党和绿党一起统治巴黎城的共产党）的'侮辱'和被认为是攻击中国残奥运动员金晶，中国正在进行抵制法国商品的一项运动。她被中国媒体称为"轮椅上的天使" ，并因为她使得巴黎示威者夺取奥运圣火的企图失败而被给予明星的地位。但这种抵制运动是反动的，并道明了中国境内目前的争论中哪个社会阶层是最响亮的。十分之九的中国人都买不起法国葡萄酒或路易威登手袋，所以从这个意义上讲，他们已经'抵制'这些货物。互联网活动份子也呼吁一个全国性的抵制作为在中国的最大的外国零售商的家乐福的运动。但这一运动-如果成功-将主要伤害该公司的40000名中国员工，而不是家乐福的法国老板。

比较而言，去年7月四川3000名工人痛击了法国水泥跨国公司拉法基，该公司关闭了在江油市附近的工厂。而民族主义者在那个时候没有呼吁抵制法国商品。接着， 2000名既今天护卫奥运圣火并镇压藏族示威者的准军事警察（ PAP）镇压了工人两周的罢工。一名25岁的女工自杀以抗议法国公司与它的中国帮凶。不像今天的奥林匹克抗议活动或西藏的暴动，四川的抗议在该国媒体从未报道过。

西藏-出路何在？

正如社会主义者所警告说的：中国政权正在利用西藏事件以及现在的针对奥运的抗议活动以获得公众支持，以便其进一步镇压和抑制对其反穷人政策的所有批评。从宣传的角度而言，政权从汉人与回族穆斯林平民在3月14日的骚乱中受到攻击的事件中得到了很大的帮助。在宣布由群众特别是工人阶级自我成立的组织为非法的政权下，遗憾的是有一个种族间的暴力高风险存在着。中国的谚语： "杀鸡敬猴" ！今天在藏族人身上应用了，但目前的讯息-"服从或予以粉碎！" -是特别针对庞大的中国工人阶级的。应该记住，在1989年3月在西藏作为该政党老板的胡锦涛军事镇压了西藏并导致数百名死亡。 3个月后，该同样的方法被用-以更大的流血事件-在北京的工人和青年身上。

镇压西藏遵循的模式同于中国政府用于其他对权力和权威构成挑战的大规模抗议活动的模式。2005年12月6日在广东省的汕尾大屠杀是一个很好的例子。官方统计， 3名村民为抗议兴建一所高污染电厂被打死。当地居民说， 13人死亡，并指责当局隐瞒尸体和为了掩盖事件真相而恐吓村民的的行为。汕尾的所有受害者都是汉族中国人。国家的电视台从来没有报道这些画面，这有别于西藏人暴乱事件的画面几乎每天被报道至数周之久。事实上，西藏事件是唯一显示于该国电视上的政治动乱的情形，据官方公布的暴乱，焚烧警车，以及其他暴力行为的图像每周连篇累牍地报道。 据报于今年3月福建反污染抗议活动中，7名示威者和1名警察被打死。以此为例。这些事件的新闻-其中没有藏人参加了-当然已经完全被封锁消息了。


西藏的诉求宗教和政治权利的抗议活动，最近几周得到其他中西部地区和多数突厥语为母语的新疆的抗议的回应，并且已经受到了国际上工人阶级和青年的极大的同情。这一切与这些国家的资产阶级立场完全不同，这些资产阶级对苦难的中国或西藏人民毫不关心，只捍卫他们自身的利润。中国政权和其他民族主义者说的在国外的大多数人从来没有到过西藏，不知道真实情况作为反驳的依据在很大程度上是无关宏旨的。2003年举行示威反对美国在伊拉克战争的30万人中大部分人没有去过伊拉克或美国，但他们见证了军事侵略。


对中国政权的一系列的错误判断的帮助下，西藏的冲突已被输入世界各地的人们的意识中。但这个矛盾在资本主义的基础上是不能得到解决的。中共政权再多的镇压也不能使大部分藏民甘心于他们现在所处的处境。但西藏流亡政府的资产阶级领导和各类几乎是宗教驱动的“西藏的朋友”的斗争也提供不了任何前进的道路。随着北京方面采取越来越严厉的措施，现在有预兆特别是一部分藏族青年被驱动接受个人恐怖主义的方法。社会主义者反对这种方法并认为这是一个有根本性的缺陷的斗争方法，只会给中国国家以籍口来推行更大的镇压，同时使和汉族的中国工人和农民团结起来并肩战斗更加困难。要从独裁与民族压迫中解放出来，只能通过基于工人阶级的力量的民主控制的和有组织的群众斗争。

敌人是资本主义
藏族和汉族的中国人几个世纪来一直有着密切的互动。许多藏族家庭敬仰毛泽东，因为他在结束封建主义和改善社会条件上起到的作用，虽然他的笨重的官僚主义方法-该方法只为斯大林专制所用-也疏远了许多人。但目前的冲突不仅是1959年或1989年的冲突再次出现（如需了解更多背景：请参阅我们的文章《西藏和民族问题》） 。在西藏，资本主义的发展极度加剧了社会紧张局势，由于大多数藏族人（ 75 ％的人生活在农村地区）与过去十年的经济繁荣无缘。主要的问题不是宗教，语言和民族自由的问题，虽然这些也是很重要的问题，最近的动乱是一个反弹以反对日益增长的经济富裕的汉人甚至回族人对西藏的支配，而西藏人在经济上被边缘化。 Pankaj Mishra在卫报周刊（英国， 2008年3月28日）的报道中认定资本主义是敌人， 该报道是少数西方一语中的的报道之一。
社会主义者维护西藏人民决定自己未来的权利，直至包括独立的权利。但在西藏各族裔社会之间甚至藏族人之间有很大的分化。北京政权扶植藏族官员和学者们这个重要阶层，这些人担心如果达赖喇嘛政府作为通过谈判解决问题的一部分被允许返回的话，他们的特权和地位将受到动摇，而他们更恐惧的是群众。而对于流亡政府来说，在中国内的更大的自治的“中间道路”已经不再是一个“策略”，而是表达他们这些前封建主能够成为由北京输入大量资本而蓬勃发展的香格里拉旅游的资本主义利益相关者的愿望。 大部分外部的资本主义评论家不知道这里事实上有两个互为竞争对手的藏族资产阶级精英，一个内部的和一个外部的，以拉萨为基础的精英比北京中共高层更敌视与达赖喇嘛的交易。
在这场争端中，中国，西藏和在国际上的工人阶级必须采取一个独立的不同于民族资产阶级阵营的立场-明确反对种族主义和民族沙文主义，并且支持工人阶级的团结和国际主义。具体而言，西藏广大人民群众为争取基本的民主权利和结束国家镇压以及民主地对经济的控制权利的斗争需要和整个中国正在展开的工人阶级和农民的斗争结合起来。这项运动必须争取：
*结束一党专政和国家的镇压
*集会自由，言论、宗教信仰的自由
*组织建立独立工会，农会和政党的权利，包括首要的任务建立一个战斗的工人党
*结束私有化和新自由主义的攻击。把所有外国人和中国人私有的大公司在民主的工人控制和管理下收归国有。基于选举产生的工厂委员会，农会和其他受欢迎的机关进行真正的社会主义计划生产。结束国家官僚的特权。
*西藏人民和其他少数民族享有自决权，同时认识到资本主义和民族压迫（帝国主义）只能通过以建立作为世界社会主义联邦一部分的民主的和自愿的中国和其他亚洲国家的社会主义联邦为目标的国际社会主义的斗争才能得到克服。

Olympic Games in crisis amid global protests

Hardening positions over Tibet and Western ’insults’ to China threaten wider crisis

chinaworker.info

The Beijing Olympic Games have been plunged into crisis. The protests following the Olympic torch on its global relay have revived international criticism of the policies of the Chinese regime in Tibet and on ’human rights abuses’ (a deliberately vague term that means state repression). The reaction in China has been a wave of nationalism led by the state-controlled media to ’defend China’s Olympics’, as if the Games were not primarily a money-making opportunity for big corporate sponsors like Adidas, Samsung, Coca Cola and McDonald’s, whose workers – in China and worldwide – will see none of the benefits.

The blame game that erupted after street protests in London, Paris and San Fransisco has led to sharpening national tensions that could spill over into a wider economic and political conflict. In a disastrous miscalculation for all the organisers the 2008 Games have become the most politicised Games since Moscow in 1980. But whereas the boycott that year was led by Western governments, spearheaded by Jimmy Carter, Margaret Thatcher and eagerly supported by their ’friend’ Deng Xiaoping (heralding the start of China’s long march to the market), today’s protests have developed from below. They have been led by grassroots organisations and have received very little support and encouragement (rather the opposite is true) at state level. The fact that the protests have been fairly small is proof that the organisers have largely operated in a ’headwind’ with little media or establishment backing – until now.

Western capitalist leaders have avoided criticism of China’s misnamed ’communist’ party (CCP) because their economies are so dependent on its anti-worker and anti-democratic policies, but also because as the saying goes: People who live in glasshouses shouldn’t throw stones! Given what the world knows about the half a million people killed under the US occupation of Iraq, the Bush Administration is hardly in a position to pronounce judgement on the actions of other regimes. President Bush has noticeably not criticised the Chinese regime for its repression in Tibet (where reportedly 150 Tibetans and more than 20 Han Chinese have been killed since 14 March), or in China as a whole, urging Beijing instead to ’talk’ to the Dalai Lama and show ’restraint’. Referring to Tibet, a top CCP leader was heard to say, ”We have Bush behind us, so there won’t be any problems,” according to Xu Youyu of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. [From Dagens Nyheter, Sweden, 25 March 2008] This replicates the pattern from Taiwan in recent years, where Beijing and Washington have cooperated closely to restrain the outgoing government of pro-independence president Chen Shui-bian.

Protests from below

Governments internationally have been more muted over Tibet than over the Chinese regime’s links with Sudan and Burma, where military crackdowns have occurred, but where the real focus of concern for overseas capitalism is China’s growing economic and diplomatic clout in Africa and Southeast Asia. Even those concerns, however, have been played down because of the West’s growing economic dependence on China. This reality was spelt out bluntly by the French Foreign Minister, Bernhard Kouchner, who was asked by Le Monde (29 March 2008) if his government’s criticism over Tibet was ’limited’ by China’s economic power. ”Indeed that makes things more difficult,” Kouchner replied. ”If Tibet wanted and had the means to buy EPR [French made] nuclear reactors, human rights would immediately be on a level footing with the CAC 40,” he said referring to the Paris stock market’s main index. French president Sarkozy is allegedly considering a ’boycott’ of the Olympic opening ceremony, but this is an obvious ploy to rebuild his sinking support in opinion polls. When the same Sarkozy visited Beijing on a state visit last November, with a 30-strong delegation that included half his cabinet, the Minister for Human Rights was left behind in Paris! Sarkozy came away with €20 billion worth of Chinese government contracts.

Yet this smug and hugely profitable business arrangement between the various capitalist governments could now be upset by an upsurge of nationalist sentiment triggered by the Olympics. A recent opinion poll in the Financial Times (UK, 15 April 2008) revealed a major shift in attitudes in Europe, with people in Britain, France, Germany and Italy now seeing China as a bigger threat to global stability than the US. In the US, China was seen as a bigger threat than North Korea or Iran. This is also reflected in the US presidential race, always an opportunity for China-bashing, although this is usually toned down by the winner once elected. Especially Hillary Clinton, who is struggling to stay in the race, has rounded off on Bush’s plan to attend the opening Olympic ceremony. A meeting between the White House envoy on Tibet, Paula Dobriansky, and the Dalai Lama, due to be held next week, could further deepen the crisis. In India, the base of exile Tibetan leaders, Tibetan protesters may have the dubious pleasure of being ’supported’ by the Hindu fundamentalist BJP, which vehemently opposes self-determination for the peoples of Kashmir, Assam and other parts of India, but hypocritically accuses Manmohan Singh’s government of ”blatant appeasement towards China”.

The images beamed all over the world of a massive security cordon to shield the Olympic torch (or ’sacred flame’ as the Chinese media call it), are a propaganda disaster for the organisers. A Paris police spokesman told The Guardian [UK, 8 April 2008] that the city’s security operation, ”was a bit like that put in place for George Bush”. Such media images, especially the high profile and at times aggressive role of a squad from the elite ’Flying Dragons’ unit of China’s People’s Armed Police (PAP) charged with guarding the torch, have done more to connect the issue of repression and lack of democratic rights in China and Tibet with the coming Olympics than any amount of lobbying and publicity by Tibetan exiles or Chinese human rights groups. In a fresh blow to the Chinese and IOC organisers, the footballer Diego Maradona pulled out of the torch relay in Beunos Aires, an unexpected move given Maradona’s close links to Castro’s Cuba and the government of Hugo Ch·vez in Venezuela – two regimes that have publicly supported China’s military crackdown in Tibet.

Hardening positions

At the time of writing positions are hardening. The Chinese dictatorship refuses to cancel the longest ever torch-relay (130 days) covering six continents, because this would be seen as a sign of weakness in the face of international pressure, a retreat that could seriously undermine the position of the one-party state. The various protest groups sense growing public support internationally, but of course capitalist politicians are now jumping on the bandwagon for electoral reasons, using hypocritical and nationalist arguments. This shifting stance is because the ruling class, particularly in the dominant imperialist states, are alarmed by the Chinese regime’s intransigence over Olympic-related issues and see this as a sign of a tougher stand in future over other – more important – economic and geo-political disputes.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) suddenly finds itself in the company of the G8, WTO and other symbols of corporate greed and power politics that are the target of protests. With strong working class parties in key countries it would be possible to issue an appeal for workers’ unity against political and religious repression and capitalist exploitation globally. Unfortunately, given that none of the main groupings involved represent a working class or internationalist position, the debate surrounding the protests has assumed a nationalistic tone on all sides. The demonstrations are universally described by the Western media as ”anti-China” or ”pro-China”, lumping together the dictatorial regime and the masses it oppresses (often on behalf of US and other foreign companies). To many Chinese this appears to be a campaign against them as a people, traditionally looked down upon by racist Western rulers, and for this reason many at this stage are lining up on nationalist lines behind the CCP regime.

The fact that many spokesmen for the Free Tibet movement are Westerners, not Tibetans, also helps feed the propaganda of the CCP that the protests are organised by Western governments and the CIA, who exploit the Tibetan issue to attack China. As we have seen, the opposite is true. Not even the Dalai Lama and his bourgeois Tibetan exile government – who are desperate for negotiations with the Chinese regime – support the protests or the call for an Olympic boycott. The Dalai Lama confirmed recently that envoys of his government have entered into ”private” talks with the Beijing regime even as the clampdown in Tibet continues. President Hu Jintao demands that the Dalai Lama show ”concrete action” in order for serious talks to take place. Beijing wants the Tibetan leader to distance himself even more categorically from the protests, and to urge his followers to cooperate with the authorities. This is not excluded in the coming period, but would provoke deep schisms within the Tibetan exile movement and further undermine a leadership that is heavily criticised for its conciliatory line.

Are the Olympics ’non-political’?

The claim by the capitalist establishment everywhere that politics shouldn’t be brought into sport is pure hypocrisy! China’s opening to the West under Mao Zedong in 1971 began with the decision to allow the US national table tennis team to play in China. Today, backed into a corner over Tibet in particular, the Chinese regime is using the issue of the Olympics as part of a highly political gambit. It has given massive publicity to the allegedly anti-Chinese slant of the Olympic protests to create the idea that China is under attack and must defend itself. Chinese nationalism has deep roots as a result of the crimes committed by Western and Japanese imperialism in the past. But a closer look at the regime’s policies exposes the hypocrisy of its current position. The CCP has dismantled the country’s once extensive welfare system (free health care, cheap public housing, free schooling) and the bureaucratically planned economy that financed these reforms, in order to embrace capitalist economics and massive amounts of foreign capital. 50,000 US companies operate from inside China and receive massive handouts from the CCP regime in the form of tax breaks, subsidised land, and cheap labour. Why on earth should workers and peasants in China ’defend’ this, or the other capitalist policies of the present regime?

The CCP regime’s strategic alliance with foreign capital is embodied in the Beijing Olympics. The Olympics is a corporate sporting spectacle, the main role of which is to make huge profits for its sponsors and the media and construction industries. It offers little for working people other than a temporary distraction from the hard grind of economic survival. The torch relay which has been transformed by the Chinese regime into a symbol of Chinese ’honour’ actually began life at the 1936 Berlin Olympics as a symbol of Nazi triumphalism. It has nothing whatsoever to do with internationalism or harmonious relations. The Chinese regime’s decision to route the march through Tibet (including a plan to scale Mount Everest), Xinjiang and Taiwan cannot be described as ’non-political’. Such lavish publicity stunts are the hallmark of ruling elites everywhere that want to show their strength and deflect popular attention from the real issues: jobs, low wages, deadly pollution and surging food prices.

Half the world’s population will ’boycott’ this year’s Olympics in the sense that they are too poor to get to a television or to stop working. The specially-built Beijing National Stadium – or ’Bird’s Nest’ – can hold a maximum of 91,000 spectators, or 0.00007 percent of China’s population. Despite the fact their city is one of the richest in China, most citizens of Beijing cannot afford a ticket to the arena, where the best seats will be occupied by wealthy foreigners and the Chinese elite. The stadium has cost 3.5 billion yuan (350 million euros) to build. Meanwhile 260 million people in China, including many Tibetans and other minorities, have no access to safe drinking water. Beijing itself faces a severe water shortage as a result of desertification in northern China and depletion of the underground aquifer. To ’solve’ this problem for the three weeks that foreign journalists, athletes and tourists are in the city for the Games, the city of Beijing has been allowed to drain the neighbouring province of Hebei of its water reserves, prompting protests from industrialists and farmers there.

The 2008 Olympics is intended to celebrate this ’New China’, a key player in the process of capitalist globalisation, but where the wealth gap is now more extreme than in Russia or India. China has 106 dollar billionaires, only the USA has more. Yet 300 million people still live on less than one dollar (7 yuan) per day, the World Bank’s definition of absolute poverty. For the vast majority of China’s still poor population what’s needed is struggle and organisation – not extravagant nationalist and corporate pageants!

Clash of nationalisms

By portraying all criticism of its policies as an ’attack on’ and ’attempt to split’ China, the CCP has succeeded temporarily in mobilising public support, especially from the urban middle classes and sections of the Chinese community living abroad. Not for thirty years has such anti-Western rhetoric been used by the Chinese media, who for decades have rather tried to emulate and covet all things Western. Even regime critics and sections of the Chinese left have been swept along to some extent by this nationalist wave. The CCP is copying the propaganda of Bush and the US Republicans, who falsely portrayed all opposition to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as ’anti-American’ and ’pro-terror’. The results – further down the line – can be similar in the sense of massive disillusionment and anger against a government that lies to its people. But this policy also entails huge risks for an escalation of Chinese nationalism and a global backlash in the form of anti-China nationalism opportunistically whipped up by politicians.

The bourgeois media internationally is once again trumpeting ”Western values” as against Asia’s ”authoritarian capitalism”, as if the former did not exploit and rest upon the latter. Police forces outside China have arrested almost as many Tibetan protesters in recent weeks as Chinese security forces (although of course their subsequent treatment will not be the same). In London, it was reported that police even arrested youth wearing ’Free Tibet’ tee-shirts – so much for freedom of speech!

Right-wing commentators imply that democratic rights are intrinsic to Judeo-Christian capitalist societies. This is nonsense! Historically, the European capitalist states ruled much of Asia using similar methods to those the Chinese regime uses today: There were no free elections in Hong Kong under British rule, for example, or in Tibet which was invaded and occupied by British troops from 1904 until the Second World War. Most of Europe did not enjoy universal suffrage until after the Bolshevik revolution in Russia in 1917, which forced the capitalists elsewhere to institute far-reaching reforms for fear of revolt. History has shown that the ultimate guarantor of basic democratic rights is a strong organised workers’ movement. These rights are increasingly coming under attack in Western countries especially since the start of the ’war on terror’, and can only be maintained by sustained working class struggle and ultimately by overthrowing capitalism and replacing it with a democratic socialist society.

Unless steps are taken to diffuse the Olympic crisis, this could mark the beginning of a new ’Cold War’ between rival capitalist camps. Within the regime-sanctioned ’pro-China’ camp, as seen by their big demonstration in San Fransisco on 9 April, an assortment of right-wing nationalists, fascists, Kuomintang supporters and mafia – no friends of the Chinese working class – are seizing this opportunity to extend their influence. A veteran of the 1989 Beijing events was physically attacked and called a ’traitor’ by pro-regime Chinese at the San Fransisco demonstration for a tee-shirt saying ’Don’t forget Tienanmen’. In Australia, Chinese organisations that are mobilising to ’defend’ the Olympic Torch on 24 April have had to order extra stocks of Chinese national flags as local supplies have been exhausted. The official 2008 Olympic slogan – ’One world, one dream’ – has become a joke! Meanwhile within the Tibetan national movement advocates of independence as opposed to the ’greater autonomy’ espoused by the Dalai Lama are gaining ground as the repression intensifies.

Lessons from anti-Japan protests

As the anti-Japan street protests in 2005 showed, however, the Chinese regime can move to diffuse the protests and lock down the nationalist internet chorus when this begins to pose a threat to its export markets and foreign investments. In today’s precarious environment the threats to China’s economy are even more serious. No large economy is more dependent on global markets than China. Another – even greater – threat to the Chinese regime is posed by the super-exploited working class, which could seize the opportunity to go on strike for wage increases and other improvements against the foreign capitalists who own a quarter of China’s industry (although these companies are heavily enmeshed with ’national’ Chinese capital). In April-May 2005, 40,000 workers in Dalian and 12,000 in Shenzhen, downed tools against their Japanese bosses. Among their demands were free trade unions and while they did not win this crucial demand, the strikes secured substantial economic concessions.

A campaign is now underway in China for a boycott of French goods following the ’insult’ delivered by French politicians (ironically including the Communist Party, which runs the city of Paris together with the Socialist Party and Greens), and the perceived attack on Chinese paralympic athlete, Jin Jing. She has been dubbed the ”angel in a wheelchair” by Chinese media and given star status after she fought off an attempt to seize the Olympic torch by a Paris protester. But this boycott campaign is reactionary, and says a lot about which social classes are most vocal in the current debate inside China. Nine-tenths of Chinese people cannot afford to buy French wine or Louis Vuitton handbags, so in that sense they are already ’boycotting’ these goods. Internet activists are also calling for a nationwide boycott of Carrefour, the biggest foreign retailer in China. But this campaign – if successful – will mainly hurt the company’s 40,000 Chinese employees rather than Carrefour’s French bosses.

Compare this stance to when 3,000 workers in Sichuan last July fought a bitter struggle against the French cement multinational Lafarge, which closed their factory near Jiangyou City. There were no calls from the nationalists for a boycott of French goods at that time. Then, a 2,000-strong contingent of the same paramilitary police (PAP) that today guards the Olympic flame and suppresses Tibetan demonstrators, was used to crush the workers’ two-week strike. One 25-year old woman worker committed suicide in protest against the French company and its Chinese state heavies. Unlike today’s Olympic protests, or Tibet’s riots, the protests in Sichuan were never reported in the state media.

Tibet – What’s the solution?

As socialists have warned the Chinese regime is using events in Tibet, and now the Olympic protests, to garner public support for its much greater use of repression and to silence all criticism of its anti-poor policies. From a propaganda standpoint the regime was helped enormously by the attacks on Han Chinese and Hui Muslim civilians during the 14 March riots. There is unfortunately a high risk for inter-ethnic violence under a regime that outlaws self-organisation by the masses, especially by the working class. There is a Chinese saying: ”Kill the chicken to scare the monkey”! Today an example is being made of the Tibetans, but the message – ”obey or be crushed!” – is aimed particularly at the huge working class of China. It should be remembered that in March 1989 Hu Jintao, then party boss in Tibet, organised a military crackdown in Tibet with hundreds killed. Three months later the same methods were used – with even greater bloodshed – against the workers and youth of Beijing.

The repression in Tibet follows a pattern from other mass protests that pose a challenge to the power and authority of the Chinese government. The Shanwei massacre on 6 December 2005 in Guangdong province is a case in point. Officially, three villagers were shot dead for protesting against the construction of a high-polluting power plant. Local residents say 13 were killed and accuse the authorities of hiding corpses and terrorising villagers as part of a cover-up. All the victims in Shanwei were Han Chinese. These images were never shown on state television, unlike the footage of rioting Tibetans which has been shown almost daily for several weeks. In fact, the Tibetan events are the only case of political unrest to be shown on television, in a country where according to official figures, riots, burning of police cars, and other acts of violence, occur on an almost weekly basis. Seven protesters and one policeman were reportedly killed in March in anti-pollution protests in Fujian province, for example. News of these events – in which no Tibetans took part – has of course been completely blacked out.

The protests demanding religious and political rights in Tibet, echoed in recent weeks by protests in other Western regions and in the majority Turkic-speaking province of Xinjiang, have met with great sympathy from working people and youth internationally. This has nothing to do with the stand of the capitalist classes in these countries who do not give a damn for the plight of the Chinese or Tibetan peoples, providing their own profits are safeguarded. The retort of the Chinese regime and other nationalists that most people abroad have never been to Tibet and don’t know the real situation there is largely irrelevant. Most of the 30 million people who demonstrated against the US war in Iraq in 2003 had not been to Iraq or the US, but recognised military aggression when they saw it.

The Tibetan conflict has been pushed to the fore of people’s consciousness around the world, helped by a series of miscalculations on the part the Chinese regime. But this conflict cannot be solved on a capitalist basis. No amount of repression by the CCP regime will reconcile the majority of Tibetans to the conditions they experience today. But neither do the bourgeois leadership of the Tibetan struggle in exile and the assortment of mostly religiously motivated ’friends of Tibet’ offer any way forward. With increasingly heavy-handed measures from Beijing’s side, there are now warning signs that a section of the Tibetan youth especially could be driven in the direction of individual terrorism. Socialists oppose this as a fundamentally flawed method of struggle that will only give the Chinese state an excuse for greater repression, while making a united struggle alongside the Han Chinese workers and peasants more difficult. Liberation from dictatorship and national oppression can only be achieved through democratically controlled and organised mass struggle, based above all on the forces of the working class.

’Capitalism is the enemy’

The Tibetan and Han Chinese communities have lived in close interaction for centuries. Many Tibetan households revere Mao Zedong for his role in ending feudalism and improving social conditions, although his ham-fisted bureaucratic methods – the only methods available to a Stalinist dictatorship – also alienated many. The current conflict however is not just a re-run of the clashes in 1959 or 1989 (for more background: see our article Tibet and the National Question). The development of capitalism in Tibet has aggravated social tensions to the extreme, as the majority of Tibetans (75% of whom live in rural areas) have missed out from the last decade’s economic boom. Rather than primarily an issue of religious, linguistic and national freedom, although these are also important issues, the recent unrest was a backlash against the growing domination of the Tibetan economy by wealthier Han Chinese and even Hui, while Tibetans are economically marginalised. ”Capitalism is identified as the enemy,” exclaimed Pankaj Mishra in the Guardian Weekly (UK, 28 March 2008) in one of the few Western reports to hit the mark.

Socialists defend the right of the Tibetan people to decide their own future, up to and including the right to independence. But there is great polarisation in Tibet, between ethnic communities and even among the Tibetan people themselves. The Beijing regime has groomed a substantial layer of Tibetan officials and academics who fear for their privileges and positions if the Dalai Lama’s government is allowed to return as part of a negotiated settlement, and fear the masses even more. While for the exile government the ’middle way’ of greater autonomy within China is no longer a ’tactic’, but expresses the desire of these former feudal masters to become capitalist stakeholders in a booming tourist ’Shangri La’ financed by big infusions of capital from Beijing. Unbeknown to most outside capitalist commentators there are in fact two rival Tibetan bourgeois elites, one internal and one external, with the Lhasa-based elite even more hostile to a deal with the Dalai Lama than the CCP tops in Beijing.

The working class in China, Tibet and internationally must take an independent position from all the national bourgeois camps in this dispute – clearly opposing racism and national chauvinism, and standing for working class unity and internationalism. Concretely, the masses in Tibet need to link their struggle for basic democratic rights, an end to state repression, and democratic control over the economy, to the unfolding struggle of the working class and peasantry throughout China. This movement must fight for:

* An end to one-party rule and state repression
* For freedom of assembly, freedom of speech and religious worship
* For the right to organise, to build independent trade unions, peasant associations and political parties, including the all-important need for a fighting workers’ party
* An end to privatisations and neo-liberal attacks. Nationalise all major companies – foreign and Chinese-owned – under democratic workers’ control and management. For a genuine socialist plan of production based on elected factory committees, rural associations and other popular organs. End the privileges of state officials.
* The right to self-determination for the Tibetan people and other minorities, while recognising that capitalism and national oppression (imperialism) can only be overcome through international socialist struggle, with the aim of establishing a democratic and voluntary socialist federation of China and other Asian states as part of a world socialist federation