China bans Bibles from 2008. Or does it?

Living, as we do, in an age where the ideological differences between Beijing and Washington are as prominent as ever, and where the former is fast becoming a competitor of the latter in everything from the oil market to space travel, it is not uncommon for the halls of power in Washington to echo with the sound of Congressmen or Senators calling on the US government to take action against China over issues such as trade, military expansion, or human rights.

However, in a comical of events, red faces of anger quickly became red faces of embarrassment in Washington this week, as US official chastised China over a human rights violation that later turned out to be a complete work of fiction. Leading to the loss of much face for the White House, and to those involved becoming a laughing stock.

Red Faces

This Wednesday, speaking before the US lower house Republican Senator for Michigan, Thaddeus McCotter, tabled a strongly worded motion condemning Beijing for placing Christian religious texts; specifically Bibles, on a list of prohibited items that could not be taken into the Olympic village during the 2008 games, only for it to be revealed that the Beijing had issued no such ban on Bibles, and that the entire story was a fabrication.

Also not realizing that the story was a false, fellow Republican Senator Lindsey Olin Graham, of South Carolina, went so far as to summon Chinese diplomats to issue a reprehend to them; stating that the ban was unacceptable, anti-Olympic, and that it was 'not in the interests' of continued Sino-US cordiality.

It is not currently known why neither Senator attempted to confirm that the ban was real before acting, or why they relied on media accounts rather than official reports.

The Rumor Mill?

Although it is not yet clear exactly where the story first originated, or if it was created as the result of a malicious hoax, a language/cultural misunderstanding, or if it was simply a a rumor that got out of control, the story was first carried in the US by the religious media whom cited Spanish tabloid "The Reason (La Razon) and Italian sports publication "The Sports Gazette" (La Gazzetta dello Sport) as being their sources. It was also carried by the notoriously right-wing Fox Network, whom regularly carry anti-China material.

Speaking before the story had been confirmed as fabricated religious spokesperson Reverend Dr. Keith Roderick of  Christian Solidarity International condemned the supposed ban, and and claimed that it was evidence that China did not deserve to host the Olympic

Speaking at a scheduled press conference, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Liu Jianchao strenuously denied that Beijing had any such plans to limit the religious freedoms of athletes, stating that to do so would be a direct contravention of Chinese law.

In addition to denying the rumors, Liu also spoke out against those spreading them. Voicing that they had a hidden agenda to undermine China's relationship with the rest of the world through the spreading of misinformation.

While more restrictive than US law it does not prohibit the carrying of Christian texts for personal use, either by foreigners or Chinese. The full text of the pres conference may be viewed on the Foreign Ministry website (http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/xwfw/s2510/t379492.htm)

Ironically, the rumor comes less than 2 months after Chinese officials announced the construction of a church in the Olympic village so that participants in the games could worship freely on the site.

Implications?

While China watchers are not surprise at the recent turn of events, some have expressed concern over the fact that two US Senators, and so many media groups - including a national network - took the story at face value without first checking the facts behind it. Indicating that they are readily willing to expect the very worst from China, and to do so without solid reason.

China watchers have also questioned whether US media groups have done enough to correct issue corrections of their earlier stories, or if they are allowing their audiences to continue with uncorrected and pejorative views that could lead them to making snap judgments as to China's guilt, just as Senators Graham and McCotter did.

china watchers have also expressed concern over the propaganda value that this week's debacle might have to Chinese nationalists. Particularly its propensity to be used as Anti-American ammunition by those wishing to paint the Washington as a hostile and wooden-headed entity that is determined to paint China in as bad a light as possible, and by those who believe that the spreading of such rumors in America's open media system is a good reason for Beijing to maintain tight control over its own domestic media.

Political, not Religious?

Although it is true that China has imposed a number of tough restrictions on its domestic Christian community, including restricting the sale of Christian texts to permit holding organizations and prohibiting people them worshiping in churches that do not have state authorization, most of Beijing's restrictions on religious practice (both those of Christians and other faiths) differ from those found in countries such as Saudi-Arabia and Taliban held Afghanistan in that they are politician, not religious, in nature.

Specifically, Beijing sees that Chinese Christians (and other religious groups) as being cohesive and co-ordinated group whose moral and social codes do not originate from the state, and who have allegiances that they hold higher than those to the state. Thus Beijing fears that, if left unchecked, they may become prominent enough to challenge the authority of state.

Beijing measures out similar treatment to any group whom becomes too prominent, and commonly act to prevent smaller groups from from rising to prominence. Other groups who are subjected to similar treatment include workers whom attempt to unionize, land and social reform groups, and proponents of alternative philosophies or lifestyles.

specifically, Beijing harbors three primary fears

1) That a group or cause may gain sufficient momentum for it to become impossible to control, allowing it to direct state policy rather than be directed by it.

2) That a leader/leaders may emerge, from a group or cause, who might one day challenge the power of the state.

3) That the presence of any causes or movement outside the remit of the state may encourage other causes or movements to arise, including those which may go against the state.

A recent and notable example was observed during the anti-Japanese riots of 2005. At first Beijing tacitly supported the protest because they unified the people against an external focal point and drew attention away from internal domestic issues. However, when it became clear that protest leaders were becoming notable and influential forces in themselves, and when officials realized that they might soon be in their firing line for not putting pressure on Japan, as the protectors were demanding, the state quickly turned on them. Acting to suppress demonstrations and to reduce the influence of those involved in them.

A second notable example was Beijing's 2006 crackdown gay culture, which saw the blanked banning of a gay culture festival that was to be held in "Factory 798" in the Dashanzi Artist District, and the storming of the gay friendly On/Off, in order to disrupt efforts by the city's gay community to form a cohesive self promoting community.

More unusually, Chinese officials also became concerned that groups of young people were forming fan clubs in support of contestants on a domestic reality TV talent show when it was discovered that they were engaging in campaigning and awareness raising exercises in order to encourage others to vote their favored contestants through to the next round of the competition.

In response to these fears, officials at first attempted to ban the show from running another series, and then to water down subsequent series to remove as much of the fan interaction and following as they could while still allowing the show to be profitable.

tags: freedom  washington  persecution  religious  america  religion  beijing  china  

links: digg this    del.icio.us    technorati    reddit