China and the Global Civil Society

Jakarta Post, 15 May 2008

When the demonstrations by the monks of Tibet erupted on March 10, 2008, leading to the violent repression by the Chinese military, why were there no comments from state leaders around the world? Every single leader held their tongues tight. The French president could be considered an exception.

In East and Southeast Asia there was even greater silence, no statement by state leaders either on the repression itself or on the coming Olympics in Beijing. As China was taking control in Tibet, there was less and less voice of concern from the world leaders.

The silence of the state leaders around the world was alarming. Nevertheless, it did not stop global civil society from expressing concerns. Their voice came out in coincidence with the rally of the Olympic torch first in London, then in Paris, San Francisco and many other major cities.

Of course they knew the Tibet issue could not be linked with the Olympics, but this was the best stage for them to attract the attention of the world. In Indonesia, a similar demonstration, albeit of a much smaller scale, was reported. The mass media -- printed and electronic -- played an important part both in spreading the news from various cities where the demonstrations took place. The world saw the protests around the world, and the unfortunate violence of some protesters.

This phenomenon is very much in line with the action of global civil society to protest the ministerial conference of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in Seattle in late 1999. The big turnout changed the nature of the demonstration, such that it was eventually called "the Battle of Seattle".

The global civil society -- a network of various NGOs around the world -- so far has been active in voicing concern every time the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO hold meetings any place in the world. These people come from all corners of the world, ignoring their differences of race and religions, being united to the cause that was neglected by the states.

Our world has indeed displayed a strange configuration where states collude with other states to undermine the interest of their people. The states in the world are now kowtowing China, perhaps out of reverence, but most of the time out of fear of retaliation by the mighty China.

The same is true with the attitude of the states towards the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO; state leaders shut their mouths in face of the plight of their people. The term "constituent", for these leaders is no longer relevant, perhaps already moribund.

In both cases, the state (leaders) act independently, simply protecting their private interest at the expense of the interests of the people.

Can the state control global civil society? Hardly possible. Democracy grows hand in hand with global civil society; the more democratic one country become, the stronger the civil society.

In Europe and in the United States, where democracy has taken deep root, the civil society was more active and expressive than in Indonesia or other countries in Asia. Indonesia is the home of thousands of NGOs, local and international, and it is understandable that protests also erupted.

The Indonesian state could only protect the torch from being extinguished, and wisely enough, it carried out the march of the torch in a closed stadium in Senayan. The global civil society cannot be prevented from voicing their concern for human dignity.

James Mann, in his book The China Fantasy (2007), tries to show that, at the moment, there is a clear trend where state leaders avoid criticizing China. "Over the past 15 years, the discussion about China in the United States and in many other countries have settled into a familiar pattern.

"Whenever someone voices alarm about events or developments in China, that person is offered a soothing response that urges a more 'enlightened' understanding."

Mann, however, should not be too pessimistic because the global civil society will be taking the responsibility over to speak up on concerns about the plight of their fellow human beings.

Just as global civil society stands up against the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO, so do they speak for all sorts of social problems existing in countries around the world. Tibet is one, and Darfur is another.

China, actually, is not alone. So many countries, including Indonesia, are under daily close scrutiny by various groups of NGOs with headquarters spread all over the world.

It is high time for China to live in peace with the global civil society, along with the state actors and the global business actors. This is not impossible as civil society in China is also growing fast.

The writer is head of the Centre for Chinese Studies at the Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Indonesia. He can be reached at iww@indo.net.id