Beyond the unbearable repression that is falling upon the population of Burma, the question inevitably arises about China’s behavior, over which, it must be admitted, the international community exercises very little influence. By using its veto power, Beijing was able to block a condemnation by the Security Council of the military junta’s atrocities. This was typically replaced by a litany of national statements as full of indignation as they were entirely useless in helping the Buddhist monks massacred on the ground.
Let us pass over the maneuverings accompanied by threats from the Beijing officials who recently thwarted yet another attempt by Taiwan to regain official representation within the United Nations. By consistently supporting, against all others, countries like Iran in its quest to advance its military nuclear program, Sudan in its rejection of a humanitarian intervention, the Burmese junta in its fierce repression of civilians and the North Korean dictatorship, one is allowed to question the “development path” ultimately pursued by the Chinese authorities.
Especially since no “side” signal comes to allay this legitimate concern. Does German Chancellor Angela Merkel receive the Dalai Lama and show her support for the religious and cultural autonomy of Tibet? Immediately, Beijing protests vigorously and cancels its participation in a ministerial meeting between the two countries at the last minute. German television images were particularly telling on this point: to the embarrassed attempts of Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier to restore dialogue in New York, came the arrogant and condescending handshake of his counterpart Yang Jiechi in front of the cameras. Chinese television, one could also commend, has just created two channels, in French and Spanish, to better promote China in 36 countries worldwide. However, this overlooks the fact that the inhabitants of the Middle Kingdom — except a tiny minority — do not have access to BBC World, CNN, or TV5 for different and more balanced information. What can be said about the recent introduction by the Chinese Administration of Religious Affairs of legislation intended, according to an article in “Courrier International,” to “institutionalize the management of the reincarnation of living Buddhas”? After the strict control of political opinions, Beijing’s obsession now focuses on the hold over “souls,” as already illustrated by the establishment of an “official Catholic church” ignoring, or even imprisoning, representatives appointed by the Vatican.
It is unlikely that diplomacy will suffice to “contain” the ambitions displayed by Beijing. Will it be necessary under these circumstances to threaten a boycott of the upcoming Olympic Games? Eyeing markets as gigantic as they are lucrative, businesses are more concerned with the economic performance of their companies than with the outrageous manifestations of Chinese imperialism and its consequences on human rights. Given the commercial logic that now permeates the world of sports — and athletes’ world — this option, despite its symbolic as well as economic significance, remains unfortunately quite uncertain.
