Perhaps it is providential that the spirit of democracy awoke in Iran exactly
20 years after it went dormant in China. No longer will June 3 be remembered
solely as the day the fatal Tiananmen crackdown was ordered, but also the day
of the presidential debate in which Mahmud Ahmadinejad unleashed vitriol so
offensive that Iran moved for reform. As the tectonic plates now rumble beneath
the foundations of the Iranian state, a change of equal importance is quietly
underway in China. The Iranian experience provides a valuable point of
reference for understanding this change.
Iranians were not surprised by the fact that their election appeared to have
been manipulated, but rather, by how unartfully the
manipulation was performed. The intelligence of the Iranian people was so
insulted that they took to the streets to protest. The hallmark of their
campaign has been its shrewd use of technology. The Mir Hossein Mousavi
movement is powered by YouTube, while Western media pulsates to the Tweets of
Tehran. The government attempted to deprive them of those tools by censoring
the Internet, but the reformists proved too technologically agile to let their
expression be halted.
On July 1, a new rule will take effect requiring all computers sold in China to
contain imbedded software called Green Dam, the nominal purpose of which is to
censor pornography. Nobody is surprised by the fact that government is
attempting to extend the reach of its censorship, but it is quite surprising
how poorly that attempt is being executed. Computer manufacturers were only
given six weeks notice of the new rule, which they say is not enough time for
them to re-orient their production lines to comply.
Users who have tried Green Dam say that it slows their computers significantly.
A University of Michigan computer science professor who tested a copy of Green
Dam found it riddled with vulnerabilities that can be exploited by hackers,
allowing them to take control of a computer, steal all its data and crash its
operating system. All of this seems uncharacteristically sloppy for a
government that normally takes a very studied, methodical, and effective
approach.
Recall that this is the same government which, the day before the Beijing
Summer Olympic Games, commandeered the heavens by firing a thousand rockets
into the sky with silver iodine payloads to successfully prevent a rainstorm.
This raises the question, why is the implementation of Green Dam so sloppy? And
what motivates the urgency to get it out within six weeks?
Whatever the answer, the reaction has been promising. Chinese lawyers have
filed formal complaints against Green Dam, but their complaints do not rest on
privacy or human-rights arguments. Rather, they allege that the means by which
the government acquired the software violates China's government Procurement
Law, Anti-Monopoly Law and Product Quality Law. This approach is significant
for two reasons.
First, the choice to frame the issue as one of administrative law provides the
government with a face-saving opportunity to repudiate Green Dam, or at least
buy time to fix its vulnerabilities, without being perceived as conceding any
privacy boundaries. Second, the choice to defend privacy rights by such
circuitous means speaks to the growing intelligence, creativity, and
sophistication of the Chinese bar. The government should take these legal
challenges seriously. This is an invaluable opportunity to bolster adherence to
the law by showing that it is binding upon everyone, including the lawgiver. If
the government ignores the Product Quality Law, can the people be expected to
do any differently?
The Chinese blogosphere has been lit ablaze with outrage over Green Dam.
Internet opinion polls have found that 70-80% of respondents oppose it, and
China Daily, an official Party newspaper, ran an editorial criticizing its
implementation. The content of these opinions is unsurprising, but the fact
that they are being vocalized so liberally is remarkable. Ever since the
passage of the Property Law of 2007, there has been a growing sense among the
people that they have a right to speak out on issues of public concern. That
the government has been permissive of this nascent marketplace of ideas
deserves our commendation. What remains to be seen is whether the government
will pay heed to the consensus that the marketplace produces.
China can function without democracy, but it cannot function without some
mechanism for incorporating the feedback of the people into the decisions of
the government. Today, all of the components necessary for such a mechanism
exist - the reactions to Green Dam approximate the beginnings of civil society.
Presently those components lay inert, waiting for the government to breathe
into the body politic the breath of life.
How much has changed in 20 years. It may be the worst of times in Tehran, but
in Beijing, there is reason to hope that best of times are just ahead.
Richard Komaiko is co-author of a forthcoming book, Beyond the
Mandate of Heaven: Lawyers, Law and Order in Modern China.
(Copyright 2009 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about
sales, syndication and
republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
