18 Nov 2013 | Magazine
Recent revelations about conditions inside China’s Gulag camps by a former prisoner make the impressions of privileged visitors seem almost frivolous. Yet what we found was unexpected and, at the very least, a witness to China’s capacity for change.
Three of us, Michael Holroyd, Margaret Drabble and myself, went to China for the British Council, as guests of the main writers’ organisation, for over two weeks. Each of us was independently told that we would find sullen, unsmiling populations who would surround us and stare, and who were afraid to speak to foreigners. They would also spit everywhere all the time.
An American journalist who has worked in Beijing for five years said all this was true, up to three years ago: people were so afraid of drawing attention that even the bicycle bells were muted.
We went to Beijing, Shanghai, Shian and Canton (now Guangdong), all full of tourists from Europe, but even more from Japan, South Korea and other adjacent countries. We found smiling, laughing, robust and friendly people who did not spit, did not stare and were concerned with foreigners only to be helpful, to make money out of us, or to learn to make money.
The students in the universities were well informed about British and American literature and at least as sophisticated as their American counterparts.
This is a country on the make, determined to do well, full of energy, confidence, competence. We did not see one drunk person. Every city greets you with slogans like ‘China welcomes you with a billion smiles’.
As for being afraid, everyone talks freely about everything, particularly the Cultural Revolution. The euphoria of the times is such that people will say confidently there is no poverty in China (perhaps hoping there soon won’t be), yet if you walk down a minor street in Shanghai or Beijing there are the bare rooms where whole families are putting themselves to bed under a naked electric light bulb, reminding me of the ‘brick lines’ in Africa. The gap between rich and poor must surely widen.
My most informative encounter was with a group of magazine editors and writers, in their thirties and forties. We met publicly at a Friendship Restaurant. When I commented that to the outside world China gives the impression of continuous 100% swings in policy, with the implication that this was a swing to liberalism, and why weren’t they afraid their now so open criticisms might be held against them, they said, ‘What liberalism?’
Clearly they had expected more from China’s glasnost. They told me of a friend’s novel about conditions in the Chinese army, which are every bit as bad as those in the old Soviet army.
Yet controversial books are published: Jung Chang’s Wild Swans, already published abroad in translation, is expected soon. With a certain scepticism, however. A democratic writer, the idol of youth, has upset the literary establishment with her irreverent, rude, crude stories and poems, but they are forced to accept her because of her popularity. She has not been prohibited nor censored. In short, the situation is fluid. Novels and stories about the
Cultural Revolution are plentifully printed.
We met hardly anyone who had not suffered; even the highest were affected — for instance, the former Minister of Culture, Wang Meng. At that private encounter at the Friendship Restaurant every person around the table told what had happened to them.
When asked what he felt about being defamed and tortured in prison, one replied that the victims were, at other times, themselves the victimisers.
The Cultural Revolution is thought of by us as a war against people, but the young iconoclasts also destroyed orchards, gardens, even mulberry trees and silkworks, let alone temples and shrines. In a traditional courtyard in
Beijing the little stone lions that often guard homes had all had their heads knocked off. When with these lively, sensible, practical, humorous people, it is not easy to hold in one’s mind the knowledge that these same people, just like oneself and one’s friends, were so recently part of that lunacy; or that the entire population was willing, at a word from Chairman Mao, to stand — for hours, or days — beating pots and gongs to prevent birds from landing anywhere so that they fell out of the sky dead or so weak they could be clubbed to death — in myriads, in billions. Birds had been categorised as pests. So few birds are left in China; any wild bird you do see is in a cruel cage.
Two phenomena, both much discussed, seem portents of danger to the country. One is the 100 million people forced off the land by mechanisation, all on the move. But ‘what is 100 million?’ seems to be the feeling. They will be absorbed. These displaced ones do casual labour, pilfer, are petty traders or become bandits on an old and familiar model. They can always go back to their villages — so it is said — where they will be looked after.
But for how long will these people be regarded as the responsibility of their villages when they contribute nothing? At a farm near Guangdong (the city is like a vast building site, and the traffic horrendous, so the 10-mile journey took two-and-a-half hours each way) they told us that 10 years ago every member of the couple of hundred villagers had worked on the farm, but now 15 people did all the work. The others were working as labourers in the building industry. This is a revolution of traditional China so profound it must make previous revolutions seem like minor upheavals. In this village we were proudly shown the loudspeaker that not long ago howled out Party directives or banged out loud martial music nearly all the time. Now it was silent.
The other thing everyone talks about is what they call ‘The Little Emperor problem’. The law that there must only one child per family is more or less enforced in the cities, sometimes with cruel pressure. Everywhere you see wonderful babies and little children, each one being adored by attendant grownups. Each is a little emperor (or empress, but, it seems, fewer of them) who gets the best of everything, from love to education. But in the provinces it is not so easy to enforce the law, and there are many farmers, number unspecified, who have three or four children.
These are badly educated or not educated at all, and will always be poor, unless China decides to educate and feed them, but that would mean a reversal of a policy regarded as essential — the curtailment of population.
Once again, as before in China’s history, ignorant and poor peasants will look in at the privileged towns, full of their rich and educated contemporaries.
We did not go into the poor parts of China. Our guide said confidently that there were no poor areas, no poor farms. She did not know there was controversy over Tibet, which was a place where she and friends talked of taking a holiday. She was well educated, and demonstrated one of the reversals of policy when she recited the list of Chinese dynasties from their beginning, long before Christ, or even Confucius.
Until recently, history taught in schools began with Communism: the imperial past was ignored.
It seemed to me during this trip, and remains with me now, that the most astonishing thing is that five years ago, less, it meant prison or torture or even death for conversations of the kind we were having, so easily, at all levels. But that loudspeaker on the roof of the communal hall on the farm had not been removed, only switched off.
China makes me think of a great lumbering farm cart that has had the most modern of engines fitted to it and is rattling along at 50 miles an hour instead of five. Rushing ahead it certainly is; but the strains and stresses may, almost certainly will, again and again slow or check the cart, even change its direction in unexpected ways.
As China grows strong it will influence the whole world. Let us hope its way of reducing everything to simple and simple-minded formulae does not catch on. The successes of Political Correctness show that we should not be too confident.
This article was originally published in Index on Censorship magazine, September 1993.
Click here to subscribe to Index on Censorship magazine, or download the app here
18 Nov 2013 | Egypt, News and features, Politics and Society, Religion and Culture
Supporters of Egypt’s ousted President Mohammed Morsi in Helwan District raise his poster and their hands with four raised fingers, which has become a symbol of the Rabaah al-Adawiya mosque. (Nameer Galal / Demotix)
Public service messages on Egyptian radio stations candidly tell listeners that a new constitution currently being drafted by a fifty-member panel “won’t be the best that the country has had”. Listeners are assured however, that the new charter will not be Egypt’s last.
“Regardless of whether you approve or disapprove of the new charter, you must vote in the popular referendum on the document,”exhorts the radio ad. “This will send a message to the world that Egyptians are united.”
The radio spots serve as a warning to the public against raising their expectations too high for the new constitution which –if endorsed in a national referendum slated for January 2014–will replace the country’s first post-revolution constitution drafted under Muslim Brotherhood rule. The 2012 constitution’ crafted by an Islamist-dominated panel was suspended on July 3 — the day Islamist President Mohamed Morsi was toppled by military-backed mass protests. Critics blame the “divisive, Islamist-tinged constitution” for Morsi’s political isolation while he was still in office and say that it ultimately led to his downfall. The 2012 charter– and a decree issued by the now-deposed president giving himself extra-judicial powers –sparked violent protests outside the presidential palace last December in which around a dozen people were killed. The toppled president is now facing trial for allegedly inciting the killing of protesters during what has since come to be known as the “Ittihadeya violence”.
A fifty-member constituent assembly made up mostly of leftists and liberal politicians, who were hand picked by the interim government, is currently working on amending the 2012 disputed charter. The assembly has been given a sixty day mandate, which expires on December 3, to complete the seemingly Herculean task. Democracy advocates had hoped the revised document would be a vast improvement to the one liberals had complained “strengthened the role of Islamic law, gave the military extensive powers and undermined the rights of minorities and women.” But as the deadline draws near for submitting the draft document to interim president Adly Mansour, rights campaigners say their hopes for a more liberal constitution that meets the aspirations of Egypt’s revolutionaries have been all but dashed . They complain that “the draft charter grants the military even greater powers and preserves the Islamic law provisions while also falling short of protecting the rights of women and workers .”
Revolutionary activists are particularly enraged by a provision that would grant the military the power to try civilians in secret military courts. Senior army officials have defended the clause saying it is “necessary in light of the surge in Islamist militant attacks against security and military forces in the Sinai and elsewhere in the country since Morsi’s ouster.” Rights advocates meanwhile argue that such trials are “hasty and are known to deliver disproportionately harsh sentences.” Hassiba Sahraoui , Amnesty International’s Deputy Director for the Middle East and North Africa has denounced Egyptian military tribunals as being “notoriously unfair.” Egyptian journalist Ahmed Abu Draa , the Sinai correspondent for the independent Al Masry El Yom Newspaper was detained by the military last September and faced a military tribunal on charges of “spreading false news about the military”. In a statement calling for his release, Sahraoui reminded Egyptian authorities that “trying civilians in military courts flouts international standards.” She also denounced the decision to try Abu Draa in a military court as “a serious blow to press freedom and human rights in Egypt.” While Abu Draa was handed a six month suspended jail sentence in October,anyone who challenges or “insults the military” risks suffering a similar fate.
While the previous constitution had given the military the discretion to indict civilians for “crimes that harm the armed forces,” the revised document allows the army to indict anyone “for crimes in which officers are involved.” The “No To Military Trials For Civilians group”–a grassroots movement working to end the practice, has in recent days threatened to reject the draft charter if the provision remains unchanged.
“It is clear that the military wants to maintain its privileges including the broad discretion to punish and try people as they choose,” Heba Morayef, Human Rights Watch Egypt Director, told the Washington Post earlier this month.
A brutal security crackdown on members and supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood — including the detention of more than 2000 members of the Islamist group, ill-treatment of political detainees and the killing of around 1000 people since Morsi’s ouster– signals continued impunity for the military and the police in Egypt, Morayef lamented.
Role of Islam
Religion has always played an important role in Egypt’s conservative, patriarchal society. Prior to the January 2011 uprising, Egypt could neither be described as a “religious” state nor as a “secular” state (in the Western sense of the word). While the country was not ruled by “religious authority, practically every aspect of Egyptian life was governed by religion. Under Muslim Brotherhood rule, Egypt’s liberals and Christians had feared the country was headed on the path of even greater Islamisation. Morsi’s ouster, however, revived the hopes of some of the revolutionary and liberal groups for the creation of the “secular, civil state” that revolutionary activists had called for during the 2011 mass uprising that toppled former President Hosni Mubarak. It is now almost certain that those groups are headed for disappointment.
Right from the start of the constitution amendment process, it became clear that Article 2 would remain unchallenged. The article –adopted from the two previous constitutions– states that “the principles of Islamic Law (Sharia) are the principle source of legislation in the country” and that “Islam is the religion of the state.” Another provision meanwhile, stipulates that Egyptian Christians and Jews should refer to their own religious laws on personal status issues. Unlike those two provisions which are supported by a majority of the assembly members, Article 219 –which defines Islamic Law based on Sunni Muslim jurisprudence — has been a bone of contention, sparking heated debate among the members. The three Christian members on the panel this week threatened to walk out if the controversial article was not removed. They fear the provision which allows for stricter interpretations of Islam could undermine the rights of Egypt’s minority non-Muslim population (including Christians who make up an estimated 10 to 12 percent of the population). Bassam al-Zarqa, the sole Salafi member on the panel insists however that the provision should remain in the new charter.
Since the military takeover of the country a little over four months ago, Egypt has witnessed a surge in church attacks while hundreds of Christians have been forced to flee their homes in search of less hostile environments.
While the panel has voted separately on each of the amended articles, it has postponed discussions on the contentious issues until the end of the month to allow tensions to ease. It remains to be seen however, whether the wide gap in the members’ perceptions of the role of Islam in the “new Egypt” can be bridged .
Women’s Rights
Rights advocates have also expressed concern that the draft charter may not match expectations for greater rights for women. Calls by women’s rights groups for restoration of a quota system that would ensure fair representation of women and Christians in parliament have so far fallen on deaf ears. Last Wednesday, dozens of activists staged a protest rally outside the Shura Council headquarters in Cairo demanding the re-introduction of the women’s quota without which they fear women will be grossly under-represented in the next parliament.
“The panel has announced it would retain the obligatory 50 percent parliamentary representation of workers and peasants from earlier constitutions, why then doesn’t it re-introduce the quota system so that women too can guarantee a fairer representation in the People’s Assembly?” asked Mona Qorashy, a feminist who participated in Wednesday’s rally.
Low female representation in parliament and a surge in sexual violence against women have pushed Egypt to the bottom of the Arab region for women’s rights. A recent poll by the Thomson Reuters Foundation on the treatment of women in 22 Arab countries has labelled Egypt “the worst Arab country for women” below Saudi Arabia and Iraq — two countries known to have an exceptionally poor human rights record.
Workers’ Rights
Workers too are unhappy about their rights in the draft constitution. In comments to the semi-official Al Ahram newspaper, Kamal Abbas, a rights activist and Coordinator of the Centre for Trade Union and Workers Services described the draft document as “labour-unfriendly.” He cites Article 14 as one of the reasons for his conviction. “The article states that ‘peaceful industrial actions like strikes and sit-ins are inherent labour rights’ but then goes on to empower legislators to regulate such action,” he complained.
Representatives of the newly formed trade unions are absent from the constituent committee, he lamented, adding that “the sole labour representative on the panel is a member of the government-controlled Egyptian Trade Union Federation–an ardent opponent of the ongoing labour strikes.”
As panel members race against time to meet the December 3 deadline for submitting the draft document to the President , public debates on the document are taking place in parallel outside the confines of the Shura Council premises. Egyptians who have become increasingly politicized since the 2011 uprising, are adamant to take part in the discussions that will shape their future for years to come. “We cannot afford to wait for the referendum to express our views on the constitution. Now is the time to pile pressure on the politicians. After all, it is our destiny –and that of our children– which is at stake,” said Somaya Saeed, a veiled housewife who was at the women’s protest last Wednesday. She pointed to a placard raised by another protester and read the words out loud: “Women are capable of effecting change. Where are the women in the new constitution?” With only five women on the constituent panel, it is not surprising that the rights of women are being overlooked.
This article was originally published on 18 Nov 2013 at indexoncensorship.org
18 Nov 2013 | Middle East and North Africa, News and features, United Arab Emirates
Waleed al-Shehhi (Image @uae_detainees)
Waleed al-Shehhi, an activist from the United Arab Emirates, was today sentenced to two years in prison and fined 500,000 Dirhams (£84,500) for tweeting about the trial of a group of human rights defenders known as the “UEA 94”.
The 94 activists, many of which were arrested in September 2012, were charged in January for “seeking to seize power.” Al-Shehhi tweeted about the authorities failure to investigate alleged torture against political prisoners, and called for the release of activists he believed had been detained for taking part in the pro-democracy movement.
Al-Shehhi, who was arrested on 11 May 2012, was sentenced on Articles 28 and 29 of the Cybercrimes Decree. This bans the use of information technology to “endanger state security” and “harm the reputation of the state.”
“Authorities are using the veil of national security to target peaceful political activists and it is having a chilling effect on free speech in the country,” Rori Donaghy, Director of the Emirates Centre for Human Rights said in a statement.
This article was originally published on 18 Nov 2013 at indexoncensorship.org
15 Nov 2013 | News and features, Pakistan
Malala Yousafzai opened the Library of Birmingham in September. Her own book is now banned in Pakistani private schools. (Image Michael Scott/Demotix)
“My friend told me Malala is not a Pakistani or a Muslim; her real name is Jennifer and she is a Christian,” said ten-year old Fatemah, conspiratorially. “But I don’t believe her one bit,” she added waving the book “I am Malala”. She is reading the autobiography of Malala Yousafzai, the young Pakistani girl who survived an assassination attempt by the Taliban.
The rather precocious 10-year old went on to say the book “gave me something important to reflect on… That what I had always taken for granted, like education, does not come that easily for thousands.” She found Malala to be a “real hero” for standing up for what she believed in. Fatemah may just be ten but her views are reflective of the debate raging in Pakistan today, especially in the media, after the book surfaced and was subsequently banned in some private schools.
On 10 November, the All Pakistan Private Schools Federation (APPSF), announced the decision to ban the book from member schools for “being against the injunctions of Islam and the constitution of Pakistan”. The book will not be kept in the library of any of its schools and no co-curricular activities, including debates, will be held on it, Kashif Mirza, chairman of the APPSF told Index. Almost 25 million children, 10 million of which are girls, study at the federation’s 152,000 private school. They employ 7,250,000 teachers, 90 percent being women. The book has not officially been banned by the Pakistani government in state schools, but is not part of any school’s curriculum.
Yousafzai has been bagging one award after another internationally. In Pakistan, where the entire nation had rooted for her to win the Nobel Peace prize, the book has led to a slight dimming of that adulation. Having British award-winning journalist Christina Lamb’s name on the cover as co-author hasn’t helped. “Lamb is reputed to be both anti-Pakistan and anti-Islam,” Mirza said.
Dr AH Nayyar, a noted educationist, said the reaction of the private school owners was that of “weak-kneed people” who are more worried about their “business interests” than what “is right and what is wrong”.
Rumana Hussain, a former principal of a private school who has written and illustrated several children’s books, finds it tragic that “the 25 million students who attend private schools in the country will not read the book. The millions who attend public schools, where the book isn’t banned but won’t be taught, bought or stocked, will not read it either.”
She lamented: “All of them will be deprived of the chance to read the account of a young Pakistani girl’s struggle for education – not only for herself but also for every Pakistani girl, every child – and get inspiration from her story.”
“We are not against girls education or against Malala,” argued Mirza. “On the contrary, we are a great supporter of Malala’s mission of girl’s education and have always advocated for liberal, enlightened and empowered women. When Malala was shot, for the first time in the history of private schools, we held a strike and closed all schools.”
Today, however, Malala seems to have lost favour in the eyes of Mirza and many others who think like him.
“I have read the book and find it hard to believe that a child who of just 16 has so much knowledge of international affairs,” he said, implying that the west has used her “confused state of mind” to grind their own axe.
Dr Nayyar finds this argument hard to digest. “The book was written by a non-Muslim. How does her writing make Malala a tool in the hands of the west?”
But what exactly has Malala or Lamb written that has half of Pakistan in a tizzy?
“She has shown disrespect to Prophet Muhammad by not using Peace be Upon Him after his name. She speaks of [former Pakistani president] Zia ul Haq bringing the Islamic law of reducing the women’s evidence to half into the court. She can’t comment on that as it’s in the Quran and no more can be said about it. She also talks about her father referring to Satanic Verses and believing in freedom of expression. We can’t have young impressionable minds reading her, having her as her role model and going astray,” Mirza said adamantly.
What he failed to mention was that all this had happened during her father’s college days when he took part in a debate of whether Satanic Verses should be banned and burned. The Satanic Verses controversy, also known as the Rushdie Affair, was the heated and frequently violent reaction of some Muslims to the publication of Salman Rushdie’s novel, first published in the United Kingdom in 1988. While few Pakistanis may have read the novel, most have been led to believe that it is an insult to Islam because it disparaged the honour of the Prophet Muhammad.
Malala’s father, while finding the book offensive to Islam had the courage to suggest, to a packed room of fellow students: “First, let’s read the book and then why not respond with our own book.”
Nayyar found absolutely nothing wrong with what Malala has stated. “That minorities are often attacked in Pakistan and that Ahmedis regard themselves as Muslims while the government does not; every word of these statements is true. Even the quoted statement of her father about Rushdie’s book Satanic Verses is praise-worthy; face a blasphemic book with a good book of your own,” he said.
“I think the ban is condemnable even if it applies to a few thousand schools,” said Zohra Yusuf, chairperson of the independent Human Rights Commission of Pakistan. “We should be opening up young minds, not shutting them. Malala’s story should be a great inspiration for students,” she added.
“I did not find anything objectionable in the book itself,” said Farah Zia, the editor of English daily The News’ magazine The News on Sunday section. “The only problem I had was the voice of the book, that switched between a 16 year old and a mature one,” added the mother of two.
While the ban has not been enacted across the board yet, she finds it ridiculous. Still, she hopes the controversy may make many curious enough to pick up the book and read it. On the other hand, she says the “atmosphere of fear being artificially created” may stop publishers from translating the book into local languages.
This article was originally posted on 15 Nov 2013 at indexoncensorship.org
