Got a tip for Noah?
SEND IT!
(Guaranteed Confidential)
Subscribe

Subscribe via RSS

Archives by Date
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006

See all Archives
Archives by Category
'Canes
Ammo and Munitions
Armor
Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
Bizarro
Blimps
Blog Bidness
Bomb Squad
Cammo Green
Chem-Bio
Cloak and Dagger
Comms
Cops and Robbers
Data Diving
Dissent Tech
Drones
Eat My Dust
Eye on China
FCS Watch
FOS Files
Gadgets and Gear
Ground Vehicles
Guns
Homeland Security
Info War
Iraq Diary
Lasers and Ray Guns
Less-lethal
Logistics
Los Alamos and Labs
Medic!
Mercs
Missiles
Money Money Money
Net-Centric
Nukes
Planes, Copters, Blimps
Politricks
Rapid Fire
Raptor Watch
Red Team
Retro-Futuro
Roll Your Own
Sabra Tech
Ships and Subs
Space
Strategery
Terror Tech
The Deadlies
Those Nutty Norks
Training and Sims
War Update
You can run...

See all Archives
Related Links
News and Intel
Military.com News
Aviation Week
Natl Defense Mag
Strategy Page
Global Security Newswire
Soldiers for the Truth
Security News
Defense Review
Fed Comp Week

Security Sources
GlobalSecurity.Org
Fed Am Sci
CSIS
Ctr for Defense Info
Defense & Natl Interest
Instit for Sci & Intl Secy
Secrecy News
POGO
Cryptome
The Memory Hole
Natl Security Archive

Geeks and Mad Scientists
Slashdot
Wired News
Security Focus
The Register
Gizmodo
Geek Press
Robots.Net
Cosmic Log
Space Daily
New Scientist
TechCentralStation
Engadget
Space.Com
Technology Review
Gyre
Near Near Future
Fed Dev Blog

Bloggers and Buddies
Phil Carter
Global Guerillas
Jeffrey Lewis
Milblogging
OPFOR
Laura Rozen
Larisa Alexandrovna
Juan Cole
Ryan Singel
Josh Marshall
Cursor
Boing Boing
InstaPundit
Winds of Change
Tapped
TalkLeft
Brad DeLong
Mountain Runner
Gene Healy
Clive Thompson
Greg Djerejian
Jeff Quinton
Workbench
Electrolite
Jim Henley
War in Context
Kathryn Cramer
Wash Park Prophet
Blogs of War
Tom Shachtman

Official Dispatches
DARPA
AF Research Lab
Marine War Lab
Soldier Systems Ctr
Naval Research
Army Research Lab
UK Def Sci Lab
NASA News
DoJ Cybercrime

Military Network
Military Benefits
Veteran Employment
GI Bill Express
Personnel Locator
Free ASVAB
The Few
Fred's Place
Army Insider
Navy Insider
Air Force Insider
Marine Corps Insider
Coast Guard Insider



Edited by Noah Shachtman | Contact

Censorship's Silver Lining

By now the numerous slights – both deliberate and accidental – during Chinese President Hu Jintao’s visit to Washington are well known: mixing up Taiwan and China when introducing the National Anthem; the Falun Gong heckler; President Bush unceremoniously tugging President Hu around by his coat-sleeve; administration officials dozing through Mr. Hu’s statements. What's less understood, though, is the official Chinese reaction – or really, lack of reaction --to these gaffes.

Hu Visit.jpgThe slip-ups, and their possible implications, have all been widely discussed in the US and international media. But in the Chinese press, they haven’t been mentioned at all.

In the West, the censorship has been seen as a measure of how serious these insults are. The argument is that the assorted incidents are so shaming and embarrassing that “keeping the incident off Chinese screens was to save Hu Jintao from humiliation,” in the words of one Beijing-based analyst.

Maybe. But the far more important point this censorship communicates is the value China places on its relationship with America, and the direction the government wants that relationship to go.

China’s government could have easily used these incidents to spur anti-American, patriotic sentiments within the population. They didn’t hesitate to do so a year ago, when demonstrations over revisionist Japanese textbooks engulfed the nation, or 7 years ago in the aftermath of America’s bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade. In both of those instances, it would not have been difficult for the government to keep the population from learning of the issues. However, stirring up nationalist, anti-Japanese or anti-American sentiments suited the government’s agenda at the time, and it didn’t hesitate to do so. However shaming or embarrassing last week’s gaffes may have been, they pale in comparison to having your sovereign territory (the Embassy) bombed and offering only a few student protesters in response. But in the past, the government was willing to swallow the shame of these events in the interests of its agenda. They almost certainly would do so again if it furthered their plans – few things will rally a population to support you like rallying them against someone else. That they have chosen not to, and have rather gone to great efforts to hide the gaffes, indicates a desire to maintain and improve their relationship with America.

Broadcasting the insults would almost certainly have given fodder to hardliners within China to rail against the slap in the face. And it’s easy to imagine the reaction of our own China hawks to any anti-American demonstrations that may have resulted. If China’s censorship of last weeks events indicates the government’s desire to keep the ball away from these hardliners on both sides of the Pacific, it may be the silver lining to last week’s exhibition of America’s inept diplomacy and China’s continuing free speech issues.

[My thanks to Ms. Lauren Keane in Beijing for helping develop this analysis.]

-- Matthew Tompkins

Latest Comments

BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO censorship!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YeaHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH freedom!!!!
freedom of speech. Everything we fight for!
Censorship, everything we fight to stop !!

Posted by: Max Anderson at February 25, 2007 9:58 PM


What good would it do for Mr. Hu to start any anti-us propoganda? The results would hurt their nation more than it could help it, because the result would make them look as if they were edging towards hostitlity.

It seems everyone in the US is stuck in a delusional state of paranoia. Has anyone thought that maybe the whole inccodent was just flared up by common rhetoric from the political junkies in the US. Instead of something simple, most of you want to complicate it and try to sight some kind of hidden agenda. HAH. Give me a break. Get off of the "I told you so" power trip, because you first have to know something.

It seems no other countries are allowed to make moves, without everyone in the US being so damned threatened about losing its power position.

Posted by: d at May 13, 2006 7:23 AM


I think this lack of reaction to our poor reception of Mr. Hu is indeed indicative of an agenda that we are not aware of...yet. Let us hope we are not caught unawares when their machinations are set into motion.

Posted by: slappi at April 28, 2006 8:31 AM


I don't agree with this analysis.

IMHO,

Mr.Hu & Co cannot allow chinese to see Mr.Hu being offended by a Bush. Losing his face.

Even if they can&want to use the incident as fuel for anti-us bashing, it will also give reason to competing fractions in the Party to criticise Mr.Hu as being a weak leader, not worthy his leadership position.

Pls remember, in dictatorship/totalitarian society leaders' paramount concern is (perceived) challenge to their leadership.

Posted by: Igor at April 28, 2006 2:33 AM


Just the Chinese continuing to lull the USA to sleep while they pursue their own agenda. We will wake to find our position in Asia to be untenible.

Posted by: Thomas Wentzel at April 27, 2006 10:38 PM


» View All 6 Comments

» Post a Comment