Skip to content

Many Examples of Malicious Reporting and Attacks on Academic Freedom

On November 5, the School of History at China’s Capital Normal University in Beijing hosted an offline lecture, “Shen Zhihua: The Establishment and End of the Soviet Socialist Model.” The lecture was simultaneously broadcasted live on the Chinese video sharing platform Bilibili. The lecturer Shen Zhihua is a well-known expert on Cold War history. He is a tenured professor at the History Department of East China Normal University. The lecture and live broadcast were interrupted after the event had been going on for about one hour. After the incident, the organizer’s social media account issued a statement, “This lecture was forced to transfer to the Tencent meeting (an online video conference platform) halfway through it, due to malicious reporting.” The statement condemned such malicious reporting that seriously interfered with normal academic exchanges, while reserving the rights to pursue further responsibility.

This is one of many incidents in recent years in China in which academic freedom was attacked by “reporting.”

Yang Shaozheng is a former professor at the School of Economics of Guizhou University. He was discharged from office in 2018 for criticizing the government in class and online. Yang told Voice of America (VOA) that, if the authorities would abide by their own constitution and protect citizens’ freedom of speech, there would not be a market for such malicious reporting. “It is precisely because the constitutional provision of freedom of speech is ignored that anyone who says what the Communist Party thinks is politically incorrect will be punished. As a result, malicious reporting happens everywhere.”

You Shengdong, who is 73-years-old, is a former professor of economics at Xiamen University. In 2018, he was reported and later fired because his classroom lectures were not in line with the Chinese communist ideology. Professor You told VOA that the trend of reporting on Chinese university campuses has been rampant and teachers are worried that they cannot teach freely.

“In the past few years, the political and academic atmosphere in Chinese universities has deteriorated. When teachers are giving lectures, there are cameras recording them and informants watching them. I was reported and other teachers were reported. The situation is getting worse.” “If there is no freedom of speech in a country, especially in universities, how can truth be spread? How can knowledge be taught? How can students be taught? In any country, if it is for the people, then it should allow a hundred flowers to bloom instead of seeing that all speak with one voice.”

It has been reported that many universities even openly recruit informants to keep an eye on the teachers, requiring student informants to report on the teachers who spread superstitious ideas, Western values, and criticism of the principles of the Party.

In addition to professors Yang and You, there is a long list of scholars who have been punished for their words.

Deng Xiangchao, deputy dean of the School of Arts at Shandong Jianzhu University, was disciplined and ordered to retire in 2017 because he re-posted articles critical of Mao Zedong. Deng was also dismissed from all government positions.

Shi Jiepeng, a professor at Beijing Normal University, was dismissed in July 2017 for “erroneous remarks on the Internet” and “crossing the red line of ideological management.”

Tan Song, associate professor at Chongqing Normal University, was expelled from the school and detained by the police in September 2017 for investigating the history of land reform, the anti-rightist movement, the Anti-Japanese War, and the Wenchuan Earthquake, as well as for talking about the 1989 student’s movement in class.

Xu Chuanqing, associate Professor at Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture, was reported in September 2017 for blaming students for not taking classes seriously. Xu used Japanese students as role models and predicted that Japan would become a superior nation. In 2018, he was given administrative sanctions.

Zhai Juhong, an associate professor at Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, was disciplined. In May 2018, he was expelled from the Party and given an administrative penalty because he criticized Xi Jinping’s constitutional amendments and discussed the institution of China’s National People’s Congress in the classroom.

Wang Gang, an associate professor at Hebei University of Engineering, set up a Wechat group with a focus on civil rights and posted articles that conjectured that China would not embark on the path of constitutional democracy. In July 2018, the school dismissed Wang.

Cheng Ran, a lecturer at Xiangtan University, was demoted because he “quoted a large amount of false information and reports from foreign media” in the classroom and he made remarks that “impaired the image of the Party and state leaders.”

In March 2019, Tang Yun, an associate professor at Chongqing Normal University, had his teacher’s qualification revoked and he was demoted because students reported him for making remarks that harmed the nation’s reputation.

In the famous case of Xu Zhangrun, a professor at Tsinghua University Law School, Xu was suspended in March 2019 for criticizing Xi Jinping’s constitutional amendment, demanding redress of the 1989 student’s movement, and for other remarks.

In April 2019, a student reported Lv Jia, an associate professor at Tsinghua University, for “opposing the Party and violating the constitution.” The Tsinghua communist party discipline organs subsequently put Lv under investigation.

In April 2017, Zi Su, a teacher at the Party School of the Yunnan Provincial Party Committee, suggested that the Chinese Communist Party implement intra-party democracy and asked Xi Jinping to resign. In April 2019, he was arrested, charged with “inciting subversion” and sentenced to 4 years.

Huang Chun, a retired female professor at Guizhou Minzu University, was put under administrative detention for 15 days due to her remarks on Twitter and WeChat about Hong Kong’s anti-extradition law amendment bill movement and the 1989 student’s movement.

Liu Yufu, a teacher at Chengdu University of Technology, was under administrative penalty in October 2019 because of his remarks in class and over the Internet.

Cao Jisheng, a lecturer at Shanxi University of Finance and Economics, was subjected to administrative sanctions and a record of demerit in October 2019 for making “inappropriate remarks” in a WeChat group.

Source: Voice of America, November 17, 2020
https://www.voachinese.com/a/academic-seminar-interrupted-malicious-tip-offs-criticized-as-deprivation-freedom-speech-in-China-20201117/5665744.html

U.S. Condemns China’s Failure to Enforce Sanctions against N. Korea

On Tuesday December 1, at an online seminar that the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington-based think tank hosted, Alex Wong, deputy assistant secretary of state for North Korea, said that China’s failure, if not refusal, to implement UN sanctions aimed at denuclearizing North Korea may be delaying the process.

The UN Security Council obligated all UN Member States to repatriate DPRK laborers by the end of last year. “China continues to host at least 20,000 DPRK laborers, who earn revenue that goes straight back to North Korea’s weapons development efforts. In fact, earlier this year Chinese authorities were making it easier for DPRK nationals to work in China, in complete violation of its UN obligations.”

“The Chinese government increasingly allows its companies to conduct trade with North Korea in a broad spectrum of UN-prohibited goods, including seafood, textiles, iron and steel, industrial machinery, transportation vehicles, and sand and gravel. Chinese companies transact with North Korean companies and establish UN-prohibited joint ventures with them. They even continue to conduct business with UN-designated North Korean entities and those operating on their behalf—including entities that play key roles in North Korea’s weapons programs.”

China also hosts no less than two dozen North Korean WMD and ballistic missile procurement representatives and bank representatives.

“In the past year, on 555 separate occasions, we have observed ships carrying UN-prohibited coal or other sanctioned goods from North Korea to China. On none of these occasions did the Chinese authorities act to stop these illicit imports. Not once.”

“400 of those voyages were North Korean-flagged vessels shipping coal to Chinese coastal waters. Most of these shipments go to China’s busy Ningbo-Zhoushan area, where the vessels are required to provide extensive information about their identity, origin, and destination to local authorities. These ships are not coming to China like a thief in the night. They are ringing the doorbell and literally announcing themselves. Yet the Chinese authorities have done nothing.”

“On another 155 separate occasions, Chinese-flagged coastal barges have sailed directly into North Korea, loaded up on UN-prohibited coal, and then carried the illicit cargo back to Chinese ports.”

Wong acknowledged that China has reduced its overall trade with the DPRK since 2017, and especially in 2020 due to COVID-19. “The remaining illicit, unreported trade that exists is significant and it is trending in the wrong direction. In no other country do we see this breadth and depth of continuing illicit commercial activity with North Korea, the scale of which puts China in flagrant violation of its obligations.”

To help expose sanctions evasion activities by North Korea, the US State Department has, since June 2019, offered up to a $5 million reward for information on such activities.

According to Wong, the State Department on Tuesday launched a website specifically dedicated to such information.

“Today, the State Department is launching a new website, DPRKrewards.com, through which individuals across the globe (can) provide information to our rewards for justice program on DPRK sanction evasions,” he said.

Wong argued that removing or easing sanctions on North Korea now would only weaken the reasons for North Korea to consider denuclearization faithfully.

“Chinese leaders are asking us to build the frame of a house, even furnish it, without laying the foundation first,” said Wong.

Source: U.S. State Department, November 30, 2020
https://www.state.gov/deputy-special-representative-for-north-korea-delivers-keynote-address-at-csis-conference-on-north-koreas-economy/

The Paper: India Banned another 43 Chinese Apps

Well-known new Chinese news site The Paper recently reported that, according to the Cybercrime Coordination Center of India’s Ministry of the Interior, the Indian government banned another 43 Chinese apps based on Article 69A of the Information Technology Law. The newly banned apps include widely used Alipay, AliExpress, and Tencent’s WeTV, among others. These are highly popular Chinese apps. The Indian government explained that these apps participated in activities that are not conducive to India’s sovereignty, national security and public order. The Indian government had banned 59 Chinese apps in June and 118 apps in September. Those include well-known apps like TikTok, WeChat and the Xiaomi Browser. So far India has banned a total of 220 Chinese apps. The spokesperson of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressed his serious concerns. China also believed India’s bans violated WTO rules as well as free-market principles and called for immediate corrections of this discrimination against Chinese businesses.

Source: The Paper, November 25, 2020
https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_10134794

HKET: UK Government to Spend 250 Million Pounds to Eliminate Huawei Equipment

Hong Kong Economic Times (HKET), the leading financial daily in Hong Kong, recently reported that, the British government just introduced the Communications Security Bill, which is designed to monitor the nation’s 5G mobile network and its fiber network. The new rules will impose a 100,000-pound daily fine or a fine totaling ten percent of sales on the violators if Huawei equipment is used. The UK government required all communications companies to eliminate all Huawei equipment before the year 2027. The government also set aside 250 million pounds to help communications vendors to replace Huawei’s 5G equipment. The new bill covers all electronic hardware and software that process internet traffic. The bill is expected to take effect starting next year at the earliest. According to British Telecom (BT), the government’s Huawei ban will cause BT to suffer a 500 million pounds loss. Oliver Dowden, British Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, just established a working group to help telecommunications providers. He’ll release more details on this before the end of the year.

Source: HKET, November 26, 2020
https://bit.ly/36lwFK1

Buddhism: A New Tool for China’s “Sharp Power”

Although the outside world generally believes that China has adopted a policy of repression against religion, recent studies have shown that the Chinese government is quietly using Buddhism as a tool to expand its “sharp power” internationally and increase its political influence.

On the one hand, during the 2020 epidemic, the Chinese government massively destroyed unapproved or foreign-published Buddhist books and demolished a great number of outdoor Buddhist statues. On the other hand, Chinese Buddhist institutions have used Buddhist teachings to appease the society that the epidemic has affected and to maintain national security.

At a recent seminar that Georgetown University held, David L. Wank and Yoshiko Ashiwa, who have been studying Chinese Buddhism, pointed out that these religious activities that the Chinese Buddhist organizations overseas have carried out are part of the Chinese government’s operations to expand its political influence.

“In 2015, the BAC (Buddhist Association of China) Ninth National Congress formally recognized the global promotion of Chinese Buddhism as a key activity. It called for Chinese Buddhism to ‘go out’ (zou chuqü) of China to other countries in order to ‘tell the Chinese story well’ to their peoples so they could realize China’s accomplishments and peaceful intentions.”

Wank said that, although the BAC’s global plan began in 2015, it has been launching actions since Xi Jinping took office in 2013. The Chinese government has diverted a large amount of resources to Buddhism.

Since the early 1980s, the Chinese government has used Buddhism as a tool of its foreign policy to achieve its political goals.

“The revival of Buddhism has helped persuade overseas Chinese business people that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is no longer following ‘leftist’ ideology and that they are welcome to come worship and invest in the PRC (People’s Republic of China).”

Wank also pointed out that, after the 1989 student movement, the Chinese government used Buddhism to improve its international image that the Tiananmen Square Massacre had damaged, and it used religious exchange activities to promote its “One China” policy.

“Chinese leader Hu Jintao, assumed office in 2002; he used the Confucian term ‘harmony’ to refer to his new approach to reduce economic inequalities in China and to manage international relations.”

“In 2006, the BAC reintroduced itself to global Buddhist society by convening the World Buddhist Forum, the first major international religious conference in the PRC.”

Wank and Ashiwa identified different strategies that the Chinese government adopted to use Buddhism in different countries.

First are Asian countries where the Buddhist majorities are economically dependent on China, including Cambodia, Myanmar, Laos, Mongolia, and Sri Lanka. The Chinese government’s strategies include “establishing bilateral Buddhist friendship associations; setting up Buddhist broadcasting networks; organizing joint religious and cultural rituals, such as praying for peoples’ health during the coronavirus pandemic and commemorating historical Buddhist ties between the countries; and providing funds to restore temples.”

Second are Western countries with recent histories of Buddhism and a growing popular appreciation of Buddhist culture as Asian culture in daily life. In these countries, efforts have been made to build Chinese Buddhist temples in order to further Buddhist cultural activities. For Buddhists and Chinese tourists, these projects are sites for worship and pilgrimage, while for the general populations of these countries, they are presented as Chinese cultural theme parks.

Third are strategies for Asian countries—India, Japan, Taiwan—that Beijing sees as geopolitical rivals and that the BAC views as competing for global status in Buddhism.

“In 2017, the Nanhai Buddhist Academy opened in the PRC, with strong state backing, to compete with India’s recently revived Nalanda University as the world center of Buddhist teaching. The academy is a center for creating Buddhist culture and Sinicized Buddhism as well as Buddhist friendships using such methods as inviting clerics from other Asian countries for study.”

The two researchers believe that the promotion of Chinese Buddhism around the world is exerting an influence that is beneficial to the Chinese government.

First, many activities—such as conferences, rituals, and inviting people (clerics, politicians, ministers of culture) to the PRC—further the aim of the UFWD to develop ties with individuals who may become favorably disposed to the PRC.

“These overseas Buddhist activities develop a network of individuals who may become favorably toward Chinese government. This is one of the main strategies of the United Front Work. This network includes Chinese Buddhists, famous overseas Buddhists, foreign leaders in cultural affairs.”

Wank also pointed out that temple-building projects in other countries may bolster the status of the Chinese clerics associated with them in the eyes of societies and governments of the host country. This can offset the status of those Buddhists that the Chinese government considers competitors, such as the Dalai Lama.

Giving resources to major Buddhist temples and schools can create dependencies and pro-China factions in Buddhist-majority countries.

Ashiwa’s analysis is that the teachings of Chinese Buddhism may also have a more far-reaching impact. “In Buddhist teachings, secular leaders have the potential to become Buddhists in the future. What we are concerned about is how this image of leaders will be shaped to such an extent that people’s political obedience is fostered, and how this will affect the perception and behavior of Chinese and overseas Buddhists.”

Both researchers believe that the current Chinese state promotion of Buddhism is operating on an unprecedented scale. An issue that the CCP will have to face is how Sinicized Buddhism representing Chinese great civilization will cooperate with other locally embedded Buddhist traditions in Asian countries, as well as Westernized Buddhism. Without well-considered strategies, the global promotion of Buddhism may trigger results that are contrary to CCP expectations.

Source: Berkley Center for Religion, Peace & World Affairs, Georgetown University. November 17, 2020.
https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/events/china-s-global-promotion-of-buddhism

HK Chief Executive Carrie Lam Has No Bank Account

Major Taiwanese news group Eastern Media International recently reported that HK Chief Executive Carrie Lam commented in a TV interview that she currently has no bank account. With the passage of the Hong Kong National Security Law, the United States sanctioned 11 Mainland and Hong Kong officials immediately. To comply with U.S. sanctions, no foreign bank, no local Hong Kong bank, or even a bank that China fully owns would agree to provide services to Carrie Lam. Since she has no bank account, the Hong Kong government pays her salary in cash. According to Lam, she has “piles of cash” at home, and she only spends cash on her day-to-day living expenses. Lam commented in August, when the U.S. just announced the sanction, that it was “meaningless” since she has no assets in the United States and has no plans to visit the U.S. She said in the interview that, as the Chief Executive of Hong Kong, no one in the city is willing to serve her banking needs. When asked whether since the sanctions began, she has ever been refused service. Lam said that has not been the case. However, she did say she took the U.S. sanctions as an honor.

Source: Eastern Media International, November 28, 2020
https://www.ettoday.net/news/20201128/1864545.htm?from=rss

China Daily Paid Millions to Spread CCP Propaganda in U.S. Media

In June of this year, the US Department of Justice received a financial statement from China Daily, which showed that over the past three and a half years, China Daily paid a total of nearly US$19 million in advertising and printing costs to different US media. In the past six months alone, China Daily has invested nearly US$2 million in advertising in the US media. From May to October this year, China Daily spent more than US$4.4 million in printing, distribution, advertising and administration. Of the money paid, more than US$85,000 was spent on advertising with The Wall Street Journal, US$34,000 was spent on the Los Angeles Times; and US$100,000 was paid for advertising in the Foreign Policy Magazine. In addition to advertising fees, China Daily also pays a high printing cost to many newspapers.

The financial statement disclosed that China Daily paid to open a “China Watch” column on the inside pages of two newspapers to publish commentaries on China’s economy, culture and geopolitics. The Wall Street Journal has a website that China Daily funds. It is simply a reprinted version of “China Daily,” carrying articles such as Beijing’s handling of COVID 19 as well as articles that criticize US officials because they blame the Chinese government for misleading the West and causing the virus to spread throughout the world. In August this year, some newspapers cut off their ties with China Daily. For example, the Washington Free Beacon disclosed that the New York Times quietly ended its partnership with China Daily.

In February of this year, the U.S. State Department listed China Daily, the Xinhua News Agency, the China Global Television Network, China Radio International, and the overseas edition of People’s Daily as “foreign agents” because China has direct control over them and they are part of the CCP’s propaganda machinery.

Source: Radio Free Asia, November 23, 2020
https://www.rfa.org/cantonese/news/propaganda-11232020111312.html?encoding=simplified