Unfortunately the direction of China’s progress is perceived as a contest to the power base dominated principally by America and other Western countries who would have not otherwise be so loud and incessant in berating China: Tiananmen, prison labour, Wen Jiangseng (Mr Democracy), Rubaiya Kader (ethnic unrest in Xinjiang), the refusal to deal with the Dalai Lama with respect to Tibet, prison labour (employed in industries), illegitimate regime for being not democratic (in not being a mirror image of Western democratic form of government where multi-parties vie for power periodically), the manipulation of yuan, Additonally, the unfavorable reports of China’s claims to Taiwan, Paracel Islands and the atols south of them, Diaoyu Islands and the questioning of China’s trade and relation with African countries are rather telling.

If China were like North Korea, Myanmar, Cuba or China were still like it was three or four decades ago then the gift of the Noble Peace Prize would be understandable and may be considered appropriate.

The notion or the implications of democracy are not beyond China’s understanding and, more importantly, can China be left alone as a soveriegn country to take its time to evolve as it thinks fit? By and large the majority of people in China and Chinese people overseas fully accept the way the country is being governed and are proud of China in its journey to its rightful place in the world as a world power to be reckoned with and engaged with respect. China deserves to be applauded and not berated. Consider China as a worthwhile partner for world peace and prosperity – rather than one to be shunned.

Also, please note the term “境外”(foreign), being used throughout the verdict. It is obvious the Chinese court saw Liu Xiaobo’s political speech as exceeding “limit of free speech”(超出言论自由的范畴), is due to foreign sponsorship.

That, is consistent with our own law, specifically FARA.

BTW, has the Chinese lobby ever advocated abolition of our constitution?

With respect to Chas’ comment about funding, the verdict on Liu Xiaobo said nothing about funding, but only addressed his writing and publishing of articles, some published in China and some abroad, and the Charter 08. Liu’s conviction on “incitement to overthrow state power” was solely based on speech and writing. (For both Chinese and English texts of the verdict, see http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/files/liu_xiaobo_verdict-en-ch.pdf)

The influence of one country on the domestic affairs of another country is always a sensitive issue, as Chas’ comment suggests. For a look at influence in the opposite direction, i.e., China on the US, see John Pomfret, “China’s Lobbying Efforts Yield New Influence, Oppeness on Capitol Hill,” Washington Post, January 9, 2010 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/08/AR2010010803710.html?waporef=ak

Freedom of speech, human rights…are the universal values and it is good for the country. I also believe the current way will lead China to nowhere without further political reform. However, for a country as large and complicated as China, the governmet needs to be cautious. Besides, most of the Chinese people still have distrusts on the Western, especially the American policy towards China. And the Chinese people can still see that many measures are trying to be taken to overthrow the CCP and split the country. It is my belief, that someday, the Chinese people can find its own way to build another ‘prosperity’.

As for Zhao Ziyang, his fall from power was not necessarily due to his reforms. I personally thought that he was a victim of the chaos that went out of control. It would be interesting to see what would happen to him if the protesters did not persist that long until the troops finally came in.

Further, there had been many thousands, perhaps millions of Chinese who died of some causes before. Compared to those, you can certainly mention a few by your standard.

If Liu were American he would be in violation of FARA (Foreign Agent Registration Act).

Former Premier and General Secretary of the CCP, Zhao Ziyang tried to introduce political reform from the top in the 1980s, but was purged by the Party during the June 1989 Tiananmen demonstrations and was placed under house arrest until he died in 2005. His memoirs have been published in English as “Prisoner of the State: The Secret Journal of Premier Zhao Ziyang” (Simon and Schuster, 2009). The failure of the CCP leadership to implement rule of law in China affects all of its relations, domestic and foreign. Jerome Cohen, America’s leading specialist on Chinese legal issues, commented for CNN on December 31, 2009 (http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/12/31/cohen.china.dissidents/) in his essay: “China’s Hollow ‘Rule of Law’”.

It appears that China needs a gradual and continuous change, especially politically.

A big bang revolution may not necessarily produce good results to the Chinese people, no matter how well intended it may be.