The Darker Side Of Search In China
Earlier this week Wang Xiaoning and his wife, Yu Ling, sued Yahoo making claims under the U.S. Alien Tort Claims Act and Torture Victims Protection Act. Wang is serving a ten-year sentence in China for "incitement to subvert state power." He had distributed online several journal articles calling for democratic reform and a multiparty system in China and alleges that Yahoo identified him as the author of the articles to the Chinese Government.
There are a lot of factual and legal issues that appear to make Wang's suit against Yahoo an uphill battle; but, a quote of a Yahoo official commenting on the case struck me:
"'Companies doing business in China are forced to comply with Chinese law,' said Jim Cullinan, a Yahoo spokesman. When government officials present the company with a lawful request for information about a Yahoo user, he said, 'Yahoo China will not know whether the demand for information is for a legitimate criminal investigation or is going to be used to prosecute political dissidents.'”
The spokesman is right, so far as he goes; but, is it fair to accuse Yahoo of pursuing profit on the backs of, by our standards, innocent Chinese citizens? Put another way, should Yahoo and Google and MSN pull out of China until China quits its efforts to repress free speech?
Are the search companies wrong to do business in a country with which the U.S. Government maintains relations, despite knowing of its human rights violations?
Is more good done by the companies' infrastructure in China that allows access to some of what can be found on the Internet?
Finally, is the "problem" short term in that, given time, China won't be able to hold back its people from what they have seen and heard from the rest of the world.
Richard Nixon, with Henry Kissinger at his side, opened China's "door" going on forty years ago. Since then it has never been fully shut. The real uphill battle is being fought by the Chinese Government, trying to selectively close the door to some things and some ideas. Wang may just be collateral damage.
5 comments:
Doing anything with China is like trying to be friends with a bully. We let them get away with many atrocities, which we figure in the long run, will benefit us - as long as we get what we want.
Eventually the "door" needs to proped wide open, or slammed shut - and that should be the only way we do business - either full cooperation, or go away. No inbetween.
Both China and the USA are playing each other like a fine tuned fiddle, and thinking they really skinned the cat everytime they 'almost' accomplish something.
Yahoo is already an extremely wealthy corporation, yet they made the decision that they would willingly help imprison and torture people for the chance to become even more wealthy.
Do they recognize any moral authority other than the profit margin? Is there any line they will not cross?
Okay, I'm only playing devil's advocate here, but what if China thinks it's morally right?
One man's dissident freedom fighter is another man's seditionist.
Is it fair for the West to demand to play in someone else's sandbox, and then demand to dictate the rules?
Is there a difference between Yahoo giving information to the Chinese government, or Homeland Security? Or, are we suffering from selective vision?
Robert,
Your last point first. There is no difference. The matter is highlighted by last year's flap about phone and internet companies turning over information to the government even without subpoenas issuing. Shouldn't have been asked for and shouldn't have been given.
Your first and second points together. Too harsh a term, but U.S. amorality in foreign relations and foreign trade has been the norm for quite awhile now. By amorality, I mean U.S. acquiescence to Shahs, Sadaams and Mugabes where its strategic and trade interests are seen to be furthered by acquiescense. We talk a lot; but, we don't follow through on our moral pronouncements.
I think the acquiescense is driven by both a realization that the U.S. can't be the world's moral police force and maybe shouldn't be.
Companies like Yahoo play in the sandboxes that exist. As the world becomes more interdependent, the borders of the sandboxes get closer together. Sand from one spills into the others. Over a very long period of time what is moral will be less defined by individual countries and more by consensus of all the players.
For better or worse, I think the Chinese sandbox will get more sand from us than we get from it.
Great post. You are asking all the right questions.
Post a Comment