On Air: Liu Xiaobo: the right choice for the Nobel prize?

If only China itself could relate to Woody Allen films. It might then gain some insight into its own behavior. Until then, I don't think it's a bully. It's simply not yet an adult personality - very reactive, not proactive, feels the need to be secretive and shut down its critics because it doesn't understand more "mature" ways to attain and preserve real power.

Is China the world's Bully? Not yet. But it is slowly stealing that trophy away from the US. (especially considering the reaction towards wikileaks: death threats, cyberattacks, bullying companies to block access and services, threatening students with unemployment if they look at wikileaks etc).
I think it's great that there are rights activists in China and that they have support from the rest of the world, and hope that the people of China get their rights. I don't think it's great to abuse the nobel prize as a political tool (which is what the question implies "is this the only way to make China listen?").
I predict this will turn into a "which bully do you prefer, China or the US", so I will pre-emptively strike and suggest that the world foster an environment in which bullies cannot operate. Where the rule of law is the "bully" and each nation is held to account. The US as leader of the Western democratic world and sole superpower has been in the ideal position to build this environment of accountability, but has squandered this unique opportunity so far, and has gone in the opposite direction by promoting itself and its allies above the law. Time is running out to rectify this situation before the advantage is lost and the mantle of superpower is handed over to China.

Your question makes the Peace Prize sound like a collaboration by the West to force political change on China. If the collective West had this kind of influence on the Nobel Committee's choice of the winner, Obama wouldn't not have received the award - he understood that those who fear his success in the US used the prize against him and it DID hurt him politically. And other nations in the West were jealous too. In fact, there were a lot of folks responding on WHYS with negative comments about Obama for receiving the prize. Accrediting the Peace Prize Committee as representing more than it actually does turns a "committee issue" into a West vs. East issue, or a world issue. The Chinese government can interpret Liu Xiaobo's award however they want, BUT we should hold China to the facts when discussing it; it is a Norwegian committee's evaluation in a given year of the best representative of those working to better the world (with special emphasis on improving the lot of others.)

If somebody has power it will be used. Every superpower used its might to influence to influence other nations.

I do not understand the harsh reaction of China. It is clear that the Nobel Peace Price is a western price promoting western values (human rights). I think this rights should be universal, but the Chinese Government clearly has an other opinion. What is the problem in being reminded of this difference.

China can only be deemed to be bullying for those nations who bow to its threats. We now know that Russia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Afghanistan (among others) 1) can be bullied, and 2) are severely under China's thumb. Interesting. (These are also countries who have demonstrated less of a regard for human rights than those who are attending the award ceremony.)
The threat itself implies 1) China's greatest fear - the unleashing of opinions other than the State's inside its borders, and 2) China's belief that money, to the exclusion of all else, makes the world go around. Neither of these items are a surprise, BUT for China, who values behind-the-scenes, face-saving string-pulling, to try to jerk chains so publicly is an uncompromising declaration of values that should inspire Western nations to protect their long-range interests/independence by cooperation and compromise that would cut China down to size a bit.

China is definitely not the "bully" of the world. I can well understand why China doesn't believe Mr Liu deserved the Nobel Peace Prize. One can thank the Nobel Prize commission on its current composition for awarding Mr Liu. Reminds one of President Obama being given the same award. This topic has been brought up on numerous occasions on the Chinese TV channel.
How can China be declared a "bully" when their President constantly states they will not interfere in the Internal affairs of sovereign nations? China has developed friendship with many countries through diplomacy. In fact, China has encouraged diplomacy through the six party talk regarding DPRK which is being ignored.

I agree with you, Ibrahim in UK (#2,) that the US has done/is doing its share of trying to bully. This doesn't make China "right", however. Nor does it equate the US with China. The fact is that bullying, i.e. trying to impose one's own nation's interests on other nations is something nations (empires, etc.) have tried to do since their invention. This doesn't make it "right" or "fair," but the fact that hegemony, tyranny of the purse, etc. have been around for 1,000's of years means that so long as we are a world of separate nations, attempts to promote one's interests will remain.
To me, the issue of Liu Xaobo's Peace Prize and China's uncharacteristically vehement, public reaction against it is not the abstract contemplation of "bullying," but rather a wake-up call to the rest of us. Corporate greed is handing Western technology cost-free to China in order to have future access to China's billion strong purchasing market, and consumer greed is affirming corporate choice to produce cheaply. We are feeding our own, future monster, which is not only short-sighted, but also self-defeating. One doesn't disarm a bully by preaching to him, rather the bully's pretense to power needs to be leveled to balance with his peers. Whether it is public opinion (a more effective leveler to influence Western countries) or economic balance (the leveler for China,) those of us who want a freer, more open world politically and economically need to understand the dynamics at work for each of the players, and then work as one to nudge nations toward a level playing field.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Its clear that China has grown economically and can now flex its muscles with the West but lets face it, China will not listen at least not now. For China to fit or be better than the west, China has to match its ever growing economic might with things like freedom of speech and expression and not forgetting political reforms which is not the case at the moment. I know the West has some loop holes in observing Human rights but at least they care to show they are dedicated to maintaining it.

it was so right to award the peace price to a dissident and China will need more than this to listen. May be another revolution will work to change things.

also its funny how the suppression of information comes at a time when julian assange is being hounded by the US government and people at the top levels are even saying he should be tried for treason and imply he should be assisinated if necessary.

so freedom of information isnt universal after all...

suddenly information should only be released according to what WE find acceptable.

therefore if WE deem publishing information or articles to be allowed, it should be allowed.

if WE deem it to be not allowed, it should not be allowed.

its hypocrisy at its finest.

its not an arguement about censorship, but the DEGREE of censorship at the end of the day.

and of course apparently our standards are always correct, and everyone else must follow at our pace.

China: it seems they have forgotten their own philosophers.

Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent's fate. - Sun Tzu

If China wants to "Bully" the world, they need only to stop the export of X-Boxes and cheap kitchen appliances in time for Christmas. For all those who find China's ways "corrupt" (which I do), Hey, we are still paying their "bribe" money.

Nobel "Peace" Prize: Well that was given to a sitting president who resided over two unjustified wars with no intentions of ceasing. The "peace" prize lost its credibility their. Those who view it as anything but a diplomatic trinket are in fact "clowns".

av123, I can add nothing to your comments; they say it all. Well done!

Congratulations to BBC World for your comprehensive coverage of the award in Oslo.
One suggestion: post the name of the countries that didn't attend the ceremony, and bowed to the Chinese arm-twisting.
Western and free media must now step-up the pressure on Chinese Communist leaders themselves, and caracterize them as personnaly (Hu Jintao and Wen JiaBao) as dictators, pure and simple.
Boycotting visits of Chinese leaders in Europe, or at least showing they are not welcome. They must be treated as Khadaffi, Ahmenidejad, the stupid North Korean, the Zimbabwean despot, as well as Chavez.
Congratulations to BBC, you've not wavvered.

"(It would take) 300 years of colonialism. In 100 years of colonialism, Hong Kong has changed to what we see today. With China being so big, of course it would take 300 years of colonialism for it to be able to transform into how Hong Kong is today. I have my doubts as to whether 300 years would be enough."

Liu Xiaobo

An advocate of the foreign repression of China, given the history of China's experience of the Imperialist West in its former heyday, is pretty stupid in the eyes of most Chinese, except those who wish to forment widespread social unrest on the path to a more 'mature' society.

A peace prize for Liu Xiabao is, well, 'provocative'

I'm sorry but since the Nobel prize has been awarded to Mr Obama, president of a country in war, occupying several other countries, killing lot of people around the world, it has become a bit of a farce.

The west love to give lessons to the rest of the world but with Mr Assange being jailled, I'm not sure we are very credible in lecturing others about freedom of speech.
Let's imagine what would have happened if Mr Assange had been Chinese and denounced his governement's actions. Well we would quickly call him a hero and perhaps give him a nobel prize.

The countries which opted to boycott Nobel award ceremony are supporting China's authoritarian rule. The country which does not permit even moderate protest should be condemned. I understand that China has issues with Nobel committee but how can it force other countries to do the same. I am happy that India is going to attend the ceremony. What is shocking for me is to see countries like Russia and Saudi Arabia are abstaining. It seems after the collapse of Soviet Union Russia has become so weak that it decided to bow China. Even the allies of US are evading the ceremony. Pakistan's decision to stay away from distinguished award ceremony has not cone as surprise. I hope countries confront to China's bullying in future.

It is extremely difficult to understand China's position. Its stance is exasperating to say the least! Muzzling free speech in this day and age goes against the grain of civilised behaviour. The Nobel Prize is a recognition for excellence. Forcing dependent countries to its way of thinking is a form of bullying. These countries that follow China blindly have clearly lost their principles for fear of losing Chinese patronage or concessions!

It seems to me that the Nobel Peace prize award is another example of China bashing by Western mainstream media and vested interests. I wonder how many of the judges on the award panel have been to China. The speech by the chairman sounds like a lecture given by a patronising and pontificating teacher. It is so obvious that the powers that be in the West are bashing China out of fear of its emerging global influence and the majority of the people who support such views do not have enough facts to form an impartial opinion of China. It would be wiser for them to find out more and visit the place before they agree to be unknowingly used as foot soldiers in this war of public opinion against China and its government.

China’s governmental actions relative to the Liu Xiaobo Peace Prize award are predicated upon the fear of losing control and are thus perfectly understandable. Freedom of public expression can be a very dangerous thing when not in control. The recent little episode involving UK student protests over increased tuitions well illustrate the fact a mob’s intelligence is equal to the reciprocal of its numerical size. The Chinese government knows this also. As with every society, most Chinese are intelligent and well able to balance personal freedoms with societal duties; but some are likely not so well-controlled. This latter group may be a small percentage; but a small percentage of a billion plus people can easily congregate and be larger than a regional authority or even the nation’s ability to easily contain. Why should one be surprised to see the government straining, and hopping angry to boot, to keep the cork in the bottle? Wasn’t the recent removal of Saddam and the ensuing Iraqi chaos lesson enough? Slow progress toward freedom beats rapid progress toward anarchy every time. The Nobel Committee and Mr. Assange too, should remember freedom to act does imply such action is wise.
g

Really, it explain the proximity of so called over press powes nation of their level ground playing toward the economic strength of the world greatest power nation to be. Unarguably, we will at the end realise the threat is nothing but for freedom

Really, it explain the proximity of so called over press power nations on their level ground playing to show the economic strength of the world greatest power nation to be. Unarguably, we will at the end realise the threat is nothing but for freedom

As is the case with all bullys, if the rest of the world stod up to China, it could not operate.
China throws it's weight around becuase of it's economic status, but China could be so powerfull without the world to trade with. So if the rest of us stood up to china and refused to trade and traded amongst ourselves, China would soon back down.

Aslong as we allow this to continue China will continue to pull the Economic card whenever something it doesn't like happens. Everyone should have gone to the ceremony, what can they do? They can't kill everyone who attends without very serious repurcussions from the rest of the world. If we all ignored China and carried on it would be powerless.

Unfortunately i suspect will all continue to appease China wherever possible, and allow it become a less friendly version of the United States.

Great...

When I look at the countries declined the invitation, I am not sure it was the Chinese pressure that made them do so. Russia, Saudi Arabia or Egypt (to just name some) could be in the same situation as China next year. So it makes little sense to show respect to the Nobel Peace Price.

Each country's response to who is a dissident and who is a civil rights hero is relative. I wonder what the United States would say if Julian Assange were to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize?

multipack - explain to me how is china a bully? it keeps itself to itself.
it never comments on foreign affairs, unless its about foreign countries commenting on them.

by the way russia has called upon julian assange to be awarded the nobel prize.

if china awards its own peace prize to assange will the US and the UK and european nations be attending?

Some respondents seem harshly to criticize Chinese leadership for its reaction to the awarding of the Peace Prize to a person they see as divisive. I’m sure the situation isn’t as simple as it may appear. That is, “if the one is perceived as good, then the other must be bad” must be a trifle simplistic. I have found it best to assume a political adversary to be as honest, capable, well-intentioned, and patriotic as myself. Errors in judgment and in action may occur; but most citizens of a Nation are usually motivated toward its greater good. I think the Government of China is so motivated. I do not think this particular Peace Prize award, nor last year’s, particularly aids efforts to achieve peace. I think the Nobel Committee has acted unwisely in this case, yet I applaud their efforts to do their very best.
g

Surely the biggest news is the boycott by the Philipines and the BBC either completely failed to realise this or have chosen to discreetly ignored the fact. The Philipines is or was suppose to be a major US ally and this switch of allegiance to Beijing represent a seizmic shift in balance of powe in the Asia Pacific region.

Lets face it the West has committed economic suicide by transferrng its manufacturing industry to China,, with an enormous balance of trade deficit that means that China could collapse their economis at will - and what bargaining power does the west have. Note the enromous energy the BBC invests in reporting on the West Bank compred to almost zero on Tibet - where there is real colonialism - and you see that Britain already Kow-Tows to Beijing. The UNHRC cannot have a single debate without having a motion against my country for political reasons -but real human rghts abuses in China are almost a subject for congratulation there. China is not a bully - it toghether with its allies (the so-called non-alligned bloc) already control the UN live with it.

As a Civics teacher, teaching mostly new Canadians, and as a traveler, I understand that most of the world does not share in our value of freedom. For most people their interest is in security. We, including myself for most of my life, are so naive in believing everyone wants freedom. It will take generations of living in a stable, prosperous society to develop a respect for freedom. Without the stable, prosperous society I just can’t see how an appreciation of freedom could develop. So why don’t we just get off China’s back and show some respect for others outside the western world.

I agree with Dan, Give the Nobel Prize to Mr. Assange.

I don't know the criteria used by the Nobel Awards committee to select winners but I don't see any heroic features in Liu Xiaobo that merits the award.The guy has not achieved much in keeping peace to qualify him to be placed at level grounds with people like Nelson Mandella and the rest who have won the award in the past.
I think it is only a calculated attempt to mock the Chinese authority thinking about the fact that the Chinese government though not democratic is not oppressive and is in fact doing very well.
China has emerged under this same authority and one could clearly see that china has become a thorn in the flesh of certain powers.
Liu to me is certainly not the right choice for the Nobel prize.He has only tried to infuse western culture and ideologies into China but has failed.

Man, why can't China take a cue from the west when it comes to silencing it's internal dissidents. Give them pretty things, tell them they "The greatest", enslave them in debt while telling them they are free, give them a choice of repressed lives or join the "voluntary" military, toat how "free" the society is while wire tapping, spying on, and having other countries imprison their political prisoners. Hell, if they find themselves in a war, they can always just round up their free criticizes and put them in camps.

Bullies? I don't know. They are not very good at hypocrisy, i will tell you that much.

The alarming thing about this row is that it points up clearly China's complete misunderstanding of how democracies work. China obviously thinks that the Nobel Committee is some arm of the Norwegian Government and can be made to toe the line by shouting at it. They clearly do not understand that the Norwegian government has no say in or influence over what the committee decides to do. This does not make the Nobel Committee's decision right or wrong it just means that the government can do nothing about it. China needs to make a serious effort to understand how democracies work. Lets hope they do because if they do not it may mean that we will face serious trouble in the future.

The Chinese leadership claims to be protecting China's long-term interests, but that leadership is in fact very short-sighted.

A country that does not have freedom of expression, assembly and information squanders the innovation and drive that people who are not oppressed are free to exhibit.

The good news is that the Chinese authorities cannot keep the Chinese people wrapped up in a protective cocoon forever. It is no longer possible to create a total news black-out in this era of information and communications. And as China continues to send workers and representatives to countries all over the world, returning Chinese will come back with ideas that the authorities will find increasingly hard to encase in protective cocoons. A butterfly may yet emerge.

The Nobel prize does not change the way China deals with its people.It is only a symbolic gesture in support of the dissidents' struggle.

Even granting that China has its own social priorities and values, its reaction to the prize has been too aggressive.It needs to realize that it cannot impose upon the world the control it applies to its own people.

Its economic progress has not been achieved only because of the willingness of the world to have business dealings with it, not in isolation. It cannot now act imperious and show contempt for the world's opinion of it.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Liu Xiaobo ; the right choice for the Noble price?
Frankly, don’t know whether he deserves it or not. But, I do know for sure that the Noble Price has had been politicized and lost its purpose.
The reaction from China was predictable - so, what is new? May be China would not have gone to that length to sentence Liu Xiaobo for that long, if it was not, so, provoked.
The West should have had considered the implications of their actions first. Don’t think they care a bit whether he went to jail or even received harsher sentence. At least they are helpless to do anything about.
China’s actions within it boundaries, is Chain’s business, only the Chinese people are judge of that, having, said that, Chin’s polices will eventually change for the best and that will be from within and not from without.
I remember not long ago that Mr Rabin and Arafat both shared the Noble Price for peace (which never materialize up to date), eventually Arafat was labelled as a terrorist when he didn’t dance to the West music.

I think this display of anger exposes a deep and justified fear among the elite in Chinese government - they're losing their grip and they know it. The Nobel Prize is a direct thrust at their hearts.
Since Mao Tse Tung died China has become something he would not have recognized. It is being Westernized at an incredible rate, mainly because of their decision to be the world's producer of the benefits of capitalism. The Party is a joke - an entire generation has grown up seeing it as nothing but a source of corruption. The government would probably love to be seen as the world's bully because of the illusion of a strong central power that would imply. Mao said that true political power comes from the muzzle of a gun, and that is fast becoming the only reason they keep what they have.

If China awards its own peace prize to assange will the US and the UK and european nations be attending?

They wont attend. This incident actually reflects an ideological war. I found BBC has hidden so much extra information about Liu which may change public opinion and the comments that BBC has chosen to put on the website are so one-sided.

May be, now is too late to lecture to China about human rights.It is bargaining (or not at all) from a position of power.

If the prize was give 20 years earlier, when China was just setting out to do business with the rest of the world, it may have been effective.If the west has a committment to democracy, it would try to nip totalitarianism in the bud.

That said, it is possible that with respect to its own people, China's policies may not be motivated by cruelty. they will probably balance their Confucian ideals of putting the common good before the individual's freedom and get it all right.

China's aggressive stance towards the rest of the world is scarier than its internal policies

At the risk of sounding flippant, I wonder how the US government would react if Julian Assange were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize next year? After all, the website claims it aims to 'publish material of ethical, political and historical significance while keeping the identity of our sources anonymous, thus providing a universal way for the revealing of suppressed and censored injustices.' One could argue that that meets Nobel Peace Prize selection criteria, couldn't one?

Or let's forget Assange for a minute and consider Bradley Manning, now charged with leaking US classified information. He claimed he did so because he was disillusioned with US foreign policy and hoped or believed that the leaks would lead to "worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms."

I wonder how different the US government's reaction would be to the Chinese?

Of course China is a world bully, but that is only because the rest of the world have ceded their authority to China because of the lust for money and their investment there. Face it, if it were Zimbabwe doing this, the world would shrug it off, ignore it and most likely laugh in their face. But because the world is so addicted to cheap manufactured goods the greed of international companies and fear of being locked out of the Chinese market and access to their labour forces then the world yields to the demands of China be they reasonable or unreasonable for fear of losing money. Money always comes first, everything else a sad sad last! Perhaps if we didnt surrender our manufacturing industry to China a few things would happen... We would have better quality goods, safer goods, more employment for our own workforce but most of all, the ability to tell China that we dont yield to their paranoia or opression which is trademark or repressive regimes. But sadly, we are tied to China, have given them the power to push us around and at the mercy of our greed to the detriment of the democracy, free speech and all those things western nations hold dear, but easily ignore when profit suits.

Penkar
Capitalism requires larger markets and materials to survive. Like 170 years ago, when China's last fedual dynasty - Qing Dynasty had closed themselves for hundreds fo years and became weak, China was tortured and taken advantage of by most of the Western countries as well as Japan who were hunger for markets and raw materials. The rest of the world wouldnt stop trading with China. As to Liu, Im not sure whether he is the right choice, but Im sure this Peace Prize is highly politicized.

Bullying others into submission?

Do you mean like the US is doing to Julian Assange? Does that mean that Assange ought to be considered for the Peace Prize next time?

As to being the right choice; that prize has been pretty politically controversial in the past, with a lot of lobbying and money spent in promoting some certain person for the prize. Even Henry Kissinger got one and he was the architect of the overthrow and assassination of the Democratically elected Salvador Allende in Chile, Dr,K was/is a genuinely evil person in my opinion who ought to have been given the Anti-Peace Prize.

But I think that the choice this year is a good one.

I don't see China as a Bully but more as a 4 year old having a tantrum that some are trying to placate, some are ignoring and the rest see it as a sad day that only decreases their respect for China.

The Peace Prize in general has an odd history and is surely the most ambiguous and inconsistent of prizes.

I think Al Gore’s prize was more than a little odd. He simply did not deserve it.

Obama's has proven a meaningless political gesture.

Then there’s the just plain shameful horrors of the prize.

Henry Kissinger, certified war criminal?

Menachim Begin, old Irgun terrorist?

Shimon Peres, political father of Israel’s nuclear weapons?

Theodore Roosevelt, imperialist extraordinary?

A few awards in recent decades meant something for sure, as that to Doctors without Borders or that to Jimmy Carter.

But, in general, it’s not a proud history.

I think the real clowns are the chinese leadership because of their own slippery position; they don't knowfor sure when they can be ejected or jailed like many of their predecessors. Hence they flex their muscles just to show their so-to-say bravery and thus protect their uncertain back.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Liu Xiaobo-I HAVE NO ENEMIES
I listened to the BBC world service’s coverage of the Nobel peace prize ceremony. I couldn’t but wonder why the Chinese government can’t accept the fact or better still publicly accept the fact that they cant continue with the human rights violation they perpetrate in china.

A lot of comments from china by Chinese listeners were for the Chinese government. While a lot were for the Chinese Nobel winner.

The Chinese government should realise (if they don’t know) that all the winners that weren’t allowed to pick up their prizes by their respective governments had the last laugh. Check the roll call. How long can they continue suppressing freedom of speech?

As the country is opening up to capitalism and as China seems to be having more middle and high income families, their human rights that is freedom of everything is inevitable.

Also inevitable was China’s response to the broadcast of the Nobel peace prize ceremony. The blockage of foreign media live broadcast of the ceremony cannot be short of an analogy of a spoilt kid throwing tantrums but I add that this spoilt kid seems to be having his way in the comity of nations and his tantrums are treated with care.

But one undeniable and immaculately certain event is that the Nobel peace prize would be handed to the Chinese human rights activist one day, even if it is in eleven years time when he would be released or before then due to an official pardon. Either way, as his address was aptly titled, he would come out saying I HAVE NO ENEMY. He deserves the nobel peace prize.

Dolapo Aina,
Lagos, Nigeria.

Liu Xiaobo's Charter 08 is a very serious attack on China's government. The way the charter was released was calculated and damaging to the stability of China. Therefore, I'm not surprised he was convicted of state subversion.

His way is acceptable in the west because this is how the west works. To use the same method in China in its present state is crazy.

Of course the Noble Prize is being used as a political weapon against China. The president of the Peace Prize committee is now using the prize ceremony to demand action from China to realease him immediately.

Unfortunately for Liu Xiaobo, he made himself into a pawn for the new Cold War by being a reckless amateur.

The choice for Liu Xiaobo is the right one. At the same time, the western world has no right to critize China. Would the U.S., U.K and Europe be what they are today without Child Labour, Slavery and hypercapitalism?

I think the important thing to remember is that China has for a couple thousand years been ruled by a central government headed by a single person with great power and supported by a bureaucracy whose members have been chosen for ideological conformity as much as any other expertise. At the top of the heap they used to have an emperor. Now there is a sort of short-term emperor and a new one is selected from time to time by the highest echelon of CCP members. In practice, these governments have been responsive to the people -- but only to the extend judged necessary to preserve their own ruling positions.

Historically, mass movements have been one of the few real threats that a ruling regime may face. So luan (disorder) is greatly feared and quickly stamped out by the government. (Think of what happened in the Tiananmen Incident.) The CCP is aware of what mass movements of uneducated people have done to China in the past. Even though the people are educated today, the government still dares not trust the people. So any movement with mass appeal will be seen as a potential source of rebellion, and any individual with the capacity for individual thought and courage to express that thought will also be seen as a threat.

The U.S. can't feel too superior in this regard. Think of the reactions of people like Nixon to dissenters. There is, unfortunately, no mechanism by which Chinese people can rid themselves of leaders with totalitarian tendencies.

It's mind-blowing to note that a lost of people here have failed to answer the question but instead rant and rave about the US being a bully. China is indeed a bully but I pity the nations that actually have no principles and back down to these threats. I would equate this to a man forced to change his religion under the threat of missing a few meals.

Even Russia backed down to China! Unbeleivable indeed. How the mighty have fallen, wonder what Gorbachev would have thought about this. And to all the Chinese saying that this award means nothing, why block the ceremony from the entire country? What a bully!

If it embarrasses the leaders because they all inwardly feel that they should be doing the same work, but don't. That's just to bad!

Hopefully they will learn from it!

As an amazingly mature culture with a great history, one would think that China would be a leader in civil rights for their people. Not one of those in last place.

They are only repressing their greatest strength! Their actions are evidence of that!

It's just a dirty trick of the West.
Keep your prize and hand it to your needy people on the street.
Stop interfering others countries internal affair.
Look at the mirrow of yourself and make sure that your face is clean, prior making common on others.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Liu Xiaobo is a heavy smoker that I do know about him He has polluted the climate. It is my human rights to breath fresh air so how come he is getting a peace prize for helping to deny me of that?

The Philipines has boycotted the ceremony yet the BBC still made no mention about this except keep going on about Serbia's representation by a junior embassy staff. Come on BBC, the Phillipines is an ally of the US going back many years and has now sided with Beijing if that not news worthy I don't know what is!!!!

Liu is an enemy towards Communist Party and a political tool used by western politicians. Dont think China is a bully while US is indeed a bully. There is a line in everything and that line is different in different nations and cultural groups. Has anyone made an in-depth survey of whether Liu`s proposals are practical or not in the current China that is a developing country despite their economy boom? My Chinese friends told me Liu once greatly encouraged Iraq War and wanted US to colonize China for at least 300 years and replace Chinese culture with Western culture. He even proposed to change the race of Chinese people. The West would be glad to see that happens.

Whether the choic of the prize winner is right or wrong, the aim of the prize to shed light on peace has been achieved. At least now we can all see China for what it really is when it comes to peace and human rights. Compare the Nobel peace prize to the Mo Ibrahim awards for African Leaders, pathetic comparism. I am glad we are talking about peace and human rights, I just wish the Mo Ibrahim awards which surpiringsly have had no winner for the past two years could be talked about. Peace to the world and humanity

The Confucius Peace Prize is obviously a lame attempt at being a copy cat award.

It brings disgrace to the name and honor of Confucius.

Take a good look at the Wikileaks, the founder, Julian Assange. He's just a messenger. Now what? He got looked up.
Is this you call freedom? It's called double standard of the west!!!!
Just like Liu, who is the criminal in China. But he is the hero of the West.
Think about it carefully, you'll get it.

There is no Confucius Peace Prize in mainland China nor Taiwan. Both sides have denied that. Some Western media were lying. Shameful.

Chinese government supresses freedom of speech on politics not on other areas. Why US government hates assange so much when they encouraged freedom of speech and assange did so? Peace prize should be honored to Assange.

Never in the history of the nobel peace prize ceremony has so many countries boycotted yet BBC 6 O'clock news say it has backfired on the Chinese which I find laughable. All EU countries are compelled to attend like it or not, because it is an anti China forum the US and its allies has to be there too. It was a massive blow to the US that long time ally the Phillipines with Afghanistan, Iraq and Vietnam has boycotted. Some countries who are attending like Serbia have sent junior embassy staff instead because of US/EU pressure.

There are 194 countries represented by the UN.
2 out of 5 permanent members of the UN with the power of Veto will not be present.
Countries that have boycotted the ceremony out of the 65 invitation handed out by Oslo

China
Vietnam
Kazakhstan
Russia
Venezuela
Cuba
Tunisia
Morocco
Sudan
Algeria
Saudi Arabia
Iraq
Iran
Egypt
Pakistan
Afghanistan
Sri Lanka
The Phillipines (not mentioned by the BBC for what reason we do not know)
Palestine

A further 129 countries will not be present because they have no diplomatic ties with Norway.

china is beginning to open up its media anyway. why choose this point in time when things are opening up in an ongoing basis anyway.

china will do things in its own time. its like the tortoise and the hare. the west is the hare, always thinking selfishly and in the short term, china is the tortoise, slow and steady wins the race.

it will plod along step by step, and develop itself at its own pace.

On reflection, the awarding of the Nobel prize to Liu Xiaobo by the Norwegian Nobel Commitee was not a good move. The Commitee before doing so must have realised it would be highly controversial and would give cause for China to react in the extreme way China has done. The winner as above and other dessidents will suffer more as a result. Theres no two ways about it, China and its leaders is a Dictatorship, no different to the past Stalin's past dictatorship, with a slight difference whereby Stalin's Soviet Union did not enjoy the huge economic advantage as has China, so that China is economically and militarily one of the strongest nations on Earth. They clearly intend to maintain their dominance and will do everthing in their power to keep it that way. Should sometime in the future, China becomes a democracy with all the various ethnic groups within China, there would be unrest in the whole country. Simillarily, by trying to bring democracy to Iraq, only to find the country is in a much worse state than before.
Anything that may be of concern to the leadership of China it will react with all ruthlessness. To imprison Liu Xiaobo and other dissidents for being outspoken is a crime against humanity in itself.
On reflection before World War2, The Norwegian Nobel committee considered and very nearly awarded Adolf Hitler the Nobel Prize.

To me, when a country resorts to threats it becomes immediately discredited. Most especially when the threats are merely an attempt to silence critics. That's truly a position of weakness, and completely contemptible.

Ibrahim makes excellent points in #2. In defense of the US, though, economic or military sanctions are not levied merely because the other country is criticizing the US. But still, my disagreements with the previous administration's foreign policy were for exactly this sort of situation. It's impossible to retain the moral high ground, when we invade countries because we don't like the way their rulers operate internally. Unfortunately, this is becoming the case also in Afghanistan.

Liu us another propaganda weapon in the west's arsenal to use against China.

If China awards its own peace prize to assange will the US and the UK and european nations be attending?

They wont attend. This incident actually reflects an ideological war. I found BBC has hidden so much extra information about Liu which may change public opinion and the comments that BBC has chosen to put on the website are so one-sided.

It's ridiculous to compare Liu Xiaobo and Julian Assange - the latter has been arrested for an alleged sex crime against a person. Liu Xiaobo and his family are under arrest by a paranoid state for the crime of disagreeing. While most Western jurisdiction's laws explicitly permit Julian Assange's boat-rocking activities, it is establishment corporate interests that are acting against him and (mostly) not offices of states. There are obvious parallels between Assange's troubles and those of Anwar Ibrahim in Malaysia, but we really need to hear the case against Assange before impugning the Swedish authorities' motives.

I believe Liu Xiaobo is the right choice if only because it highlights the risks of campaigning for social change in China. It shouldn't be a crime to disagree, nor should it be considered reasonable to extend punishment for disagreeing to the dissenter's family or friends. China isn't the only country doing wrong in the world, but it could clearly use the experience to learn how to better handle its turn in the limelight and how not to handle non-violent dissent.

There are obvious similarities between China's public posturing and the posturing of US and allied governments when they accuse Assange of 'treason', putting invading armies at risk(!) etc, but until Assange is detained for disagreeing rather than sexual assault, I think the Nobel Peace Prize committee can still just about claim the higher ground.

#51 I wonder have you read Charter 08.

You are suggesting that it is dangerous subversion to call for, to take but a couple of examples:

1. Freedom of speech
2. Peaceful unification with Taiwan
3. The state to respect the rule of law
4. An independent judiciary

So I assume that you believe all of the above to be dangerous and that any country should (a) imprison everyone who says anything that does not follow the state line (b) be free to invade some other country for any reason (c) arrest people not because of the law but because some official feels like it and (d) judges should do what politicians tell them not act in accordance with law. Strangely such a system looks very like absolutely monarchy circa 1300

It is amazing how China has grown in influence. Twenty years ago no one would have paid attention to China's threats. Now 1/3 of the nations invited are now subject fear through a new found industrial bully. China is just beginning to show its teeth. Just wait another 20 years. What will the Big Bully do in 20 years. It will in probability be able to bully the world into submission.

You should never judge a book by its cover. Liu Xiaobo was not simply pushing for democracy or even western style democracy. What he was proposing was for China to be colonise by western powers and its culture completely eroded and Chinese people ethinically cleansed. He is a supporter of the Iraq war and George W Bush's policy. Sound far fetch for any decent human being, I would call him a psychopath. Here is a summary from an interview Liu gave highlights some of his radical views
“Q. Under what circumstances can China carry out a genuine historical transformation?
A. Three hundred years of colonialism. Hong Kong became like this after one hundred years of colonialism. China is so much larger, so obviously it will take three hundred years of colonialism. I am still doubtful whether three hundred years of colonialism will be enough to turn China into Hong Kong today.

Q. This is 100% “treason.”
A. I will cite one sentence from Marx’s Manifesto of the Communist Party: “Workers do not have motherlands. You cannot take away what they don’t have.”…

Q. You are saying that you want China to take Hong Kong’s path?
A. But history will not give this opportunity to the Chinese people. The era of colonialism has gone by. Nobody is willing to bear the burden known as China.”

Here is an extract from an article Liu wrote in 2004

On Bush’s war of terror –
"Bush’s excel­lent accom­plish­ment in anti-terror, is some­thing Kerry abo­lutely can not negate”

On the Iraq war –
"Bush adminstration’s ‘premp­tive strike” strategy is the right choice”

"No mat­ter what, the anti-Saddam war is right­eous! Pres­i­dent Bush’s deci­sion is a right one!”

It should be noted that all the five Norwegian politicians who comprise the Nobel Peace Prize Committee are representatives of political parties that have backed the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Liu's nomination for Nobel was backed by none other than Dalai Lama, the list of people who submitted the nomination was from an inivation only group of 300 most powerful people in USA, Europe and Japan, none from China. Liu's award was politicised and design to contain China's rise by a fearful West.

I'm still shocked, perhaps unsurprise the BBC has not woken up to the fact the Phillipines has boycotted the ceremony and switched their allegiance from Washington to Beijing. China has gained a strategic partner in the Asia Pacific region and stronger claims to the South China Sea. Despite US and Japanese pressure on Vietnam with promises of economic incentive to contain China this has also backfired. Losing the support of both Iraq and Afghanistan also shows America has lost control of these two countries.

In the future every developed nation (and ultimately the whole world) will use one of only two systems: the liberal democracy or the amoral empire. An amoral empire is essentially a dictatorship where ruthless individuals compete within "The Party" for the throne. It will be amoral in the sense that it does not have a real ideology based on some idea of morality, though patriotism will be highly encouraged by the leadership and take the place of an ideology for the common man, religions will be discouraged, but not necessarily banned as long as they do not threaten the leadership. The leadership only seeks to increase its own power, by expanding the empire. The empire will be wealthy and efficient, allow economic freedoms and treat women and gays equal because these issues do not threaten the power of the leadership. Freedom of speech and privacy will not exist however and there won't be the slightest hint of democracy or even the right for ordinary people to appeal government decisions and those who are loyal to "The Party" and serve in the security services will be able to act with impunity. Organized crime will be dealt with harshly because it competes with the interests of the leadership, which behaves much like a crime syndicate itself.

China is the first example of such an empire and Russia is becoming one. China says it does not interfere in other countries but that is a lie, whenever China wants to interfere abroad it just declares the region in question an undeniable property of the Chinese people. Taiwan, Tibet, Xinjiang and several oil-rich island chains have already received the treatment and it's only a matter of time before the same happens to Mongolia, Indian border areas and parts of Siberia while much of Africa and South Asia will become protectorates.

So yes, China IS a bully and a horrible sign of one possible future for the world. The alternative system, the liberal democracy, is under great pressure from Chinese (and Russian) influence. When human rights are being thought of as "Western concepts" rather than universal truths and what other countries do within their own borders is thought of as "none of our business, as long as they sell us the goods", we become a bit more of an amoral empire ourselves.



















'

@64 GregStick

The People's Daily (official CCP newspaper) seems to disagree with you:
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90776/90882/7225686.html

What is quite incredible is that 6 of the 19 countries who boycotted the ceremony are on the council of the UNHRC - the UN sponsored councl of Hypocrits and Racists - whihc is supposed to look after Human Rights worldwide but has instead become a means of attacking the only real democracy in the Middle East. Speaks volumes

What has the prize got to do with peace? Absolutely nothing and as such is a propaganda tool.

I do not really care who has been awarded the Peace Prize. If someone like Obama can be awarded, then who can't be awarded? If someone like Assange can't be given a prize, then who deserves it? I am really disappointed about the prize, a prize imposes moral judgement on others at a seeming vantage point. Anyway, I respect the Committee's point, but I am totally disappointed by your choice.

BBC's John Simpson is a clown, his bias reporting reeks. This is the same idiot who ran around in Baghdad like a lunatic thinking he had liberated the city. Look Mr Simpson, people are still dying in Iraq through American atrocities so why are you not there?

Usually, the nobel peace prize award is given to those who deserve, once he deserves it is for him. I do not believe anything else again can be done.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

China doesn’t need "Jasmine”.