喜歡用「大國崛起」、「和平崛起」打造「和平」「大國」形象的中國 該釋放諾貝爾和平獎得主劉曉波了!

[轉載]     自由電子報自由廣場 2010-10-24

當諾貝爾反嗆中國

◎ 邱曉明

諾貝爾獎挪威委員會主席Thorbjorn Jagland,二十二日發表聲明「為什麼我們要獎勵劉曉波」。他說,中國指控諾貝爾獎「干預中國內政」,然而不分國家,世界各地人類的基本權利都是遵照聯合國的「人權憲章」(Universal Declaration of Human Rights)。這是每個人的權益,不是任何一個國家的內政。更何況,政府的責任是保障人民的言論自由,而不是壓迫不同的意見。我們恭喜中國在經濟上的成就,但中國要真正成為國際社會上令人尊重的國家,第一步就應該是釋放劉曉波;因為發表某些言論就被監禁十一年,這跟「和平」實在太背道而馳了!

同一天,前捷克總統哈維爾及前諾貝爾和平獎得主南非主教圖圖,也聯名發表文章:「中國面對真相的時刻,釋放劉曉波是大國的表徵」。哈維爾與圖圖表示,儘管中國一開始的反應是譴責諾貝爾委員會,軟禁劉曉波之妻,但還是可以「回頭是岸」;若是中國不釋放劉曉波,則顯現出中國跟窮苦小國緬甸的軍政府一模一樣—當年翁山蘇姬獲得諾貝爾獎,緬甸也是不放人;中國敢放人,才真正是「泱泱大國」的風範。

哈維爾與圖圖還苦口婆心的說,當年中國開始經濟改革時,捷克還是共產國家,南非也還是種族隔離。而今時移物轉,兩人都見證到自己國家的民主化,所以今天可以如此「沒有懼怕、充滿希望」的自由發表言論。中國的經濟開放帶來進步,釋放劉曉波則是中國進步、大國的真實表徵。

再回頭看和平獎揭曉當天,紐約時報普立茲獎得主評論家Nicholas Kristof恭喜劉曉波,談到二○○八年在劉被逮捕之前,Kristof打電話給劉曉波,不僅馬上被公安監聽,電話還被切斷!Kristof感嘆,多數人以為中國經濟開放必定帶來民主,但根本不是這麼回事。過去二十年來,劉不斷受到中國政府的騷擾、監控,而他只不過是要求一些人民基本的權利。文章結尾他語重心長的說:盼望有一天,中國真的尊敬劉曉波,而不再把他當犯人。

中國喜歡用「大國崛起」、「和平崛起」打造形象,台灣部分媒體也常如此形容。只是到底什麼是大國?怎樣算和平?從劉曉波獲得諾貝爾獎提名到現在,藉由國際輿論對此事的評論,我們可以判斷中國到底是不是大國,算不算和平—最基本的是:檢驗中國有沒有言論自由。因為「和平」的「大國」共同點就是有這些基本自由。

至於中國是不是「大國」,是否「和平」,瞎子吃湯圓,心裡有數吧!

(作者為美國台僑)

Thorbjorn Jagland: Why We Gave Liu Xiaobo a Nobel (Updated)

Thorbjorn Jagland, chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, explains in the New York Times the decision to give the Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobo:

Today, universal human rights provide a check on arbitrary majorities around the world, whether they are democracies or not. A majority in a parliament cannot decide to harm the rights of a minority, nor vote for laws that undermine human rights. And even though China is not a constitutional democracy, it is a member of the United Nations, and it has amended its Constitution to comply with the Declaration of Human Rights.

However, Mr. Liu’s imprisonment is clear proof that China’s criminal law is not in line with its Constitution. He was convicted of “spreading rumors or slander or any other means to subvert the state power or overthrow the socialist system.” But in a world community based on universal human rights, it is not a government’s task to stamp out opinions and rumors. Governments are obliged to ensure the right to free expression — even if the speaker advocates a different social system.

These are rights that the Nobel committee has long upheld by honoring those who struggle to protect them with the Peace Prize, including Andrei Sakharov for his struggle against human rights abuses in the Soviet Union, and the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. for his fight for civil rights in the United States.

Not surprisingly, the Chinese government has harshly criticized the award, claiming that the Nobel committee unlawfully interfered with its internal affairs and humiliated it in the eyes of the international public. On the contrary, China should be proud that it has become powerful enough to be the subject of debate and criticism.

Update: Danwei points us to a spoof People’s Daily cover posted on a Chinese microblog site that translates Jagland’s piece:
images Thorbjorn Jagland: Why We Gave Liu Xiaobo a Nobel (Updated)

Advertisements