The Great Firewall

China is known for its walls, and many of them appear to be labeled “great.” The notion of free speech has never been high on the list of Chinese values. In pre-Confucian times (before 600 BC) and continuing through most of dynastic China, folks learned to speak in flowery metaphor, laced with plausible deniability (i.e., there’s always another interpretation) to avoid divulging private information that could be used by local rulers to confiscate property or inadvertently offending a regional prelate looking to inflict head removal or more painful terminations of life upon hapless citizens. Indeed, this notion of not communicating with the rest of the world is evident in traditional Chinese architecture – four solid walls with the windows facing inwards to the courtyard for residences and walls-within-walls leading to the inner royal sanctum of the Forbidden City. The restrictions on free expression, both legal and cultural, continued through history.

Novel-writing has never been a cherished pastime with the Chinese – not really even explored until Westerner made their presence felt fairly late in local history; abstract paintings, calligraphy, very abstract theater and lots of strict essay writing permeated Chinese creativity. Abstract is more plausible denial than reality or perceived reality. Even when free speech was permitted, it often became a trap to discover dissidents, who could then be exterminated. For example, in 1956-57, China’s Chairman Mao Zedong in initiated the “Hundred Flowers” campaign and encouraged people to speak their minds under this slogan: “Letting a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend is the policy for promoting progress in the arts and the sciences and a flourishing socialist culture in our land.” Sequentially, his Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution movements purged dissidents and inflicted violent solutions against those who threatened the status quo.

China fiercely controls mass communications, and most importantly, the Internet. Hence the name: “The Great Firewall.” We’ve watched the battle between Google and the Peoples Republic of China, the imposition of the “Green Dam” censorship software, the virtual ban on personal Websites (you can apply, but good luck), blogging and open search and surfing. Likewise, the importation of film and television product is severely limited and conducted only through governmental sources of distribution, with very tight quota restrictions… this despite the fact that piracy reigns supreme and black market copies of Western content are everywhere. With box office revenues growing in China (official sources tell us that there was a 279% increase from 2008 to 2009) and literally motion picture theater growth staggeringly fast (one new screen every day!), the West looks at content as perhaps an equalizer in the trade deficit battle that looms underneath the quest for currency restructuring. China looks at free trade as essential, but considers “content” political and cultural, unfit for consideration as an open exchange.

Enter the World Trade Organization, of which China is now very much a member nation, that has imposed sanctions on China – under appeal, but China is losing – because of its severe restrictions on the import of content and mass media. Since China relies on the WTO to keep trade barriers down as to the exportation of Chinese goods to other countries, this is serious business for the PRC. The Journal from the American Bar Association (November issue) summarizes: “China, like the 139 other countries that are WTO members, is a party to the General Agreement on Trade in Services. The treaty, which went into effect in 1995, basically requires member states t o treat foreign service providers the same as domestic service providers. Thus, if the Great Firewall discriminates against foreign companies, it violates GATS…

“The trade organization has already held that China’s commitments on audio visual services prevent it from discriminating against foreign suppliers of some Internet services. In December 2009, a WTO appellate body ruled that China’s GATS commitment on ‘sound recording distribution services’ covers the electronic distribution of sound recordings. The panel also indicated that China’s GATS commitment on ‘audiovisual products’ covers the electronic distribution of movies, TV shows and other audiovisual works… China also agreed not to discriminate against foreign companies providing a variety of telecommunications services, including electronic mail, online information retrieval and online data processing (including transaction processing). China added that ‘all international telecommunications services shall go through gateways established with the approval of China’s telecommunications authorities.’”

But this an agonizingly slow process, and strangely, the incumbent Chinese leadership is actually revered by most Chinese and have little to fear from the free flow of mass media. The ABA Journal continues with exactly where this process stands today: “A WTO appellate body ruled against China in December of last year. The ruling did not question whether China’s censorship was necessary to protect public morals or maintain public order. Instead, the WTO panel found that China could continue its censorship through less trade-restrictive means: Allow foreign entities to import and distribute works, and give the Chinese government sole responsibility for conducting content review of these works. China agreed to abide by the ruling.

“Critics who want to use the WTO to knock down the Great Firewall face a dilemma. They must convince the WTO that either China’s censorship isn’t necessary to protect public morals or public security, or there is a less trade-restrictive alternative by which China can censor the Internet. The former is a politically sensitive topic that the WTO would prefer to avoid. The latter may satisfy foreign high-tech firms that want to do business in China, but it is unlikely to mollify human rights campaigners.” But free speech and human rights advocates may just have to ride the coattails of commercial motion pictures and television productions, which are slowly battering their way into the PRC marketplace – warriors using the trade deficit and international treaties to erode the power of The Great Firewall.

I’m Peter Dekom, and at some level, sooner rather than later, this seemingly solid barrier to global communications will erode or be blown apart… this time by external sources.