As China’s one-child policy nears its 31^st anniversary, there is still no end in sight to these aggressive regulations. The policy, which is still strictly enforced by the Chinese government, began in 1979 and was scheduled to end September 25, 2010. Since the implementation of the policy, government crackdowns and social pressure to have a son have resulted in at least 50 million “missing” women. A traditional preference to have sons along with the one-child policy has led to sex-selection abortions and a major gender imbalance throughout the country. Unfortunately, many families feel they must resort to extreme measures in order to ensure a male heir and avoid breaking the one-child regulation. The growing gender gap poses the question- how have such a large number of women seemingly vanished while going unnoticed by the rest of the world?

What has been termed as “gendercide” continues to produce rippling effects throughout the country that threaten and devalue the lives of women and children. The conditions of the one-child policy have allowed human trafficking to thrive as unwanted girls and boys are traded as commodities. In July, an unprecedented raid by the CCP’s Ministry of Public Security unveiled a child trafficking ring that led to the suspension of over 300 suspects. At least 81 children were rescued, including 13 babies as young as 10 days to 4 months old. The Ministry reported the deployment of 2,600 police officers from 14 provinces in the July 20^th raid. The incident has only touched the surface of a major black market in which children are bought and sold as future wives, slave laborers and sex workers. As successful as this raid may have been, the root causes of child trafficking in China are still very much in place.

U.S. President Barack Obama will meet with the Dalai Lama, despite threats from China that the meeting "would further hurt already strained bilateral relations." The President, who "snubbed" a visit with the Dalai Lama back in late 2009, will meet with His Holiness, although a date still has not been set.

While China regards the Dalai Lama as a "dangerous separatist," the 1989 Nobel Peace Prize laureate, is known around the world as a "respected religious and cultural leader." The Dalai Lama wants Tibetans to be able to "freely practice their culture, language and religion under China's rule" - conditions that do not currently exist.

To aid in its control of Tibet and the repression of Tibetan human rights, the Chinese government extended its vast Laogai system into Tibet. According to the International Campaign for Tibet, "the Chinese government severely restricts the rights of Tibetans, including the freedoms of speech, press, association, and religion. Tibetan political prisoners endure harsh prison conditions and torture... Since 1949, hundreds of thousands have died as a direct result of China’s policies."

In October 2009, the Dalai Lama visited the Laogai Museum.  Watch his visit below:

Following Secretary of State Clinton’s disappointing comments on human rights on her trip to Asia in February, and coming on the heels of the decision to delay a meeting with the Dalai Lama, I applaud President Obama for finally, and publically, taking a stand on human rights in China. Both in his town hall meeting with Shanghai students and in his meetings with the Chinese leadership in Beijing, President Obama promoted freedoms of speech and religion and emphasized that these were universal rights to which all peoples are entitled, including ethnic and religious minorities. President Obama’s public statements provide comfort and support to the brave men and women inside China who are fighting for these rights every day, many of whom are suffering in China’s Laogai—a vast archipelago of forced labor prison camps—as a result of their efforts. I encourage the Obama administration to continue to publicly affirm its commitment to human rights, and to better integrate human rights into its strategic dialogues with the Chinese leadership.

Although President Obama’s first state visit was generally a positive step, there remains much room for improvement. For example, Obama made a clear and strong case for Internet freedom during his town hall meeting, but reports of these remarks were deleted from Chinese websites by the authorities within half an hour. President Obama should have come out publicly against the censorship of his own remarks.

A few weeks after the announcement that some of America’s most well-known diplomats would be building a permanent residence in Shanghai, one of the lesser known U.S. players made a trip across the Pacific.  Or, that is at least what you would believe if you were a Chinese resident following the news last night.  Apparently in terms of overall newsworthiness, President Obama visiting China and having a town hall discussion with Chinese students isn’t much of a story.  Maybe that’s because the media knew that the so-called ‘students’ were hand-picked for their brand loyalty, and that the most interesting question of the evening, regarding internet censorship, would come from the U.S. Ambassador to China, Jon Huntsman.  And even though the Chinese Internet portal Netease found the story compelling for a brief period of time and posted Obama's answer to Huntsman's question, Netease must have felt the story lost its appeal after only 27 minutes because they consequently removed it. (More after the jump)
 

Tomorrow morning, President Obama will meet with President Hu Jintao in a series of talks which will set the trajectory of US-Chinese relations for the remainder of his tenure in office.  We applaud the President for beginning his State visit by speaking yesterday in Shanghai concerning religious freedom and freedom of expression.  However, in order to make true progress in the human rights debate with Chinese leaders, the President must fully integrate human rights into the larger discourse concerning our strategic partnership.  

Many in the West have become enamored of the narrative that China is slowly plodding towards political liberalization.  Thus far, the Obama administration’s dealings with China have been in this vein, focusing on issues of so-called “strategic interest,” largely to the exclusion of human rights.  Secretary Clinton went so far as to declare we wouldn’t let human rights, “interfere” with dialogues on issues like global climate change and the financial crisis.  This may be appealing, but in the long run the choice between human rights and strategic interests is a false one.  China’s central government may sign on to global climate initiatives, but local officials will continue jailing journalists for reporting on lead poisoning in children.  Should the US and China reach favorable trade agreements, this does not ensure clarity with regards to the growth rates issued by the Chinese government (7.1% for the first half of 2009 despite falling energy use and tax revenues for the same period). Does it stand to reason that a government that can’t enforce its own domestic environmental regulations will enforce international agreements on the same subject?  Is it sound economic practice to stake our own financial recovery on a state-run economy with murky statistics?  Although conversations on “strategic interests,” may seem relatively simple compared to human rights dialogue, the Obama administration would do well to remember, with China there are no easy issues.   (Read more after the jump)

On his visit to Shanghai, President Obama defended internet and religious freedoms during a townhall forum with around 400 Shanghai students.  "These freedoms of expression and worship, of access to information and political participation, we believe are universal rights," the president said, referring to four rights curtailed in China.

Unsurprisingly, the Chinese government was at work to censor the President's anti-censorship message, blocking internet portals that streamed the event.  According to the Christian Science Monitor, "Chinese censors blocked Facebook and YouTube, limiting coverage to local TV and China's official news agency." To see the president's message, view the videos below:

While the Chinese Communist Party has been in the business of persecuting independent thinkers for decades, there tend to be a few wiley rascals who just won’t learn.  These so-called “bad elements “ tend to be a thorn in Beijing’s backside on the worst of occasions, usually when a foreign dignitary is coming to town.  Even though many of these “subversives” most certainly have opinions about the up-coming visit of President Obama to the PRC, no one had the guts to write him a letter and hand it to the international press.  Well, except one.

In an incredibly bold move, former “New Youth Study Group,” member and Black Series author Yang Zili, did just that.  Risking re-arrest, Yang wrote the letter on behalf of friends and fellow group members Xu Wei and Jin Haike who each have two years remaining in their 10 year sentences.  In an interview with the Associated Press, Yang stated, "I have no choice but to take this risk because I feel I have a responsibility to help them.  If I don't make an appeal that is particularly on behalf of these two people, they might just slip through the cracks."

Yang, Xu, Jin, and Zhang Honghai (who also signed Yang’s appeal) were arrested in 2001 for their private meetings of the “New Youth Study Group,” in which they discussed the possibility for democratic reforms in China.  Despite their small number and benign activity, their group was seen as a threat to the CCP, and, all four men were jailed.  Clearly, the People’s Armed Police were no match for them, however, as they are still “subversive” almost 10 years later.

On Wednesday, the Laogai Museum was honored by a visit from His Holiness the Dalai Lama.  We were of course overjoyed, but at the same time disappointed that President Obama did not see fit to meet with the Dalai Lama at this time.  As we saw from the press this morning, the Chinese still kicked off about the fact that the “reviled” Dalai Lama received an award in Congress. 

Obama may have thought that by not meeting with the Dalai Lama before his upcoming trip to Beijing, he would somehow gain favor with the Chinese government on other issues.  In reality, they’ll leverage this decision by pressuring the Obama administration to lower the bar even further when it comes to human rights.  Back in the spring during her trip to Beijing, Secretary of State Hilary Clinton said human rights would not be allowed to “interfere” with other strategic issues like climate change or the financial crisis.  But what good is a climate change agreement in a world where the Chinese government routinely imprisons environmental whistleblowers?  And what good is a Chinese-led solution to the global financial crisis without a free press to make sure that the financial sector is transparent?