The Internet once
promised to be a conduit for uncensored information from beyond
China's borders, and for a brief, shining instant in modern
Chinese history, it was a potential catalyst for political and
human rights reform in China. However, for China's 79 million Web
surfers-the most educated and prosperous segment of the country's
population-the Internet is now a tool of police
surveillance and official disinformation. If a stable,
democratic China remains a key goal of America's global strategy,
the Bush Administration and Congress must consider ways to
penetrate China's "Great Firewall." The United States must restrain
the transfer of sensitive and often proprietary
cybertechnology from Western-including American-firms to
Chinese police agencies. Just as the United States established
Radio Free Asia to provide a source of uncensored news, so too must
the U.S. minimize the obstructions that the Chinese face in
acquiring and disseminating news and information via the
Internet.
The Democratic
Imperative
In 2003, President
George W. Bush declared, "We welcome the emergence of a strong,
peaceful, and prosperous China. The democratic development of China
is crucial to that future."[1] This imperative of a democratic
China has been a feature of America's strategic plan for nearly six
decades. President Harry S. Truman said that a "strong, unified and
democratic China" is "of the utmost importance to world
peace" and consequently "in the most vital interests of the
United States."[2] Yet two out of three is not good
enough. A strong, unified, and undemocratic China is a
greater potential threat to the region and to America than a weak
and undemocratic one.
If the U.S. truly
believes that a peaceful China evolving along democratic lines is
in America's interest-as well as in the interest of the Chinese
people-then the U.S. should recognize that the Internet could be a
most effective tool. Moreover, it requires no special informational
input from the U.S. government. Key elements of democratic thought,
free market economics, and concepts of a civil society are all
freely available on the Internet. Yet regrettably, the Internet has
an even greater potential as an instrument of Orwellian thought
control. With the help of foreign-including American-high-tech
companies, Internet technologies have enabled China's Big
Brother to keep a close eye on its citizens and to identify and
arrest those who spread democratic ideals.
Democratic reform in
China is highly unlikely to come from the top down, that is, from
the Chinese Communist Party. It will have to emerge from the
grass roots. If the Internet is to be a medium of that reform, ways
will need to be found to counter China's official censorship and
manipulation of digital communications. The cultivation of
democratic ideals in China therefore requires that the U.S.
adopt policies that promote freedom of information and
communication by funding the development of anti-censorship
technologies and restricting the export of Internet censoring and
monitoring technologies to police states.[3]
Naïve optimism
about China's Internet fills the pages of America's leading papers
and scholarship, giving the impression that an increasingly wired
China will necessarily evolve into an open and free society. One
recent editorial in The Wall Street Journal
optimistically claimed, "By searching for new measures to clamp
down on its increasingly high-tech citizens, the Communist Party
has taken on a battle it is bound to lose."[4]
For Chinese Communist
Party leaders, domestic "stability" is a prerequisite to national
goals, but by stability they mean unchallenged Party rule. Thus
while cosmopolitan urban Chinese-who perhaps number as many as 50
million (out of China's 1.3 billion people) and have an average
annual family income in excess of $5,000-increasingly enjoy the
electronic gadgetry of modern life, they have learned that the
price to be paid is the unquestioned rule of the Party. As the
central propaganda organs and police agencies maintain and tighten
their grips on information flow and private digital communications,
the average Chinese citizen now realizes that political speech on
the Internet is no longer shrouded in anonymity: Private contacts
with like-minded citizens in chat rooms, or even via e-mail text
messaging, are not likely to escape police notice.
Big Brother Is
Watching
For several years
during the 1990s, Chinese Internet users gained increasing amounts
of information from the Internet. By 1998, according to an
insider's account of China's Internet development, the Chinese
Public Security Ministry and its police stations around the country
found that their resources for monitoring the Internet were
becoming overwhelmed.[5] Several major U.S. firms came to
the aid of the Chinese security services by constructing a new
Internet architecture that enabled China's cyberpolice to monitor
Internet sites in real time and identify both the site owners and
visitors.
The inevitable result
is that suppression of Internet dissent has increased in
recent years. China is said to have the largest prison population
of "cyberdissidents" in the world. As of June 2004, the
Reuters news service reported there were 61 cyberdissidents in jail
for criticizing the Chinese government.[6] In January 2004,
Amnesty International documented 54 cases of individuals arrested
for "cyberdissent," but concluded that the 54 cases were probably
just "a fraction" of the actual number detained.[7]
According to another report, 13 Internet essayists were tried,
sentenced, and denied appeals between October and December of
2003 alone.[8]
In April 2004,
The Washington Post described a typical
cyberdissidence case involving a group of students who were
arrested for participating in an informal discussion forum at
Beijing University. It was a chilling report that covered the
surveillance, arrest, trial, and conviction of the dissidents and
police intimidation of witnesses.
Yang Zili, the group's
coordinator, and other young idealists in his Beijing University
circle were influenced by the writings of Vaclav Havel, Friedrich
Hayek, and Samuel P. Huntington. Yang questioned the abuses of
human rights permitted in the "New China." His popular Web site was
monitored by police, and after letting him attract a substantial
number of like-minded others, China's cyberpolice swept up the
entire group. Relentlessly interrogated, beaten, and pressured to
sign confessions implicating each other, the core members
nevertheless withstood the pressure. The case demonstrated
that stamping out cyberdissent had become a priority state
function. According to the Post, Chinese leader Jiang Zemin
considered "the investigation as one of the most important in the
nation." In March 2003, the arrestees were each sentenced to prison
terms of between eight and ten years-all for exchanging opinions on
the Internet.[9]
Then there is the case
of Liu Di, a psychology student at Beijing Normal University who
posted Internet essays under the screen name of Stainless Steel
Mouse. She is an exception among cyberdissidents-after a year
behind bars, she is now out of jail. The then 23-year-old Liu was
influenced by George Orwell's 1984 and became well known for
her satirical writing and musings on dissidents in the former
Soviet Union. She defended other cyberdissidents, supported
intellectuals arrested for organizing reading groups, attacked
Chinese chauvinists, and, in a spoof, called for a new
political party in which anyone could join and everyone
could be "chairman." Arrested in November 2002 and held for nearly
one year without a trial, she became a cause
célèbre for human rights and press freedom groups
overseas and apparently gained some notoriety within China as well.
Although she had been held without trial and was never formally
charged, she was imprisoned in a Beijing jail cell with three
criminals. In December 2003, she was released in anticipation of
Premier Wen Jiabao's visit to the U.S. Yet nine months after
returning to the Beijing apartment that she shares with her
grandmother, Liu still finds police security officers posted
at her home. She has found it impossible to find a regular job, and
police monitors block her screen name Stainless Steel Mouse
from Web sites.[10]
One reason Ms. Liu was
released was the incessant prodding of another Internet
essayist, Du Daobin (identified only as a 39-year-old civil
servant from Hubei province), who condemned Liu's jailing. In
turn, at least 1,000 people signed a petition in support of Du
that urged the government to stop using anti-subversion laws to
hinder free speech. Of course, Du was charged with subversion
and jailed. In June 2004, a Chinese court announced that Du would
get a suspended sentence instead of a long prison term. Du's
case, says The New York Times, may not be one of
government magnanimity, but rather an example of what can
happen to other cyberdissidents in "a quiet but concerted push to
tighten controls of the Internet and surveillance of its users even
though China's restrictions on the medium are already among the
broadest and most invasive anywhere."[11]
On July 31, 2004,
hundreds of villagers of Shijiahecun hamlet in rural Henan
province demonstrated against local corruption. Provincial
police from the capital at Zhengzhou dispatched a large anti-riot
unit to the village, which attacked the crowd with rubber bullets,
tear gas, and electric prods.[12] Propaganda
officials immediately banned media coverage of the incident, and
the outside world might not have learned of the clash if an
intrepid local "netizen" had not posted news of it on the Internet.
The Web correspondent was quickly identified by Chinese cybercops
and arrested during a telephone interview with the Voice of America
on August 2. While the informant was on the phone with VOA
interviewers in Washington, D.C., he was suddenly cut short, and
the voice of a relative could be heard in the background
shouting that authorities from the Internet office of the Zhengzhou
public security bureau (Shi Gonganju Wangluchu) had come to
arrest the interviewee. After several seconds of noisy
struggle, the telephone connection went dead.[13]
Popular Web Sites Shut
Down
In other cases, when
it is difficult for the state to discern whether or not certain
Internet activity is a clear and present danger, the cyberpolice
simply shut down Web sites. For example, on September 13, 2004,
officials from the State Council News office, the ministry of
information industry, and the ministry of education suddenly
appeared at Beijing University to announce the closure-for no
stated reason-of Yi Ta Hutu (One Big Mess), a popular
university bulletin board system (BBS). It was understood that the
BBS was shut down for "disseminating political rumors." At the same
time, the government ordered all Web sites in China to delete
Internet links to One Big Mess. Six days later, three Beijing
University law instructors wrote an open letter to Chinese
President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao praising the closed BBS
site as "an important channel by which the party and government can
understand the feelings of the people." The professors then
condemned the BBS closure as "suppressing freedom of speech" and
decried the state action as "illegal" and "regrettable."
Needless to say, the professors' open letter was not published on
Chinese sites and had to be e-mailed to correspondents outside
China.[14]
One Big Mess was host
to over 800 separate discussion boards, boasted an average of
20,000 page viewers at any one time, and had over 300,000 regular
viewers on its list.[15] Instead of being a vehicle for
democratic reform, Chinese security services now use the Internet
to identify and eliminate networks of dissent.
Surveys conducted by
the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences show that in metropolitan
areas more than one in three people has Internet access.[16] Even in small cities, 27
percent of residents have access to the Internet.[17] Given these numbers and the
determination of the Chinese Communist Party to stamp out each and
every vestige of dissent and opposition, it is not surprising
that China has the most extensive Internet censorship in the
world.[18]At last estimate, access was
blocked to 19,000 political Web sites considered threatening.[19] These blocked sites include
popular foreign news, political, religious, and educational Web
sites, including fairly innocuous Web sites of church and religious
organizations serving foreign businessmen and residents.[20]
Clampdown Aided by
U.S. Firms
In addition to
blocking sensitive Web sites, the government also controls the
sites that appear in popular global search engines such as Yahoo
and Google. For instance, a search for "Jiang" in the Chinese
version of Yahoo returns only 24 sites, all of which are flattering
to Chinese leader Jiang Zemin. Moreover, e-mail subscription
services are blocked and the government can and does monitor
personal e-mail and "erase online content considered
undesirable."[21]
Some American Internet
portal companies assist the Chinese government in limiting
information available to the Chinese people. In 2001, Yahoo signed
an agreement with Chinese security authorities to block
critical content from its Chinese language servers. Yahoo
further promised to avoid "producing, posting or disseminating
pernicious information that may jeopardize state security and
disrupt social stability."[22] By contrast, the search engine
Google, which has not signed such an agreement, has been deemed
"unselective" and "unsupervised" by the security authorities and
has consequently been censored. Google is especially feared by
China's cybercensors because of its cache feature that makes
available saved copies of Web pages that have been deleted and Web
sites that have been taken down. Since 2002, Chinese visitors
to Google.com have been re-routed to a local search engine.[23]
Surveillance of the
Chinese Internet is greatly enhanced by the custom design of
China's Internet portals. All Chinese Internet traffic is routed
through five major channels using devices sold by a U.S.-based
corporation. American engineers developed special routers,
integrators, and a "special firewall box" programmed to
monitor Internet traffic and detect selected keywords.[24] China Telecom bought
"many thousands" of these special firewall boxes from a U.S. firm
for $20,000 each.[25] These boxes allow the Chinese
government to search for, identify, and intercept potentially
subversive transmissions, which had theretofore been
considered difficult to track.[26] By exporting
sophisticated communications technology to China, North American
telecoms and software companies facilitated the construction of the
"Great Firewall of China" against the world and provided the
Chinese government with a means to conduct surveillance against its
citizens.[27]
Big Brother's Eyes at
Internet Cafes
The Chinese government
has also installed elaborate monitoring systems at all Chinese
Internet cafes. For example, the Shanghai Cultural Broadcast
and Film Management Bureau is installing software in 110,000
computers in the city's 1,329 Internet cafes for comprehensive
long-term surveillance. This software allows the government to
monitor, in real time, the identities of Internet users and the
sites that they access or attempt to access. New regulations
require all Internet users at cafes to register in their real names
and provide identification cards before log-on. Press
announcements of Shanghai's new Internet regulations
indicate that the local security services expect all Internet
cafe proprietors to cooperate-and pay for the new software
upgrades. China's large eastern province of Shandong has also
reported adoption of an "internet real names" project to track
cybercafe Web surfers.[28]
Online conversations
are subject to constant eavesdropping, and Web surfing is
scrutinized. Yahoo-China, for example, reportedly hires
supervisory "big mamas" for the teams of censors assigned to
every Yahoo-hosted Internet chat room in China. One American expert
in the Chinese Internet describes the big mamas' mission as
deleting politically undesirable chat room comments in real
time and sending warnings to violators in cyberspace. All Chinese
chat rooms, according to this expert, are watched by surveillance
teams who can also monitor e-mails, including Web-based
accounts, and may use unblocked Web sites as "tripwire" stings to
locate and trap possible agitators.[29]
Chinese censors
periodically and inexplicably block and unblock foreign news sites
that inquisitive surfers may try to access.[30] There
is a special task force of some 30,000 "cybercops" who patrol the
World Wide Web, block select foreign news sites, and terminate
domestic sites with politically sensitive information. Coupled with
the ability to log viewers of sensitive sites, security agents may
record names of surfers who attempt to access forbidden sites
or selectively unblocked sites for further monitoring. In this
way China's Internet has increasingly become a tool for security
agencies to identify, monitor, arrest, and imprison potential
dissidents.[31]
Censorship Under the
Guise of Moral Propriety?
The Beijing government
emphasizes the dangers of corrupt influences on children and says
that in one survey 60 of 100 juvenile delinquents in a Beijing
courthouse were frequent visitors to pornography sites. In
what appeared to be a commendable effort to bolster youth
morals, Chinese authorities shut down over 30 pornography sites
between June and July of 2004.[32]
Although President
Hu's anti-porn crusade has superficially lofty goals, the
nationwide crackdown conveniently tightens state control over the
spread of digital information. In fact, more than 90 percent
of the articles in China's legal regime governing Internet
sites is "news and information," and less than 5 percent is "other
inappropriate content."[33] Recent reports
indicate that authorities in Shanghai intend to restrict Internet
communications for religious groups. China maintains
restrictions on religious expression and does not permit
religious activities coordinated between Chinese and religious
groups from abroad.[34] As digital communications
present a potential gap in Beijing's scope of supervision, the
crackdown against pornography appears to be a smokescreen for
increased surveillance of political dissent.
Mobile Phone Text
Messaging Tracked
For several days in
late September 2004, a Chinese-citizen researcher for the
Beijing bureau of The New York Times was-unbeknown to him-
hunted by Chinese police for providing his employer with news that
China's leader Jiang Zemin was planning to retire. The researcher
had been visiting friends in Shanghai and had turned off his mobile
phone. When he switched on his phone again a few days later, it
took secret police less than an hour to track him down at a
restaurant and arrest him.[35] It was just the
latest evidence that China's mobile phone network has become a
means of police surveillance. Yet for several years, Chinese
citizens had used mobile phone text messages to disseminate
information.
In February 2003, a
mysterious virus swept through the southern Chinese province of
Guangdong, decimating the staffs of hospitals and clinics.
According to The Washington Post, "there were 900 people
sick with SARS [sudden acute respiratory syndrome] in Guangzhou and
45 percent of them were health care professionals." The Chinese
media suppressed news of the disease, apparently in the belief that
the public would panic, but:
[News] reached the
Chinese public in Guangdong through a short-text message, sent to
mobile phones in Guangzhou around noon on Feb. 8. "There is a fatal
flu in Guangzhou," it read. This same message was resent 40 million
times that day, 41 million times the next day and 45 million times
on Feb. 10.[36]
The SARS epidemic
taught the Chinese security services that mobile phone text
messages are a powerful weapon against censorship and state control
of the media. The Chinese government announced in 2003 new plans to
censor text messages distributed by mobile telephone. China
Mobile, the country's largest service provider, alone tallied 40
billion text messages in 2002.[37] With over 220
billion text messages sent each year via all China's telecom
providers, the Chinese government has had to establish 2,800
centers across the country to conduct routine text monitoring.
However, interception of personal messages may not be peculiar to
China for long. The Ministry of Public Security recently permitted
the manufacturer of these low-cost surveillance systems to
sell them on the open market, leading to their possible
proliferation worldwide.[38]
A Faustian Deal for an
Orwellian Future
Without innovations in
technology provided to China by Western telecoms, networking,
Internet portal, and software firms, the Chinese government could
not have gained its current stranglehold over Internet information.
The "Great Firewall of China," designed in large part by North
American firms, is increasingly effective at monitoring and
censoring online speech in a medium that had for a few short years
carried a lively debate about democratic ideals. Chinese
filtering systems have removed politically provocative Web
sites and postings and have redirected Web surfers to search
engines that show only content favorable to the regime.[39] China's Internet now serves to
disseminate propaganda and block the flow of information and the
proliferation of democratic ideas. Contrary to conventional
wisdom, which holds the Internet as a great propagator of
information and ideas, China's electronic communications are
heavily censored and are increasingly used as an instrument
for surveillance, repression, and propaganda.
Recommendations for
U.S. Policy
A democratic China is
indeed "in the most vital interest of the United States," and
fostering an environment in China conducive to the free
expression of ideas should be a primary objective. The Bush
Administration and Congress must consider strategies to break
through the Great Firewall. Specifically, the Administration
and Congress should:
Designate Internet
censorship and monitoring systems as "police
equipment." Since the Chinese
telecoms and police agencies are using custom-designed Internet
hardware and software primarily for police purposes-and
because this equipment has been used broadly to apprehend and
arrest political dissidents- these types of software should be
designated "police equipment" for the purposes of the Export
Administration Regulations (which regulate the export of
dual-use items for foreign policy and national security
purposes).[40] U.S. exporters should be
required to file adequate descriptions of their custom-designed
systems with the U.S. government. License applications for
exports of these systems to China should be treated in the same way
as other police equipment exports to China.
Renew research into
anti-censorship technologies. A few years ago the
Voice of America briefly sponsored a network of servers, code-named
"Triangle Boy," which was beyond the reach of Chinese censors.[41] Although reportedly
successful, the system failed due to inadequate funding and
over-cautious handling of the contracts. Rather than funding its
expansion, VOA decided to pursue "safe-haven Web sites," but these
are now blocked on a real-time basis by Chinese censors. There
should be renewed efforts to create an information network that
would permit Web surfers in China to access accurate news beyond
China's Great Firewall.
Establish an Office of
Global Internet Freedom. Legislation-like the
Global Internet Freedom Act of 2003 (H.R. 1950)-is already drafted
that would create an Office of Global Internet Freedom under the
International Broadcasting Bureau (the parent agency for the Voice
of America) to coordinate U.S. efforts to develop
counter-censorship technologies. The need for a concerted,
U.S.-backed campaign to promote democracy in China is urgent, and
authorizing legislation should be included in the next State
Department authorization bill.
Conclusion
Chinese police
surveillance of Internet communications has increased as
Chinese citizens have gained more access to the medium. The
censors' reach extends to each computer terminal, and even personal
mobile phones and personal digital assistants. As Chinese citizens
found during the SARS outbreak, mobile phone text messaging and
access to the Internet were their only conduits for the
truth.
Support for a
democratizing China must be a primary objective of American
policy. This should be done by challenging the Chinese Communist
Party's monopoly on information in that country. U.S. firms that
have provided the tools of censorship and surveillance to a police
state should also help in defeating those tools. The United States
established Radio Free Asia to provide Chinese short-wave radio
listeners with uncensored sources of information about what
was really happening in China and the world, but short-wave
broadcasting is now obsolete. A similar effort on the World Wide
Web would have a far greater impact.
John J. Tkacik,
Jr., is Research Fellow in China Policy in the Asian
Studies Center at The Heritage Foundation. Augustine T. H. Lo and
Emily Ho, interns at The Heritage Foundation, contributed to this
paper.
[1]The White House,
The National Security Strategy of the United States of
America, September 2002, p. 27, at www.whitehouse.
gov/nsc/nss.html (October 4, 2004).
[2]See President
Truman's instructions to General George C. Marshall in U.S.
Department of State, United States Relations with China, with
Special Reference to the Period 1944-49 (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1949), p. 133 (emphasis added). This
document is also known as the China White Paper.
[3]For a
comprehensive discussion of policy options, see Report to
Congress of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review
Commission (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office,
June 2004), pp. 213-223. For several technical briefings on this
issue, see Hearings, SARS in China: Implications for Information
Control, Internet Censorship, and the Economy, U.S.- China
Economic and Security Review Commission, 108th Cong., 1st Sess.,
June 5, 2003, at www.uscc.gov/hearings/
2001_02hearings/transcripts/02_06_05tran.pdf (October 4,
2004).
[4]Op-ed, "China's
Cyber Censors," The Wall Street Journal, July 6, 2004, at
online.wsj.com/article/ 0,,SB108906627345855454,00.html
(September 24, 2004, subscription required).
[5]Ethan Gutmann,
Losing the New China: A Story of American Commerce, Desire and
Betrayal (San Francisco: Encounter Books, 2004), p.
130.
[6]Reuters, "China
Is Largest Jailer of Cyber Dissidents," June 24, 2004, at
www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200406/ s1139911.htm (October
6, 2004).
[7]Amnesty
International Report, "People's Republic of China, Controls Tighten
As Internet Activism Grows," January 28, 2004, at
web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGASA170012004 (September 24,
2004).
[8]Liu Di, "The
Powerful Voice of a Mouse," The Washington Post, December 7,
2003, p. B02, at www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/
articles/A40194-2003Dec5.html (September 24, 2004).
[9]Philip P. Pan, "A
Study Group Is Crushed in China's Grip," The Washington
Post, April 23, 2004, p. A1, at
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34768-2004Apr22.html
(September 24, 2004).
[10]Jim Yardley, "A
Chinese Bookworm Raises Her Voice in Cyberspace," The New York
Times, July 24, 2004, at www.nytimes.com/
2004/07/24/international/asia/24prof.html (September 24,
2004).
[11]See Jennifer
Chou, "China's Cyber-Crackdowns," The Washington Times,
January 1, 2004, at www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/
20031231-083459-2999r.htm (September 30, 2004). For information
on Mr. Du's trial, see Howard W. French, "Despite an Act of
Leniency, China Has Its Eye on the Web," The New York Times,
June 27, 2004, at www.nytimes.com/2004/06/27/international/
asia/27chin.html (September 24, 2004).
[12]Philip P. Pan,
"Farmer's Rising Anger Erupts in China Village," Washington
Post, August 7, 2004, p. A1, at www.washingtonpost.
com/wp-dyn/articles/A46778-2004Aug6.html (September 24,
2004).
[13]"Zhengzhou Zhenya
shangfang cunminde wangmin zhuan bei bu, Jiazhong jieshou dianhua
fangwen shi zhuanchu zhuaren sheng, gunagfang dui ci fengkou"
(netizen who reported Zhengzhou crackdown said to have been
arrested, sounds of police seizure during telephone interview at
home, official silence on case), World Journal (New York, in
Chinese), August 4, 2004, p. A8.
[14]"San Jiaoshou
shangshu Hu Wen, Kangyi Beida Wangzhan bei feng, Gongkaixin dui 'yi
ta hutu' BBS zhan cao mouming jiangzui biao yihan, tongchen zhengfu
weifa, daya yanlun ziyou" (three professors petition Hu Jintao and
Wen Jiabao, protest closure of Beijing University Web site,
open letter expresses regret at unspecified accusation against "One
Big Mess" BBS site, decry government illegal suppression of freedom
of expression), World Journal (New York, in Chinese),
September 24, 2004, p. A8.
[16]Charles Hutzler,
"Social, Economic Impact Is Expected As Internet Use Spreads Beyond
Big Cities," The Wall Street Journal, Nov. 18, 2003, at
online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB10690946059938900,00.html
(September 24, 2004, subscription required).
[18]
Amnesty
International, "People's Republic of China: State Control of the
Internet in China," January 28, 2004, at
web.amnesty.org/library/index/engasa170072002 (September 24,
2004).
[19]Associated Press
and New York Times News Service, "China's Internet
Censorship World's Most Extensive," The Taipei Times,
December 5, 2002, at
www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2002/12/05/185937
(September 24, 2004).
[20]Associated Press,
"Officials in Shanghai to 'Update' Rules on Religion," reprinted in
The Taipei Times, July 21, 2004, p. 5, at
www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2004/07/21/2003179804
(September 24, 2004).
[21]Associated Press,
"Beijing Blocks Access to Google," The Taipei Times,
September 4, 2002, at www.taipeitimes.com/news/
2002/09/04/story/0000166786 (September 24, 2004). See also
Charles Hutzler, "China Finds New Ways to Restrict Access to the
Internet," The Wall Street Journal, September 1, 2004, at
online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB109399116510306244,00.html
(September 24, 2004, subscription required).
[22]Richard McGregor,
"China Steps Up Curbs on Internet," Financial Times, Sept.
11, 2002. See also Editorial,"Yahoo's China Concession,"
The Washington Post,August 19, 2002, p. A12, at
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34015-2002Aug18.html
(September 24, 2004). Details on Yahoo's involvement with China's
Internet censors is also found in Gutman, Losing the New
China, p. 132.
[23]Gutman, Losing
the New China, p. 165.
[24]Reporters Without
Borders, "Internet Under Surveillance, 2004: China," June 22, 2004,
at www.rsf.fr/article. php3?id_article=10749&Valider=OK
(September 24, 2004).
[25]Gutman, Losing
the New China, p. 130.
[26]Ethan Gutmann,
"Who Lost China's Internet?" The Weekly Standard,February
15, 2002, at
www.weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=922
(September 24, 2004).
[27]Amnesty
International, "State Control of the Internet in China," November
26, 2002, p. 13, at web.amnesty.org/library/
Index/engasa170072002?OpenDocument&of=COUNTRIES%5CCHINA
(October 6, 2004).
[28]Adina Matisoff,
"News Update-Mid-February-Early May 2004," China Rights Forum, No.
2, 2004, p. 9, at
iso.hrichina.org/download_repository/2/NewsUpdate6.2004.pdf
(September 24, 2004).
[29]Gutmann, "Who Lost
China's Internet?"
[30]Reuters, "Beijing
Replaces Internet Blocks After Bush Departs," The Taipei
Times, October 23, 2001, at www.taipeitimes.com/
News/front/archives/2001/10/23/108312 (October 6,
2004).
[31]Reuters, "China
Tightens Its Rules on Internet Address Managers," The Taipei
Times, November 22, 2003, p. 5, at
www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2003/11/22/2003076827
(September 24, 2004).
[32]"Wanglu Saohuang,
Jiuyue Yao Rang Seqing Juechi" (sweep pornography from Internet,
sex to be totally eradicated by September), China
Times, July 20, 2004.
[33]For example, see
"Hulian Wangzhan Congshi Dengzai Xinwen Yewu Guanli Zhanxing
Guiding" (provisional regulations on the management of registration
of Internet sites involved in news activities), Xinhua News Online
February 8, 2003, at
news.xinhuanet.com/newmedia/2003-02/08/content_897716.htm
(July 19, 2004).
[34]Associated Press,
"Officials in Shanghai to 'Update' Rules on Religion," The
Taipei Times, p. 5, at www.taipeitimes.com/News/
world/archives/2004/07/21/2003179804 (October 6,
2004).
[35]Josephine Ma,
"Arrest of New York Times Researcher Came After It Broke News of
Jiang's Departure," South China Morning Post (Hong Kong),
September 24, 2004, p. A01.
[36]John Pomfret,
"Outbreak Gave China's Hu an Opening, President Responded to
Pressure Inside and Outside Country on SARS," The Washington
Post, May 13, 2003, p. A1, at
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47408-2003May12.html
(September 24, 2004). See also Tian Jing and Feng Liang, "Hu-Jiang
Power Struggles Enter Cyberspace," Asia Times, July 20,
2004, at www.atimes.com/atimes/China/FG20Ad04.html
(September 24, 2004).
[37]See U.S.
Department of State, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor,
"Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, 2003: China
(Includes Tibet, Hong Kong, and Macau)," February 25, 2004, at
www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2003/ 27768.htm (October 4,
2004).
[38]Reporters Without
Borders, "China Under Surveillance," June 1, 2004; "China to Censor
Text Messages," BBC News, July 2, 2004. See also "Statement
of Jay Henderson, Director, East Asia & Pacific Division, Voice
of America," in SARS in China, and Associated Press, "China
Ups Surveillance on Mobile Phone Messaging-Reports," July 2, 2004,
at online.wsj.com/article/ 0,,BT_CO_20040702_001421,00.html
(September 24, 2004, subscription required).
[39]Martin Fackler,
"China Ends Google Search Block," Associated Press,
September 12, 2002, at www.blue-tech.com/
topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=24&FORUM_ID=12&CAT_ID=4&Forum_Title=Others&Topic_
Title=China+Ends+Google+Search+Block (October 6, 2004). As of
September 2004, according to a report in the South China Morning
Post, Google searches omitted results from government-banned
sites if search requests were made through computers connecting to
the Internet in China. See Associated Press, "Google Conforms to
Chinese Censorship," in South China Morning Post, September
27, 2004, p. 2, at
story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20040925/ap_on_hi_te/google_china
(October 6, 2004).
[40]The Export
Administration Act, which governs shipments of "dual-use" military
and civilian applications, lapsed in 1994, but continues to be
implemented by emergency powers of the President. See George W.
Bush, "Continuation of Export Control Regulations," Executive
Order, August 17, 2001, at
www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/08/20010817.html
(October 4, 2004).
[41]"Triangle Boy" was
a proxy server system with a triangular architecture for the
Chinese Internet user, a fleet of Web servers somewhere outside the
Chinese firewall and a "mothership" that the servers report to, but
which the Chinese government hackers cannot find. Chinese users who
had managed to make contact would be e-mailed new Triangle Boy
server addresses each day. When it was finally de-funded, Triangle
Boy reportedly had a cache of 600 million Web pages and had tens of
thousands of Chinese users. See Gutmann, Losing the New
China, pp. 155-156.