But there’s something that doesn’t seem right: why is Toyota getting so much attention for this?  In October 2009, Ford had to recall 4.5 million vehicles due to the fact that they could catch fire (faulty cruise control switches).  This recall is linked to 550 separate incidents and it’s not a new problem;  Ford, over the past decade, has recalled over 14 million vehicles in 8 separate recalls related to cruise control switches catching fire.  Since 2008 alone, Ford has recalled over 14 million vehicles for various issues.  But the media mentions next to nothing about Ford’s safety problems and recalls.

Where are the congressional hearings for Ford?  It’s quite clear that Ford has a problem with cruise control switches and the results aren’t pretty.  But a few floor mats and (made in USA) pedals in Toyotas and we have a media storm.

Of course, the US Government owns a large portion of American car companies and also happen to now be a good source of bad press for Toyota.  An opportunity has arisen!  Coincidence?  Your call.

We’re supposed to believe that a 30-something consultant/contractor in China, working for the Chinese Government, was allowed to post his exploit code for a top secret government contract publicly on the web.  That’s right, the Chinese Government is all about open source now.  They think: “You’re working on a top secret exploit to hack western companies?  Post it online, no worries!”

Now don’t get me wrong, the Chinese government most certainly does pay folks to hack.  But in this specific case, I’m becoming more and more skeptical: it is hard to believe that the government would be this…amateur.  This seems more likely to have been a patriotic hack routed through the schools involved.  Even without the government, human rights activists are very unpopular in China.  In any case, this doesn’t sound like a “sophisticated attack” at all anymore.

No self respecting hacker would access a wide array of high value targets directly from their own computers in schools.  Sophisticated hacks aren’t going to come from high-school level vocational schools.  And top secret government contractors are definitely forbidden from posting their exploit code online for all to see.

Here are the main possibilities for this attack:

1. Computer consultant happens to find an exploit in IE6, and posts it online.  Patriotic hacker(s) find the code and start using it, likely relaying attacks through easy-to-exploit lab computers at a vocational school & another university.
2. Chinese government approaches a 30-something computer consultant, contracts him to write some exploit code.   He then posts the code for his top secret government contract online.  Hacker(s) are then hired by the government to carry out the attack directly from their schools, without the most basic of protection (i.e. relaying the attack through other nodes).

In any case, it’s really frustrating to read lines in the FP article such as: “Chinese officials had special access to the work of the author.”  What does that mean and how do they know this?  Without any source to back up this information, this is either just pure speculation (at best) or a blatant lie (at worst).  In any case, it is an insult to the reader’s intelligence that we should just swallow this information without question.

If this feeble reasoning is what’s considered good journalism, the newspaper industry is in trouble for a very good reason.

Lanxiang Vocational School is one of the schools supposedly involved in the attacks.  Lanxiang is reputed to be a great school for those who wish to become a hairdresser, auto mechanic or seamstress (some of the popular programs highlighted on their colourful main page).  Lanxiang basically operates at a Community College level and doesn’t even have a computer science program, unless you consider “learning Photoshop” to be computer science (which it isn’t.)

This brings an important question to the surface: what evidence did Google even have to make such thinly veiled accusations?  Not much, it would appear, other than: “some IP addresses of schools in China attacked us.”

Now to be fair, the other institute, Jiaotong University, is a top school in China.  But, people in a school like this are generally bright, inquisitive and prone to learning a thing or two about computer security on their own.  It is definitely possible that the Chinese Government paid students from this school to hack Google, but it’s also equally likely that one or more students simply chose to hack Google of their own volition, purely for the challenge.  Many foreign human rights activists are extremely unpopular in China.

What this does bring to light is that Google is making irresponsible accusations without doing proper investigation.  Nobody should jump to conclusions like Google did without sufficient evidence to support their conclusion.  There’s an important thing called Presumption of Innocence that the good folks at Google may want to look into before making such accusations in the future.

But the one point that I cannot make too lightly about this video is this: when you travel, don’t act like an ass.   Times like this are when everyone should be sensitive to the foreign culture you’re visiting, even if it’s classified as a “terrorist state.”  Take the extra step to avoid being rude and ignorant to the people showing you around.  I’ll give some examples….

North Koreans are taught that Americans are basically greedy imperialist bastards.  Shane lives up to the stereotype fully during the trip by insulting their food, their leader, their country and their culture on several occasions.  You can clearly see the tension between him and the people showing him around.  The people he interacted with likely went home saying: “what we were taught about Americans was right.”

That’s not what you want.  You want people going home saying: “it’s weird, that American was actually quite nice.”  Don’t go around saying how the food is disgusting, and look at how much they’re giving him!  It’s common sense: Shane knows they don’t have much food.  They KNOW they don’t have much food.  Blatantly insulting their hospitality doesn’t help anyone.  It doesn’t matter what culture you’re from, insulting food is a definite no.  Doubly so when food is scarce there.

The North Koreans show him around their best school with its brightest students, while Shane is busy saying how sad it is to see them forced to do things like “play the piano”.  They bring him to Karaoke and sing him some songs, and he’s retaliates by singing a drunken rendition of British Punk music, and later goes on making fun about how they don’t know anything about music.  Shane proceeds to almost gets in a fight with one of the guards he’s been assigned (maybe because he looked to be trying to pick up one the girls at the time?)

But at the end of the day, this documentary is a great peek into North Korea.  While the serious journalistic social engineering required to get deeper wasn’t there, you do get a to see some fascinating sights, especially the (typically lavish communist) subway stations and the beautiful Arirang.

Of course, I would ask you not to misinterpret what I’m saying, this isn’t a commentary either way on anything related to North Korea itself (I haven’t done enough research to comment on that, yet).

This is more of a personal thing: when you travel, you’re dealing with real people, often from different cultures.  It’s usually best to try to bridge the cultural gap and expand your perspective: listen, be polite, and always compliment the food (even if you don’t like it).

What’s interesting here is that this hasn’t happened before, there’s some saber rattling going on.  These actions are quite likely showing a bit of the China of the future; more self-confident and less willing to allow other countries to tamper with what they consider to be their affairs.

In any case, the Chinese government is sending a clear message to these corporations: take part in this sale and your business will “have troubles” in China.  Troubles to the tune of $400 billion in lost revenue.  With China’s 4 trillion yuan bailout last year, there is a lot of money up for grabs to help extend and enhance China’s infrastructure.  China projected to need several thousand new airplanes over the next 20 years, companies like Boeing stand to lose a lot if these threats follow through to action.

Overall, this is an aggressive move: the Chinese government does not usually get so active in corporate affairs.  But US/China relations have been quite strained recently, with the Obama administration calling out Beijing for things like Internet censorship.  New and bold actions such as this are quite likely the beginning of a new phase for China, which has been the largest economy on the planet for centuries.  Now that China is on track to take back this position, things like arms sales to Taiwan will not be as simple as they once were.

Rampant Slavery

Many are under an idealistic view that Tibet, prior to the 1950s, was a serene and peaceful place.  The Dalai Lama says that Tibet was: “a society dedicated to peace and harmony. We enjoyed freedom and contentment.” [9]  While this may have been his experience, the history does tend to differ quite starkly with this view. In fact, history shows that slavery and oppression were rampant in Tibet.  Around the turn of the century, numerous British explorers described the tyrannical rule of the (previous) Dalai Lama.  It was described as “an engine of oppression” and they explained how the “intolerable tyranny of monks terrorized the people” [1].  Slaves had their eyes gouged out for attempting to escape [2], their wives taken for use by their masters [3], their children sold or forcibly conscripted into monasteries [4] and various other, quite frankly, horrific things.  Many were born into slavery through debt, held permanent by massive interest rates.  This debt came from being taxed for nearly every activity imaginable; debt was also transferred from father to child.

What kind of taxes?  Well, serfs were taxed for nearly everything you can imagine: from being unemployed, to planting a tree, to keeping animals.  They were taxed for festivals, for getting married, for traveling to another city, for having a child, for a death in the family; and if one could not pay a given tax, the monastery would conveniently lend them the money, with interest rates of up to 50% [12].  Wealth was incredibly unevenly distributed in favour of the lords & lamas [6].  This does not appear to be such a tranquil place, as I had been lead to believe.

Return of the Lama

While countless Tibetans want the Dalai Lama physically back in Tibet, very few want a return of the social order he represented.  The most telling quote I found was of a former slave, Wangchuk, says that he worshipped the Dalai Lama, but added: “I may not be free under Chinese communism, but I am better off than when I was a slave.” [5]

What’s the logic behind this?  Under the Dalai Lama, nearly all of the property was owned by the lords and lamas, who also owned the slaves.  But in the early 1960s, Chinese authorities expropriated all of the property and land that was owned by lords and lamas.  The Chinese authorities re-distributed thousands of acres to slaves and peasants who had previously owned nothing [6].  In the 1950s, they reduced the exorbitant interest rates which had originally bonded the slaves into slavery, allowing their debts to finally be repaid.  They also brought running water & electricity into Lhasa, as well as vastly improving healthcare, education and housing.  Of course, slavery does not does not fit under the ideology of Communism, so it had to go.  And some may be surprised to learn that the West was not sitting idly by at the time.

The US State Department revealed, in 1998, that the now exiled Tibetan community had received millions of dollars from the CIA to support Tibetan operations, with what some may call questionable ethical goals. The Dalai Lama’s battles against the PLA (People’s Liberation Army) had active involvement from the US CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) [7].  In 1956-57, armed Tibetan bands were trained by CIA to perform ambushes against PLA convoys.  The CIA setup training camps and gave them airlift support. The Dalai Lama’s annual payment from the CIA was $180,000 [7]. Dalai Lama’s two brothers, Thubten Jigme Norbu and Gyalo Thondup, were both CIA agents [10].  While many people agree with the Dalai Lama’s current message of peace, the facts suggest that his past does not appear to be consistent with his current opinions; perhaps he has learned from his mistakes?

But the Dalai Lama / CIA alliance is a logical one; communism was not kind to the rich and the lamas, being by far the richest people in Tibet, would have felt threatened by the possibility of losing much of what they, their families and the lords owned.  For the USA, the cold war was looming and anti-communist activities most certainly had to be aided.  Of course, the CIA’s meddling is only a small fraction of the inappropriate Western activities in China over the past century or two (read about the opium wars to know more).

Who owns what now?

Today, many in the West have a simplistic notion that Tibet needs to be “returned to freedom”.  But, as usual, the concept of freedom here is not very straight forward at all; Tibet has been a part of various Chinese dynasties for a long time.  China has had direct involvement in selecting numerous Dalai Lamas: even the current (14th) Dalai Lama was installed by an escort of Chinese troops and dignitaries, in accordance with a tradition which dates back centuries.

Britain, who has invaded Tibet a number of times, were effectively the most recent nation to attempt to separate Tibet from China.  Britain invaded once in 1888 and again in 1903 and fought heavily against Tibetans in the process [8].  At that point, Tibetans were not interested in separating from China by the British.  When the PLA took back Tibet in the 1950s, some (Western) accounts claim that: “contrary to popular belief in the West, the Chinese took care to show respect for Tibetan culture and religion.” [11]  Of course, the typical Western version would have us think otherwise, but at this point, hopefully you may start to question some of your opinions on this subject.

The fact is, Western nations have been meddling in Tibet and China for well over 150 years; we started the Opium wars, we’ve invaded Tibet repeatedly, the CIA has used the Dalai Lama as a puppet against China, the list goes on and on.  After a lot of contemplation, I have to admit that there is an incredible amount of bias in the Western media.  Many of us are clearly ignorant to key facts surrounding Tibet, and China as a whole (I would argue, but that’s for another post).

Unwashing our brains

It’s easy to naively rally under the “Free Tibet” campaign.  After all, who doesn’t like freedom?  But it’s significantly more difficult to look past our simplistic “Good vs. Evil” view of the world to see why these situations exist and persist.  I am saddened to see that a significant portion of the pro-Tibet movement are like I once was: I didn’t even understand the basics of the situation, yet fervently supported this supposedly noble cause.  Now, I regularly see misinformation (on both Tibet and China in general), propagated by journalists who know that a “China is Evil” mantra is very easy to follow, the stories practically write themselves.  Looking into the facts, the history and conveying the subtleties in a highly complex situation?…well, that’s a lot of work…

References

1. Stuart Gelder and Roma Gelder, The Timely Rain: Travels in New Tibet. London Hutchinson, pp. 123-125, 1964.
2. Stuart Gelder and Roma Gelder, The Timely Rain: Travels in New Tibet. London Hutchinson, pp. 113, 1964.
3. Anna Louise Strong, “Tibetan Interviews,” New World Press, pp. 91-96, 1959.
4. Melvyn Goldstein, William Siebenschuh, and Tashì-Tsering, The Struggle for Modern Tibet: The Autobiography of Tashì-Tsering. Sharpe, M.e., Inc, 1997.
5. John Pomfret, “In Tibet, a Struggle of the Soul; Buddhist Land Caught Between Ancient,” Washington Post, 16 July 1999.
6. Pradyumna Karan, “The Changing Face of Tibet”, London Times, 4 July 1966.
7. im Mann, “CIA Gave Aid to Tibetan Exiles in ’60s, Files Show,” Los Angeles Times, 15 September 1998.
8. T. Das, “British Expansion in Tibet”, NM Raychowdhury & Co, 1928.
9. Donald Lopez Jr., “Prisoners of Shangri-La: Tibetan Buddhism and the West,” Chicago and London: Chicago University Press, 1998.
10. Carole McGranahan, “Tibet’s Cold War: The CIA and the Chushi Gangdrug Resistance, 1956–1974,” Journal of Cold War Studies, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp 102-130, 2006.
11. M. C. Goldstein, “The Snow Lion and the Dragon: China, Tibet, and the Dalai Lama,” pp 52, University of California Press, 1997.
12. Stuart Gelder and Roma Gelder, The Timely Rain: Travels in New Tibet. London Hutchinson, pp. 175-176, 1964.

Google, and even its shareholders, may not care about the loss of revenue from China.  But their Android partners, whose businesses are built on the idea of selling phones, may not tend to agree with this reasoning.  Let’s not forget that China has had more cell phones than the US has people, and for a few years now.

I really like what Jack Ma of Yahoo China said: “It is easy to give up, but one must hang on … China will set the rule of (the) game in the 21st century, and businesses must not go to the mainland for the profit motives only but rather to take part in setting the rules.”

Google should most certainly be taking part in helping set the rules of the web in China.

Google: Let us remove censorship, or else we’ll do exactly what you want: we’ll leave!

Government of China: Woo hoo!

The Chinese Perspective

Google has not had a good run in China.  Not only is Baidu much more popular, but Google has had a number of other problems.  In 2007, Google publicly admitted to having stolen IP from the Chinese company Sohu.com.  An American company stealing IP from a Chinese company?  Ouch.  In 2009, Kaifu Lee, the head of Google China, left Google and the word was that he felt too tied down (by the US Google office) to be able to adapt Google China to suit the needs of Chinese users.  As well, due to the pornography problem that Google has in China, the Government-sponsored media basically called Google the Chinese word for “an aspiring prostitute”.

Think of a young girl who grows up saying: “I want to be a prostitute”.  They have a word for that in Mandarin, and the Government-sponsored media called Google that.  (Sorry, I don’t have an english link for that)  With Google leaving, the Government’s angle will be: “the departure of porn-centric Google makes the Internet safer”.  An Internet with less pornography?  Not exactly a hard sell for any government to make to its citizens.  It’s easy to turn disagreements over “Censorship issues” into disagreements over “Pornography Censorship issues”.

Ultimately, many Chinese netizens believe that Google China has failed, and that Google’s actions are just a ploy to hide the closure of a failed business unit.  The “moral stand” of Google also does not ring well with many Chinese citizens:  the Google = pornography angle that the Government is pushing makes Google’s “do no evil” motto seem more than a little hypocritical.  The moral position of Google will be disintegrated domestically by the Government, and with little effort.  What’s more, Chinese citizens are extremely sensitive to claims of moral superiority, since governments across the world (Britain, US, France, etc.) have been doing this for ages.  That only serves to alienate Google from the Chinese public, who are the one’s they’re trying to help.

Does it help their cause?

At the end of the day, Google leaving China hurts their own cause more than it helps their cause.  They want an open internet with unfiltered access, which is an admirable goal.  But this requires careful and subtle negotiation.  Even in the US, things like Net Neutrality are controversial.  In China?  Forget about it; unfiltered Internet in China will likely precipitate the fall of the Government, and the Government knows that.  The ultimatum that Google has presented only does one thing: it makes Googlers feel good about themselves.  But it does not further their ultimate cause of freeing information.  In fact, when (not if) Google leaves, China will be have LESS access to open information.  In effect, Google is harming their own cause by leaving.

Negotiating with Governments

In a very broad sense, Google seems to have had a hard time understanding the role that lobbyists have in influencing their own goals, even in the US.  Microsoft also had this problem for a period, but has since become more pro-active.  In China, lobbying is a much more subtle affair.  You won’t be successful in China by making giant public threats.  Even if you have short term success this way, the Government will make you an enemy and do everything it can to destroy you.  Look into the history of what the Chinese Government did to the Falun Gong.  Public threats are not the manner to achieve your goals in China.

No, in order to achieve results, you have to find a negotiator and a champion of your cause.  You need someone who’s friendly to the Government, and to your cause.  In China, this is how things like the Gambling industry became “legitimate”, via continuous negotiations through an influential and well-connected person.  Publicly threatening: “stop being evil, or we’ll leave” basically leaves Google no negotiating power whatsoever.

Clash of Cultures

Ultimately, like many western companies hoping to get into China, Google doesn’t understand Chinese culture.  It’s fairly obvious that the Chinese Government does not want Google in China.  Yet, oddly enough, Google uses “leaving China” as a threat.  At the end of the day, the Chinese Government’s upcoming marketing campaign is trivial to imagine: “We’re better off without that IP stealing, porn driven, American Google.”

While Google’s goals are admirable, their methods are unsound and it’s clear on many levels that they will not succeed via this path.  I believe that Google should stay in China, leaving will not help to accomplish their goal.

On a related note, congratulations to those of you who own Baidu stock…