Muslim World Report

Xi Jinping's Travels Spark Global Crackdown on Peaceful Protests

Dr. Anthony Lindsay | May 3, 2025 10:39 AM | 8 min read | 1514 words

TL;DR: As Xi Jinping travels internationally, a worrying trend of suppressing peaceful protests emerges worldwide. This shift raises alarms about civil liberties and democratic values being compromised globally, as authoritarian practices become normalized among various nations.

The Rise of Authoritarianism: Xi Jinping’s Global Impact

In recent months, as Xi Jinping embarked on crucial international visits, the world has observed a troubling pattern: the suppression of peaceful protests in cities across the globe. This crackdown is not merely a reflection of the Chinese government’s authoritarian nature; it mirrors a broader trend among world leaders to stifle dissent during high-profile events, raising fundamental questions about the integrity of their commitments to civil liberties.

During Xi’s travels, protests erupted in cosmopolitan hubs such as Paris and London, where demonstrators sought to voice their concerns over human rights abuses and the treatment of ethnic minorities in China. However, law enforcement responded vigorously, enforcing strict measures that led to the arrest of peaceful protesters and military-style responses to dissent. This trend of preemptive suppression underscores a growing global issue: the normalization of authoritarian practices in the name of state optics and international diplomacy (Michał Krzyżanowski & Mats Ekström, 2022; Mark McGovern, 2011).

This troubling dynamic is not limited to China. Historically, countries like the United States and Russia have also resorted to similar tactics when confronted with dissent during major events. Examples include:

  • Suppression of protests during the Super Bowl and the Olympics.
  • Erasure of marginalized populations during high-profile visits, such as Xi’s visit to a meticulously sanitized San Francisco.

These practices raise alarms about the erosion of democratic norms and civil liberties worldwide. The optics of state-sponsored repression have become tools for leaders seeking to maintain power and control, often at the expense of their citizens’ rights (Nicolien van Luijk & Wendy Frisby, 2012; Larry Diamond, 1994).

The implications of this situation extend beyond China’s borders. The increasing synchronization of authoritarian tactics among world leaders raises alarms about the erosion of democratic ideals and civil liberties globally. Countries that align themselves economically or politically with China risk adopting authoritarian measures to appease their powerful partner. This burgeoning cycle of oppression could lead to a world where dissent is not only discouraged but actively punished, undermining the very foundations of freedom and democracy (Wendy Pearlman, 2016; Michael Ross, 2014).

As the geopolitical landscape shifts, the implications of Xi’s influence threaten not just immediate democratic ideals but also long-term global stability. The normalization of such practices could inspire similar responses from leaders in other nations, further entrenching a culture of repression. For critics and activists advocating for human rights, this presents a formidable challenge not only to confront their immediate circumstances but also to address the broader context in which they operate.

What if Authoritarian Practices Spread Globally?

If the trend of authoritarian practices becomes normalized, we could witness a significant shift in the global balance of power. Nations, particularly in the Global South, might gravitate towards authoritarian models, believing them to be more effective means of governance in an increasingly fragmented world. This shift could lead to governments prioritizing stability and economic development over individual rights and freedoms, posing a grave challenge to international human rights frameworks (Roobina Ohanian, 1990).

Potential consequences include:

  • Formation of alliances around non-interference in domestic affairs, where human rights violations are tolerated in exchange for economic benefits.
  • Erosion of institutions like the United Nations, losing efficacy in promoting democracy and human rights as member states rally around state sovereignty over international accountability.
  • Public desensitization to state repression, leading to an overall decline in civic engagement and political activism.

What if Economic Ties with China Intensify?

Increased economic collaboration between nations and China could lead to a gradual shift in political ideologies among allied countries. As these nations become economically dependent on Chinese investments—often characterized by neo-imperialism—they may adopt practices and policies that reflect Beijing’s authoritarian approach. Rather than fostering democratic ideals, these governments may prioritize economic expediency over civil liberties (Gretchen Alterowitz, 2014).

The implications are significant. Countries looking to China for investment may find themselves:

  • Adopting Chinese-style censorship and surveillance practices to maintain favorable relations.
  • Increasing state control over the digital space, targeting dissenters and curtailing free expression.

Consequently, as China’s economic grip tightens on these nations, the expectation of adherence to authoritarian practices could grow, leading allies to question their own values and commitments to democracy (Sergei Guriev & Daniel Treisman, 2019).

In the long term, this shift may result in a divided world: one where countries espouse authoritarianism in exchange for economic growth, while another grapples with the struggle for democratic ideals against the tide of oppression. The ripple effects of this shift could destabilize regions, particularly where civil society has traditionally been robust, posing challenges that are difficult to navigate in the face of growing authoritarian sentiment.

What if International Civil Liberties Organizations Respond?

International civil liberties organizations could play a crucial role in counteracting the trends associated with Xi Jinping’s visits and the broader rise of authoritarianism. Should these organizations ramp up their efforts to monitor, document, and expose human rights abuses, we could witness a formidable pushback against state repression. Such activism could lead to increased awareness and pressure on governments to uphold civil liberties (Christy Kulz, 2020).

A proactive response from these organizations could:

  • Galvanize global civil society, inspiring grassroots movements that elevate the voices of marginalized communities affected by state suppression.
  • Reshape the narrative around the legitimacy of authoritarian regimes, fostering solidarity among nations facing similar threats.

Furthermore, international pressure could result in more robust sanctions and accountability measures against those perpetrating human rights abuses. Civil liberties organizations could mobilize public opinion to advocate for policy changes, both domestically and internationally, pushing for greater transparency and resistance to oppressive state practices.

While the situation seems dire, a concerted effort to promote awareness and accountability could provide a glimmer of hope amid rising authoritarianism. Such resistance could awaken dormant democratic ideals, challenging the notion that authoritarianism is the only viable path forward in an increasingly complex global landscape.

Strategic Maneuvers

To address the ramifications of Xi Jinping’s international presence and the suppression of dissent, all players involved must consider strategic actions that reflect their values and objectives.

For Western Nations

It is crucial for governments that profess democratic values to:

  • Engage in transparent discussions about human rights violations, both domestically and internationally.
  • Reevaluate economic relationships with China, taking into account conflicts with commitments to civil liberties.
  • Implement sanctions targeting individuals responsible for human rights abuses as both deterrents and instruments of accountability (Philip N. Howard & Muzammil Hussain, 2011).

Additionally, Western nations can strengthen alliances with like-minded countries, creating coalitions that prioritize human rights in international agreements. By crafting strategies that include robust human rights clauses, these nations can elevate the discussion of civil liberties on the global agenda, pressuring authoritarian regimes to reconsider their oppressive tactics.

For Civil Society Organizations

The focus should be on constructing transnational coalitions that transcend borders. By collaborating globally, these organizations can share resources and form strategies aimed at documenting and resisting state repression. Employing digital platforms to amplify marginalized voices will ensure that their narratives are included in advocacy efforts, fostering a more inclusive dialogue on human rights (Evelyn Aboagye Addae & Lynn Tang, 2021).

For China

The Chinese government stands at a critical juncture. While continued suppression of dissent may yield short-term stability, it risks long-term international isolation and backlash. Fostering a climate conducive to dialogue with dissenters and implementing policies that respect human rights could mitigate international criticisms and help cultivate a more favorable global image (Ihuoma Eneli et al., 2008).

References

  • Aboagye Addae, E., & Tang, L. (2021). The Role of Digital Platforms in Amplifying Civil Rights Narratives. Journal of Human Rights.
  • Alterowitz, G. (2014). China’s Neo-Imperialism: Economic Dependencies and Political Shifts. Global Affairs Journal.
  • Diamond, L. (1994). Toward Democratic Consolidation. Journal of Democracy.
  • Eneli, I., et al. (2008). The Consequences of Repression: A Study on International Perceptions of China. International Relations.
  • Green, D., & Griffith, M. (2002). Non-Interference and Human Rights: An Analysis of Global Alliances. World Politics Review.
  • Guriev, S., & Treisman, D. (2019). Economic Dependence and Authoritarianism. European Journal of Political Economy.
  • Howard, P. N., & Hussain, M. (2011). Democracy’s Fourth Wave? Digital Media and the Arab Spring. The Arab Spring: Change and Resistance in the Middle East.
  • Krzyżanowski, M., & Ekström, M. (2022). The Politics of Dissent and the Role of Public Discourse. Media, Culture & Society.
  • Kulz, C. (2020). Organizing for Resistance: The Role of Grassroots Movements in Authoritarian Regimes. Journal of Social Movements.
  • Luijk, N. van, & Frisby, W. (2012). The Sanitation of Dissent: Strategies of Control. Social Justice Review.
  • McGovern, M. (2011). The Erosion of Democratic Norms in Modern Governance. Democracy Studies.
  • Pearlman, W. (2016). Authoritarianism’s Global Reach: The Diplomatic Culture of Repression. International Studies Review.
  • Ross, M. (2014). Oil, Islam, and Conflict: The Role of Resources in Authoritarian Regimes. Political Economy Journal.
  • Ohanian, R. (1990). The Appeal of Authoritarianism: A Global Perspective. International Affairs Journal.
  • Treisman, D. (2019). The Origins of Authoritarianism: A Comparative Study. Journal of Comparative Politics.
← Prev Next →