The New York Times

Nov. 27, 1996

editorial

By announcing yesterday that it would go ahead with a film about the Dalai Lama despite threats from China, the Walt Disney demonstration that it would not accept censorship as the price of doing business in China or anywhere else. That is a welcome stand at a moment when the American Government and American companies seem increasingly prepared to set aside important democratic principles in hopes of expanding commerce with China. China must understand that it cannot impose its repressive practices on the free global marketplace.

Like many other companies, the Disney organization has hit a lucrative bonanza in China. From Mickey Mouse to "The Lion King," Disney merchandise and movies are increasingly popular, and the company is talking about opening a theme park in China. Unrelated to all that, the movie about the Dalai Lama, who fled China when Tibet was conquered in 1959, recently went into production in Morocco, directed by Martin Scorsese.

Chinese authorities warned that Disney's business opportunities in China would be curtailed by the Government if the company went ahead with the movie. The Chinese warnings were especially outrageous because Disney has no plans to distributed the movie in China itself.

Tailoring movies, music and other forms of entertainment before distributing them to different audiences in different countries is common. But for Disney to have dropped a movie simply to save its business operations in China would have set a disastrous example, effectively letting Beijing dictate its own version of history to audiences beyond its shores. That kind of behavior, at the very least, is unacceptable for a country trying to become a member of the World Trade Organization, which China seeks to do.

Chinese leaders delight in lecturing Westerners that it is culturally imperialist to impose human rights standards on Beijing. Free expression and political pluralism, of course, are not a preserve of the West and are honored in some Asian countries. But Chinese argument is now contradicted by its own insistence that it can force its peculiar form of repression on the global economic system.

Censorship seems on the rise in the world today. In the United States, self-appointed moral guardians have hectored the movie and music industries in Hollywood about tailoring content to suit their view of mainstream America. It is gratifying in the case of Chinese interference that Michael Eisner, the Disney chairman, has come down on the side of artistic freedom, albeit without any ringing statements explaining the decision.

The Disney action ought to be carefully studied by the Clinton Administration, which has just participated in an economic summit conference of Asian leaders in Manila. President Clinton was right to demand that all the countries of Asia work harder to lower trade barriers in the coming decades. The Disney episode shows that free expression is essential to the success of free markets. It should embolden the administration to press China on human rights and other sensitive issues, even if China's leaders object. China must adjust to the dynamic world of free markets. That world does not and cannot operate by Chinese rules.