WANG DAN FREED

April 20, 1998
		Wang Dan, a leading figure in the 1989 pro-democracy uprising in Tiananmen Square, arrived in the United States yesterday following his release from a Chinese prison. Following a background report, Jim Lehrer and guests discuss the significance of Mr. Wang's release.

March 9, 1999: A U.S. scientist is fired for allegeldly passing nuclear information to China Feb. 26, 1999: The State Department criticizes China's crackdown on dissidents. Dec. 30, 1998: China cracksdown on political opponents. July 7, 1998: The Tibetan question. June 29, 1998: President Clinton challenges China on human rights issues. June 24, 1998: Three dissidents discuss Clinton's visit to China. June 15, 1998: The Chinese ambassador on Clinton's trip April 27, 1998: An interview Chinese dissident Wang Dan Dec. 10, 1997: An interview with Chinese dissident Wei Jingsheng Browse the NewsHour's coverage of Asia   Embassy of the Peoples Republic of China Human Rights Watch State Department human rights report on China	JIM LEHRER: Two perspectives on this now. Kenneth Lieberthal is a professor of political science at the University of Michigan. He was in China in February. Sidney Jones is executive director of Human Rights Watch/Asia. Professor Lieberthal, how significant a development is this release of Wang?
	"It's certainly a very welcome move by the Chinese."
	KENNETH LIEBERTHAL, University of Michigan: I think it's, in fact, quite significant. Wang was the most well known remaining dissident left in prison in China. I think this is clearly an indication by the Chinese side that they want to continue to make progress with the United States. Hopefully, that progress will broaden in the human rights area, get beyond simply the release of top dissidents and become much more systematic. But I think this has to be scene as a very good sign. It's certainly a very welcome move by the Chinese. JIM LEHRER: A welcome move by the Chinese, Ms. Jones? SIDNEY JONES, Human Rights Watch/Asia: A welcome move in that it's good for Wang Dan. It doesn't have much significance for all of the rest remaining in prison in China. There's still no access to the Chinese prison system. There are still people being arbitrarily detained even as recently as March and earlier this month, in fact, and there's still no access on a regular basis to Tibet. There are major human rights problems, and releasing one or two dissidents doesn't address those problems. JIM LEHRER: Professor Lieberthal, what's your reading as to why China released Wang yesterday? KENNETH LIEBERTHAL: I think clearly I see this as part of a process of improving the relationship of the United States. The White House has made it abundantly clear to the Chinese side all along that an improved relationship requires progress on the human rights side. I agree, frankly, with Sidney Jones that releasing one or two dissidents does not improve the lot of the people of China. But at the same time politically the United States has been extremely important to get these high profile cases managed in a way that suits our own values and brings these very courageous people freedom. We now have to move on to a broader engagement of this issue. We've already begun that process. I think it has to expand, and I think a strong cooperative China-U.S. relationship works in the right direction on that issue. JIM LEHRER: Ms. Jones, on the specific issue of why Wang was released, do you agree that the U.S. played a major role in that? SIDNEY JONES: No question that the U.S. played a major role and also no question that it was a calculated move by the Chinese government to ease the way for President Clinton's visit to China in June. JIM LEHRER: Do you think, Ms. Jones, that if Wang was still in prison when the president went there in June, there would be--what kind of problems? Why was that important, to get him out of there before then?
	A political gesture?
	SIDNEY JONES: I think it was not so much that Wang Dan himself had to get out of prison. It was that the Chinese government had to show the United States some concrete gesture before preparation for the visit could go ahead. And I think part of the problem is that every time there's been some kind of watershed in U.S.-China relations it's come down to releasing one or two individuals. There have also been a few other steps negotiated by the United States, which have also been portrayed as major improvements in the human rights picture. For example, China agreed to sign a major treaty on social and economic rights. Unfortunately, that's only the first step. It doesn't make China a party to the treaty. It has to go through a ratification process, but that was held up by the United States Government as evidence of progress. Likewise, the United States agreed to drop international pressure at the United States Commission on Human Rights in Geneva, where traditionally every year it's put forward a resolution criticizing China. It agreed not to do that any longer in exchange for a promise, not an actual act, but a promise to sign a treaty on civil and political rights. So we see this bargaining process go on for some time. JIM LEHRER: And that bargaining process, Prof. Lieberthal, you think is paying off? KENNETH LIEBERTHAL: Yes, I certainly do. I think that each side is moving to the point where it understands the political needs of the other side, and it's beginning to develop the level of trust necessary to begin to move forward on these various programs. So, for example, I think we're at a point where it was perfectly legitimate and appropriate for the United States to accept a promise by the Chinese side to sign and ratify the declaration on political and civil rights and be confident the Chinese will follow through. Should they not follow through, they know very well that a year from now we could again raise the resolution in Geneva and other things. We have also begun a very serious program to help them construct a legal system, help them build the institutions through training of judges, training of lawyers, other kinds of advice. We're very well suited to do that. And I'm delighted to say it looks like they welcome it and are trying to cooperate on this. JIM LEHRER: What about Ms. Jones' point about the president's trip to China? Do you believe that Wang had to be gone in order for that trip to work? KENNETH LIEBERTHAL: I think the Chinese understood full well that the trip would be politically far more difficult for the president if Wang were still in prison. I think the issue is probably primarily one of timing. The Chinese would prefer an earlier visit to a later one, and I think the White House effectively said if you want the president to come earlier, you've got to speed up the action on getting Wang released. We don't want to be there with Wang still in prison. The Chinese responded. JIM LEHRER: Ms. Jones, for those of us who don't follow the individual dissidents that carefully and closely tell us about Wang. What kind of man is he? Why is he a leader? How should he be considered by us?
	"...a symbol of courage."
	SIDNEY JONES: I think he was important because first of all he was so visible during the 1989 protests, and he was one of these quiet, soft-spoken people who had taken part with a number of other intellectuals in Beijing in what they called democracy salons in the Beijing spring of April and May 1989. Then he became a major leader out in the square, and because he seemed liked almost our typical intellectual with the large glasses and the soft voice and so on, he became a figure that everyone knew about and someone who was widely revered by other students and, indeed, other people in the intellectual community. Then when he got this completely unfair sentence of four years, after being the No. 1 most wanted person, again, he was a symbol of the unfair treatment of dissidents in China. Then he had this brief period where he was one of the very few people willing to meet with foreign journalists, willing to write about democracy, willing to press for justice for other victims of the June 4, 1989, event. So every time he's gone to the forefront, despite the risks to himself, and he became a symbol of courage. And I think that was one of the reasons why he got to the top of the lists of dissidents presented by government. JIM LEHRER: When you say intellectual, what do you mean? SIDNEY JONES: In this case, anybody who has had a university education in China and who takes part in discussions of serious issues confronting China is termed an intellectual. And he was somebody--an intellectual traditionally has played a very important role in China--so he was someone who appealed to a wide range of people in China as someone who was a potential leader. JIM LEHRER: But he's a young man. He's not somebody who's written a lot of books and that sort of thing, correct? SIDNEY JONES: Correct. He's only 29. JIM LEHRER: Right. And he was a student when all this happened. SIDNEY JONES: He was a student when all this happened, and it's pretty extraordinary that he's had such a colorful but also extremely hard life and he's not even 30 yet. JIM LEHRER: Prof. Lieberthal, what would you add to that in terms of the importance of Wang as a dissident leader, how he got to that point? KENNETH LIEBERTHAL: First of all, I think Sidney accurately characterized his background. This is a man of great courage, and he's a man who has moved to the fore simply by dint of his personality and his inner strength. Having said that, let me say it's important to understand not all dissidents are the same. Wei Jingsheng was released a few months back. That got a tremendous amount of publicity. Wei and Wang are two quite different types of people. Wang is an intellectual. Wei's background is more modest than that. Wei has called for the overthrow of the Chinese government. He said you can never trust the Chinese; they're always going to say one thing and do the opposite. I think that Wang's record is quite different from that. He, as your report at the beginning of the hour indicated, is someone who feels that you have to constantly pressure the Chinese government to move in the direction of a more democratic society. So you have to have the end point of democracy clearly in mind, but you've got to work with the system to move the system along. To go to an extreme against the system is likely to be counterproductive; therefore, for example, at the end of the democracy demonstrations in Beijing in the days prior to June 4 of 1989, that terrible day of repression, Wang was someone who was arguing that essentially we ought to get out of here, that there is no good outcome to this unless we find a way to withdraw. Others in the student movement out-voted him, and the result was tragedy. JIM LEHRER: Ms. Jones, what can we expect from Wang now in the United States? In other words, what kind of power can he generate, if any, from here, now that he's here? SIDNEY JONES: I think the most important thing he can generate is ideas. I think he can--he can try to put forward ideas that will actually push democracy movement forward in China and through his access to electronic media to other forms of communication I think he has a possibility of doing that. He's far better known inside China than Wei Jingsheng is. I think part of the problem is anyone released from China into a kind of forced exile, I think it is important to stress that he had no choice, he had only a choice between continuing his 11-year prison sentence and going into exile; he could not stay in China and voice these ideas. But I think now he has the opportunity to try and think through what does China need to move toward real democracy and political change. JIM LEHRER: Do you agree with Prof. Lieberthal's distinction drawn--the distinction between him and Wei and some of the other dissidents? SIDNEY JONES: I think that all of these people are people of tremendous courage, all of whom have come up with ideas. You have to remember, Wei Jingsheng, while he was an electrician, rather than someone who was known as an intellectual, did write a very important essay, was a leader of the democracy wall movement and did have specific ideas for how to bring about democratization. I think there's a lot of ferment and ideas and creativity in both individuals. JIM LEHRER: Prof. Lieberthal, what would be your reading of what kind of influence Wang could demonstrate from here?
	The problems facing exiles.
	KENNETH LIEBERTHAL: Well, I think he will be largely limited to his writings and his public appearance. He, like Wei, has a problem in that he does not speak English very well, so he's going to have a hard time say appearing on a show like this and getting his message directly out to a very good audience. I think his writings will find their way back into China. China now is reasonably open to the Internet and other means of communication. Whether they catch on or not is very hard to say. It's the problem of all people in exile. They, after a short period of time, begin to be seen as people who aren't in the middle of things, don't have a fine grain understanding of what it's like to actually be there, and so others who come up behind them in the country tend to replace them as leaders of movement. So I would be modest in my expectations, but this is a very intelligent, very articulate individual, and he may have some role to play. JIM LEHRER: And we're going to hear from him on Thursday. He's going to have a news conference in New York. We'll see what happens. Well, Prof. Lieberthal and Ms. Jones, thank you both very much. KENNETH LIEBERTHAL: Thank you. SIDNEY JONES: Thank you.