MUZZLING DISSENT

December 30, 1998
		Although personal freedom in increasing in China, the Communist government in Beijing is cracking down on high-profile dissidents. After a background report, Elizabeth Farnsworth discusses the latest arrests with a panel of dissidents and China experts.

Dec. 30, 1998: A background report on the latest crackdown on Chinese dissidents. 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   Embassy of the Peoples Republic of China Human Rights Watch	ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: We get four views now on the situation in China. Harry Wu spent more than 19 years in Chinese prisons for criticizing the government. He came to the United States in 1985 and now heads an organization which documents abuses in China's prison systems; Minxin Pei is an assistant professor of political science at Princeton University, he's a Chinese citizen who has been living in this country since 1984; Xiao Qiang is the executive director of the New York-based group, Human Rights in China, he has been in the United States since 1986; and Michel Oksenberg of Stanford University was a National Security Council staff member responsible for China during the Carter administration. We invited a representative from the Chinese embassy to participate but got no response. Thank you all for being with us.
	The extent of the crackdown.
	ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Xiao Qiang, how extensive is this crackdown? Does it go beyond people whose names we mentioned in the setup? XIAO QIANG, Human Rights in China: It has gone way beyond those few now prominent individuals' heavy sentences. Over last two months there's over a hundred of detentions and arrests and at least four more people sentenced to re-education through labor and few people are missing who are also the organizers of China Democracy Party. But in addition to sentences there are two lobbying issues since November. One is aiming to curb the freedom of association; another one is aiming to suppress the freedom of association and the government speeches. In other words, this is a systematic campaign by propaganda machine, security apparatus, even legislative body to suppress the rising demand for political change. ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Minxin Pei, do you see this in that way, as a systematic campaign by these different organizations? MINXIN PEI, Princeton University: Well, I - I'm not following how many people are being sentenced. I think so far only four people have been sentenced, although many people have been detained or harassed. I think in the short-term certainly this is a very serious and unfortunate step backward for China. I don't know how long this campaign will continue if it continues say for another six months - that would certainly be very disturbing. ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: But at this point you see it as a step backwards in the midst of two steps forwards? MINXIN PEI: Well, as an optimist I'm inclined to think so, because if we look at what has been happening in China in the last six months certainly the signs of openness were very encouraging right now, much less encouraged. ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Harry Wu, how do you see this? Is this a really significant crackdown? HARRY WU, Laogai Research Foundation: First of all, I don't think we should be surprised. The Communist Party wants to do something. Whatever they want to do, they want to maintain their power. And I can tell the story that four people - the last thing starting and the first character is "W." The first one is Harry Wu - the story started in 1950's - and second person named Wei Jing Shenwei - and that happened in 1979; and then the third one - ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: These were all people - yourself included - who have been imprisoned whose names begin with "W." HARRY WU: They - ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Over all these years. HARRY WU: Yes. So when you're talking about the change in China - take place in China - there's one fundamental thing that cannot be changed - Communist system. They're not willing to change. But this incident, I think, has served very good lesson for the western nations who, you know, have softened their stance on human rights in China, and also the lesson for those people tried to argue that democracy can lead into China by economic development. I think that's very good lesson for these people. ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Michel Oksenberg, how significant do you see this crackdown as being?
	Cycles of relaxed, then tightened control.
	MICHEL OKSENBERG, Stanford University: I think it is significant and unfortunate, and it suggests to me that a pattern of rule that had existed both in the Mao era and the Deng Xiaoping era is going to continue. And I describe it as periods of relaxation, followed by periods of tightening up, relaxation, tightening up, and what Jiang Zemin has done in the last several weeks has been to indicate that there are, indeed, strict limits, constraints on how far he is prepared to go in liberalization and that this pattern of tightness and relaxation will continue; however, we must also not lose sight of the fact that progress has been made and, I suspect, will continue to be made. Let me give you just one quick example. I was talking to someone today who had gone out in the bookstores in Beijing to see what this crackdown had led to, and he found that in a bookstore one of Wei Jingshen's diaries from prison had been translated in Chinese - still for sale in the bookstores. So it's a mixed picture, very complicated, but this isn't a significant step backward. ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Xiao Qiang, how do you explain this crackdown? Why is it happening now? XIAO QIANG: Well, it's happening now because Chinese government is seriously frightened. I think Michel just said the one hand they're increasing individual freedoms in China -- disregard the government attempt to control -- people are circulating more information, more and more vocal about their discontent and the criticism to the government, and more and more people involved in activities from environmental organizations, labor organizations, or even trying to organize a political party. But what I want to say here is that none of those people - those behaviors - those activities really trying to overthrowing Chinese government but rather just a natural process of demand more freedom and the formulation of civil society, but the Chinese authority see that as serious threatening to their status quo of the power, and they crack down and they relay on security apparatus, which is, in my view-those suppression doesn't make the problem go away - they only make the future transition more dangerous and potentially more radical. ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Minxin Pei, how important is the Democracy Party in all this? Was that a line beyond which the Communist Party of China did not want anybody to go to form a new party? Is that important here? MINXIN PEI: I think so. I think the people - the first three people - Xu Wenli, Wang Youcai, and Qin Yongmin, were leaders of the China Democracy Party. What they have done is clearly crossing the unwritten line drawn by the Communist Party, which is it will tolerate perhaps individual dissidents but organize dissident or opposition is not tolerable at this point. So I think that explains why these three leaders were sentenced in the first place. ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: And, Michel Oksenberg, what about economic problems, do the economic problems in China and elsewhere in Asia place a role here?
	The impact of the Asian financial crisis.
	MICHEL OKSENBERG: Absolutely. This is - this crackdown is occurring against a background, and that background is as follows. The leaders of China have attempted to gain legitimacy, popular support through high growth rates, and they have been remarkably successful in that regard. The growth rate that they believed is necessary to quell potential civil unrest is around 8 percent per year, 7, 8 percent - the figures are not all that accurate. It now appears that the Chinese economy is slowing down, even though the economy has been buffered from the turmoil in the rest of Asia. That turmoil is beginning to affect China. Unemployment is rising. And the banking system - state-owned enterprise reforms have been delayed. Under that set of circumstances - plus rising discontent over growing corruption in China - smuggling - the leaders are walking a very difficult road; they fear that discontent could spill out into broader disorder. And I think what they're doing is - in a Chinese saying - is killing a chicken to warn the monkey. That is to say they're going to try to write out whatever unrest arises through toughness. I'd prefer - I think a wiser course would be liberalization, but their decision is keep the growth rate at a maximum. They can't afford to let the growth rate go down, and they think that liberalization is likely to lead to disorder and possibly to slow the growth rate further. As I say, I think that's a bad judgment, but that's their judgment. ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Harry Wu, why do you think it's happening now? HARRY WU: We have to know the economic development happened in China today behind the development - the forces - the power is come from capitalism - not come from socialism. So the political system want to remain as before, as designed and set up by Mao Tse Tung. And the economy going to another direction. That kind of confrontation sooner or later will explode. That is a problem come up here because we have a private ownership growing up - economic capitalism system growing up. Finally the people seeking their democracy - seeking their freedom-and that authority wouldn't allow it. So it is not surprising, what happened.
	What should the U.S. do?
	ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Harry Wu, what should the United States do about this? Do you think that this is a reaction partly to the Clinton administration's having - President Clinton having gone to China - having given a certain amount of praise to the Chinese for changing? HARRY WU: Today the American so-called engagement policy from my view is a typical appeasement policy. It's based on money, based on investment, and not based on moral basis. Any foreign policy didn't come to a moral basis is typical - ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: So what do you think the U.S. should do now? HARRY WU: Well, engage themselves not so bad - engaged by what? We have to tell the Chinese government we not only want to see a prosperous, a peaceful China, we want to see a democracy China - a stable China - not stable in communism system. ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Minxin Pei, Human Rights Watch has called for the administration to consider postponing or canceling a planned visit by Commerce Secretary William Daley and a high level trade delegation that's going early next year. Do you think that should happen? MINXIN PEI: Well, that certainly should be considered, but I think a more effective way is to perhaps to start a high level dialogue with the Chinese to warn the Chinese that the current situation is not politically sustainable within the U.S. and perhaps to remind the Chinese leaders that the U.S. will also have the option of sponsoring a bill critical of China in the U.N. as human rights forum in Geneva sometime in March next year, so there are many other options. ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: And Michel Oksenberg, what would you have the U.S. Government do? MICHEL OKSENBERG: Well, certainly there must be very strong statements delivered to the Chinese Government protesting what has just happened. The Chinese leaders will consider this interference in their internal affairs, but that still has to be said to them, and, in addition, it has to be pointed out that by these kind of actions the climate that was created so effectively by President Clinton to move forward in China policy is going to be damaged, but at the same time we have to remember that our relations with China have many facets, as Secretary of State Albright so well said, this is a multi-faceted relationship - we have many interests at stake. Taiwan - Korea - non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction - and we cannot allow any one facet of our relationship to be held hostage to others - I don't think this is a policy of appeasement. I believe - to the contrary - that it is a policy of enlightenment - and - I agree with Mr. Wu on one very important point - that as China develops, the forces for political change will grow, and that means let's help them develop. ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Xiao Qiang, given all these interests that the U.S. has in China, what do you think the policy should be, given this crackdown? XIAO QIANG: Well, I think Professor Pei Minxin already suggested - reintroduced a critical resolution at Geneva Human Rights Commission - work with European allies and other democratic countries to introduce as a censor the U.N. Human Rights Body, but I think let's look at it in perspective, that not - this crackdown is not going to be the only one in the near future. U.S./China policy has to have a consistent and very persistent human rights element and should be pursuing it no matter what to encourage China's development towards more political openness and respect the human rights. Talking about why those things happening - it's always reminded me that a song I heard in 1989 is that China is a land old and new, the best and brightest ruled by code and few. And the Chinese people demand that changes. I think the international community, including United States/China policy can encourage and facilitate this change.
	Are dissidents being driven underground?
	ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: And Xiao Qiang, in the brief amount of time we have left, what are you hearing about the effect of arrests on the people in the movements, which leaders have been arrested from? Are people going underground? XIAO QIANG: No. I think it will. What we have seen - those people have never been underground. They are subject 24 hours to political, civil -and since day one - such as Xu Wenli - since the day one he came out of prison in 1993 - what they are having doing - is everything's public, everything they're trying to be lawful, but what they are doing is to advocate this version - this vision, I'm sorry, vision of government should be accountable to its own people. The - both - just this week the 217 dissidents in China sent out another petition to the leadership to protest the new sentence of labor activist Zhang Shanguang, who was just sentenced to 10 years because he did interview with Radio Free Asia funded by United States Government and the people are still there; the voice is still there; and the struggle will continue; and history is on our side. ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: All right. Thank you all very much. That's all the time we have.