The conditions under which Zhao Ziyang (趙紫陽) lived at the time of his death, in utter isolation from Chinese society due to an illegally imposed 16-year house arrest, shames both Chinese justice and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Zhao's persecution was the persecution of a leader who dedicated himself for more than a decade to groundbreaking efforts that became the foundations of China's economic reform. In the late 1970s, peasants had long since lost their rights to own their land, owing to collectivization and the establishment of the People's Commune. It is a right they have never regained. Zhao, however, was the first to advocate giving autonomy back to the peasants and so initiated the first pilot tests to abolish the People's Commune.
Chinese industry had been transformed into subsidiaries of government through nationalization and central planning. Zhao was the first to propose "expanded autonomy for Chinese enterprises" and "restoration of a healthy relationship between government and industry." Expanded autonomy for enterprises and the peasantry were critical first steps whose success led eventually to full-blown economic reform.
These were among the many incremental victories Zhao won to help China's people break out of the suffocating stagnation of Maoist socialism. As China's premier, Zhao implemented 10 years of economic reforms that brought steady progress in which the people, especially the peasantry, enjoyed tangible improvements.
But Zhao was also the only CCP leader to propose a political reform package to tackle China's system of one-party rule. The party's unchallenged monopoly on political power systematically ensured that every mistake it made -- such as the dreadful decade of the Cultural Revolution -- turned into a prolonged nationwide crisis.
For genuine and long-term stability, Zhao proposed reforms that ultimately aimed at the legalization and systemization of democracy. He wished to establish the kind of democratic politics that could sup-port and nurture a healthy market economy. Although the short-term practical objectives of Zhao's political reforms were limited by the circumstances in which they were proposed, the measures were all aimed at containing CCP power and represented a concrete step toward returning, peacefully, power to China's people. Zhao's package -- a sharp break with Mao Zedong's (毛澤東) totalitarianism -- was approved by the 13th Party Congress, officially the highest authority within the CCP.
During his 20 months as general secretary, Zhao created a culture in which the Politburo refrained from interfering in the courts, and he halted its attempts to control literature and the arts. He abolished the policy of enterprises being run by party organizations and the system by which fa ren ("legal representatives") were the core of enterprises.
Unfortunately, Zhao's reforms were terminated upon his fall from power. The dreadful result was the indiscriminate denial of civil rights and the principles of democracy, and the rise of what today's leaders call "socialism with Chinese characteristics" -- a bitter euphemism for unchecked party and government power entwined with commercial interests.
Zhao's fate is also a chilling reminder of other injustices that are on the consciences of those now in power. The only reason for Zhao's continued ill treatment was his opposition to the violent repression of the Tiananmen Square protest in 1989. It should have been his decision to make as general secretary, but things were not as they should have been.
It should be remembered that former general secretary Hu Yaobang (胡耀邦), who had been forced to step down two years earlier by Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) because of his liberal stance, died in April 1989, triggering spontaneous and peaceful student demonstrations in Beijing, which spread across the country. Half a million college students in Beijing alone were involved in this movement.
It lasted 50 days and was heartily supported by Beijing residents and people all around the country, from all walks of life. Zhao pointed out to the Politburo that the sentiments expressed by the students and residents in their commemoration of Hu, in their protests against corruption, and their desire for democracy were really the same sentiments that they themselves held. He believed that it should be possible to resolve the student protests and respect the principles of democracy and the rule of law.
Under Zhao's direction, the Politburo and its standing committee called for dialogue with the students. This hopeful direction changed completely, however, when Deng revealed his desire for a violent crackdown.
In the end, it came down to a fight among five members of the Politburo Standing Committee: Li Peng (李鵬) and Yao Yiling (姚依林) sought to deploy the military. Zhao opposed this. Qiao Shi (喬石) and Hu Qili (胡啟立) initially sided with Zhao, but then withdrew their support and, instead, asked Deng to make the final decision.
With deep divisions evident, Deng chose to bypass all existing institutions, the party's Politburo, the Central Committee and the National People's Congress and its Standing Committee. Without further discussion, Deng mobilized 500,000 troops to enter Beijing to crack down on the unarmed students and civilians. The Tiananmen Square Massacre was a tragedy for China, and another tragedy for the 20th century. Sixteen years have passed, but the pain remains, buried in the hearts and minds of the people.
In the years that have passed, China's leaders were responsible not only for Zhao's unlawful house arrest but also for a systematic effort to erase his name from history. But their attempts to conceal the truth about the past only reveal their weakness and their shamelessness. For there is one thing they cannot change: Zhao remains with us, in the Chinese people's ongoing struggle for rights and democracy.
Bao Tong, former director of the Office of Political Reform of the CCP Central Committee, was secretary to Zhao Ziyang from 1980 to 1985.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS