Ma Ying-jeou needs a history lesson

`The consistency of the CCP over these 17 years [regarding the Tiananmen massacre] belies Ma's talk of the CCP gradually changing its views.'

While in Australia last week, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) met with Taiwanese and Chinese students at the University of Sydney. When asked to present his views on China's democratization, Ma said that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) must indeed face the issue of how to pursue democracy in China, but that progress is possible, just as the CCP used to refer to the Tiananmen Square crackdown on June 4, 1989 as the "1989 counter-revolutionary riots" but now calls it the "1989 political disturbances."

The fact is that since taking over the KMT chairmanship, Ma has always put forth this example as his standard answer when asked about democracy in China. As a participant in the protests on Tiananmen Square in 1989, I have been following Beijing's views on this issue over a long period of time, and I cannot reach the same conclusions as Ma. I would thus like to offer my views on the topic.

First, I would like to point out that Ma's argument contains a fundamental factual mistake: the replacement of "counter-revolutionary riots" with "political disturbances" is nothing new. The tone in official Chinese documents changed as early as 1990. If that change of tone implies a shift in political stance, does that mean that Ma really believes that China changed its position as early as 1990? Over the course of improving his understanding of Chinese policy, I think Ma has made a serious mistake. This kind of misinformation, however, could lead to serious errors of judgement, and I hope that Ma will correct his opinion based on the facts.

The second thing I want to point out is a fact that Ma has never touched on. During the 17 years since 1989, no Chinese leader, from former Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) and premier Zhu Rongji (朱鎔基) to the incumbent President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) who has been said to be open-minded, has ever implied a relaxed definition of the Tiananmen Square protests. Even Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶), once secretary to former CCP secretary-general Zhao Ziyang (趙紫陽), said with conviction at the press conference following his inauguration that the suppression of the protests was correct, and CCP spokespeople have repeatedly said that there will be no changes to the official definition of the protests. The CCP's consistency over these 17 years belies Ma's talk of the CCP gradually changing its views.

Finally, Ma has been involved in politics his whole life, and he should understand that when you want to know what a politician thinks, the main point is to watch his actions rather than listen to what he says. As for the CCP's attitude toward the Tiananmen Square protests, the reasonable and gentle demands of the "Tiananmen Mothers" led by Ding Zilin (丁子霖) still have not been able to solicit an official response. There is still no room in Chinese debate to discuss the June Fourth Movement, not to mention mourning the dead. "June Fourth" cannot even be mentioned. To this day, many exiled dissidents are still not allowed to return home. Even the requests of a dying 80-year-old Liu Binyan (劉賓雁) to return home were denied. I want to ask Ma whether anything in all this implies that the CCP is gradually changing its mind.

Ding's son was shot to death by soldiers in Tiananmen Square, but she is still not allowed to mourn her son in public. Every year on the day of his death, all she and the families of other victims can do is burn some incense in the privacy of their homes. I can only guess at the despair and helplessness she would feel if she were to hear Ma -- who all along has been supporting the democratization of China -- talk about how the CCP gradually has been changing its view of the June Fourth Movement.

Over the past 17 years, Ma has consistently attended annual memorial services to commemorate the June Fourth Movement, and he has repeatedly stressed that a reversal of the Tiananmen Square verdict is a precondition for unification talks.

Myself other participants in the protests as well as people concerned about the democratization of China, both overseas and in China, have been moved by this and admire Ma for his support.

It is precisely because of this that I don't want him to be led by misinformation regarding the June Fourth Movement and come to flawed conclusions. As June 4 is not far off, I venture to offer the above discussion in the hope that Ma will give it further consideration.

Wang Dan is a member of the Chinese democracy movement, a visiting scholar at Harvard University and a member of the Taipei Society.

Translated by Daniel Cheng and Perry Svensson