Wed, Oct 10, 2001 page8

• China plays the hypocrite, again

  • By Paul Lin 林保華
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Following the Sept. 11 attacks, apart from trying every possible means to distance itself from the terrorists, Beijing has also adopted anti-terrorist slogans, slapping the label of "terrorist" on all the targets it intends to attack. This is another example of the Chinese Communist Party's (CCP) hypocritical trickery.

  The clearest indication of this was when the CCP established an "anti-terrorist, anti-splittist and anti-extremist" task force. Grouping "splittism" and "extremism" together with terrorism is just a means for the CCP to suppress (as "terrorists") dissidents and others unwilling to accept the CCP's authoritarian rule. Beijing further intends to use this method to avoid criticism by the West, and to manipulate Western nations' perceptions of the CCP's suppression of dissidents. The CCP's mixing together of these three "isms" shows that anti-terrorism is mainly internally, and not externally, directed. It shows moreover that Beijing's anti-terrorism is bogus, and is actually a means of dealing with dissidents.

  Towards the end of September, Beijing circulated rumors that an intelligence delegation would provide details to the US about how Taiwan's military intelligence has, for the last six years, maintained contacts with, and given financial support to Islamic military organizations. The Taiwanese government has yet to issue a response.

  Taiwan has contacts with the Tibetan government in exile, and the Dalai Lama maintains an office in Taipei. I am not sure whether Xinjiang separatist organizations have any contacts with Taiwan, but even if such ties do exist, separatist groups aren't necessarily equivalent to terrorist groups. By the same token, Islamic separatists are not necessarily equivalent to Islamic terrorists. Some separatist organizations around the world engage in terrorist activities, but some don't -- one example being the Quebec separatist organizations in Canada.

  Given the destruction of ethnic minority religions and cultures that has occurred under the one-party authoritarian rule of the CCP, the appearance of a separatist movement (from inside China) is completely understandable. The emergence of a violent resistance movement is also understandable when people are violently suppressed. As long as the violent resistance isn't intentionally directed at civilians, it can't be called "terrorism."

  Moreover, if an organization as a whole doesn't adopt terrorist means, and only individuals and/or small groups within it use extreme methods of resistance in the wake of massacres perpetrated by the CCP, that organization should not be considered a terrorist organization. Actually, in Xinjiang, rumors about executions of members of separatist organizations massively outnumber reports of violent resistance by separatists.

  In fact, the CCP is the true terrorist group. During the Chinese communist revolution, the CCP used terrorist methods to deal with traitors. The most famous example was the CCP's "Traitor-elimination Squad" (鋤奸隊). Led personally by Zhou Enlai (周恩來), this squad killed the entire family of Gu Shunzhang (顧順章) -- chief of the CCP's secret service who defected to the KMT -- as well as all others present at the scene. Not even individuals who had previously helped save Zhou's life were spared in the massacre. The "red-terror rule" that followed the CCP's rise to power -- culminating in the Cultural Revolution (文革) -- resulted in the unnatural deaths of tens of millions of civilians.

  Currently, the CCP is still engaged in the wanton killing of innocent people. This includes the suppression of Falun Gong, the kidnapping of dissidents and their use as bargaining chips to blackmail Western nations. All of this constitutes "state terrorism."

  The CCP's military threats against Taiwan also constitute state terrorism. Perhaps the most representative examples would be the blatant military exercises and threats made by Beijing in 1996 -- and in the run-up to last year's presidential election -- as well as the call sounded by government-sponsored scholars for the "destruction and reconstruction" of Taiwan.

  Further, in order to prevent the US from giving Taiwan military support, the Chinese military published the book Unlimited War (超限戰). The book, which trumpeted the need to adopt a new military strategy towards hostile nations in which "anything goes," has become a set of guiding principles for some terrorists. The Sept. 11 terrorist attacks are evidence of that. Thus, it is very natural for Taiwan -- which must deal with Beijing's military threats -- to have contacts with and support dissidents from across the Taiwan Strait, and to collectively resist the militarily superior China.

  The Xinjiang separatist organizations aren't based in Afghanistan (a nation that borders China). Formerly located in Turkey (a member state of NATO), the camps were later moved to Germany. This shows that the Xinjiang separatist groups aren't in collusion with any of those places considered rogue nations by the US, particularly Afghanistan and the Taliban government. The CCP however, set up a telecommunications network for the Taliban, and laid underground fiber-optic cable for another rogue nation, Iraq. And the nuclear and missile technology that China exported to Pakistan could end up in terrorists' hands. On the very day of the Sept. 11 attacks, Beijing even signed a memorandum for cooperation with the Taliban. So which country is actually aiding and abetting terrorism ? Isn't it obvious?!

  The purpose behind the CCP's current display of hypocrisy is to shift the focus of anti-terrorism.

  In the name of cooperating with the US to combat terrorism, Beijing will engage in obstruction, serving the cause of its "anti-US united front." The CCP will further block potentially threatening Western concepts of freedom and democracy from appearing in Chinese broadcasts. US media and some officials are aware of these intentions, but there are also some people encouraging the US to use this opportunity to form an alliance with China. Such an alliance, however, would be an extremely dangerous move.

  The US can seek the cooperation of the CCP in order to reduce its ability to hamper the anti-terrorist campaign. But the US needs to be careful not to let itself be exploited by the CCP. The CCP can deceive some people temporarily, but it won't be able to do so over the long term. Only by attacking state terrorism at the appropriate time will the US be able to truly restrict terrorist activities.

  Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.

  Translated by Scudder Smith
• Most Popular

  • 1

    New Taipei building collapses near construction site in Sanchong

  • 2

    What! Dad made a fortune selling English in Taiwan?

  • 3

    Taiwan launches ‘digital nomad’ visa

  • 4

    More than 120,000 green iguanas to be culled this year

  • 5

    Dell picks AMD for business PCs