China’s “zero COVID-19” policy is unscientific, inhumane and autocratic. It has caused great human suffering and economic havoc, and resulted in many unnecessary fatalities. The latest incident was a fire at a high-rise apartment in Urumqi, Xinjiang.
A COVID-19 lockdown prevented the residents from escaping the blaze and the firefighters from reaching them. Local officials say that 10 were killed, including three children, while nine were injured. Many believe the number of casualties is much higher.
Demonstrations erupted throughout China. Students at Beijing’s Tsinghua University held blank sheets of paper to show their disgust with government lies and censorship.
Song Dynasty poet Su Shih (蘇軾) wrote a poem to express that helpless feeling: “No words to ask; only tears in thousands of lines.”
The “Blank Paper Movement” appears to be the biggest nationwide protest in China under the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in recent history.
The “zero COVID-19” policy has been intrusive, thoughtless, reckless and heartless. The majority of college students in China today have known nothing of college life, just COVID-19 lockdowns. Many low-income workers have been unable to feed their families, or care for their old and young. Youth unemployment has reached 20 percent. Worse yet, people have been deprived of freedom. Not surprisingly, protesters chanted: “Give me liberty or give me death.”
The curse for Chinese has been a totalitarian regime. Will this be the magical moment that finally breaks that curse?
Protesters have simple demands: democracy, freedom and for Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and the CCP to step down. Clearly, public opinion is turning against the CCP as a legitimate government.
However, the movement is a spontaneous outpouring of emotions that does not have leaders.
Moreover, given that Xi is willing to jail or kill anyone who opposes him, one can expect few political concessions.
Regardless, when historians review these events, the movement might be recognized as the beginning of the end of the CCP, and a social movement of awakening for Chinese to seek liberty and justice, and to secure freedom and democracy, by revolution if necessary. How long it will take is anybody’s guess.
For the sake of humanity, the international community must ensure that Chinese get the help they need. Anyone who orders the shooting of protesters should be immediately prosecuted for crimes against humanity.
The Internet should be maintained to prevent the government from blocking and isolating the protests. Businesses, including Apple, should consider moving out of China as a form of economic sanction against the CCP’s tyrannical actions.
There is no recipe for a revolution to succeed, but nothing can be accomplished without good planning.
An opposition party should be organized to lead the negotiations. While the CCP’s 20th National Congress granted Xi another five-year term, the public has not. Xi should get five years as a transition period, while cities and provinces hold local elections in two years, and national elections in another two.
As American journalist Elmer Davis said: “This nation will remain the land of the free only so long as it is the home of the brave.” Bravery loves company. A lone figure with two banners on a highway overpass in central Beijing on Oct. 13 denounced Xi as a “despotic traitor.” Since then, tens of thousands have chanted the same.
While with “no words to ask; only tears to speak,” the movement in China has made history with its breadth and depth. Let history show that humanity will overpower tyranny.
James J.Y. Hsu is a retired professor of physics.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The Hong Kong government on Monday gazetted sweeping amendments to the implementation rules of Article 43 of its National Security Law. There was no legislative debate, no public consultation and no transition period. By the time the ink dried on the gazette, the new powers were already in force. This move effectively bypassed Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. The rules were enacted by the Hong Kong chief executive, in conjunction with the Committee for Safeguarding National Security — a body shielded from judicial review and accountable only to Beijing. What is presented as “procedural refinement” is, in substance, a shift away from
Taiwan no longer wants to merely manufacture the chips that power artificial intelligence (AI). It aims to build the software, platforms and services that run on them. Ten major AI infrastructure projects, a national cloud computing center in Tainan, the sovereign language model Trustworthy AI Dialogue Engine, five targeted industry verticals — from precision medicine to smart agriculture — and the goal of ranking among the world’s top five in computing power by 2040: The roadmap from “Silicon Island” to “Smart Island” is drawn. The question is whether the western plains, where population, industry and farmland are concentrated, have the water and
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
RSS