Zhongnanhai

This is a letter that was published in Wednesday’s edition of the National Post.  It is a follow-up of a column that was published on Monday to coincide with the June 4th anniversary.  I think the letter writer raises some good points.

Tiananmen no concern of a ‘capitalistic’ China
National Post
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
Page: A15
Section: Letters
Byline: Petros Dratsidis
Source: National Post

Re: Chinese amnesia, Cam MacMurchy, June 4.

With all due respect to Cam MacMurchy, the so-called Tiananmen Square Massacre is not a major anniversary in Chinese history. We are talking about a nation with a 5,000-year history, a nation whose population is one-fifth of humanity, an emerging and ambitious superpower. What happened in early June, 1989, in Beijing is merely an episode in history caused by misguided and impressionable students, an episode equivalent to the 1968 riots in Paris or the student unrest in North American universities between 1968 and 1972, but far smaller in scale.

Talk about amnesias: Should the French commemorate the anarchy on their streets some 40 years ago? Should the U.S. president lay a wreath every May 4 to commemorate the killing of the four students at Kent State University in 1970?

I have just returned from China, and I can assure you that the epithet "communist" does not fit China today. There are no pictures of Mao glancing admonishingly from billboards — except the one overlooking Tiananmen Square, where his mausoleum is. The police on the streets are almost invisible, and owning private property is encouraged, as is opening a private business. Western music is everywhere, Shanghai’s stock market is booming and China is full of "capitalistic" energy, in fact, too much of it.

If we must give a name to the Chinese system of government, then a correct name would be centralized democracy. Foreign investment agrees with this assessment, and is pouring into China at rates never seen before in history.

David Brady, deputy director of the Hoover Institute of Stanford University, recently said: "The normal pattern is for at least two parties to alternate in power … but I wouldn’t say that has to be China’s way. I am not smart enough to tell what China should do."

The same should apply to Mr. MacMurchy. Is he, a freelance journalist, knowledgeable enough to tell the Chinese people how to conduct their affairs?

Petros Dratsidis, Toronto.

Petros makes some good points about other movements that have been crushed by the government or law enforcement officials, especially the one at Kent State in the United States (although that was 4 people to an estimated 3,000 in Beijing).

Governments, including the Chinese one, should never feel obligated to remember those who died challenging their authority. However individuals — the mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, and cousins of the victims — should be able to remember what happened, publicly, if they so choose. 

People in Paris can read about the riots of 1968, and lay a wreath if they like.  People in America can read about what happened at Kent State or watch a documentary on the subject.

Unfortunately, when it comes to June 4, 1989, people in China aren’t so lucky. 

It’s nice to see Canada having a bit more flair. Yesterday, current Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper decided to decline a meeting with U2 star Bono.

"I’ve got to say that meeting celebrities isn’t kind of my shtick, that was the shtick of the previous guy," said Harper in a dig at his Liberal predecessor Paul Martin, who met Bono regularly.

"I hope we do it at some point but my principle focus in public policies is not kind of to meet celebrities," added the prime minister, a Conservative.

The Reuters story says Bono has met with George W. Bush and Angela Merkl already, but Harper says he’s too busy to meet the star. 

While relieving debt to African nations is a laudable goal, it’s nice to come across a politician who is more concerned with actual politics instead of photo-ops with celebrities. 

Huang’s funeral was held at Babaoshan Cemetary, where all the major government leaders and revolutionaries are buried.  Even disgraced former leader Zhao Ziyang was buried there, despite his opposition to the government’s crackdown on June 4, 1989 and subsequent house arrest, which lasted untl his death in January 2005.

Jiang Zemin and his ailing wife made it up from Shanghai and all the way out to Shijingshan for the memorial, which makes it all the more curious that Li Peng and Qiao Shi weren’t there - as Beijing residents, they didn’t have nearly as far to go.

Those familiar with Li Peng will know he was the Premier under Zhao Ziyang in 1989. He was the most vocal and supportive of bringing in the military to rid Tiananmen Square of protesters. Students in the square (and people around the country) loathed Li Peng for everything from corruption to overusing government vehicles and stopping traffic for simple trips to the grocery store (Zhongnanhai hears this may have also been his wife). 

Li Peng was no fan of Huang Ju, and speculation has run rampant for the reasons behind this.

As for Qiao Shi, he served as Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress from 1993-1998.  He was previously known for his dislike of Jiang Zemin, and Huang Ju was a Jiang loyalist and member of his Shanghai clique. 

They were the only two high-level officials or former leaders who were not present for the memorial.