Tibet Repression: It Goes Back to MFN and John Kerry

The vote was before the Senate.  The Majority Leader was leading the floor vote.  The issue was whether or not to reward China with increased trade so soon after a major political repression.  Something you missed in the news about Tibet?  No this was the first time, what made Tibet possible, and told the Chinese government that shooting unarmed protesters and running over them with tanks was okay.  Tiananman Square, 1989, and I remember it like it was yesterday.  

See, no one thought that with the eyes of the world's media upon it, the Chinese could do such a thing. We know violent repressions are nothing new in this world, in fact it's a way of doing business in many places.  This was different.  ABC, NBC, the New York Times and every other paper in the world was working with the idealistic Beijing University students who had organized the mass demonstration for a more equitable distribution of the recent economic boom, which was being stolen by party bosses, the business class connected with the party bosses, and the upper-level bureaucracy.  There were rumors of the army about to be called out to "restore order," but they wouldn't dare.  These students were the next generation, the promise that the Chinese government might someday join the ranks of civilized governments.  They quoted Thomas Jefferson, they built a statue reminiscent of the Statue of Liberty.  Democracy was on the march in places like Berlin and Romania.  They believed we lived in a new day in which the world would not let this happen.  Would take care of them and erupt in outrage if the Chinese government tried to do things the old-fashioned way.

Which they did.  They threw the foreign press out, abruptly sealed off the city, brought in tanks and truckloads of soldiers', and told the students to disperse or else.  

I still have the moving photos from the book "Children of the Dragon," showing students pleading with soldiers in their trucks not to fire on them, to join them as comrades, handing them flowers.  I can see in my mind perfectly the haunted looks in some of the soldiers faces.  

They were mowed down with machine guns and run over with tanks.  I held a picture of a crushed bicycle once before the motorcade of Chinese President Jiang Zemin, who came to power in the wake of Tiananman, when he was welcomed many years later by the president of Harvard Larry Summers, as it passed through Harvard Square and a crush of human rights protesters.  Zemin was in town at the end of a state visit with Bush Senior.  Bill Clinton outdid Bush when he was in power, and gave Zemin a state visit which included the honor accorded only to the fewest international leaders, a 21-gun salute.

But most especially I remember the year just after the Tiananman Square Massacre, when it was being debated whether to grant China Most Favored Nation trade status, in the US Senate.  It was still unclear whether or not the Chinese government would be welcomed into the ranks of civilized nations so soon after Tiananman Square.  Most of the Democrats were against it or had serious qualms, and the Bush Senior administration was pushing for it.  Many people couldn't believe we were even talking about this so soon after the pathetic images of bodies in Tiananman Square and flattened tents had exited the country through brave protesters using the new technology of the fax machine, so that the world knew what was happening.

With the fate of the bill unclear, I remember, Senator Kerry, that you stepped forward with a compromise deal to grant China MFN, rather than fighting like hell against these butchers getting away with this.  The movement against MFN might have picked up steam and a statement might have been made to the Chinese government: No, this is not okay.  Instead, I remember very clearly, you said a compromise bill with a few conditions, like periodic review, was better than the Republicans getting the whole enchilada, since you said they had the votes.  But we didn't know that.  Instead of digging in and making the Republicans explain to outraged Americans why China was being rewarded, keeping them on the hot-seat since the Republicans' own constituents found this revolting, you bailed them out.  It had to be a Democrat who broke ranks, to give political cover, and you were it.  I remember just how it went down.

I passed out flyers in front of your office in government center asking people to call you in protest, and one guy said he walked right into your office and slapped it on your receptionists' desk.  Did you ever get that?

I worked for your campaign before that, and much, much later, I supported your campaign against Bush because it was my patriotic duty to dislodge the man who made premeditated war on Iraq.  

So I guess I came around, eventually.  But I remember.  Oh yes, I remember.  We wore black armbands that day, June 5th, 1989, and I saw some women crying listening to the news reports and the radio.  They were killing the students.  The young beautiful, people we saw dancing in Tiananman Square celebrating their ability to bring good change to their nation, and out of sheer youthful exuberance.  

Now China does whatever it wants to Tibetans, and still gets the Olympics.  Because long ago, they were told it was OK.  
 



Display:


We should do everything we can, BUT... (none / 0)

I think Americans often don't realize how little the Chinese (and other countries) consider US reactions to things they do in situations like this. Unfortunately. They have done this for 4000 years and it has at times held China back tremendously, AS IT IS DOING NOW.

But, they don't care. The Chinese leadership's main concern is staying in power, and they will do whatever it takes, even if it kills thousands (or even, I suspect, millions) of people to do it.

The main reason, I think, that China is in Tibet is uranium and other minerals.

They see Tibet the way we see Iraq, Iran, etc.

And as we see, they act similarly.

:o


http://www.thisamericanlife.org/Radio_Ep isode.aspx?sched=1242
Confused by the 'Bailout' Lies?
Listen to NPR's The Giant Pool of Money
by architek on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:02:51 PM EST

That said, everything we can do to open up China (none / 0)

to the opinions of the rest of the world is good.
They do mderate some of what they do slightly when they know the rest of the world is watching. We could be doing much more.

BTW, Nancy Pelosi was doing quite a bit to pressure China at the time. So was Tom Lantos and Barbara Boxer.


http://www.thisamericanlife.org/Radio_Ep isode.aspx?sched=1242
Confused by the 'Bailout' Lies?
Listen to NPR's The Giant Pool of Money
by architek on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:07:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tibet Repression (none / 0)

I remember this too.  Baking bread in the morning and listening to the radio at 5 AM to hear what was happening in China - and it was so amazing, there was such hope, such energy.  And then it was crushed.

And Tibet.  Crushed.  Its culture, obliterated.   And the PNC gov giving reports much like the Bush Administration, where everything is opposite day. We respect the traditional culture, meaning, we wiped it out.

They say, and I quote, from their white pages, released by the Information Office of the State Council of the PRC -
"The state respects and safeguards the rights of Tibetans... As society progresses, some decayed, backward old customs despising laboring people that bear a strong tinge of the feudal serf system have been abandoned, which reflects the Tibetans' pursuit of modern civilization..."

shorthand:  we are doing everything we can to obliterate their culture and traditions.


by carolyn urban on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:20:53 PM EST

It was a theocracy, but it was POPULAR.. (none / 0)

There are a lot of contradictions in the back and forth of propaganda..

For one thing, Tibet WAS a feudal society. It was run by the lamas, and most people were INCREDIBLY poor. (many still are, too, though) Tibet, being so high, doesn't have a lot of farmland, and the farmland it does have is not of high quality.. malnutrition there was very bad, and this was compounded by the fact that Tibetan Buddhists DON'T EAT MEAT..

But, by all accounts, those lamas were also incredibly popular, and considering the backwardness, they did rule well, and were considered to be fairly just, far more so than the Han Chinese who basically invaded Tibet (for the upteenth time, granted, as China had been in Tibet off and on for almost 1000 years)

The thing that never gets mentioned is that Tibet has the worlds largest uranium deposits, because of the way the Earth's crust is folded there.

I think thats the real reason China so aggressively pursued the conquest of Tibet.

In 1950, following the revolution, China had a huge debt to the Soviet Union. They repaid that debt very quickly, but at a HUGE cost in lives...

The Tibetans say much of the debt was repaid in uranium.. from Tibet..


http://www.thisamericanlife.org/Radio_Ep isode.aspx?sched=1242
Confused by the 'Bailout' Lies?
Listen to NPR's The Giant Pool of Money
by architek on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:00:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tibet Repression: It Goes Back to MFN and John (none / 0)

The idea that MFN is somehow responsible for China's repression in Tibet is profoundly wrong.

The Han Chinese culture has been in an extended civil conflict with Tibet culture for many centuries.  This is not a new conflict that emerged over the past 50 years.  

As with, for example, Russia and Kazakhstan, or Persia and Azerbaijan, it is just not clear where "China" (in the Han sense) ends and where Tibet begins.  The concept of "Greater Tibet," for example, encompasses not only the Tibet Autonomous Region, but also parts of Qinghai, Gansu, and Sichuan provinces -- all of where unrest has been occurring in recent days.

To be sure, the Tibetans are the aggrieved party for the past 50 years.  Beijing is being incredibly short-sighted in refusing to talk to the Dalai Lama, who recognizes Chinese sovereignty and renounces the use of violence.  It's entirely possible that one day the Chinese leadership will profoundly regret this, much in the way Israel now regrets cutting a deal with the PLO in the late 1980s, when it had the chance.

But I think that at least some consideration must be given to the broader civil conflict.  Certainly the analogy that some have been drawing between China and Nazi Germany is deeply misplaced.

Periodically you find Mexican nationalists who want to reclaim "Aztlan" (i.e., the U.S. southwest) for Mexico; most people think they're batty, and a few conservative radio talk-show types react with alarm and demagoguery.  

I think this is perhaps how Han Chinese view the prospect of Tibetan independence.  


by He Who Must Not Be Named on Sat Mar 29, 2008 at 12:15:47 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.